User's avatar
⭠ Return to thread
Raziel's avatar

Trump’s indictment is just another boost to further polarization of America, more and more republicans see this just another way Democrats are weaponizing justice system to deal with opposition (honestly I cant blame them), and when this very weak indictment fails, many Democrats will claim that it is because Republicans have packed the courts.

No mater what happens now, both sides will be unhappy with outcome. Question is, can we survive as country if we continue on this path, or are we already at point of no return.

I honestly hope that this will all end, not with death of USA, but with death of corrupt DNC and RNC, both parties are rotten to the core (DNC more than RNC), and sooner we get rid of them, the better.

Expand full comment
Joseph Kaplan's avatar

Ross perot (anyone remember him?) famously said “there ain’t a dimes worth of difference between the two parties”. It’s only gotten worse.

Expand full comment
Brad's avatar

This massively pro-criminal Manhattan DA, who downgraded half of all felony charges to misdemeanors last year as part of what he calls “criminal justice reform,” is indicting a former president by *straining misdemeanor charges into felonies*, stretching the law in novel ways for the sole purpose of finding a reason to indict a political adversary. It's banana republic bullshit. The Left is in jubilation but the country will reap the whirlwind.

https://euphoricrecall.substack.com/p/banana-republic

Expand full comment
NCMaureen's avatar

Leaders who have had their political oppenents arrested--

Stalin

Mao

Hitler

Biden

Expand full comment
Andrew Holmes's avatar

You missed Woodrow Wilson and Abraham Lincoln.

Expand full comment
Greg's avatar

I don’t think this is the end of America. Most people I interact with outside of specific bubbles in the country are not hyper aware of the news and aren’t very online. They’re all living their lives and trying to enjoy them at that. I think this will further divide the lunatic categories of people who define themselves by their religious political affiliations. Maybe we could just have a civil war between the far left and the far right so the rest of the basically moderate population can get on with life?

Expand full comment
LonesomePolecat's avatar

I have wished for a strong third party but I don't think that will happen. The closest thing to clearing out corruption is term limits. With term limits you bring in a new set of thieves every six or eight years.

We also need constitutional amendment that set up a betrayal of public trust law where all elected and high officials in the federal government are monitored for corruption by an independent agency. This agency will also replace the congressional ethics committees in the house and senate, which do little or nothing against members for ethics violations.

If anyone is convicted of corruption they get a mandatory, twenty year, no parole, sentence in a federal prison, not in club fed, where they will be taking long ,warm showers with a muscled up, tattooed guy named knuckles.

Expand full comment
Andrew Holmes's avatar

And sooner or later the agency will be captured by some demagogue, ideologues, or factional interest, ending the American experiment.

Expand full comment
LonesomePolecat's avatar

Like the end of the Ancient Roman Republic and Germany in the 1930s.

Expand full comment
Pacificus's avatar

Polecat, the third party dream is always an illusion/delusion...the "party" isn't corrupt, it's the people in it, or rather those that run it...a third party might, at best, have a momentary period of promise, and then quickly revert to the norm, probably before it ever held power. Greed and ambition are ever-ready to have their way with things.

But I broadly agree with your point that we must asume the flawed nature of people/politicians and craft a system designed to counter this fact, much the way the framers intended. But where are out Madisons, Hamiltons, and Jays today?

Expand full comment
Lynne Morris's avatar

Soft times create soft men . . .

Expand full comment
Pacificus's avatar

Lynne, what comes after the "soft men" part?

Expand full comment
Lynne Morris's avatar

We have a lot of soft men (people) at this point and soft people create hard times. But that is not the quote. The actual quote is "Hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men" . It is from a post-apocaliptic novel by G. Michael Hopf. And I think it applies to people in general not just men.

Expand full comment
LonesomePolecat's avatar

I often ask. Where are the Harry Trumans and the George C. Marshalls?

Expand full comment
Shri Shahapurkar's avatar

The president should be paid comparable to corporate. Isn't running a nation much harder than running a company? Why isn't the president paid like a CEO? Then maybe capable people can enter politics and "public service" doesn't have to mean staying poor.

As for Trump's indictment, it is immensely satisfying to see a crude, childish, corrupt, rude man of incredibly low moral character being admonished, but I'm afraid it will only grow his base because Trump is not the problem. If people who voted for him are okay with his behavior and character there's

a much bigger problem with the erosion of our nation's moral fabric. We are one nation we have to stop this hate.

Expand full comment
Andrew Holmes's avatar

They don't need the money. Look at how Biden came into the presidency with multiple expensive homes on never more than a government salary.

Expand full comment
Heyjude's avatar

That’s the problem Shri. The point shouldn’t be that it is immensely satisfying to see a man you despise punished. In this country people are not punished because others don’t approve of them.

Expand full comment
Shri Shahapurkar's avatar

Fair enough, I don't feel good about feeling that way but actions need to have consequences it's not just about disapproval.

Expand full comment
Robert Moore's avatar

"Then maybe capable people can enter politics and "public service" doesn't have to mean staying poor."

Are you living in the real world? It has always been declared that if we give teachers more money then the outcome for student achievement will improve. But what has happened in reality? Test scores go DOWN, not UP! Giving politicians more money will NEVER result in a "more perfect nation" but will definitely make YOU AND I poorer!

Expand full comment
Shri Shahapurkar's avatar

I am a big proponent of teachers making a lot more. I am interested to know more about test scores going down when teachers are paid more. Can you point me to what you're referring to?

Expand full comment
Mark E. Sedgwick's avatar

As I was earning my BA at mid-life (40), I took a lot of 500- and 600-level (graduate) EDU courses. Most of the students were accredited teachers trying to get a Masters degree and transition to administration. The EDU Department Chair taught these classes, and he had over 30 years of experience as a teacher and state-level administrator. The primary learning outcome from those classes was that data reveal scant positive correlation between more spending and increased test score outcomes in public education. It's not just about spending money: Europeans teachers are the equivalent of our PhDs, as only the best minds are trusted with the intellectual nurturing of children. In the U.S., EDU departments have long been captured by ideologies at war with meritocracy, and with low expectations thus enshrined, it makes little difference how much money you pay teachers and the growing body of administrators. I am not going to cite sources here, but even the slimmest amount of search-engine results will confirm my analysis.

Expand full comment
Shri Shahapurkar's avatar

Thanks for that. You are correct if everything else remained the same just increasing teacher pay will not have a drastic effect on student success. I'm not a big believer in using test scores as a measure of success. Our primary and secondary education system needs to set the bar higher. Parents need to be involved and treat education as a priority in raising children not just as a place for child care. Teachers and administrators need the flexibility to inspire more from our students. I'm very involved with my kids' schooling and constantly in touch with teachers. I'm appalled (public schools) at how students treat teachers and how they cannot do much if anything about it. They're asked to teach to swim with their hands tied behind their backs and the bar is set so low to accommodate everyone. I had to move my kids to a charter school so they're individually challenged and learn how to respect and how to earn respect. Success is excelling at both, academics and character.

Expand full comment
Lynne Morris's avatar

Geez. You start out the president should be paid like a CEO so "public service" doesn't keep people "poor" and gloss right over the fact that elected leadership grows rich at the public trough. Exhibit "A" being 47+ years of Joe Biden and family, and Exhibit "B" being that poor boy from Hope Arkansas, William Jefferson Clinton. Then you go on to lambast the only man elected President who did not enrich himself thereby and include calling him "corrupt". You are proof that the other commenter saying all Democrats are imbeciles may be right.

Expand full comment
Lee Morris's avatar

Trump International Hotel - where everyone Trump invited to the White House stayed..

Expand full comment
Lynne Morris's avatar

Really? That's the best you've got? I mean the people did stay there so there was a benefit received.

Expand full comment
Lee Morris's avatar

I wasn't shooting for the moon! I guess I could have searched harder..

:)

Then again charging two grand a night or more for foreign dignitaries, his Secret Service and regular guests - Trump made out handsomely.

Expand full comment
Lynne Morris's avatar

I did a cursory search -"how Trump benefitted from Presidency" and that issue popped up. In fact MUCH ado was made of it, and still is among a certain class. It was looked into by a Congressionsl ethics panel and nothing came of it. There is also a White House ethics group and likewise nothing came of it. Say what you will about him he has been heavily scrutinized. While a blind eye is turned to misdeeds of the other side. Which many of us find troublesome. It is like watching an illusionist distracting the audience with the left hand while performing the deed with the right hand. Some are very easily deceived. Others not so much. Personally I am glad Trump has been indicted as now he is in a bona fide court, of record, with rights, privileges, and immunities of a citizen accused and out of the social media self-professed town square where those things are non-existent.

Expand full comment
Shri Shahapurkar's avatar

I'm surprised you even reply to my comment, I'm surprised I'm responding. Maybe because I see some glimpse of reason in your responses if i ignore the name calling. You think Trump didn't enrich himself? Lol. Poor can't run for office it costs too much money. You've to be fairly wealthy to run in the first place. I would like to think people run to serve and make things better but somewhere along the way get sucked into the game or that's the only way to be in it, I don't know. If $ was an incentive many more capable people would compete.

Expand full comment
Lynne Morris's avatar

I generally avoid name-calling because it does not advance the conversation but your comment was illogical. Which surprised me about you. You do not have to be wealthy to run for president. You have to be 35 and a citizen born in the US. While Trump was an oddity because most people do not start with the presidency as a first run, he inherited some money and spent a lifetime in business. Clinton and Biden enriched themselves during a lifetime of "public service". Obama did in what 14 years of "public service"? That should be a red flag for anyone. As for Trump enriching himself who knows. He probably lost as much business as he gained, given the absolute hatred still evident. As much as he, and his family, were investigated the allegation thereof does not seem to have panned out. Lastly, the office pays $400,000 and the benefits are extraordinary for an 8 year maximum term. If "good" people need more they are not very good, rather they are profit driven. But I do agree that some would incur a pay-cut if they chose to run.

Expand full comment
Shri Shahapurkar's avatar

I'm just looking at it from this perspective. A CEO of let's say the top 5 companies by volume which the largest is $2 trillion market cap makes 10s of millions of dollars in base plus stock. The GDP of US is about 24 trillion. Top pay attracts top talent.

Expand full comment
Lynne Morris's avatar

I understand your point I just do not agree with it. The US Presidency is not a "job" in the traditional sense. And the one time that has been tried in our lifetime was Trump. He is widely hated. Also IMO military experience is sorely needed as we have not had such a President since the elder Bush. Things have certainly derailed significantly since then.

Expand full comment
TxFrog's avatar

Please give an example of a politician who is poor.

Expand full comment
Shri Shahapurkar's avatar

Maybe poor was a bad word choice but can an honest politician get wealthy? You've to be wealthy to run in the first place. People in congress and senate make a healthy package what about those in the state and city?

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Apr 7, 2023
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Shri Shahapurkar's avatar

Sorry you feel that way.

Expand full comment
Anthony's avatar

Stop this hate?

Read your own comment you utter fool. You ARE the hate.

Expand full comment
Shri Shahapurkar's avatar

This was very useful to the conversation. From how angry you sound, my comment must've hit home.

Expand full comment
Christopher B's avatar

Democrats always project.

Expand full comment
Jesper Bo Henriksen's avatar

Trump took only $1 a year for being President. Unlike Barack Obama and Joe Biden, he didn't use the office to get rich.

Anyway, could be that Obama will be the next politician indicted - certainly more of a career-maker for an ambitious DA than boring old Joe and his corrupt family.

"Stop the hate" is what you should be telling Joe, who recently told an audience that most white Americans would still be lynching Black Americans if they could get away with it.

Expand full comment
Pacificus's avatar

Yes, in an ideal world, we'd have Obama, Biden, and Hillary all locked up in the same cell...a fellow can dream, can't he?

Expand full comment
Skinny's avatar

Such a great dream wouldn’t want to wake up 😂😂

Expand full comment
Robert Moore's avatar

Yes, and we would resume tar and feathers for pols while riding a pole out of town, but it won't happen...dang it!

Expand full comment
Skinny's avatar

Brandon at times is a despicable man!

Expand full comment
Pacificus's avatar

Hey, just because Brandon showered with his daughter til she was a teenager and fondles little kids doesn't make him "despicable"...or does it?

Expand full comment
Skinny's avatar

No surviving we at the point of no return if the Democrats can continue to do what they are doing to President Trump can you imagine after 2024 what they will be able to do to us.

Expand full comment
Mike R.'s avatar

They're doing it.

Expand full comment
Lynne Morris's avatar

Yes they are.

Expand full comment
Jack Sant's avatar

We're so f**ked.

Expand full comment
Skinny's avatar

Simply put!

Expand full comment
Terence G Gain's avatar

Raziel

As usual you are wrong. No Republican is attacking the Rule of Law, promoting misandry or claiming that 2 + 2 does not = 4. The insanity is coming entirely from the Democrat Party Left and the only way to save America is for The Party of the Left to be destroyed. This means voting for Republicans and Trump. Not voting Republican will in fact result in further proliferation and strengthening of the insanity being imposed by The Left.

Expand full comment
Sea Sentry's avatar

The left is indeed corrupt, but I ain’t voting for an ignorant, polarizing New Yorker just because the left hates him. Trump is not the only hat in the closet.

Expand full comment
LonesomePolecat's avatar

As much as it pains me, if Trump is the Rep candidate for president, I will vote for him for exactly the reasons you have just expressed.

Expand full comment
Lee Morris's avatar

My question is, if Trump becomes the GOP nominee - and he loses the election -

does he accept the result?

Expand full comment
Pacificus's avatar

Lee Morris, to answer your question, Trump (or any candidatei in any race) will not/should not "accept the result" if the election is rigged against them. No one is obligated to play patsy in a corrupt game. And at this point, no sane person can automatically assume the legitimacy of our electoral process. Just the way it is in America, ca. 2023.

Expand full comment
Steve's avatar

I have been following Presidential races/elections since Nixon v Kennedy. In All those elections I have seen nothing that even comes close to what I saw in the 2020 election and on the night of Nov. 3 2020 (examples on request). I'm NOT saying it was stolen. I am saying I have Questions, questions that I've never seen really answered.

Expand full comment
Lee Morris's avatar

It's one thing to say that the election is rigged. With some factual evidence to support it. It's another to say that it feels to the candidate that it was rigged. And Trump if he loses will think it was rigged, and in fact will claim it is rigged before the 2024 election is even held, in order to pave the way for the post election scenario of not accepting the result.

Expand full comment
Pacificus's avatar

Lee, we have the factual evidence: a campaign of smear and hoax against Trump beginning from the time he walked down the elevator in 2015 (Russiagate, etc etc); the collusion of the deep state and big tech to contrrol the flow of info in the 2020 election (see Matt Taibbi's Twitter Files; the suppression of Huunter's lap top on the eve of the election, dishionestly brought to you by the Deep State and Big Tech; the role of $400 million in Zuckerbucks to boost turnout in Blue areas; the use of COVID to radically alter voting in ways that make fraud far easier and far harder to detect;

There's more, but I think that answers you request for "factual evidence" to support a claim of a rigged election. Yes, I know it was the trend in the immediate aftermath to claim that the 2020 election was "the cleanest in our history," but we have a whole new set of facts. Your view of things needs to evolve accordingly.

"Feelings"--either yours or Trump's, or mine for that matter--have nothing to to with it.

Expand full comment
Lee Morris's avatar

I can't say you're wrong, especially your first paragraph. But it didn't stop 74 million Americans voting for Trump - 10 million more than in 2016..

Expand full comment
Steve's avatar

I question the numbers for both Trump or (particularly) Biden. As I have said before I've never seen Anything like the 2020 election.

Expand full comment
Lee Morris's avatar

Mass voting by mail in the middle of a pandemic will do that..

The challenge going forward is that tens of millions of Americans quite enjoy voting by mail, especially when it’s handled well (as in Florida)..

so I think mail in voting is here to stay

Expand full comment
Steve's avatar

The opportunities for voter fraud Boggle The Mind.

I want election DAY not election week...month...season. But then I want to make voting Harder, not easier, more convenient. would like people to register every 2 years. That means going to an office Prove you are who you say you are, then on election DAY go to your polling place (with a photo ID and vote.

I don't expect this to happen, butt I can dream.

Expand full comment
Steve's avatar

"if he loses will think it was rigged, and in fact will claim it is rigged before the 2024 election is even held,"

Where has he said that? Given we are talking about Donald Trump, it would not surprise me if he did (and don't get me started on what I call The Ever Trumpers!), but I'd like a source.

Expand full comment
Lee Morris's avatar

I'm saying he will. He hasn't said that he will, but I know he will if he becomes the nominee, based on past performance. Just like he did in 2016.

Expand full comment
Steve's avatar

Knowing Donald Trump, and assuming its 2020 all over again (I have questions about that, that have never been answered), I'd say NO.

Expand full comment
Lee Morris's avatar

And you would be right..

Expand full comment
Steve's avatar

I would not bet more than a nickle you are wrong, but We'll see.

Expand full comment
Steve's avatar

"You Don't Have To Be A Republican, But You Can't Be A Democrat."

Dave Rubin

Expand full comment
LonesomePolecat's avatar

Right on!

Expand full comment
Timothy Kaluhiokalani's avatar

You're both half right. It's not just the pols, it's the corrupt, career bureaucrats in the JustUs Department, FBI, CIA, DHS... that have managed embed themselves into EVERY facet of the federal government and formed an incestuous relationship with the Main stream media and ambitious, power mad politicians who use them every election cycle to get re-elected. They need to be fired, and outside of Trump, I don't know who has the balls and stamina to do it.

Expand full comment
Skinny's avatar

Yip Timothy spot on I have no idea other than President Trump who has the courage to do it’s a sad state of our country

Expand full comment
Raziel's avatar

Terrance as usual you are wrong.

Maybe republicans are not (directly) attacking rule of law, but they are still corrupt to the core, be it insider trading (Kelly Loeffler and her husband Jeffrey Sprecher), be it being bought by foreign power (Mitch Mcconnel and his wife company).

RNC is corrupt to the core, and danger to rule of law. sooner they are gone the better.

I am not blinded by dislike of DNC to ignore problems in RNC. Sure DNC is more rotten than RNC, but that doesnt make it good.

Expand full comment
Heyjude's avatar

Triage, Raziel. Deal with the worst first.

Expand full comment
Pacificus's avatar

Unfortunately, Raziel's point is well taken...we cannot underestimate the corruption of the Republican establishment, even as we acknowledge the Dem establishment is even moreso. It's the Uniparty we oppose, and it has two wings.

Expand full comment
Han's avatar

the uniparty is actually the neo-con. There isn't any difference between bush ii, obama, biden, mccain, mcconnell, reid, pelosi, feinstein etc. they all have identical policies guided if not actually ordered by executive branch departments.

Expand full comment
Han's avatar

You’re comparing a vague question about a republican with the rotting fetid maggot infested corpse of the entire dnc

Expand full comment
Bruce Miller's avatar

A false equivalence. The RNC is simply stupid and corrupt.

The Democrats are corrupt and evil.

Expand full comment
Raziel's avatar

"The RNC is simply stupid and corrupt", this is also political rot, different kind of rot but still rot. That DNC is worse than RNC, doesnt make RNC good.

Expand full comment
Han's avatar

Nonsense. Who is the target in the Twitter files?

Expand full comment
LonesomePolecat's avatar

You sound like a good little soldier. You would have made a good NAZI in 1938 Germany.

How anyone with glassy eyed adoration, blindly follows a political party and worships their party's politicians is beyond me.

Maybe you can explain it to me.

Expand full comment
Raziel's avatar

sure what ever you say

Expand full comment
Han's avatar

You know it is true.

Expand full comment
Raziel's avatar

Sure what ever you say...

Expand full comment
Han's avatar

you know it is true.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Apr 4, 2023Edited
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Angelica's avatar

You can not stand people who blindly follow a political party and you're going to vote for Trump if he runs?

Trump is doing well, he raised $7 million with this indictment and it will all be paid for by stupid people who have latched on to all of his buzz words, "witch hunt" "victim" "weaponizing,"

If this indictment doesn't work the other two will. Trump is a conman, and has been one ALL of his life.

It is a shame he has ruined this country with his lies, lies, lies and hateful speech which has legitimatized it for his followers and caused hateful murders all over the country.

But I do agree that there is bad players in both parties. So we need to follow the law and using another buzz word, but I like this one "NO one is above the Law."

Expand full comment
Mark E. Sedgwick's avatar

I think this comment represents a serious misreading of the Trump phenomena and its efficacy. The vast majority of R voters are not engaged in cult-of-personality behavior, and are not blindly following Trump anywhere. However, if given limited options voters might be forced to choose the "least worst" candidate. Frankly, I don't understand your acceptance of deliberate obfuscation of the truth (and copious amounts of gaslighting) perpetrated by the current administration and its executive branch agencies. Are the Left's lies somehow more compelling?

Expand full comment
leon sutton's avatar

I don't fully understand your comment. My point is that R voters may choose Trump first because they agreed with much that he did as president, and second, to vote against the unwarranted attacks against him. Apparently, the WSJ thinks so.

Expand full comment
leon sutton's avatar

You mean, like, Hillary is not above the law, with classified documents on her server, and the FBI agents who lied to the FISA court? Did I miss those prosecutions?

Should I go back further, to the stolen election of 1962, when Jack's father arranged for dead people to vote in Cook County?

Expand full comment
Angelica's avatar

Four Governors in Illinois have gone to jail. And no one is above the law as I stated earlier.

Expand full comment
Angelica's avatar

For Illinois they’re still counting the votes!! But here’s a statement from a 1985 study An academic study in 1985[16] later analyzed the ballots of two disputed precincts in Chicago which were subject to a recount. It found that while there was a pattern of miscounting votes to the advantage of Democratic candidates, Nixon suffered less than Republicans in other races, and the extrapolated error would have reduced his Illinois margin only from 8,858 votes, the final official total, to just under 8,000. It concluded there was insufficient evidence that he had been cheated out of winning Illinois.

Expand full comment
leon sutton's avatar

Interesting,, thanks. Was there also hanky panky in West Virginia?

Expand full comment
leon sutton's avatar

But he didn't get jail time, only a slap on the wrist!

And this was NOT the FISA lying that occurred with the Trump docs.

Expand full comment
Angelica's avatar

People are going to believe what they want to believe. Here’s some info on Clinton. I’ll get back to you on the others.

https://www.fbi.gov/news/press-releases/statement-by-fbi-director-james-b-comey-on-the-investigation-of-secretary-hillary-clinton2019s-use-of-a-personal-e-mail-system

Read FBI report by Comey third to last paragraph.

Expand full comment
leon sutton's avatar

I disagree with Com ey. In particular, Deutsch broug ht his laptop home with classified documents on it and served jail time, even though he was above reproach.

Expand full comment
LonesomePolecat's avatar

In the 1980s, I held a top secret clearance. If I had done one tenth of what Hillary had done, I would still be in prison.

Expand full comment
LonesomePolecat's avatar

You obviously have not read my prior comments on the Donald and why I would vote for him. Explain to me how he has ruined America and how "caused hateful murders all over the country.". Give me examples of the murders plural. And why aren't you angry at the Dem/Socs for letting democrat cities burn from BLM and ANTIFA (both Marxists organizations) riots and murders?

He is a terrible liar as are all politicians. We just have to live with politicians lying. It is the nature of the beast.

He did do something I have never seen presidential politicians do and that is try and carry out his campaign promises, build a wall, renegotiate the NAFTA treaty, make Nato nations pay their fair share of the military costs, be harder on China. You will never see Joe be hard on China. After all he is in their pocket.

Is Trump a disgusting human being? Yes! But unlike the Dems/Socs he is not a socialist and that is why I will vote for him. He is the lessor of two evils.

Expand full comment
Han's avatar

lol no one is above the law lololololol you can not be serious right now

cite specific examples of murders that were caused by political speech as determined in court of law.

Expand full comment
Madjack's avatar

The uniparty/war party is evil

Expand full comment
Timothy G McKenna's avatar

True. They’ve coexisted for over 100 years and now, instead of acting as checks and balances for each other, they’ve achieved a kind of power equilibrium and high school-style pettiness and bickering have replaced true debate and challenge.

I don’t know that I’ve ever read a party platform, to be honest, but when was the last time anybody did? Do they represent a true philosophy behind government that merits a specific type of representation or (as I guess) are they just procedural recipes for the status quo?

Expand full comment
Timothy Kaluhiokalani's avatar

"I don’t know that I’ve ever read a party platform"

I don’t know if anyone else reads them either. At the end of the day it’s results that matter so anyone who believes we’re heading in the wrong direction should answer the following questions:

Who got the second most votes (74 million) EVER in a presidential election?

Who got MORE democratic votes than any other republican presidential candidate?

Who made the US energy INDEPENDENT?

Who kept us OUT of foreign wars while keeping Putin and Xi in check?

Who gave us an economy that was growing at 6.3%, an inflation rate of 1.4% and $2.39 a gallon gasoline the day he left office?

For all those who have forgotten the way things used to be two short years ago, it was Trump. With all due respect to the republicans who have or will announce their candidacy for the republican nomination, none have accomplished anything approaching what Trump did in 4 short years. None have faced the onslaught from the deep state industrial complex and backstabbing “republican” weenies like McConnell, Ryan, Romney, Cheney… directed at Trump for the last 6 years.

People can debate why Bragg pulled the trigger with what appears to be the most lame attempt yet to disqualify him, but what no one can deny is that his persecutors fear him. They fear him because they can’t control him and he threatens their place at the DC trough, more so than anyone they've ever faced.

Expand full comment
leon sutton's avatar

The WSJ is of the opinion that the be Dem goal is to ensure that Trump gets the nomination, since he is the only one that Biden has a chance of beating.

Expand full comment
Pacificus's avatar

If it is in fact true that the Dems want Trump because they think he is the only one they can beat, then prosecuting Trump is the wrong way to go. Bragg's outrageous prpsecutorial vendetta is going to unify the Republicans (and some independents) around Trump like nothing else and, crucially, preempt what otherwise might have been a knockdown, dragout primary that would have left the party terminally divided. They are making a martyr out of Trump, and martyrs can be hard to beat.

Expand full comment
leon sutton's avatar

You may be right, but the Dems may have figured otherwise, or, they may feel that Trump is the only Republican that Biden has a chance of beating.

Expand full comment
Pacificus's avatar

Don't forget: Hillary's people were convinced that Trump was the most beatable Rep in 2016...wrongo!

Truth be told, the biggest obstacle any Repub has to deal with at this point is a corrupted electoral process, featuring mass mail in vote, elections that start weeks before election day and end weeks after election day, etc etc. Given this new reality, I'm not sure any Republican can a national election again.

Expand full comment
Timothy Kaluhiokalani's avatar

If Trump plays his cards right he can crush Biden. Funny thing is, I'm not at all certain Biden will be the Dem nominee. It's occurred to me that the current circus is more of a deflection from the myriad of investigations into Biden Inc. that can't be suppressed any longer.

Expand full comment
Timothy Kaluhiokalani's avatar

After witnessing the voters in Pennsylvania elect a brain dead racist, who has spent more time in a mental health institution than on the floor of the US senate chamber as their representative, the WSJ is probably correct in their opinion.

Expand full comment
Pacificus's avatar

"They fear him because they can’t control him and he threatens their place at the DC trough, more so than anyone they've ever faced."

Yes, yes, and yes....Trump's enemies (esp on the Right) like to try to tell you that it's about his "character," that he's "unfit" for office...but it actually is about the aformentioned quote.

Expand full comment
Lynne Morris's avatar

Very well said.

Expand full comment
Greg Connolly's avatar

No survival is not possible.

Expand full comment
Jesper Bo Henriksen's avatar

Somewhere in America, a careerist Republican DA is already plotting to take down Gavin Newsom. Given Newsom’s numerous business interests and documented history of playing fast and loose with the law, it shouldn’t be hard.

Expand full comment
Shirley G's avatar

and Big Joe too. He seems like really low lying fruit to me.

Expand full comment
LonesomePolecat's avatar

Rotten fruit.

Expand full comment
Kevin Durant?'s avatar

Prosecute Biden’s daughter. That has to be at the top of the list.

Knowing that the girl he sexually molested is going to be prosecuted for eternity is the perfect punishment for Joe as he dies.

Expand full comment
LonesomePolecat's avatar

Prosecute Joe for pedophilia.

Expand full comment
IB Steve's avatar

Not unless you understand the evil brilliance of my states native son. The Republicans are just not competent enough to play the game that the progressive left has been playing and winning for many years. It is a tragic truth that conservatives or any remaining sane Americans just don't understand. Why would anyone listen to a Republican DA from a club that is eating its own for dinner. When Donald Trumps maga pac runs adds trashing the GOP's only real hope in 2024 and the blabbering nonsense of Kevin McCarthy's visionless plans for America is what the world see's a Republican DA from some rural state in a place coastal elites despise will go absolutely nowhere. It breaks my heart to say that.

Expand full comment
DeniCam's avatar

I was more than appalled to see that TV ad. What the he!! were they thinking? The answer is they aren't. It's evident that 'they' are short-sighted and tone deaf. The entire mess breaks my heart as well.

Expand full comment
IB Steve's avatar

At this point tone-deaf is too kind a term. I'm through defending or trying to reason with this bunch because after seeing that add I can only conclude that those who produced it and defend it have descended into insanity. The only other explanation is that the add was actually funded by George Soros.

Expand full comment
DeniCam's avatar

I am going to agree; there's no other rational explanation. But they are irrational as well.

Expand full comment
Sea Sentry's avatar

I can’t wait.

Expand full comment
DJ's avatar

Good.

Expand full comment
LonesomePolecat's avatar

Let's hope you are right. Newsome is a typical elitist. He as do most politicians, disgust me.

Expand full comment
Robert Moore's avatar

Newsome's legacy: Massively unfunded pension system, a water infrastructure that is on the verge of collapse during ANY drought, the bullet train to nowhere, and the push to eliminate the internal combustion engine with electric cars, even though the electrical grid barely supports what is needed presently. No plan, no explanations, just a lot of hair gel, a slim Hollywood physique, and whitened teeth accompanied by his calculated bullshit that the press LOVES! Yup! President Gavin Newsome in OUR lifetimes!

Expand full comment
PSW's avatar

Don't forget reparations and Covid hypocrisy!

Expand full comment
LonesomePolecat's avatar

Well said. The Californians deserve and shallow asshole like Gavin but the nation sure doesn't.

Expand full comment
LonesomePolecat's avatar

I agree. Gavin strikes me as a complete elitist jerk.

Expand full comment
Steve's avatar

I also wonder If our Democrat and Media friends (but I repeat myself) have ever heard the old saying "What's good for the goose is sauce for the gander."? Or "10% For The Big Guy."?

Also you Might Look at Youube search

Mr. Reagan Nancy Pelosi is a Criminal.

Lets just say her family history is...interesting.

Expand full comment
Lynne Morris's avatar

I have read that Califotnia has been controlled for a century by 5 families.

Expand full comment
Terence G Gain's avatar

Jesper

Nonsense. There is not a shred of evidence to support your claim.

Expand full comment
Jesper Bo Henriksen's avatar

Well, we have the trip to Montana when travel to Montana was prohibited for state employees. And then we have the maskless get-together at French Laundry, and at the NFC title game, both at times when masks were required in public spaces. Then we have the Newsom winery, which was kept open when many similar facilities were closed. And these are just the ones the public knows about. I'm sure the PPP funding for Newsom's winery could also be examined.

Expand full comment
Skinny's avatar

Exactly they got rid of Boris Johnson in England for much the same things yet the Democrats remain untouchable it beggars belief at times

Expand full comment
Anthony's avatar

There's also Gavin's wife calling Rose McGowan to ask her what bribe she would take to drop charges.

Newsome is a man who uses his political influence to protect rapist donors. I'm sure we can find a violation of law in there somewhere.

Expand full comment
IB Steve's avatar

It will never happen. We live in a state where a democratic LA councilwoman got caught on tape while meeting with other democratic party operatives where she referred to a black child as a little monkey. The child was the son of a fellow council person. LA didn't burn because Nuri Martinex is a Latina valley girl so gets a pass. The meeting included Kevin Deleon and a union thug. This was an official meeting and they spoke Spanish the entire time. This is the insanity of California. Gavin will be fine and if the GOP doesn't get it's act together will be the next POTUS.

Expand full comment
Bruce Miller's avatar

Yet knowing all that they voted for him.

Leading me inescapably to the conclusion that a split is the only answer

Expand full comment
DeniCam's avatar

I have no problem asserting that election fraud is widespread and is now an art form with the progressive left. Some of the outcomes are so bizarre there is little other reason it could have gotten so bad. Although, one should never underestimate the stupidity of the average American voter. Maybe it's more polite to use the term 'low information' voter; but sometimes it looks just stupid.

Expand full comment
JoAnne's avatar

NO! CA worked hard for a recall and had great choices for Republican candidates known and CA savvy who could have won. Then outside sources put up Larry Elder who had no CA experience who was an arrogant and flippant Fox pundit who did not even show up for the debate. The Elder campaign was one more campaign where the Left supported a nonviable candidate so the Democrat cavdidate could win.

Expand full comment
IB Steve's avatar

Agree, it is the same nuttiness and delusional insanity where republicans actually believed there was going to be a red waive by running men who impregnated the entire state of Georgia (H Walker). How silly was that. There were good candidates in CA and Kevin Faulkner former Mayor of San Diego was one of them that would have been a formidable contender. But the GOP never learns because our primary voters are brain dead and went ahead and ran Brian Dahle in the general. Another lame move.

Expand full comment
Pacificus's avatar

IB Steve (are we talking Imperial Beach here?) Kevin Faulconer is among the squishiest establishment pols that I have ever seen, and not particularly bright, either. If he is the Great GOP Hope in CA, we really are done.

Expand full comment
IB Steve's avatar

Perhaps, but what/who do you suggest? Squishiest-Establishment is an interesting description and resonates well with many GOP primary voters that mindlessly react and go on to vote for candidates that never had a chance in hell. The progressives will continue to dominate because they are consistent, organized and rally behind even flawed candidates because they understand something the GOP primary voters just can't their heads around. Winning. Thats why the red wave was such a tragic joke. It is the reason the GOP will get its butt kicked once again in 2024 because GOP primary voters will vote for the candidates that the most extreme elements of the progressive movement tell them to vote for. The progressives funded Doug Mastriani in PA. and GOP primary voters fell for it. Apparently, you believe there is little light between Gavin and Kevin and you may be right but I'm very curious to hear what you suggest relative to winning.

Expand full comment
Pacificus's avatar

IB Steve, when it comes to CA politics, I agree, the crop of GOP possibilities is very slim...but Faulconer would be scraping the bottom of the barrel. Were he governor, he would function as, at best, a minor brake on the Dems amounting to very little. Just as he did as mayor of SD.

Expand full comment
IB Steve's avatar

I am not the enemy. Really, I'm not. Additionally, I'm not a Kevin Faulconer diehard. But at some point, CA conservatives have to align on some basics and perhaps it should start with some values that we and even old-world liberals can agree on. Many in the CA GOP or conservative aligned folks hate Kevin but he is equally hated by the progressives that now dominate San Diego. They hated that he actually had a strategy that reduced the homeless population one of the few politicians in the country that was able to pull that off. The point is he understands how to lead and show results. The bigger point that I would ask you and others to consider is that to win you have to meet the voters where they are. CA is not Texas. You can do that without sacrificing your conservative values. Ron D in Florida has proved that. Four years ago, he only beat a crack addict by 30K votes. He just took his state leading by 20% points. He had many democrats and independents with him. Kevin may not be perfect, but he was the ONLY candidate that liberals and independents would have considered against Newsome. Progressives understand that and that's why they help elevate candidates like Larry Elder (a man I like). The current shit show that is the Donald T indictment has zero to do with the rule of law. It is a brilliant strategy to ensure Trump dominates the news cycle forever, so Ron D becomes an insignificant illusion. They just won. That bunch has great partners. But they're not progressives, they're the maga pac that is running ads here in CA trashing Ron D. They are a selfless bunch that is denying conservatives that don't buy into all their whims from participating in any part of civil society. I hope they enjoy life under POTUS Newsome. Please reconsider. Best!

Expand full comment
Elizabeth's avatar

That’s ridiculous.

Expand full comment
IB Steve's avatar

Nope, it's tragically the truth.

Expand full comment
JoAnne's avatar

Would like to stand with you and also say ridiculous, but wonder if you know CA politics? When ballot boxes were found in the bay are you concluding that spills happen? When Bernie Sanders withdrew days before the CA primary due to lack of funding and made Hillary Clinton the only viable D presidential candidate did that make sense to you? Ridiculous, but I thought Bernie could carry CA with all its convention votes; that the money was already spent in CA; and carrying CA would have ensured more funding not less. I speculated a deal with the Clintons and Democratic party to get Bernie out. The redistricting of Kevin McCarthy's district to include more D precincts and less R precincts was also not a ridiculous surprise. Heck, I was amazed by the sudden and ridicously surge for Pamela Price to win DA in Alameda.

Expand full comment
Elizabeth's avatar

My “ridiculous” comment was about Larry Elder being a “flippant Fox pundit.”

Expand full comment
JoAnne's avatar

We do disagree about our evaluation of Larry Elder.

Expand full comment
LonesomePolecat's avatar

California gets what they deserve. They keep voting loony tunes democrats into office and as a result have DAs that refuse to prosecute crimes, such as shoplifting, acts of violence and drug dealing. They deserve streets filled with human feces. They voted for it so they must like it.

Expand full comment
Efferous's avatar

CA has the same problem as most blue states -- 80-90% of the land area does not vote blue, but the 10-20% that does completely offsets the will of the rest of the state combined. In Oregon, Multnomah County alone can outvote the entire eastern half of the state. Washington is similar.

States are too big. It will never happen, but I would love to have every state be around the size of Iowa. You'd at least have some meaningful chance of your vote mattering then.

Expand full comment
Pacificus's avatar

Polecat, it may be true that we loony tunes-formerly-known-as-Californians keep voting Dems into office, but now, as a result of the voting "reforms" of 2020, there is virtually no chance for any other outcome any time soon...guess we just have to resign ourselves to a feces-filled, shoplifted future....

Expand full comment
LonesomePolecat's avatar

Come to Texas but leave your looney tune friends behind.

Expand full comment
Pacificus's avatar

Polecat, friends of ours, and friends of our friends, are leaving CA on an almost daily basis, for Texas and elsewhere. It's a topic at every gathering. And unlike past out-migrations, it's more because of the political climate than it is the cost of living.

Thanks for the invite to Texas. Might be too flatland for us. Maybe Arkansas.

Expand full comment
LonesomePolecat's avatar

The hill country north of San Antonio has San Marcos is a beautiful old German town with Texas State University or Huntsville Texas with Sam Houston University where my wife graduated, is in the piney woods and has a beautiful campus. It is 50 miles away from College Station home of Texas A&M where I graduated.

Brenham, Texas has Blinn Junior College and is home to Blue Bonnet Ice Cream. Northwest of Brenham all the way to College Station, TX, are beautiful rolling hills and horse farms.

And 20 miles northwest of San Antonio and 15 miles south of San Marcos is New Braunfels, TX another old German town, with two beautiful rivers running through it and Canyon Lake just a few miles from New Braunfels.

Expand full comment
Pbr's avatar

Be careful of “hill country” in texas. I am a resident so know of what I speak. Prices are skyrocketing and available land to build out of touch of mere mortals. The same scourge of new vs old, progressive vs conservatives and areas of high density (Fredericksburg and Georgetown) even higher prices of everyday living. The lower density has problems like unincorporated towns (meth country) and stupid people (alcohol). There are towns where people are strictly elderly and change is difficult and religion plays its part as well. I moved to Texas five years ago. Previously in the east. I wish I could make one more move to a simple cabin, with no internet, just electricity, my DVDs, maybe a dog or two, cats, a garden. I seriously don’t believe it will happen, but maybe if I win the lottery.

I know I am incredibly lucky, but I also see a changes coming, and to be honest, are we going to even make it to another election. I feel like the country I knew is gone, and the rich, connected are ruling or ruining everything. It’s like 1970s on steroids, and throw in mean girls for the win.

Expand full comment
Pacificus's avatar

Polecat, you paint a pretty picture. I certainly have enjoyed the few, brief trips have made to Texas.

Expand full comment
Bruce Miller's avatar

Maybe, maybe not.

But one thing I'm sure of...

Neither you nor I know what evidence there is.

Expand full comment
NCMaureen's avatar

Look, CA Democrat Rep Swalwell slept with a Chinese spy. Anything happen to him? Not until the R’s retook the house and sidelined him. Then he took to twitter and acted all wounded.

Expand full comment
AlabamaSlamma's avatar

It's interesting, because from what I understand, many members of Swalwell's own party consider him an incompetent camera whore. But they wouldn't do anything about him. The Democrats don't get rid of their bad apples because the radical Left runs the party. The GOP doesn't get rid of their bad applies because they have no coherent leadership. I'm not sure which is worse.

Expand full comment
Pacificus's avatar

Bad apples like Swalwell get rewarded by Dems, so long as they continue to deliver for the blue team.

Expand full comment
LonesomePolecat's avatar

They made the communist Bernie Sanders a committee chairman. and have several avowed socialist in congress. Need I say more?

Expand full comment
Pacificus's avatar

Bernie Sanders, you mean the socialist- with- three-houses, that Bernie Sanders?

Expand full comment
LonesomePolecat's avatar

Bernie is a hard core communist and has been since he was a teenager.

Expand full comment
Pacificus's avatar

"Bernie is a hard core communist and has been since he was a teenager."

Guess that explains the three houses...didn't the communist apparatchiks call them "dachas" in the Soviet Union?

Expand full comment
LonesomePolecat's avatar

I left out the part that he was also a hypocrite and a buffoon.

Expand full comment
dorothy slater's avatar

Perhaps what is worse is the complete indifference to what is going on -"oh, i dont listen to the news anymore - it is too depressing. I am retired and am just going too enjoy life" as they turn to their margueritas. These are the grandparents who are leaving behind the messes they - created and now seem willing to just avoid the whole thing.

Sometime, indifference IS worse . As a one time liberal Dem who, like Sasha, regrets my choices and is horrified at the results , It shuts down all dialogue and completely absolves those of us who created the mess any resposibility to correct it.

Expand full comment
DeniCam's avatar

But not all of us grandparents. My kids were raised 'right'....and they all still think that way. And I'm working on my granddaughter.

Expand full comment
hope's avatar

I've never been a Dem, but have ben surrounded by them via the industry I work in. Curious, when was there ever a "dialogue"? This is just an escalation of what it has always been. Dems were always "better people" than us others. As awful as this current dem world is, I am grateful the masquerade is over, their hypocrisy has been exposed, and the ukraine flags have disappered in my neighborhood. It is very challenging to be around people who voted for this.

Expand full comment
Lynne Morris's avatar

Worse than Swalwell is Fedderman. They elected a man that is being destroyed by the process and the result thereof. And you hear not a peep. Further evidence IMO that the Democratic machine gives not a care for any human, American or otherwise.

Expand full comment
Sea Sentry's avatar

In both cases the people of those states elected those individuals. We voters have to also accept some responsibility for these clowns we keep electing.

Expand full comment
Lynne Morris's avatar

At one time I would have agreed. But no more for the reason of out of jurisdiction donations used to manipulate the electorate. It did not work at the state or national.level in my state but it damn sure did at the local level including a Soros DA. The theme was "Vote Blue No Matter Who". Before O'Rourke was a big driver thereof. His largest contributor was Soros via his PACs, followed by sweet SBF. They claimed the SBF was returned but the announcement was very oddly worded so I am dubious.

Expand full comment
mcara's avatar

Great post

Expand full comment
Big Noise's avatar

Except that the DAs in California are all Democrats and won't challenge Newsom, and DAs in other states don't have jurisdiction. So Newsom seems pretty safe. Unfortunately. Same with Hunter and The Big Guy, unless a Republican becomes President.

Expand full comment
Robert Moore's avatar

Don't worry about Newsome. You can target him when he runs for president, which is his unstated goal.

Expand full comment
Lynne Morris's avatar

It would depend on which Republican. Most would not act. And it would take a Republican Congress too.

Expand full comment
Jesper Bo Henriksen's avatar

The good news is that Newsom has just announced a tour of all the red states, hoping to show them the error of their ways. Perhaps a young, ambitious DA in Florida - Newsom's primary target - will note some misuse of campaign funds along the way.

Expand full comment
Greg's avatar

The funny thing is I live in California and I’ve never met a fellow resident who likes Gavin.

Expand full comment
IB Steve's avatar

Do live in the Eastern Sierras? Even the straight guys I know here along the coast want to sleep with Gavin. They worship him!

Expand full comment
Cynthia Albert's avatar

No San Diego

Expand full comment
Michael Kelly's avatar

The state employees love him. He gives them 5% raises every year, and 5% bonuses right before every election.

Expand full comment
Cynthia Albert's avatar

I hate to admit it but my daughter-in-law and her family in the Bay Area all like him. You'll hear more around the dining room table than if you just talk to them. I look at them and think you are intelligent people, how can you believe this way. Since I want to see my grandchildren, I won't antagonize them, but when they ask, I present my views.

Expand full comment
IB Steve's avatar

Unfortunately, your grandchildren may already believe you support the white racist patriarchal paradigm. But you have to love them anyway. There's still hope.

Expand full comment
Robert Moore's avatar

Yet they reflexively "pull the lever" for him and his party at every election! Try to make sense of THAT!

Expand full comment
JoAnne's avatar

There was a recall with good and winning R candidates, then Elder was put in the race. Suspect that his campaign was partially funded by the Left since he would take away enough votes to allow Newsom to slither in once more.

Expand full comment
JoAnne's avatar

Why not let Newsom damn his own political career?! Do you really think that there are a significant number of voters longing for tent cities, sanctuary cities, open drug use on sidewalks, farm lands without water, banning diesel trucks, and the list continues! A smart DA in FL would point out the value of their laws and leaders that ensure a quality of life. A DA with unhinged ambitions, a Republican version of Bragg, would make Newsom a martyr.

Expand full comment
Elizabeth's avatar

Obviously, there are a significant number of voters who long for those things, because they keep pulling the “D” lever…or do they? I can’t trust elections any more.

Expand full comment
Sea Sentry's avatar

In my lifetime, California went from a red state to a blue state. Liberal white progressives in L.A. and the Bay Area swamp the rest of the state, which actually votes moderate to conservative. In L.A., the Hollywood culture, always left-leaning, dominates. It’s uncouth to be conservative. The Bay Area has always been a two-tiered society, with the elites throwing crumbs to the less fortunate peasants. Newsom is one of theirs. Throughout the state, public education has collapsed from near the top to near the bottom, but every student is exposed to a liberal dose of grievance politics. Sophisticated voter tracking software and ballot harvesting ensure continued progressive dominance of the state’s ruling class.

Expand full comment
Skinny's avatar

The Democrats are doing everything in their power to stop any Republican President coming thru

Expand full comment
JoAnne's avatar

The DAs in CA and NYC are failing to do the requirements of their jobs.This is why murdering a two year old becomes a plea for understanding for the shooters or a security guard and store clerk were charged for attempted murder. They are to busy prioritizing their image rather than maintaining the purpose of the justice system.

Expand full comment
Unwoke in Idaho's avatar

And that’s the only way bullies ever learn. They get it back twice as hard.

Expand full comment
Terence G Gain's avatar

Two wrongs have never made a right. The way for the Democrats to learn is to be voted out of office.

Expand full comment
Rich C's avatar

"Two wrongs have never made a right"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

TWO wrongs? Look. IF..... If Trump, Newson, Hillary, Joe, Hunter.... have committed a crime they should be indicted and punished. Period. So far, Trump is the only target of an out-of-control DOJ and Soros-backed prosecutors and legislators.

If this is another witch hunt (duh!) to keep Trump from having another crack at dismantling The Swamp, and if (as suggested by a poster) 'Dems' consider a vindication the result of Rep-packed courts, IN NEW YORK, then there needs to be a voter IQ test.

I'm an independent voter, but there are NOT two sides to what's happening in America today. I'm going to bitch about what I wrote in the early days of Bari's work, and that is that sooooooo many articles go something like this: 'I'm a progressive, even supported Bernie, always voted Democrat.... But even poor little 'ol ME was cancelled.' But what is ALWAYS missed is contrition (at least from moderates), the "I'm sorry" for continuing to vote for a party that allowed itself to be abducted by a radical group of socialists, the likes of George Soros, and woke 20-something misguided ideologues.

The Republican party has its fringe, but are still that - a fringe. But Dems (e.g.) recall socialist on the San Fran School Board and appoint even more socialists. CA wants to recall Newson, but they can't look in the mirror and vote for REAL change in leadership........ [cont]

Expand full comment
L.K. Collins's avatar

Hear, hear.

The "I'm sorry, and "the not doing it again" never seem to come on the scene.

As for Bari Weiss, I give her and her colleagues strong marks for taking the risk, reputationally and financially, to bring The Free Press online in to the highly compromised legacy media.

Expand full comment
Rich C's avatar

[cont] I struggle with the Washington Uniparty, but Dems will not be "voted out of office" until the large group of traditional (moderate) Dem voters - the majority of Dem voters - wake-up and stop empowering a cancer intent of destroying this country thanks to their blind votes.

Trump was not going to be my choice for 2026 (have been pulling for DeSantis). But crap like the Trump witch hunt is making it hard to vote otherwise.

My opinion, my rant.

Expand full comment
Lynne Morris's avatar

Excellent rant.

Expand full comment
Kevin Durant?'s avatar

“Two wrongs” is the slogan of people who know they benefit from the first wrong.

Expand full comment
Wrung Out Lemon's avatar

Its the same as someone who gives you and ultimatum and say they are no "blackmailing" you. You both know they are.

Expand full comment
Pacificus's avatar

Terence, it would only be "wrong" to go after Gavin Newsom (or Hunter Biden, or Jim Biden, or Joe Biden) if they have not committed the crimes they will/should be charged with...we shall see...

And by the way: the way CA votes now, with mass mail-in balloting, extended periods to vote, and extended periods to count the vote, no Democrat is ever going to lose a major statewide election any time soon.

Expand full comment
L.K. Collins's avatar

Good heavens, sir. You are being willfully obtuse.

If the prima facie evidence that you on the left continue to present to entrap Donald Trump is sufficient for him to be dragged into court, the prima facie evidence against Joe, Jim and Hunter Biden is more than enough to get them before a federal judge.

Please have at least a modicum of intellectual honesty and consistency.

Expand full comment
Lynne Morris's avatar

And the welcoming of aliens and push for non-citizen voting.

Expand full comment
Wrung Out Lemon's avatar

Pacificus, in past times we would not have gone after Jim or Hunter or the Clintons or even Newsome or Joe Biden himself. Short of murder or treason it would have set a dangerous precedent and it would have opened up Pandora's Box. It would have combined the judicial system with politics with all the risks that entails.

But, with this indictment of Trump, that time is gone. It is now the wild west.

Let's be clear, Hunter and Jim and probably Joe Biden have committed ethically egregious acts. Converting those into criminal acts would not take much imagination. The same could be said of Newsome. And, since these people have all traveled and done business across the country, there is very likely a way for some state prosecutor or DA to find a way to criminally charge them without getting nearly as creative as Bragg has. Would that happen in CA? Almost impossible. Could it happen in MT, or FL or Texas or hey, even Arkansas? Yep.

Arkansas could do something similar with the Clinton Foundation with Bill and Hillary. If they did any fundraising in Texas or FL that would open up avenues there as well.

Newsome has done business and fundraising in all kinds of places. That opens up avenues as well.

I could also see this being an intraparty issue. You get one democrat running for the White House in a tight primary.....well....take out the competition with an indictment even if you think that the charges might get tossed on appeal.

THIS is why we have traditionally not ever charged former presidents or candidates for the White House. But those days are over. Bragg put them to an end. Just like with the filibuster, this move could very well come back to bite the democrats.

Expand full comment
Lynne Morris's avatar

Ordinarily I would agree but there are exceptions to every rule and this is one. Too many Democrats have escaped accountability, any accountability, for so long they are completely, emboldened. Just think Hillary Clinton screeching in Congress "[W]hat does it matter now?" That was in reference to the death of an American ambassador, and 3 good men there to protect him. A foundation of the rule of law is that justice is blind and in the opinion of many Americans, including me, that is not true. This is truly a threat to our Constitutional republic.

Expand full comment
Terence G Gain's avatar

The Rule of Law will not be restored by Republicans also breaking the law. The destruction of the Constitution would be complete and irreversible.

Expand full comment
Mark E. Sedgwick's avatar

I detect hypocrisy: the notion that the rule of law is sacrosanct––an obvious and integral part of our county's foundational principles––is also ignored by those advocating selective prosecution within the "progressive" criminal justice realm. It flies in the face of intellectual honesty that parts of the Left want their political rivals to experience "justice," but not citizens deemed members of protected classes who engage in law breaking. Wanting to have it both ways is the definition of hypocrisy.

Expand full comment
L.K. Collins's avatar

If the Democrats were interested in the Rule of Law and the proper exercise of authority, James Comey, James Clapper, John Brennan, Andrew McCabe, James Baker, Peter Strzok and Lisa Page would all be serving jail sentences

Expand full comment
Lynne Morris's avatar

It would not but legitimate investigations/prosecutions are absolutely warranted. As is the Rule of Law is absolutely under assault. The chill is palpable.

Expand full comment
Pacificus's avatar

Agreed. The defense of the integrity of the Constitution is, and always will be, Job1.

Expand full comment
JoAnne's avatar

My son was active military duty at the time and those words “what does it matter” were why I could vote against her. If she was so careless with an ambassador in a strategic region, her care for troops and a conflict outcome were zilch.

Expand full comment
Shirley G's avatar

have you seen her "but the emails!" t shirts. this is all a big joke to her.

Expand full comment
JoAnne's avatar

She defines despicable!

Expand full comment
LonesomePolecat's avatar

Both Clintons are embodiment of evil. Both Clintons should have been tried, convicted and put in jail.

Bill perjured himself in front of a grand jury. He got a slap on the wrist. Martha Stewart got 11 months in prison for lying to an FBI agent.

Expand full comment
ElleSD's avatar

I try to imagine what Martha would say behind closed doors about how all these assholes get away with horrible things, yet she got hung out to dry. I wonder what she really did to get common folk treatment because we know if you are in the inner circle you are above the law. Only they know what really happened and why she was put away. Perhaps she threatened them and they sent her a warning. I am pretty sure her arrest and imprisonment had nothing really to do with insider trading. Only they know the truth.

Expand full comment
Crissy Cat's avatar

The entire sentence, was not “what does it matter“. Remark was that the arguments presented by the Republicans were not helpful. What mattered was finding out the exactly what happened and making sure it never happened again.

Her entire remark was that the important thing was the people who died, investigating it properly, and not sham that the Republicans were running.

You didn’t vote for someone because you believed a partial quote.

She care deeply about what happened and not the nonsense going on in the Senate chamber.

Expand full comment
George Schneider's avatar

Sorry no. Her statement was just doubling down on abdicating any responsibility for the event with a weak diversion to the Republicans. If she was serious, she would have openly and honestly cooperated with an inquiry.

Expand full comment
Unwoke in Idaho's avatar

Bee Ess. She could not have cared less to find out what really happened so it wouldn’t happen again. That was posturing.

Expand full comment
JoAnne's avatar

When reading about Benghazi, how the events unwound and then the false narrative given by the state department, I was convinced that her words represented her values. Unlike Lynne, I believe that she is responsible for the massacre and failed to use intelligence appropriately to prevent the event or provide appropriate intervention.

Expand full comment
Lynne Morris's avatar

Oh I think she was responsible. For exactly the reason you say.

Expand full comment
Lynne Morris's avatar

The whole sentence was ""[W]hy does it matter now." She may have carelessly chosen her words but the words speak for themselves. She said it. She mrant it. Her problem was not that the Benghazi massacre happened, rather it was that she, as the Secretary of State, was called to account for it. That you refer to that as "nonsense" speaks volumes. My over 25 years at the time of observing Hillary Rodham Clinton and what she did and did not stand for is why I did not vote for her. Apparently I was not alone in the sentiment.

Expand full comment
L.K. Collins's avatar

Hillary Clinton never took criticism easily.

Expand full comment
Lynne Morris's avatar

I truly despise that heifer and think she is complicit, if not responsible, for taking us through the looking glass. At least in my lifetime.

Expand full comment
Pacificus's avatar

JoAnne, my heart grieves for all the fine men and women--including your son--who have served so well a country--and more specifically a governing elite-- that cares so little for them.

But I guess it has long been that way. See, Vietnam.

Expand full comment
LonesomePolecat's avatar

Vietnam was a Democrat war disaster. It should never have happened. You can lay it at the feet of JFK and that vile, corrupt, racist, LBJ.

Expand full comment
L.K. Collins's avatar

A more honest reading has America's Viet Nam involvement being a problem of the late Eisenhower years.

Expand full comment
LonesomePolecat's avatar

Who was it that sent our boys to die in Vietnam, Eisenhower or JFK and LBJ? Ike had been out of office for what two years? And those two Bozoes in the white house said, "Let's send 500,000 troops to Vietnam and blame it on Ike." LBJ not Ike fabricate the Gulf of Tonkin in order to get Congressional approval to send troops.

Maybe you should do some honest reading.

Expand full comment
William S (Bill) Kinkead's avatar

As someone who served there, I blame JFK almost as much as LBJ. The 2nd to 3rd rate Generals who would not stand up to the political leaders did not help. Milley is another example of a brave man in battle, but a pussy when dealing with politicians.

Expand full comment
Lynne Morris's avatar

Really. I live in LBJ country. He was a real piece of work.

Expand full comment
LonesomePolecat's avatar

Are you up near Llano and Johnson City? We are just north of San Antonio on I35.

Expand full comment
Lynne Morris's avatar

Near Blanco. Used to bank at Cattleman's.

Expand full comment
Lynne Morris's avatar

All post WWII actions have been executive actions. We need to put a stop to that. For all the hoopla about the president I think the real problem.is that Congress has abdicated its responsibilities. It does nothing, literally, except spend money, mostly to try to assure votes and impact elections. Thus the system of checks and balances is rendered useless.

Expand full comment
L.K. Collins's avatar

Lynne, you are correct that all of the actions post WWII were executive actions initiated from the Resolute Desk in the Oval Office.

There are valid reasons why the Chief Executive--the President--has the power to engage US forces in combat unilaterally. There is even legislation, the War Powers Act, to puts the onus on the President to bring to Congress a measure to continue the the fighting.

The problem comes in that once the fighting has started, the inertia generated shifts from authorizing action to protecting the integrity and safety of the forces engaged. That makes it difficult for any in Congress meaningfully to oppose executive action.

Perhaps we need to rethink the concept of prior restraint on the actions of a president to the extent of requiring the approval of the combined leadership Congress during the mission planning stage inasmuch as any military action requires a certain amount of discussion prior to implementation. To assure mission security and secrecy, congressional leaders be sequestered by Capital Police at the federal facilities at Greenbriar or some other site whose sole control is under Congress.

As for Congress abdicating, that is clearly the case. It is also a matter that, correctly, is being addressed by the federal courts in cases that are beginning to limit executive functionaries to only those powers that are clearly and explicitly granted by Congress.

Put another way, I am decidedly in favor of the developing Major Issues doctrine.

Expand full comment
Lynne Morris's avatar

To clarify I am very much pro-military. I just do not want the US military treated as a police force at the President's whim but rather utilized for the protection of legitimate national interests facing a legitimate threat. And while I understand the need on occasion for hasty action I think that had been exploited.

Expand full comment
JoAnne's avatar

Heritage Foundation was urging oversight by Congress of the funds being sent to Ukraine so that the dollars are spent as designated. Since military aid is a precursor, maybe it is time Congress also become involved with accounting for use of funds. Recognizing the ability of the executive branch to set foreign policy but balancing it with monitoring funds.

Expand full comment
JoAnne's avatar

The “fitness” problem in the military is more about the leadership starting with the president than the physical fitness of the rank and file.

Expand full comment
Lynne Morris's avatar

I truly believe they are seen as cannon fodder. It grieves me beyond words to say that.

Expand full comment
Comprof2.0's avatar

Is this a new, sudden realization?

Expand full comment
Lynne Morris's avatar

No it is not. Take your blinders off. The world is not nearly as grim as you would have it be.

Expand full comment
Comprof2.0's avatar

"Take your blinders off"....ironic

Expand full comment
Lynne Morris's avatar

Keep digging. It is your only talent.

Expand full comment
Joseph Kaplan's avatar

The troops are always and every where cannon fodder. Study history.

Expand full comment
JoAnne's avatar

There is an understanding of what military service does require, but when studying history, especially military strategies, there are battles fought that were total cannon fodder without purpose. Gallipoli is an example of men being slaughtered without any strategy in place. (yes, I am aware that this was Churchill!)

Expand full comment
Lynne Morris's avatar

I think that is a reason, albeit maybe unsaid reason, we disavowed monarchy. And there is a difference between making decisions that will.mean sacrifice of soldiers' lives in the heat of combat and having leadership, (largely without military experience like say Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden) who view a standing army as not only necessary to achive their goals but also as dispensable.

Expand full comment
LonesomePolecat's avatar

In ancient Rome you had to have served in the army to hold public office. I believe we should implement that in the US.

Expand full comment
Lynne Morris's avatar

I would be okay with that but I would just require service for all as Israel does.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Apr 7, 2023
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Lynne Morris's avatar

All are ultimately headed by humans and as such fallible. I'll still take my constitutional republic over the rest. If you are implying that the US "is effectively an elective monarchy", that is only true when Congress rolls over like a fat hound. And there is a remedy for that. Two actually.

Expand full comment
Danimal28's avatar

After serving in Desert Storm I left active duty to the Guard where my unit was being prepped for service in Iraq. I saw the absurdity of trying to make nations like America in one president's term and didn't re-enlist, because it was all about cannon foddery on behalf of the MIC.

Expand full comment
Lynne Morris's avatar

I am so sorry Danimal. I thought the moral of WWII was be prepared. But not that way.

Expand full comment
Pacificus's avatar

RIght on, Lynne. Keep saying it.

Expand full comment
Tony's avatar

Unfortunately they won't be voted out of office. To many Americans now approve of this kind of treatment for people they disagree with.

Expand full comment
Wrung Out Lemon's avatar

I used to believe that. But is will not happen.

I would love to see the Arkansas AG or some DA bring charges against the Clinton's over their foundation.

Expand full comment
IB Steve's avatar

They can try, but the Clintons will just laugh. It's painful to acknowledge.

Expand full comment
Pacificus's avatar

No Arkansas AG who values his life would ever indict the Clintons...they wojuld be subject to the Mark Middleton treatment.

Expand full comment
Joseph Kaplan's avatar

Arkancide.

Expand full comment
Wrung Out Lemon's avatar

But you see my point.

And, the power of the Clinton's is waning. They are quickly becoming old has beens. But there are PLENTY of right wing folks out there that would cheer on any indictment of either one of them and there is always a DA/AG out to make a name for themselves.

If I were an AG/DA that went after the Clinton's I would say strait out in my press conference that people who cross the Clinton's end up dead. That I expect that I will be a target for mischief. Put it out there. If anything does happen the Clinton's would be looked at hard and then other AG/DA types would be infuriated and terrified to let that go.

Expand full comment
Skinny's avatar

Would love that unfortunately the Clintons and the Obamas control America

Expand full comment
Jeff Cunningham's avatar

That sure worked in 2016, didn't it?

Expand full comment
Unwoke in Idaho's avatar

No they need to be at the receiving end of their policies.

Expand full comment
Comprof2.0's avatar

Well, I wouldn't want to decimate the regions/areas that produce 70% of the country's GDP.

Expand full comment
Terence G Gain's avatar

Then Rs will be no different than Ds. You are intemperate.

Expand full comment
Unwoke in Idaho's avatar

Absurd you think nothing should be done. It’s like taking a squeegee into a war zone. Yeah, that’ll teach the dems to be civil.

Expand full comment
Skinny's avatar

Best post today, we need to give them with a big stick but it’s proving very difficult when the deck is stacked against you. I fear that with they way they scam the elections they are going to be there forever God Forbid!

Expand full comment
The Unhedged Capitalist's avatar

I hope we survive too. I don't think civil war or succession is the answer.

Expand full comment
Bobby's avatar

It's the only answer..they gave us no choice!

Expand full comment
Greg Connolly's avatar

I sure do ont know the Answer but these neurotic actions under mine deeply held hopes for most of us Americans in our daily personal life.

Safety

Sanity

Hope for a better tomorrow.

Some of the Dems etc want to destroy our basic beliefs.

Obvious for quite sometime.

Expand full comment
Karen Lynch's avatar

So true. We ordinary concerned Americans who want life peace prosperity law and order and good jobs for our families are losing hope.

Expand full comment
Skinny's avatar

But what are we going to do about it

Expand full comment