Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

85 Views

There is a phrase that has been batted around lately more than a tennis ball during a long rally at Wimbledon: rule of law. But for once, it’s not the Right that is doing the batting. It’s the Left. It seems they’ve become acutely aware of the concept after claiming President Donald Trump believes he’s above the law due to his recent impeachment acquittal in the Senate. On top of that, the President has also suggested the Department of Justice look into the conviction of former Trump associate Roger Stone (and with good reason if the recent news around the judge and jury in his case are accurate). Now, the Left is on their outrage soapboxes demanding the President and the Right respect the rule of law.

As you might guess, I take the rule of law seriously, or at least seriously enough to write a weekly blog post highlighting the Leftist take on the phrase.

rule of law

What the Left thinks it means – following the letter and spirit of the law

What it really means – following the letter and spirit of the law even when it’s politically inconvenient to do so

The Left may have the trial lawyers in their back pockets (and their hands in the back pockets of the trial lawyers for that matter), but that doesn’t mean they have a healthy respect for the law. What they do have is a healthy respect for those who can create laws through rhetorical or contextual devices that judges who are already predisposed to agree with the outcome will allow to stand in court. From the bizarre arguments from Roe v. Wade to the more recent, yet equally bizarre, legal arguments requiring Christians to act against their faith to accommodate same sex marriages, the Left figured out how to get what they want without consulting the voting public: file a lawsuit! Then, it’s just a matter of crafting a legal argument so seemingly air-tight that no appeals court could overturn it and, voila, you have a law and the rest of the country has to go along with it.

Of course, once that happens, the Left demands everyone follow the letter and spirit of the law with no deviations whatsoever. On the other hand, if it’s a law they don’t like, they feel it’s morally justified to defy the law. Sanctuary cities, anyone?

It’s this duplicity when it comes to the law that rings hollow when the Left talks about the rule of law. The recent impeachment fiasco…I mean trial is a nice microcosm of this. Remember when the Left jumped all over Mitch McConnell and other Republican Senators to recuse themselves because they already made up their minds on impeachment? On the surface, it seems like a reasonable and legally justifiable position. Of course, that same argument could have been applied to Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, and a whole host of Democrat Senators who had not only made up their minds to impeach the President, but made it a part of their regular communication with followers, constituents, and fawning media types.

And let’s not forget one of the articles of impeachment had zero basis in law, but it didn’t bother Senate Democrats enough to make them vote with the law and not with their party. But hey, party over country is a Republican thing, right?

If you haven’t recognized this Leftist tactic, it’s right out of Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals. They are trying to hold the Right to the rule of law (or at least the Leftist version of it) while ignoring it themselves, and until recently it was virtually foolproof. Then, as more conservatives and Republicans began to educate themselves on the Left’s tactics, they started to call out the Left and flip the script on them. Not only did the Right flip the script, but the Left flipped their lids, as well as their talking points, to the condition we’re in now. To use a more modern bit of terminology, we’re in the Upside Down.

Or at least some of us are.

Although it’s nice to hear Leftists take the rule of law seriously for a change, it’s based on the politics of the situation, not out of any core principles they have. In fact, the same Leftists going after President Trump for alleged violations of the rule of law were conspicuously absent when President Barack Obama took similar action on matters more pressing than a Tweet about Roger Stone.

This is where it’s important to take the politics out of the rule of law. President Obama violated the law on several occasions and many, including your humble correspondent, were justifiably outraged. President Trump, I feel, has violated the law as well, and only some of us are outraged. By letting our politics guide our decision-making, we can justify poor behavior for the sake of rooting for “our team.” But wrong is wrong, no matter whether we love or loathe the criminal. An eye for an eye may be a boon for the eyepatch industry, but it’s a poor way to enforce the law. It has to be enforced across the board for the rule of law to have any weight.

That is why Lady Justice is blind. Either that or it was an unfortunate recreation of a scene from 50 Shades of Gray, but in either case, we need to be absolutely sure we are standing for the rule of law in every case. Donald Trump isn’t my cup of Earl Grey (not of the 50 Shades variety), but I want him to be extended every legal opportunity I would get as an American citizen. The Left doesn’t want that, though. They want to prosecute first and ask questions never, all under the guise of defending the rule of law from the man they’re trying to prosecute. Call me crazy, but doesn’t that sound a lot like abuse of power? And, if so, where are the Left’s rule of law hawks on impeaching Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff, Jerrold Nadler, and the whole cast of characters involved with the impeachment process? I’m sure they’re working on it, right after they try to impeach President Trump for something else that may or may not be against the law.

After all, it’s not like Leftists are known to be hypocrites, right?

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

140 Views

With President Donald Trump being acquitted by the Senate on both counts of impeachment, the Left has gone crazy…well, crazier than normal…and normal is relative when it comes to the Left. Let’s try this again. The Left hasn’t taken the President’s acquittal by the Senate very well. Some have gone so far as to say we’re on the verge of a dictatorship, while others say we’re already there. After all, the Left has all this evidence of President Trump acting and sounding and looking like one, so how come nobody else can see it?

Well, to paraphrase a former President, that all depends on what your definition of dictatorship is. Which is great for me because it gives me this week’s Leftist Lexicon topic!

dictatorship

What the Left thinks it means – a form of government where there is an all-powerful leader, what we are experiencing now or will be experiencing soon

What it really means – the go-to excuse for when the Left fails in imposing their will, used interchangeably with fascist

The Left thrives on oppression, real or imagined, as a means to control how people think. Most of the time, this oppression is imaginary, but it’s just as effective at getting mush-minded people to agree with them and act accordingly. After all, if you feel you’re oppressed, it means you are and, thus, can claim victimhood, which is the coin of the Left’s realm. Of course, the more boxes you can check off on the Oppression Checklist, the more oppressed you are. After that, there’s a whole hierarchy of oppression that is an M.C. Escher/Rube Goldberg/Pink Floyd’s “The Wall” flowchart, and there isn’t enough booze or drugs to make heads or tails out of it. Needless to say, you shouldn’t even try unless you want to end up like Keith Richards and be 1000 years old.

That need for victimhood drives the Left’s perception of the Trump Administration being a dictatorship, more so after the Senate acquittal. They complained about the Senate trial not allowing witnesses (in spite of the fact the House Managers called 17 witnesses and didn’t bother to do even a little legwork to enforce the subpoenas filed against members of the Trump Administration so they might get home for Christmas break sooner). They said it wasn’t right for Senate Republicans to coordinate with the President on a defense. They screamed about how it wasn’t fair some of the jurors in the Senate trial said they would vote to acquit before the trial began (while saying nothing about the multiple Democrat Senators who said they would vote to convict before the trial even began). All of this and much more is proof the President is now a dictator and above the law, and it has the Left protesting loudly on social media and in public.

Let that last sentence roll around in your heads for a moment. Leftists say we’re in a dictatorship while they complain online and in public…without the President arresting them for speaking out against him. Either Donald Trump is the most incompetent dictator in world history or, now hear me out here, he’s not a dictator. I’m gonna go out on a limb here and say the President isn’t a dictator, and not because he hasn’t arrested me for making fun of his haircut. In fact, has anyone been arrested for just making fun of President Trump? Not that I’m aware of. Even most of the people who have openly opposed him haven’t seen the inside of Gitmo or any other prison for that matter. It’s only the extreme cases that get a visit from the Secret Service because that’s their job. Even if you humor the Left on this, the lack of incarceration for protesting the President is hard to overlook when making the case we’re in a dictatorship.

Good luck trying to convince Leftists of that, though. They are bound and determined to be under a dictatorship even if it doesn’t kill them. The odd thing is they aren’t opposed to being in a dictatorship as long as they’re in control of it. Some of the same folks who paint Trump as a dictator are strangely quiet on actual dictatorships in the Middle East or try to whitewash Leftist dictators like Pol Pot. For some examples closer to home, check out some of the antics the Left pulls on college campuses to stifle conservatives. That’s what makes their vocal opposition to dictatorships so disingenuous to me. You can’t pick and choose when it comes to dictatorships. Once you allow one to curry your favor, you lose the moral high ground.

Let’s just say the Left ceded that moral high ground a looooooong time ago.

In the meantime, we have to stay on our toes to ensure we don’t become an actual dictatorship. For all of the faults I find with President Trump, wanting absolute power doesn’t seem to be one of them. I understand he likes to be in control of situations based on the way he’s conducted business, but I’m just not seeing where he’s enacting anything that would lead to him becoming President for Life. If anything, he’s acted better on improving things at home by removing government regulations and making a positive impact abroad by expanding gay rights protections in countries that don’t have them. You know, like those Middle Eastern dictatorships the Left conveniently overlook?

Just because President Trump was acquitted by the Senate of two of the weakest impeachment articles in our history doesn’t mean we’re becoming a dictatorship or that we’re already there. It simply means the House Managers didn’t give the Senate much to work with. Even in real criminal trials, you can’t try to prosecute someone for a crime and expect the defense to prove your case for you. And no amount of screaming, pouting, fuming, or general jackassery will change that.

Of course, it makes it easier for us to spot the loonies, so at least we can be entertained.

It’s (Not) Dead, Jim!

140 Views

If you haven’t noticed from all the death of the Republic talk going on out there, the impending acquittal of President Donald Trump is going to signal the end of the Republic as we know it and usher in an age of authoritarianism. You know, like the totalitarianism the President has already put in place, only much bigger and scarier?

A Facebook friend of mine and I had a civil discussion about the end of the Republic. While she was lamenting the end of our great experiment, I posted a YouTube video of the scene from “Ghostbusters” (the good one, not the 2016 “woke” version) where the guys were talking about the apocalypse coming if they didn’t stop Gozer, the part that talks about “human sacrifices, dogs and cats living together, MASS HYSTERIA!” She asked me to indulge her, which I did.

But for the rest of you Leftists, I won’t. Not anymore.

For as much as you lament about the impending Senate vote proving your fears to be justified, you ignore one of the obvious duplicities of your arguments. On the one hand, you claim Donald Trump is an idiot. On the other hand, you say he’s heading up a cabal of villainy worthy of a James Bond movie. I haven’t heard that strange dichotomy since…why, it was George W. Bush! Same plays, same playbook, same overreaction, different President. It’s almost as if you guys are recycling your squawking points! And it composts quite well.

But here’s the thing, and it’s something I pointed out to my Facebook friend. The President didn’t cause the current alleged weakness in the Republic; he’s just the easy scapegoat. Since the turn of the century, we’ve seen any number of threats to the Republic coming from our elected officials. The PATRIOT Act, although passed with good intent, contained a lot of mandates that undercut individual freedom and privacy. The Arab Spring? That remains an existential threat on a global scale. Using the IRS to go after political opponents? Certainly not innocuous to the Republic when you consider the incredible (and law-defying) power they have.

And where were you Leftists when this and other actual threats to the Republic were being rolled out? With the exception of the PATRIOT Act, you were scarcer than the food at an all-you-can-eat buffet after Rosie O’Donnell and Michael Moore leave. And even with the PATRIOT Act, your opposition was targeted at the wrong parts.

That’s how I know your current freak-out is faked. You don’t give one-one hundredth of a damn about the health of the Republic. If you did, you wouldn’t be Leftists. Instead, you’re breaking out the American flags and red, white, and blue bunting to attack the Senate Republicans for voting in favor of acquitting the President and doing so in a way that draws the most amount of attention to you. While you fawn over Adam Schiff’s weaker than Mormon Irish coffee presentation, you ignore the fact he a) didn’t present a case that resembled the alleged crimes, b) has some apparent ties to some of the particulars of the investigation that would have gotten him thrown off the case due to conflicts of interest, and c) only got his pathetic case to the Senate after a rushed and extremely flawed process that defied existing precedent, and then expected the Senate to do the job he failed to do.

The House failed the country, not the Senate, and not the Senate Republicans. And if you are being honest with yourselves, you would pin the blame for the downfall of the Republic on…well, you. By your silence when it mattered because you liked the man in power undercutting the Republic and by your hyperbolic overreaction over something that doesn’t threaten the Republic because you hate the man in power, you have become the monster you have tried to create for your own ideological purposes.

Instead of hyperventilating over what you see at the death of the Republic, take account of the fact we’ve survived people in power I wouldn’t trust to run a marathon, let alone the United States, and we will continue to do so. Why? Because we’re stronger than one President or one group of people.

And we will continue to be as long as people are willing to be honest with each other. The Left isn’t interested in this because they know they will be called on the carpet for the stuff they’ve let loose on the country, just as the Right would be. Face it, there are no white hats here, just hats that are varying shades of dark gray. If you really want to save the Republic, start with cleaning up your own house, or House of Representatives if you prefer. The fact Adam Schiff is being lauded as a hero instead of run out of Washington, DC, on a rail for pulling the crap he did isn’t a sign of honesty. It’s a sign you are willing to sell out the Republic if you can justify the cause and the Republic be damned in the process.

For all the crying you do about Republicans putting party before country, you shouldn’t have such a blind spot for doing the very thing you pin on the GOP.

The DILLIGAF Defense

167 Views

Since 2015, Leftists have been wracking their brains trying to figure out President Donald Trump and why he maintains a level of support that they feel normal people wouldn’t/shouldn’t maintain. For all of their big-brain thinking, the best they’ve been able to come up with is…it’s a cult. And you know it’s a cult because Trump supporters make the same comments and believe the same things Trump does, even if it hurts them personally. You know, like Leftists.

Admittedly, it’s taken me a while to wrap my head around the pro-Trump phenomenon, but I think I have a line on it and I have pop culture to thank for it. There is an abbreviation for a particular attitude that seems to fit the President and his supporters quite nicely: DILLIGAF. It stands for “Do I Look Like I Give A Fuck?” and it represents an attitude of dismissive apathy. Like me when I hear another Tyler Perry movie is in theaters.

The Left and the media (but I repeat myself) have lined up firmly against President Trump and aren’t afraid to show their utter contempt for him and the people who vote for him. There are many ways to react to this kind of vitriol from ignoring it to returning the vitriol in some fashion. The Left wants you to react negatively so they can use you as an example of “the typical Trump supporter.” What they don’t like is when you flip the script on them because they don’t know how to handle someone who doesn’t take them seriously. They require their targets to treat their statements as gospel in order to manipulate the targets into thinking and acting like the Left expects.

There are two effective ways to deny the Left their pound of flesh. For me, I prefer laughing at the statements, but President Trump adopts DILLIGAF, which accomplishes the same dismissal of the Left’s squawking points in a different way. With either approach, the Left can’t handle the pushback and they try to escalate their attacks, which makes it easier to volley back with the same dismissiveness used previously. Eventually, the Leftist will give up, but not without throwing out more invectives than Andrew Dice Clay with Tourette’s.

Take the situation between the President and CNN’s Jim Acosta, for example. After getting shut down repeatedly, Acosta resorts to more “gotcha” style questions and more outrageous behavior to try to get the President’s attention/derision. And the more he does that, the more Trump brushes him aside (and deservedly so, in my not-so-humble opinion).

That’s the thing about the Left. They can only escalate a situation, never deescalate it, because they let their emotions overrule their intellect. And given the intellectual prowess of Hank Johnson and Joe Biden, that may not be that tough to accomplish. Even so, the Left’s emotions become their weaknesses when dealing with someone whose fresh out of fucks to give.

Someone like Donald Trump.

And the more Leftists howl with derision or outrage at whatever he says or does, the fewer fucks the President gives, which enrages the Left even more…and so on and so on. I may not agree with President Trump on everything, but I agree the DILLIGAF defense is effective when dealing with people who hate you for doing nothing more than looking at things differently than they do. 

The Trial of the Senate-ury

174 Views

It’s a common belief among the Right that Leftists and their media cohorts exchange talking points prior to a story breaking so everyone can be on the same page. Whether this is true or not is subject to debate, but if there is a case to be made in favor of it happening, we can look to how the Senate trial of President Donald Trump is being covered. It seems everyone and their grandmother on the Left is saying the Senate is on trial and if they don’t put country before party it will prove the Senate ran a sham trial.

Call me crazy (and, believe me, the label fits), but aren’t we in the middle of a trial concerning whether President Trump committed impeachable offenses? How in the hell did it become a referendum on the Senate?

Because the Left needs the Senate trial to be about the Senate, more specifically Senate Republicans and not about the weakness of the House’s articles of impeachment.

I’ve made my opinions on the two Articles of Impeachment previously, so I won’t delve too much into them except to say I’ve seen three year olds give better arguments on far less important matters than the House Democrats have so far on impeachment. Since the House went all-in on Impeach-a-Palooza, it appears they didn’t plan for what they would do if they got it, and it shows in their lack of preparedness and in their repetition of their talking points in lieu of new information or even new tactics.

While the Left has been creaming their jeans over Rep. Adam Schiff’s presentation of the House’s case for impeachment, it’s honestly come off to me like a kid who didn’t read the book he or she was supposed to read and then wing an oral book report on in front of the entire class. Schiff may sound like he’s on top of things, but it’s in the content where the presentation falls apart. How exactly is that an indictment of the Senate? If anything, it’s an indictment of the House because they approved the Articles of Impeachment in the first place.

So much of the ire against the Senate revolves around whether they will call witnesses. The Left desperately wants the Senate to do so, which is why they’re trying to shame Senate Republicans into doing it instead of, you know, having it already done when they were the ones in charge of the impeachment inquiry. Then again, if you remember waaaaaaay back in December, the House Democrats called witnesses to give powerful testimony that amounted to, at best, second or third hand information. One of their witnesses even contradicted their narrative during his testimony. And to think a good number of politicians went to law school without learning the first rule of witness testimony is to know what they’re going to say before they take the oath. What’s more, the House tried to cover up the lack of first hand knowledge by having witnesses talk about their own integrity and qualifications, none of which had anything to do with whether the President was guilty of bribery, extortion, or any of the other charges levied against him. How exactly is that an indictment of the Senate?

The larger rhetorical offensive in play is designed to conflate any action not directly in line with the way the Left expects things to be done as a gross violation of protocol and decency. Granted, this is Congress we’re dealing with here, so they could be right about the decency part, but the protocol part isn’t tied to a desired outcome. And if we’re being completely honest here, the House Democrats broke protocol by going ahead with impeachment without Trump Administration witnesses instead of getting a court to order the witnesses to testify. Now that they’ve gone this far, the House Managers are trying to get the Senate to do the work they should have done before now. If the Senate refuses, however, it’s still not a reflection on them for not allowing witnesses; it’s a reflection on how shoddy a job the House did. And do you know how I know?

Jerrold Nadler maligning the Senate as being guilty of a cover-up…before the Senate had a chance to take up the House Managers’ arguments.

It’s almost as if the Left wants the Senate trial to go poorly so their self-professed self-fulfilling prophecy will come true and they can say, “See? We told you it was rigged!” Then, they will use this narrative to help their attempt to retake the Senate and, presumably, impeach the President all over again provided he gets reelected. Judging from the current clown car of candidates, I don’t think he has much to worry about in his reelection bid.

Meanwhile, both houses of Congress may be in play while the President is running. If Republicans get what they want, they will regain the House and keep the Senate, and the Democrats want the exact opposite. I think the 2020 Congressional elections will come down to whether the public favors impeachment and removal. For once, the Left is playing a long game, but they’re playing it badly. Not only has support for impeachment slipped lower than an earthworm’s belt buckle, but it’s actually drawing people to Trump. Guess what accusing Senate Republicans of a cover-up is likely to do.

If current trends continue, the Left will be reliving 2016 in a few months, just on a much larger scale. The more the Left pushes the idea the Senate is on trial for what they do or don’t do in the Senate trial of President Trump, the more it will backfire. 

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

201 Views

House Democrats, after not learning their lesson about how impeachment backfired on them worse than Wile E. Coyote in a Road Runner cartoon, took another step towards trying to rein in President Donald Trump’s powers in the aftermath of the Iran attack. After not being briefed before the President launched the attack that took out Iran’s number 2 military leader (now he’s numbers 2 through 1 billion), the House passed a non-binding resolution that would forbid the President from blowing up more Iranian terrorists without Congressional approval. This was done under the auspices of the War Powers Resolution of 1973, also called the War Powers Act.

Although the War Powers Act (I’ll call it that for the rest of the piece because it’s shorter and I like it) has been used in a handful of situations since its inception, people, and most notably our elected officials, still don’t quite understand it in full. Even your humble correspondent had to do a bit of research on it to make sure I understood it, and if I can do it, people who get paid to write laws can do it (hopefully).

And with that being said, let’s get right into it.

the War Powers Act

What the Left thinks it means – a Congressional check on the President to avoid getting us into wars Congress doesn’t approve

What it really means – a bad idea made worse by partisan bickering

In short, the War Powers Act gives the President the authority to enter a military conflict for a limited amount of time before Congress needs to declare war and, in exchange, the President has to brief Congress within 48 hours of any military action. In the recent Iran situation, only one of the conditions was met, that being the military action. As far as the briefing, one could argue they were informally briefed by the media covering the action, but a formal briefing wasn’t offered. That angered House Democrats because…well, I’m not completely sure. Given how some Democrats were upset that President Trump didn’t act sooner, you would think they would be happy we finally did something.

And they were…kinda. But that’s a blog for another time.

The point here is President Trump is now under the microscope again for attacking Iran after they attacked our embassy and may have planned further actions against Americans in the region. We can argue the ethics of what happened all we want, but there is one thing that is crystal clear: President Trump was authorized to take action under the War Powers Act without getting Congress to sign off on it.

I can understand why the President may not have wanted to let Congress about his Iran attack ahead of time. Between the leakers, the Muslim sympathizers, and the general dullards, I wouldn’t trust them with my junior high locker combination, let alone something like information about a missile strike. Even after they were briefed, Congressional Democrats weren’t satisfied with the information and said there wasn’t enough persuasive information that Iran was going to attack again. Of course, the 40 years of Iran yelling “Death tp America” might have been a hint, but hey.

Although I believe the President was legally authorized under the War Powers Act to take action against Iran, I have to say it’s bad law because of how it circumvents the Constitution and cheapens the act of war. The President is the Commander in Chief, meaning he controls the military. Congress, on the other hand, has the authority to declare war. By allowing the President to engage in war-like activities, even if it’s done in the name of protecting us, Congress’ role in the process of war is negated. What good is getting Congressional approval to engage an enemy if the President can order an engagement prior to even talking to Congress? It’s like giving your credit card to a shopaholic for a week before setting limits to his or her spending. You know, like Congress does with our tax dollars.

What’s more, the War Powers Act ignores the human toll of war (or pre-war if you will). For every death or injury, every father or mother deployed under it, every family that is disrupted even temporarily, the War Powers Act doesn’t justify it. If we are going to strike at an enemy, it has to be done under the auspices of an actual declaration of war, not a 60-90 day window that can be extended with a Congressional vote. Not only is that far too late in the process for my tastes, it’s disrespectful to the men and women of our military and their families. We owe it to them to have the courage to put forth a united front against an acknowledged enemy.

And that’s impossible in the current political climate. Between the two poles, there is a lot of moral posturing and hatred that prevents the sober analysis of the facts necessary to declare war. Just look at the number of Leftists who blamed Trump for Iran taking down a commercial airliner because they claim it wouldn’t have happened if President Trump hadn’t acted. There’s an entire ideological side determined to blame the President for every ill and the facts be damned. And there’s an entire ideological side determined to defend the President, also with a facts be damned attitude. Meanwhile, those of us in the middle are getting exhausted trying to reason with both sides to try to get us all on the same page. As it stands, we’re not even reading the same book in the same language, which makes the likelihood of getting people to rally behind a common enemy like Iran pointless and impossible.

Which makes the War Powers Act one of the most dangerous laws on the books right now.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

211 Views

The new year started off with a bang, literally in the case of the late Major General Qassim Suleimani. Seems the good Major General got blown up in a strike in Baghdad, due to his involvement in a little act of violence against the American embassy in Baghdad. Oh, and his role in killing 600 Americans.

And now the Left is defending Iran indirectly by saying “He was a bad guy, but….”

Although there is a lot of attention being paid to Iran (after a lot of money was paid to them by a previous Administration who came up with a dumbass plan Iran wasn’t complying with), not much is known about the country itself and the Islamic theocracy in charge there. I’ll do my best to alleviate that here, and maybe throw in a few jokes.

Iran

What the Left thinks it means – a country that has suffered from American intervention, but was complying with the Iran Deal

What it really means – a country that has benefited from Leftist foreign policy failures

It’s time for a story. There was once a time in our history when Iran wasn’t the douchecanoe of a country it is today. It was the late 1970s, when polyester was the fabric of choice, KISS made a disco song, and Iran was lead by a man named Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, otherwise known as the Shah of Iran. Although he had a great deal of support in America for his more progressive (good progressive, not the Leftist version) approaches, the religious leaders and many of his countrymen disliked him and eventually overthrew him, replacing him with Ruhollah Khomeini (otherwise known as Skippy). The Ayatollah Khomeini went the opposite direction, turning Iran from a place where women could drive in public to one where shouting “Death to America” was their national pastime.

Since then, Iran has been a rigid theocracy, the kind the Left keeps telling us is right around the corner if we let those evil Christians take over! Being a Christian myself, I can see where the Left is coming from because there are some real loons out there (I’m looking at you, Westboro Baptist Church). However, I doubt the Left’s fears of a Christian theocracy are as well-founded as we think. Speaking as a Lutheran, we can’t even decide on what flavor of Jello goes best for a potluck. What makes you think we’ve got a master plan to take over the country? This ain’t The Handmaid’s Tale, kids, and we’re nowhere near it. But you know where it’s a reality?

Iran.

But, now the Left gets to pretend like they care about war with Iran because of President Donald Trump turning Qasem Soleimani extra crispy. The fact is Iran wants us dead (as evidenced by their “Death to America” chants) and will stop at nothing to make that happen. For the past 40+ years, America and Iran have been going around and around. More accurately, Iran has been getting wound up and yelling at us while America has pretty much been ignoring it. Although this approach may work with a child’s tantrum, it doesn’t work in geopolitics. All this has done is allowed Iran time to plan and develop technology that can be used to attack us.

Enter the Iran Deal. While Leftists defend this diplomatic effort from the Obama Administration to exchange lifting economic sanctions against Iran for Iran promising not to further develop nuclear technology for weapons while allowing it to continue to develop that technology to generate energy. Now, the funny thing is Iran is sitting one of the world’s biggest oil deposits, which makes it odd for them to start developing nuclear energy. Add to that the fact the Left likes nuclear energy as much as they like Ronald Reagan. Yet, the Iran Deal was heralded as a huge step forward towards reducing tensions in the area.

Oh, and the matter of a few billion dollars sent to Iran by the Obama Administration.

And what did it do? Nothing. Well, except make Iran richer and better able to develop its nuclear program.

I have been of the opinion that Iran has been developing nuclear weapons for a while now because, well, it suits their needs. Being radical Muslims, Iran has no problem lying to non-believers, as their reading of the Koran goes. And since we’re the Great Satan, they feel they’re justified in whatever they need to do to bring us down. Lying is no big deal if it leads to the end they desire.

You know, just like Leftists.

From a military standpoint, Iran has a vested interest in keeping the world in the dark about just how far along they are and in what direction their nuclear program is taking. It’s classic misdirection, and America has been taken in by promises that don’t pass the smell test. How do I know this? Because even with President Trump pulling out of the Iran Deal, Iran continued to violate terms of the agreement, as established by the foreign leaders who didn’t want us to pull out in the first place. The sensible question we should be asking is why Iran wouldn’t stick with the deal even if one of the principal partners backed out.

Because they had already achieved their goal: to bring America to heel. I maintain even if we stayed in the Iran Deal they had no intent of ever keeping up their end of the bargain because they saw what Saddam Hussein did in Iraq after Operation Desert Storm. For those of you who don’t remember, Saddam kept the UN weapons inspectors busy and distracted while they continued their chemical and biological weapons development, but the UN and Iraq both maintained the inspections and sanctions were being followed.

At least until they weren’t.

While I don’t necessarily want war with Iran, it’s insane to think President Trump’s actions in taking out Suleimani are going to make our relationship with Iran worse and lead to World War III. At worst, Iran still won’t send us a Ramadan card. But the Left need us to think this way because they have already invested a lot of time and energy trying to paint the President as a foreign policy idiot savant, minus the savant. As brutish and wrong-headed as the President is on a lot of subjects foreign and domestic, taking out a terrorist, which Suleimani was, is not a bad thing. Iran isn’t a country who will respond well to a sternly worded memo. They will, however, understand a show of force that can turn Tehran into Detroit with better water in a matter of minutes.

The Left needs Iran to be a victim of America and for the Iran Deal to be successful. With one military strike, Donald Trump has blown that right out of the water.

Sit On It

176 Views

Nancy Pelosi can sit on the Articles of Impeachment all she wants. In fact she can sit on them until the 2020 election is over.

But of course by then President Trump will have won his landslide re-election. The Senate Republicans majority will be increased. And the Republicans will have retaken the House, and Nancy Pelosi will no longer be the Speaker.

The new Republican Speaker can continue with the program set by the Democratic Party and hold on to the Articles of Impeachment. This action will of course anger and cause the symptoms of Trump Derangement Syndrome to worsen in Leftist neverTrumpers everywhere.

Now in 2022, the Speaker of the House after the mid-term elections of that year can send the 3 year old Articles of Impeachment to the Senate, if the 2022 Speaker is a Democrat. If the Republicans still have the majority in 2022 then they can continue to hold on to it as the Democrats did in 2019.

But finally after the 2024 elections. The new Speaker of the House, no matter what party, can finally send the 2019 Articles of Impeachment to the Senate. Of course by this time the Senate will dismiss the charges since President Trump will have completed his 2nd term and will no longer be the active President. And a vote or trial wont matter.

And the votes are in

198 Views

The House has Impeached President Donald Trump. This was not unexpected at all given the impeachment process started 19 minutes after President Trump took office. The Leftist Democratic Party with their Trump Derangement Syndrome wanted to impeach this President at any cost. And now they have.

The results of the vote is also no surprise either. It was a very partisan issue. And the results speak for themselves on this as well. The final vote was 232 Yea and 196 Nay. 215 votes were needed for the measure to pass. And this could have been done without a single Republican even present.

231 Democrats voted for the Articles of Impeachment against President Trump. 194 Republicans and 2 Democrats voted against the Impeachment. I will tip my hat to Congressman Peterson of MN and Congressman Van Drew of NJ who were both able to see this farce for what it was. There were also 3 Republicans and 1 Democrat that did not vote. They should have and I think all 4 of them should be voted out of office.

Now President Trump has become the 3rd US President to be Impeached but unlike the previous impeachments. This one smacks of partisan manipulation in an attempt to remove a duly elected President because the opposition did not win in the 2106 election and they do not have the ability to win in 2020.

President Trump is no angel. But his administration has done great things for the United States and the world. We are far better off now then we were under the 2 previous administrations.

This Impeachment nonsense will now be forced on the Senate. There they will try the President. In order for the President to be found guilty and removed from office. The vote must be 67 or more finding the President guilty. I don’t see this happening. There wont be enough votes for it thankfully.

The Democratic Party will scream about how unfair the Senate proceedings are during this Trial. Ignoring the fact that their own proceedings in the House were unfair and even unlawful and Unconstitutional as well. But that is the par for the course with the Democratic Party. They can take those actions but the Republicans can never do the same. It has been this way for many decades.

I will say it a 3rd time. If President Trump is found Guilty in the Senate. The Leftist Democrats will NOT stop with the Impeachment of Trump. They will Impeach Pence before he can even take the oath of office as President with the hopes of also finding him Guilty in the Senate. Then Nancy Pelosi will be sworn in as President to finish the last few months of the presidential term. From that point the Leftist agenda will proceed full steam. With the further impeachments of all those appointed by President Trump, including Justice Kavenaugh. And the policies of the Trump Administration will be erased under Executive Order and the Republic will die. 

To what end?

179 Views

Yesterday the House announced that they had two Articles of Impeachment against President Trump.

In our Constitution the President can only be impeached for one of the following crimes:
Bribery, Treason, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

The first two crimes on the list are very specifically and legally defined. And hard solid evidence is required. Thus the Leftist Democratic controlled House couldn’t charge President Trump with Bribery or Treason. The Law would stand in their way.

Now the other high Crimes and Misdemeanors was wide open. These aren’t defined anywhere as to what constitutes them. So it is up to the House to determine what is a high Crime or Misdemeanor and impeachable.

And what does the House charge President Trump with after all this time. Abuse of Power and Obstruction of Congress.

President Trump hasn’t abused his power as President. He has faithfully exercised it, which many past Republican presidents have not done. And from a legal standpoint, abusing ones power isn’t illegal. Unethical, probably so, but not illegal.

Also the term of Abuse of Power is very nebulous and could apply to anything as well. Even something harmless and mundane like getting tickets to a ball game.

The second charge of Obstruction of Congress. That one sounds bad since it sounds like another known crime. But this one too isn’t actually a crime either.

President Trump did exercise his power as the chief executive and forbade certain members of the Administration from testifying before the various House committees investigating the alleged impeachment proceedings. But this is within the rights of a President to protect his Administration.

The House could have acted on the refusal but they did not. If they really wanted the testimony of these witnesses they could have issued a subpoena. Demanding that they come before the House committee and testify. But this was not done. If it had been done and the subpoena was refused. Then Congress could have gone through the Courts and issued a court order for their appearance. But this also was not done. If it had been done and still refused. Then and only then would President Trump and the witnesses themselves be guilty of Contempt of Congress. And that could be an impeachable offense.

But all the House did was ask for the witnesses to testify. They refused. And that was the end of it. Request denied. Thus the charge of Obstruction of Congress is meaningless.

And now here we are nearly four years since this all started when prominent Democrats began calling for the impeachment of then President-Elect Donald Trump in 2016. They have finally the Articles drafted in the House. The House has enough of a Democratic majority to pass the Articles even if some Democrats vote against it. Thus forcing a Trial in the Senate.

But to what end does this serve? The House would be better served if they had passed a censure against the President, even on the same charges. It would have passed. It would have been a victory. Now the Impeachment will be handed over to the Senate where the President could likely be acquitted just as President Clinton was at his impeachment Trial. And the 2020 elections are coming fast with disastrous results for the Leftist Democrats if this fails in the Senate.