image_pdfimage_print

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

Last week, the Left were giddy with anticipation with the news special counsel Robert Mueller was going to announce indictments in relation to his investigation into whether Donald Trump’s campaign colluded with the Russians. And with the indictments of Paul Manafort and Rick Gates, the Left were happier than Bill Clinton at the Moonlight Bunny Ranch while Hillary is on her book tour. They even have a term for Mueller’s investigation: Mueller Time. They’ve even printed t-shirts with the slogan, so you know they’re serious.

Of course, the enthusiasm has dulled somewhat now that it’s come out the scope of the investigation into Manafort’s involvement with Russia was when he was working…with the Democratic National Committee. But just you wait! Mueller is going to reveal the collusion between Trump and Russia just like Scooby and the Mystery Machine gang!

Meanwhile, let’s talk about “Mueller Time” for a bit.

Mueller Time

What the Left believes it means – a federal investigation into whether Donald Trump conspired with Russia to win the 2016 election

What it really means – spending federal money on an investigation that has zero basis in fact

I know it’s shocking to think a federal government that spent money on a bridge to nowhere, a money pit in Boston, and stealth bombers that don’t exist would waste money on an investigation that would make Don Quixote tell you to cool it with the cray-cray, but it’s true. The whole basis of the Mueller investigation is a poorly-sourced assumption driven by fever-pitch partisanship in the hopes of finding something, anything that can be tied back to the President in the hopes the 2016 election can be nullified and Hillary Clinton can be installed as President.

Meanwhile in the real world, some of us are shaking our heads and/or laughing said heads off at the sight of Leftists clinging to their anti-Trump fantasies in light of factual information.

Let me be perfectly clear here. I believe Russia may have had an impact on the 2016 election, but as of this writing, the credible impact appears on the Left not the Right. Of the two major party candidates, only Hillary Clinton received direct money from Russia in the form of a donation to the Clinton Global Initiative from Ukraine. Although it wasn’t a direct donation to her campaign, it is still a financial contribution to Hillary Clinton through a layer of plausible deniability via bureaucracy.

Of course, there are other ways Russia could have impacted our election, such as through Facebook ads and other propaganda purchased by Russians. One tiny problem: Mueller Time isn’t going into that depth, at least not yet. Even if they paid for agitprop, so what? It’s not like every voter is spoon-fed information from partisan sources. That’s strictly a Leftist thing. Besides, if we really want to go down that rabbit hole, we would have to go after just about every major media outlet for colluding with Hillary’s campaign by giving her mostly softball questions no tougher than “Where would you like us to kiss your butt today, Madame President?”

Which brings us back to Mueller Time. The investigation may open up far more than the Left wants us to know, such as…oh, I don’t know…the Clinton campaign having more actual hands-on contact with the Russians than the Trump campaign. That would explain why the Left’s argument regarding the Trump dossier went from “We need to find out everything in the dossier” to “We don’t need to know who paid for it, just whether it’s accurate.” And even that doesn’t get the Left out of the woods. If Mueller’s investigation proves the Left was in Vladimir Putin’s back pocket so much Debbie Wasserman-Schultz has permanent stitch marks on her butt, the narrative will switch to “This subject is boring. Let’s focus on Trump’s connections to Russia!”

In any case, the Mueller investigation will continue on with or without my support (but will continue with my money) and we will be in for…well, something that will be more disappointing than a striptease from Lena Dunham. Whatever happens, the Left will try to put on a brave face and spin every little indiscretion into a major scandal, but for those of us on the outside of the Leftist bubble, it will be like opening the biggest package under the Christmas tree and finding it full of the ugliest sweaters, socks, and underwear.

But for you Leftists out there hoping Mueller Time will get you into the White House, you’d be better off joining a tour group.

Share This:

 

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

Remember when the Left was obsessed with President Donald Trump’s connections to Russia waaaaaay back a whole week or so ago? Well, this past week has blunted that enthusiasm now that there are alleged connections between Russia and the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee. Now, they want us to ignore their possible crimes to focus on the crimes they’ve alleged President committed.

What is at the core of both of these situations? Leftist double standards, for one, but I’m referring to Russia. The Left’s relationship with Russia makes Sybil look well-adjusted. One day, they’re our ally and we can trust them when they have information that hurts Donald Trump. The next day, they’re our enemy and we can’t trust them to tell the truth when they have information that hurts them. Complicate is hardly the word for this kind of Jeckyl and Hyde relationship.

Let’s take a closer look at the elephant, or bear in this case, in the room.

Russia

What the Left thinks it means – a country that has aided Donald Trump in stealing the 2016 election and is, therefore, our enemy. Also, a country that wasn’t our enemy when Barack Obama was President.

What it really means – our worst frienemy

There was a time when the Left looked up to the Russians. Usually, it was when the Russians were communists, but that admiration never quite went away. Now, the Left tries to relive the wonder years of the former Soviet Union while making tons of money in the pursuit of it.

Let that sink in for a moment.

On the other side of the aisle, the Right adopted Ronald Reagan’s approach of “trust, but verify.” For a while in the mid 80s and early 90s, the US and Russia had a burgeoning relationship, but that changed when hardcore communists hung around and kept just enough power to remain relevant. Then came the rise of Vladimir “Rudy” Putin. A former KGB member, Putin didn’t want the former Soviet Union to die out completely and adopted many of the same draconian ideas that were popular in the Soviet Union. (Oddly enough, college Leftists are adopting those same ideas today.) As a result, the Right went back to not trusting Russia.

This conflict of approaches came to a head during a 2012 Presidential debate between Republican Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama. While Romney warned people of the threat Russia posed, Obama brushed it off with a comment about the 80s wanting their foreign policy back. Good times. Of course, that was before the Left lost the 2016 election while collaborating with the Russians, so naturally the Russians are bad guys now, right?

Well, actually, they are, but unlike the Left, my distrust of Russia isn’t situational nor political. Call it my Cold War Spidey Sense, but whenever you have a former member of the KGB heading up a former enemy turned fairweather friend, it tends not to end well. And unfortunately our foreign policy has been slow to pick up on this. Then again, when you’ve had Hillary Clinton and John Kerry, two of the most ineffective and unintelligent Secretaries of State in recent memory, heading up foreign policy, I’m amazed Russia hasn’t already taken over the country. (Note to the Leftists who think this has already happened, respond to this column so I can send you money to buy a clue.)

Meanwhile, we still have the Russian threat to address, and they have friends. I’m speaking of China, another geopolitical thorn in our side. China and Russia haven’t always gotten along, but in recent years they’ve found a common enemy in America. Let’s just say these two countries wouldn’t be too heartbroken if we got knocked down a peg or 20, and both countries have a means to do just that with enough provocation. China owns a lot of our debt, and Russia has a significant oil reserve. Combine those two, and you have the makings of an America economic disaster that would make the mortgage crisis of 2008 look like you lost a nickel down a sewer grate.

And it’s not like this is a new phenomenon, either. Russia and China have been getting chummy for a few years now, including when a certain President mocked Mitt Romney’s prescient warning as being an outdated concept. Yeah, now the party of that President now thinks Russia is a bad guy because they believe (falsely) Russia cost their 2016 candidate the Presidency. (Yeah, it totally has nothing to do with the fact she was unlikable, inept, and couldn’t seem to find Wisconsin on a map…of Wisconsin.) Now that their own connections to Russia are coming to light, the Left isn’t so keen on digging into the situation further, but they are totally on board with continuing the investigation into the Trump-Russia connection to the point Don Quixote is telling them to seek help.

And while all of this political theater is going on, Russia is biding its time, waiting for the moment when they can drop the hammer. And possibly the sickle, too.

Share This:

 

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week – 1 of 2

For the first time in Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week history, I had a hard time deciding on a Word of the Week. There were a couple of news stories this past week that caught my attention, and both involve words that the Left seek to use as a means to advance their agenda. After careful deliberation (i.e. a coin toss), I decided on a word. Oh, and the Minnesota Vikings have elected to defer to the second half.

collusion

What the Left believes it means – an illegal secret agreement between two parties where vital information is shared with an enemy, grounds for impeachment

What it really means – a secret agreement between two parties that may or may not be illegal or grounds for impeachment

Thanks to Donald Trump, Jr. and an email practice arguably worse than Hillary Clinton’s, the Left have glommed onto collusion their latest word to throw around without actually knowing what it means. On the plus side, Mr. Trump didn’t send out pictures of his…shall we say Little Junior…to underage girls. Still, the Left is having a field day accusing President Donald Trump of having a secret agreement with Russia to take down Hillary Clinton in the 2016 Presidential election.

Let me bring up one slight bone of contention here. As of right now, Russia is still considered an ally. A scummy ally, I grant you, but an ally nonetheless (or at least they were during Barack Obama’s Presidency, as former Secretary of State Clinton can attest if she’s being honest. I know, it’s less likely than Bill remaining faithful.) As a result, the information shared with Trump or any of his campaign team may or may not be illegal to obtain.

And that’s where the Left’s ideas about collusion get messier than Jackson Pollock painting on the San Andreas Fault during a 6.9 on the Richter Scale. If there is alleged collusion as the Left defines it, then the information provided must be illegal in some way. So, what was it?

Enter the mess. No one really knows what the Russians had that they were willing to give to the Trump campaign. Through some investigation, it was determined a Russian lawyer with ties to Vladimir “Rudy” Putin offered damning evidence of possible unethical/illegal activities by Hillary Clinton. Is that illegal in and of itself? That’s the problem: we don’t actually know, and Donald Trump, Jr., isn’t giving specifics that would help us determine the legality of the information. Put another way, we have the word of someone with a vested interest in downplaying the potential illegality of his actions versus the presumptions of people with a vested interest in hyping the potential illegality of his actions. Until we learn more about the information in question, I have to opt for Donald Trump Jr.’s version of events with the possibility of future revision upon receipt of new information. You know, the whole “innocent until proven guilty” thing?

The collusion allegation is the latest in a long string of double standards the Left has for the Right. Whenever a member of the Right does something as serious as…dare I say it…having an overdue library book, the Left says that person has lost all moral authority to speak, act, or lead and should step down from any leadership position he or she holds. Of course, when a member of the Left does something as trivial as…let’s just create a hypothetical offense…leaving a young woman to drown in a car overnight while he went home and slept (again, it’s completely hypothetical because I’m sure the Left would come down hard on someone as horrible as the guy in this purely hypothetical scenario), the Left screams “witch hunt” and complains about how nasty and partisan politics has gotten. Notice the Left never admits their people do anything wrong while accusing the Right of making Adolf Hitler look like an Amish Boy Scout? That’s by design.

The Left operates under the notion that if you can’t beat them, make them beat themselves. (Get your minds out of the gutter, you cheeky monkeys!) This idea may not have originated with Saul Alinsky, but it was certainly documented in his “Rules for Radicals” when he wrote, “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” This is particularly effective against the Right because they tend to hold consistency and doing the right thing in high regard, unlike the Left whose standards are often double, triple, and quadruple depending upon the situation.

To put it in the context of the Donald Trump Jr. situation, the Left wants President Trump to hold his son to the standard he held Hillary Clinton to during the campaign. And if President Trump were a typical modern Republican, he would capitulate faster than a Frenchman in Berlin in 1942. Or today, for that matter. But, Trump isn’t a typical modern Republican. He isn’t afraid to play by the Left’s rules and expose their hypocrisy, which makes it harder for the Left to score points. Not to mention, Trump hopefully learned his lesson after the Left got him to distance himself from members of his staff who were tied to the Russia story because once the Left gets you to surrender on one item, they will flood you with additional requests similar to the original item. At this point, I’m surprised the Left hasn’t demanded Trump divorce Melania Trump because she is married to him.

If I were advising the President, I would tell the Left to pound sand when it comes to the collusion allegations. Until they bring some actual evidence the information Russia allegedly gave to the Trump campaign is illegal and not just morally gray, all they’re doing is throwing around a term they don’t understand in an attempt to overturn an election where their candidate lost because, well, she’s Hillary Clinton. And, if he wanted to twist the knife a bit more, he could remind them how the world isn’t black and white, but merely shades of gray. After all, isn’t that what the Left always tells us about moral issues?

Share This:

 

Stop Whining and Start Thinking

The mainstream media in the United States is biased. They are the propaganda arm of the liberal left Democratic Party. Even now they continue to expand on the made-up story that was debunked by General McMaster who is an eye witness to the facts.

The Leftists in this country are so upset that their candidate lost the Presidential election in November 2016 that they will do anything to discredit the legitimate and lawfully elected President Donald Trump. Including writing pure fiction and calling it news. And doing so without sources and ignoring those sources that contradict the narrative they wish to tell.

This is not news. This is fiction. And it is damaging fiction as well. It damages the US reputation abroad. It damages the reputation of journalists and journalism. Which is already on a downhill slide. Which is my there are so many bloggers like myself. We the People are taking journalism out of the hands of false storytellers and reporting the facts since they are not capable of doing so any longer.

If you are a journalist and you are continuing to report on the false narrative of the President giving secret intelligence to Russian diplomats at a White House meeting. Please use some intelligence and think about the situation first before opening your mouth and inserting your foot deeper. Or writing something equally as ignorant.

And if you are some anti Trump Democrat, Leftist, or even Republican. Please also use some intelligence before going off the deep end thinking that what the mainstream media is reporting as news is actual events or facts. They didn’t report any of that in past Republican Administrations what makes you think they have become honest journalists now?

President Trump is nearly 71 years old. He is worth billions of dollars as a businessman before getting into politics. We have a true citizen President again. This is a good thing. If we was this Russian mole that has spent 7 decades worming his way to the highest office in the land. Why would he blow that cover just a few months into his Administration? It doesn’t make any sense if what the liberal biased media is reporting as true. Donald Trump isn’t a bumbling idiot. He would not have created his business empire being one at all. And he isn’t in collusion with the Russians or any other foreign power.

Share This:

 

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

Since late October of last year, Democrats have suspected Russia had a role in the 2016 Presidential election. And thanks to a recent report from American intelligence agencies, they have renewed their suspicions to the point of accusing Russia of “hacking” our election. (Oddly enough, these same folks didn’t have a problem with our government trying to influence the Brexit vote or Israeli elections…).

With the allegations sticking around longer than a STD contracted from Courtney Love, maybe it’s time we tackle this idea head on.

hacking the election

What the Left believes it means – Russia influencing the 2016 Presidential election, an act of treason by Donald Trump and his supporters

What it really means – The Left can’t accept the fact Hillary lost.

Let’s get one thing straight. I am not a fan of Russia, especially under Vladimir Putin. I am also not a fan of jumping to conclusions, especially when the risk of being wrong is creating an international incident. As a result, I am cautious about letting my feelings towards the former taint my commitment to the latter. Yet, to hear the Left describe it, I am an evil Russia-loving, Putin-worshiping traitor.

You know, like Hillary Clinton was in 2009?

Either way, we really don’t have much to go on when it comes to the “hacking the election” allegations. “But didn’t 17 intelligence agencies just issue a report saying Russia tried to get Donald Trump elected?” you might say. Well, yes and no. Yes, American intelligence agencies issued a report that suggests Russia did what they’re being accused of, but it wasn’t nearly as much of a slam dunk as the Left wants us to believe.

Out of the 17 agencies, only 3 offered any analysis. And of those 3, a whopping 0 offered any hard evidence of such. Oh, they offered suggestions and assumptions, but no hard evidence.

Think about that for a moment. We have members of a political party willing to condemn a foreign country of a major crime solely based on assumptions. Then again, these are some of the same folks who ran with the UVA rape story from Rolling Stone, so actual justice may be something alien to them.

So, if it’s not Russia, who did “hack the election”? The first thing to understand is our election was not hacked. Hillary Clinton lost because she was a bad candidate. The only reason for this line of absurdity is because Democrats cannot accept the fact Hillary lost. If the election results were different, Russian hacking would be the last thing on the Left’s hive-mind and they would be telling Trump voters to get over it.

But there is a deeper reason why the Left needs to blame their Presidential loss on Russia: they suck at cybersecurity. This is where Wikileaks comes into the picture. Had it not been for Julian Assange, we might not know about how the Democratic National Committee screwed over Bernie Sanders to bestow the party nomination to Hillary. And how did they get caught? There are two lines of thought.

First, Wikileaks got emails from a Bernie Sanders supporter who had access to some of the most damning emails. This makes sense, given how Sanders got treated worse by his party than Ike Turner treated Tina. And let’s not understate the fact the DNC all but disregarded Sanders supporters unless they knelt before Zod…I mean Hillary. Even prominent Sanders supporters were told to knuckle under, and more than a few of them did. One can imagine what that did to more strident Sanders supporters. If the party felt fine with betraying them, it’s not impossible to imagine they would betray the party. And thanks to Wikileaks, these Sanders supporters earned a measure of revenge. One rule of cybersecurity is to make sure you have everything protected, and the Left didn’t do that here.

The other line of thought is John Podesta, Hillary’s right hand man, got caught by a phishing email. For those of you unfamiliar with the concept, a phishing email looks like a legitimate email from a trusted source, but contains malicious software that captures vital information that can often be used against the victim and others in the victim’s email groups.

And remember, kids, these are the smart people. Just ask them!

I tend to believe both lines of thought are valid and may actually be part and parcel of the same conclusion. In either case, the Democrats got caught with their pants down (not unlike one of their previous Presidential candidates) and couldn’t figure out a way to recover. But they sure figured out who they could blame for their failures.

Now, we just need to hope we don’t wind up in another Cold War because of them.

Share This:

 

The New Red Scare

If you’ve been following the news the past couple of weeks, you’ve heard a lot about allegations Russia tampered with our election. It’s gotten to the point President Obama has taken time away from his busy schedule of golfing to order research be done on the 2016 elections to find out what happened. Mr. President, you could pay me half the money it would take for that report to be done and give you the right answer: Hillary Clinton sucked as a candidate and believed her own press.

Of course, that hasn’t stopped the CIA from speculating and letting the media know there is a possibility of Russia getting involved in our election. I’ve had the chance to read what Reuters and the Washington Post wrote about this CIA report. If you haven’t read it, don’t bother. It’s basically two anonymous sources who allegedly have knowledge of the report saying exactly what Hillary’s camp is saying. Wow. Imagine that! Leftists covering for Leftists!

Now, members of the Senate are getting into the act. Four Senators,  Democrats Charles Schumer and Jack Reed and Democrat Lites John McCain and Lindsey Graham, released a statement echoing the sentiments from the Left, the media, and just about every conspiracy theorist from the Left.

But here’s the thing. We don’t know for sure if the information is accurate, and that’s kinda important if you’re going to level such severe charges against Donald Trump and Russia. The Left is quick to point out Trump’s cozy relationship with Vladimir Putin (a bromance story no one wanted) as proof. Throw in allegations that Wikileaks was working with Russian hackers, and you have an iron-clad argument according to the Left.

Yeah, but that ignores a lot of information. As Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton has ties with Russia since, well, it was part of her job. And as we’ve seen, she sucked at her job. Remember the “Reset” button fiasco? Put simply, she wasn’t ready for the job, and it showed.

Russia knew President Obama and his cast of misfits could be easily manipulated and mocked, and they did both in spades. Having Hillary be President would have been a boon for them because she would have guaranteed more ineptitude which would allow Russia to thumb its nose at us for at least 4 years. But that changed when the US Government attempted to interfere in Russia’s election. Yeah, that might have given Putin a legitimate beef with us. Thanks Obama!

So, Russia had the motive, if you want to accept revenge as a reason for acting out. And they certainly have the means. Russian hackers have been busy for the past several years and may have been responsible for at least some of the embarrassing emails Wikileaks published. But having a motive and means is not as air-tight as you might think. The fact Hillary Clinton would have been an easy target for Russia to muscle in on adds a level of disbelief that cannot be discounted.

Another factor to consider is when it was “known” Russia influenced our elections. If they were as clever as the Left makes them out to be, why wouldn’t they have disrupted the nomination process to prevent Hillary from even becoming the nominee? After all, Bernie Sanders’ ideology is a lot closer to Russia’s than Hillary’s. A case could be made they wanted to string her along so she could fail on the biggest stage, but why would they do that? Stringing her along would only make it more likely she might have won, especially if the polls were right. (They weren’t, but stay with me here.) Such a strategy would have had the potential for major blowback if Hillary won.

The Left has also claimed Russia was involved in spreading fake news about Hillary that made her look bad. Listen, kids, Hillary Clinton made herself look bad. The Russians had nothing to do with that.

Granted, this is all speculation on my part, but where I deviate from the prevailing sentiment on the Left is…I actually acknowledge my speculation. If Russia did have a hand in the 2016 election, I want it called out and addressed. If not, the Left will have a lot of explaining to do, but they won’t be bothered with it. They’ll stick it away in their memory hole and pretend they weren’t wrong.

Until such time as hard evidence is presented, I will withhold condemnation of Russia at this time. Call it my “Don’t Want to Wind Up Like Rolling Stone With the UVA Rape Story” sense.

Share This: