Tag Archives: Donald Trump

What If Orange Fail Was Actually a Success? by Eric Peters

Was Donald Trump a Deep State plant, and a Deep State success? From Eric Peters at ericpetersautos.com:

 
Many aspects of the failed Trump re-election bid are open for debate.

One thing that is not debatable is that Trump allowed hypochondria to be weaponized. The excuses don’t matter.

The fact remains.

And then comes the question: Why would a smart man (giving him his due; Trump is many things but he’s not an imbecile) permit the weaponization of hypochondria? A smart man would see – immediately, easily – the threat; that fear of “the virus” would be used to get people to vote absentee – or rather enable mass unvetted and thus easily fraudulent absentee voting and that would be the means by which his opponents would remove him.

Ergo, why let them?

 

Some will say: But he filed lawsuits! The courts refused to hear them! True. So? If what we suspect and what OF asserted was true then why didn’t the president – chief law enforcement officer of the nation, who swore an oath to defend the Constitution – not insist that the ballots be vetted and then counted?

Not recounted – after the fact. And without any vetting.

He had both the legal authority and the power to do it. But he did nothing – other than incoherently bloviate and Tweet, encouraging his desperate followers to believe he might actually do something.

To those who say he couldn’t have, I say – he didn’t even try. No announcement before the election that mass absentee voting (contrary to state election laws regarding voting) is problematic and the American people have a right to know who they elected and, accordingly, every ballot submitted prior to election day will be vetted to establish its legitimacy (e.g., that the person exists, is alive and actually did vote, as by signature verification) before it is counted.

But the Left would have keened in outrage! True. So? The Left always keens in outrage. Why didn’t the “brave” and “tough” OF challenge them? The case for making sure the vote is legitimate is inarguable – to reasonable people. As for the rest? Forget them.

Continue reading→

MSM’s narrative about the murderous Capitol mob has collapsed, but don’t let that get in the way of a good political lynching, by Tony Cox

What is the mainstream media going to do without Donald Trump to kick around? SLL puts the over/under on the bankruptcy or the first mainstream outlet as one year. From Tony Cox at rt.com:

MSM's narrative about the murderous Capitol mob has collapsed, but don't let that get in the way of a good political lynching
As their dishonest narrative collapses around them, mainstream media outlets and Democrat politicians are trying to hold together their latest bid to destroy Donald Trump, but some of the lies are getting too big to shrug off.

I’m reminded of  the media-speak popularized during the Trump era – lightly used words or phrases that became ubiquitous in the talking points, like “violating norms” – especially the term “debunked.” In the eyes of MSM and their controllers, Trump was a president who needed to be debunked thousands of times. Whether it was about the size of his Inauguration Day crowd, the animal-like savagery of MS-13 gang-bangers or the fact that Haiti is “a s**thole”, any Trump claim had to be debunked, false or not.

When an obnoxious loudmouth constantly blurts out things that lift the skirt on the ruling class’ treachery, his voice must be discredited. And even if just part of his story can be attacked, the rest will be forgotten. It’s like a Jenga game where all the pieces automatically fall down when one is removed.

But the same standard doesn’t apply to the media’s own story lines. No matter how many times MSM and establishment politicians are exposed as liars — from the MLK bust in the Oval Office to the Russia collusion hoax — the people are supposed to keep believing the gist of their arguments. The Jenga tower can be levitating with entire floors missing, but the con artists insist that it’s still standing.

Continue reading→

The 2025 Car You’re Voting for Today, by Eric Peters

Elections have consequences, even in the automotive world. From Eric Peters at ericpetersautos.com:

Much is in the balance today – election day – including the kinds of cars you’ll be able to buy (or not) in the years ahead.

It’s not on the ballot, per se, but the outcome of the vote will decide that by dint of deciding whether the federal government will enforce the almost-doubling of fuel economy mandatory minimums to nearly 50 MPG by 2025.

The Orange Man opposes this. The Hair Plugged Man endorses it. His predecessor attempted to impose it.

People not familiar with regulatory rigmarole – and what it takes to “comply” with it – may be under the impression that nothing but good could come from a mandate requiring that all cars average nearly 50 MPG. It’s right up there with money for nothing and your chicks for free.

And that’s just how it’s sold – or rather, how it is marketed by politicians such as the Hair Plugged Man, who specialize in the free lunch paid for by someone else.

To the average ear 50 MPG sounds great. If it takes a prod from the government to make the recalcitrant  car industry build efficient cars, then so be it.

The cost of this is never explained to people – because then it would not sound so great. How much is a 50 MPG car worth if it costs 25 percent more to buy than a 35 MPG car? If it is twice as complex – and so twice as likely to break down or need an expensive repair at some point during its lifetime?

What if it costs you what you need in terms of capability?

Continue reading→

Heroes, Villains and Establishment Hypocrisy, by Craig Murray

The establishment and its media have their heroes and villains and truth and facts have become irrelevant. If your the former you’re protected and if you’re the latter, you’re crucified. From Craig Murray at craigmurray.org.uk:

Trump and Johnson’s populism have shaken the old Establishment, and raised some very interesting questions about who is and who is not nowadays inside the Establishment and a beneficiary of the protection of the liberal elite. Yesterday two startling examples in the news coverage cast a very lurid light on this question, and I ask you to consider the curious cases of Hunter Biden and Brendan Cox, two of the most undeserving and unpleasant people that can be imagined.

The BBC news bulletins led on the move to impeach Donald Trump for, as they put it, his efforts to get the President of Ukraine to undermine a political opponent. To be plain, I think Trump was quite wrong to get personally involved in this, but please park the entire subject of Donald Trump to one side for the next ten minutes.

Continue reading

Did Pedophile Jeffrey Epstein Work for Mossad? by Philip Giraldi

Jeffrey Epstein’s orgy island may have been an intelligence operation, and the intelligence agency behind it may have been Israel’s Mossad. From Philip Giraldi at ahtribune.com:

Jeffrey Epstein Ghislaine Maxwell Trump Clinton 5f2fd

The extent of Israeli spying directed against the United States is a huge story that is only rarely addressed in the mainstream media. The Jewish state regularly tops the list for ostensibly friendly countries that aggressively conduct espionage against the U.S. and Jewish American Jonathan Pollard, who was imprisoned in 1987 for spying for Israel, is now regarded as the most damaging spy in the history of the United States.

Last week I wrote about how Israeli spies operating more-or-less freely in the U.S. are rarely interfered with, much less arrested and prosecuted, because there is an unwillingness on the part of upper echelons of government to do so. I cited the case of Arnon Milchan, a billionaire Hollywood movie producer who had a secret life that included stealing restricted technology in the United States to enable development of Israel’s nuclear weapons program, something that was very much against U.S. interests. Milchan was involved in a number of other thefts as well as arms sales on behalf of the Jewish state, so much so that his work as a movie producer was actually reported to be less lucrative than his work as a spy and black-market arms merchant, for which he operated on a commission basis.

That Milchan has never been arrested by the United States government or even questioned about his illegal activity, which was well known to the authorities, is just one more manifestation of the effectiveness of Jewish power in Washington, but a far more compelling case involving possible espionage with major political manifestations has just re-surfaced. I am referring to Jeffrey Epstein, the billionaire Wall Street “financier” who has been arrested and charged with operating a “vast” network of underage girls for sex, operating out of his mansions in New York City and Florida as well as his private island in the Caribbean, referred to by visitors as “Orgy Island.” Among other high-value associates, it is claimed that Epstein was particularly close to Bill Clinton, who flew dozens of times on Epstein’s private 727.

Continue reading

The Meaning of Verification, by Ted Snider

The International Atomic Energy Agency has certified 11 times that Iran is in compliance with the Nuclear Agreement. Now that the US has pulled out of the agreement, Iran can kick out the inspectors and we won’t have that source of information on what Iran is doing. From Ted Snider at antiwar.org:

As North Korea begins to open up to the world, what must they be hearing?

Two of the loudest stories concern Donald Trump’s reactions to countries accused of having active weapons of mass destruction programs. Trump bombed Syria for using chemical weapons, and he has now officially pulled out of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) nuclear agreement with Iran.

But the first thing that needs to be said in any discussion of Syria’s chemical weapons or Iran’s nuclear weapons is the one thing that is seldom said: Syria has no chemical weapons and Iran has no nuclear ones. The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) verified Syria to be chemical free, and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has verified Iran’s consistent and continued compliance with the JCPOA. To the best of anyone’s knowledge, Syria has no chemicals and Iran has no nukes: that’s what verification means.

Syria

On September 14, 2013 the United States and Russia finalized a Russian brokered agreement on the removal and destruction of Syria’s chemical weapons. On January 4, 2016, the OPCW declared the completion of the destruction of all chemical weapons in Syria.

Nonetheless, on April 14, Trump ordered the bombing of Syria because of a claimed chemical attack in Douma, near Damascus. Only days before the missile strikes, Defense Secretary James Mattis said that the U.S lacked the intelligence that Assad was responsible for the alleged chemical weapons attack. Mattis admitted that the US was “still assessing the intelligence… We’re still working on it.”

Days after, however, the US bombed three particular buildings that they claimed housed specific chemicals and chemical production equipment. That’s very precise, specific intelligence. Armed with that proof, why would the US rush to bomb Syria? Why not take that intelligence to U.N. inspectors? Why not hand it over to the OPCW? Why not reveal the illegal Syrian clandestine chemical weapons program to the world?

Russian chemical weapons specialists who were on site found no trace of chemical weapon use. Neither did Red Crescent doctors who treated people. The OPCW inspectors might quickly have answered the question, but their access to the site was blocked by the United Nations department of Safety and Security.

To continue reading: The Meaning of Verification

They “Said” That? 1/18/18

No real quote tonight, just two pictures that speak volumes. Donald Trump and Bill Clinton are both 71.

Trump has never drank or smoked, and just got a clean bill of health. Heaven only knows how badly Bill Clinton has debauched himself. It catches up with you.

The Little Putsch That Could….Beget a Great Big Coup, by David Stockman

Donald Trump certainly doesn’t have to accept the fate the Deep State has plotted out for him. From David Stockman at lewrockwell.com:

Bull’s eye!

“They made up a phony collusion with the Russians story, found zero proof, so now they go for obstruction of justice on the phony story. Nice … You are witnessing the single greatest WITCH HUNT in American political history – led by some very bad and conflicted people!”

The Donald has never spoken truer words but also has never sunken lower into abject victimhood. Indeed, what is he waiting for—– handcuffs and a perp walk?

Just to be clear, “he” doesn’t need to be the passive object of a “WITCH HUNT” by “they”.

If Donald Trump had any kind of presidential strategy and propensity to take command, he would have had all the intercepts of Russian chatter gathered up weeks ago. He would then have had them declassified and made public, even as he launched a criminal prosecution against Obama’s hit squad—-John Brennan,

Susan Rice and Valerie Jarrett—for illegally unmasking and leaking classified information.

Such a course of action would have crushed the Russian interference hysteria in the bud.

At bottom, the latter was a rearguard invention of the Deep State and Democratic partisans. They became literally shocked and desperate for a scapegoat early last fall by the prospect that the unthinkable was happening.

Namely, the election by the unwashed masses of an outsider and insurrectionist who could not be counted upon to serve as a “trusty” for the status quo; and whose naïve but correct instinct to seek a rapprochement with Russia was a mortal threat to the very modus operandi of the Imperial City.

Moreover, from the very beginning, the Russian interference narrative was rooted in nothing more than standard cyber noise from Moscow that pales compared to what comes out of Langley (CIA) and Ft. Meade (NSA). And we do mean irrelevant noise.

After all, it didn’t take a Kremlinologist from the old Soviet days to figure out that Putin did not favor Clinton, who had likened him to Hitler. And that he welcomed Trump, who had correctly said NATO was obsolete, that he didn’t want to give lethal aid to theUkrainians, and had expressed a desire to make a deal with Putin on Syria and numerous other areas of unnecessary confrontation.

To continue reading: The Little Putsch That Could….Beget a Great Big Coup

The Phony War Against Donald Trump, by Daniel McCarthy

James Comey’s testimony is probably the beginning of the end of Russiagate. From Daniel McCarthy at strategic-culture.com:

There is no known crime at the heart of the Trump-Russia affair, and no crime has yet been even credibly alleged in President Trump’s involvement in the investigation

James Comey’s public testimony to the Senate Intelligence Committee revealed both more and less than expected. It revealed less than expected by President Trump’s critics: Comey related no other incidents as eyebrow-raising as his account of when Trump asked him, in discussing the investigation of Mike Flynn, to “let this go.” Comey wrote memoranda to document each of his direct discussions with the president, but based on his testimony to Congress, none of those other memos contains anything comparable to the exchange about Flynn.

In his prepared remarks for the hearing, Comey described President Trump asking for his loyalty. This is one place where Comey’s testimony was more revealing than expected—not in showing that the president might apply vague pressure to his employees but in showing how ill-defined the relationship between a president and America’s intelligence agencies can be. There is a difficulty here that does not begin or end with Trump, a basic, but unexamined, problem of how the executive branch operates. How can it be both political and, at the same time, above politics? How can the president have full legal authority not only to dismiss the FBI director, as Comey testified, even to direct what the FBI does and does not investigate, while the FBI also holds itself to be “independent”? And what does it mean for any intelligence service to be independent of elected leaders—and thus, independent of the public?

 

Trump’s Apology for ‘Killer Putin’ is Wrongheaded, by Finian Cunningham

Here’s the money quote: “As for the «moral equivalence» complaint, the truly objective answer is that there is no comparison between unfounded allegations against Putin as a «killer» and what US presidents actually do as a matter of routine.” From Finian Cunningham at strategic-culture.com:

US President Donald Trump has landed in hot water yet again when he told media that he respected Russian leader Vladimir Putin – in spite of (unfounded and sensationalist) accusations that the latter is responsible for killing journalists and political opponents.

Trump was being interviewed on Fox News by Bill O’Reilly, and while expressing respect for Putin as the president of Russia, his interlocutor interrupted with the terse assertion: «He’s [Putin] a killer, though. Putin’s a killer».

Unfazed, Trump replied: «We’ve got a lot of killers. What, do you think our country’s so innocent?»

The program went on air Sunday ahead of the US Super Bowl football final, and so is sure to have drawn a record audience. Western media outlets also reported the interview in advance with outraged tone that Trump was offering an apology for the Russian leader, and equally as bad, that the president was making a moral equivalence with the misconduct of the US.

Britain’s Guardian headlined: «Donald Trump repeats his respect for ‘killer’ Putin».

The news outlet added: «Asked on Fox about the Kremlin chief’s bloody reputation, the US president said: ‘There are a lot of killers. We’ve got a lot of killers’».

The Washington Post, among other outlets, noted that this was not the first time that Trump has appeared insouciant in front of interviewers who make claims about Putin’s alleged involvement in violent repression against opponents.

The Post recalled: «It wouldn’t be the first time Trump has brushed aside the topic of Putin’s political killings».

As with much of Western media coverage on Russia and its leader, there is an offending journalistic sloppiness that states allegations and even slander («Putin’s political killings») as if they are factual.

To continue reading: Trump’s Apology for ‘Killer Putin’ is Wrongheaded