Bargaining With Bluff


We won’t be seeing today’s subject on any coins, at least not for another 20 years. Long enough for history to be rewritten. In the meantime, here is a coin depicting his namesake. Image from wikimedia.

This exchange says everything about the Democrats’ control of the African American community, and the community’s representatives.

Separate But Equally Disdainful

The entitlement-minded host who seems to have zero experience in radio complains that after 15 minutes Biden can’t just leave an interview because that’s an insult to “black media” or something, trying to use a faked claim of racism as a nightstick to Rodney King his guest into submission.

Having worked in radio, it’s clear to me that the host either never had a guest bail on him because the interview got too dicey, never had to deal with other people’s schedules, or is unaware that other people have lives too. Or maybe he only thinks that Black Lives Matter. Seems to be that last one, based on how Biden was talking. The only way that the host isn’t a spoiled brat whiner who lies about racism in his temper tantrums is that if Biden’s campaign promised more time and really is bailing early, but even that isn’t a racist act. It’s not an assault on “black media” as this honky-voiced whiner claimed, unless I’ve missed something and this whiner happens to be the only African American media representative in the country.

I don’t know anything about him, I’d heard his name before and honestly thought he was solely a rapper, but I already don’t like him because his reaction to the perfectly normal occurrence of a guest leaving before the host wants them to shows he’s just an entitlement-minded spoiled little wimp that thinks saying everything is racist is how to get what he wants.

TL;DR the black host tried to pull the race card while fronting that he was a strong black man fighting for his community, but in the end Charlamagne the God was on his knees praying to Joe Biden for forgiveness. He might be the face of black millennials, but it’s the same docile face that kept the rest of the slaves in line prior to 1865.


The creep in back is the one who won the exchange with what was- according to the host- the entire combined might of “black media”. Image from PJ Media

Biden didn’t leave here unscathed either. White Democrat leader Biden tells the black host that he isn’t black if he doesn’t back Biden 100%. So Biden took a hit with black voters. Well… let me rephrase. Any blacks on the fence might be alienated by what Biden did.

Let’s look at what the black community loves to have Democrats do to them. Biden gloating that blacks are race traitors if they don’t vote Democrat and all of the rest saying blacks are mentally ill if they support Republicans, Maxine Waters saying any blacks supporting Trump are incapable of understanding what they’re saying and are “talking out of turn”, and Democrats getting away with blackface . That’s quite a level of loyalty from blacks- they’re treated with utter disdain and contempt and still beg for forgiveness if they dare voice a thought Democrats don’t like.

So… really Biden was just reminding Chuckles the Gosh of his place, and Chuckles graciously asked for forgiveness for stepping out of line, and most blacks (as we’ll see on election day, as we’ve seen on past election days) wholeheartedly believe that Biden is 100% correct in his statement here. Why would they stop supporting him just because he told the truth? Maybe they’ll lie and say they’re annoyed or something because cognitive dissonance is a real thing, but their votes and donations show their true feelings.

And Biden knew he could get away with this sort of thing. Remember what happened to Kanye West (who just two months ago made a very relevant observation)/Dr. Ben Carson/Condoleezza Rice/Diamond And Silk/even Charlamagne himself when they took a centrist or rightwing position? Biden knows blacks have his back, that he can go on the air and gloat about it and not lose any votes. Charlamagne obviously learned from the last incident where he was referred to in a racist way for not goose-stepping with the Democratic Party.


Biden had that host whipped. By the end of the interview, the host went from faking his front of strong “black media” representative to begging Biden for scraps for his community. See, the only way to get Biden to give them anything is for blacks to legitimately threaten to vote for Trump, that’s the only way to encourage Biden to even make promises let alone deliver on them, yet the host took that off the table. So why, Mr. Host, should Biden and Democrats bother giving you or your community ANYTHING if you’ll surrender this easily?

Further, Charlamagne’s surrender shows that he knew this going in, that he was more bluff than bluster. He followed-up the interview by talking up how great Biden is and then stating “[y]ou can’t possibly want me to Fear Trump MORE than I want something for my people” as if that little bit of bluster meant anything anymore, because when Biden directly addressed the wimp with that point, the wimp choked. Instead of saying “yes, Trump is a legit alternative because of all the things he’s done for us”, the host basically said “I would never vote for anyone that wasn’t a Democrat, I beg of you to acknowledge our servitude to your political party”, which Biden already had given lip-service to earlier in the interview. And since the wimp revealed that blacks would never stop voting Democrat no matter what (they carried Biden, even though under the Obama/Biden Administration blacks watched their wealth wither away vs. having record high employment rates under Trump. They loved Obama and hate Trump, according to polls. And for you folks that claim blacks were stuck jobless under Obama because Recession! remember that Democrats promised blacks/the country would NEVER recover, remember that you said Trump’s policies that gave jobs to blacks were going to destroy the economy and bankrupt the African American community, then YOU spent months praying for a recession that’d decimate the black community just so you can win in 2020… and blacks STILL support you…), he ceded any bargaining room so he should be thankful Biden even deigned to give that lip-service. Simply put: if you’re going to vote Democrat no matter what as the wimp revealed in the interview, why should they bother doing anything for you when they can use the resources that were supposed to go to you to court new voters?

You know what the real irony is (aside from the fact that Charlamagne would be just as submissive if Kamala Harris- who made her career taking money from/marrying whites and using blacks as slave labor– were the candidate and seems to think she’s a good Vice Presidential pick)? If the host actually cared about blacks and wasn’t just a wimpy poser, then Trump would be a legitimate alternative to Biden, Trump’s proven that. Despite the host hinting at that in his response later in the day about the interview, we saw that when under the gun all he had was a blank in the chamber. Lots of noise that he hopes would be scary, but would never be a threat.


A nurse holds the 1969 intellectual equivalent to Chuckles hostage. Image from IMDb

But hey, with a shallow name like his it’s no surprise that his activism and backbone would be nonexistent. “Charlamagne tha God”? I think this guy needs a paraphrased lecture I heard on Adam-12 directed at a biker leader named Bach (pronounced “batch”): he can pretend to be smart by taking the name of the Father of Europe but he’s not smart enough to spell it or “the” right, he can pretend to be powerful by taking God’s name in vain but we all saw how much power he really has, he can pretend to be courageous by pulling the race card on Biden but spent the rest of the day submissively urinating all over himself after Biden reminded him of his place.

If the wimp wants to be smart and tough, maybe he should start by educating himself- the founder of this blog has a book that’d be at the top of the wimp’s reading list (I’ll add the link when it’s out).

I guess the wimp should’ve known better than to tangle with the guy who ended the legendary Corn Pop’s reign of terror.

It’s Miller Time!


Stephen Miller- he looks like a weenie. Image from Washington Post

The Atlantic is publishing articles about how to talk to Trump supporters on Thanksgiving. Not one article on how Trump supporters can talk to insane liars like the people on the Left who report lies about stuff they see with their own eyes, rather it’s how the insane liars on the Left can talk to Trump supporters as if supporting the President is the problem, as if Trump supporters are the ones living in a different reality despite how the hard evidence proves otherwise. We don’t believe their spin, so we’re evil and ignorant. Nazis and terrorists.

No, the problem is condescending partisan hacks like you who believe so much that anyone opposed to you is an untermensch that must be patronized simply because they find your lies despicable and insulting to their intelligence. Yes I acknowledge Trump has flaws, yes I know there could be problems with Stephen Miller, but they’re nowhere near what you’re making them to be and if you weren’t such an arrogant lying asshole to begin with then we’d never be at this stage of partisanship where Republicans have to defend flawed fighters like that lest they back a limp-wristed ninny like Jeb who’d never win against the Left’s war machine! If it weren’t for your media and your partisanship and your bubbles pushing you away from us (I can verify that it’s YOU who are moving farther from the center- remember in 2008 when you voted for the anti-illegal immigration candidate? Remember how that’s now far-right white nationalist thought, the very thing you voted for only 11 years ago? Barack Obama, whom you voted for, is a white nationalist according to you. Whereas with George W. from 19 years ago the biggest criticisms the Right have is what they always had- not a fighter but tolerable. So who moved, the guys who could get along with themselves 19 years ago, or you who’d be punching your Nazi self from 11 years ago?) we’d have Jeb Bush as President and it’d be civil business as usual, the kind of civility we saw under Eisenhower and Kennedy. Or you guys would’ve picked Jim Webb instead of crooked Hillary, whom you’d have ruled out for covering for her husband’s misdeeds and for the strong whiff of scandal and rigged systems that follows her around.

But nope, that’s not what happened, you want a damn civil war because you think people who don’t believe your propaganda are “Lebensunwertes Leben”, not even the same species, so you create fake studies (and you have fake news purveyors Washington Post saying conservatives that don’t read their lies are more likely to believe fake news than liberals) and write articles like the one that started this rant which all serve to objectify your political enemy as an inferior form of life despite the untruth of that idea, making it easier to hate this “other” and segregate yourselves from them. Because the worst thing a liberal might do is question the liberal orthodoxy. Funny I should mention that, as it turns out that you guys with your authoritarianism and intolerance are actually psychopaths, according to the people behind a study you used to love citing that said conservatives were the psychos.


I ask where your brains are at. Nevermind, I found them. Brains Strauman. Image from WWE

Tell me something smart guy- if you’re so smart how’d Trump win over all the Obama folks? How come your Mueller fellow came up short? How come you have to lie all the time? How come you have to ban people from arguing against you? How come you always resort to insults and even mob violence rather than arguing your point? If you’re so damn smart, why do you act like a savage? How come you’ve had solid evidence of criminal impeachable offenses by Trump for two and a half years according to your geniuses, yet right now two of your own smart guys defected to join Republicans because they think impeachment is a loser and all your smart guys on Mueller’s team put together with millions of dollars couldn’t oust Trump? And if you’re so smart, why do you unconditionally believe everyone who lied to you about blue waves and Mueller impeachment and now Ukraine impeachment? How come you believe the people who can’t even tell the truth about their economic plans? How come you yourself aren’t smart enough to do some rudimentary math and figure out that there’s no way to pay for what the smart people want you to pay for? If you’re so smart, why don’t you like taxing the rich liberal donor class especially if you are rich yourself? Also, if you are so smart, why did you support a (by your standard as linked later) white nationalist named Obama in 2008 and a (by your standards of #BelieveAllWomen) rapist-enabler named Hillary in 2016? Well? Show me your brains!

Maybe it’s your measure of intelligence that’s flawed. You think ivy-league degrees in coloring coloring books or petting puppies mean you’re intelligent. You think being able to parrot the latest talking points from your favorite candidate, uncritically, makes you into a smart person. You think shouting down the opposition, punching them even, and calling them every bad name you can think of makes you smart. You think blind obedience to your own party makes you intelligent. You get lost when people aren’t telling you what/how to think. You also don’t believe minorities are intelligent, you white supremacist. No wonder you voted for xenophobe Obama in 2008.


It’s been over a year now, I really need to finish that book…

See, you view free thought as the enemy. That’s why you write elitist garbage like that piece from The Atlantic that I’ve seen over and over from many other liberal outlets over the years (also want to point out this study, which shows that people who love economic freedom tend to be quite intelligent too, and basically says someone who loves economic freedom and is socially liberal would be the brightest crayon in the box, meaning the socialists aren’t terribly bright). Funny too how they all just brief your readers on the liberal talking points of the day, as if your readers aren’t able to think on their own or able to create their own arguments. Isn’t that a measure of intelligence? Or do you view “intelligent” as “able to memorize liberal talking points” and don’t really care about understanding them? Some socialist you are, socialist leader Khrushchev thought people like that were idiots.

I don’t read rightwing talking points I don’t read rightwing stuff like that if there is any, does that mean I have superior mental agility to the Left since you guys apparently need to be told what to think and how to interpret things and view anyone that doesn’t see reality as you do as an “other” that must be destroyed because you don’t understand and can’t tolerate them?

You might also notice that I don’t directly quote stuff that supports my point from the links, I kind of expect anyone reading this to be intelligent enough to look through it and figure out for themselves how my point is supported. I don’t believe in insulting people’s intelligence, unlike you liberal who think conservatives and minorities alike are idiots as linked above.

You know, this was the original first paragraph here, but then I became annoyed. Anyway what had started this post was how President Trump’s longtime adviser Stephen Miller, a Jew, is being accused of white nationalism by the Southern Poverty Law Center, a liberal group who sees white nationalists under their bed, like their partners in crime the Anti-Defamation League who thinks the “ok” hand gesture is racist and who think The Beatles with their bowl cuts are white supremacists. ADL should be taken seriously, people are getting fired over their partisan garbage. SPLC merely goaded Chik-Fil-A into abandoning the LGBT community in order to support SPLC.

Smearing The Accuser

SPLC spends most of their time drafting charges of hate against Republicans, and then Democrats refer to this arm of the DNC as an independent institute dedicated to fighting racism. Basically, imagine if Donald Trump created a think tank called the Trump Institute and whenever he wanted a policy change he cited studies from the Trump Institute supporting it. That’s the SPLC’s relation to the Democratic Party right now. They have all the credibility of Snopes or CNN– meaning they’re a buncha partisan liars and you should pay as much attention to them as you would to Farrakhan

Actually, there is a certain irony in this story, speaking of Farrakhan. You see, the Congressional Black Caucus is following SPLC’s lead in attacking Stephen Miller. The CBC goes right on along with all of SPLC’s accusations against the Right. The trouble is that back when SPLC was sort of legitimate, they put Farrakhan on their naughty list. The CBC is composed of Farrakhanites as I’ve mentioned before. So, by legitimizing SPLC’s claims against anybody, CBC is making itself look like a bunch of racists. Or at least they would be if Democrats had any sense of decency. But they don’t, as evidenced by their perversion of SPLC into a partisan group whose sole contribution to society today is to call anyone opposed to the Democratic Party a racist, while letting Democrats get away with genuine racism.


Surely you remember the guy in the middle and the guy on the right, they’re two of only four white people I know who are allowed to wear blackface according to the SPLC.

Where is SPLC on Hillary Clinton saying Gandhi worked at a gas station, or Biden working with segregationists (incidentally, liberal, didn’t you say all the Dixiecrats had become Republicans by the time Biden was in the Senate?), or Kamala Harris taking white cash to put blacks in jail, or AOC’s racist Green New Deal that’ll obliterate minority communities and minority voting districts by forcing them out of their homes and businesses, or Ayanna Pressley’s bigoted statement that all people MUST conform to the stereotypes she lays out for them, or Ana Navarro’s racist stereotyping the black community (she’s the one who was filing her nails to make the point that she did not care about Latinos dying, a vile disgusting creature who gets fat off ignoring or encouraging the suffering of others), or Rashida Tlaib’s anti-Semitism, or Ilhan Omar’s antiSemitism, or CAIR’s anti-Semitism, or the racism of New York Times’ Sarah Jeong, or Jimmy Kimmel wearing blackface to mock a black athlete, or Ralph Northam wearing blackface, or Mark Herring wearing blackface? They don’t care when their OWN side does it, if Democrats put blacks back into slavery tomorrow SPLC would label it as a heroic step to solve the problems of housing and unemployment.

I’d say that about wraps up their case, but don’t take my word for it. They had to pay a $3.4 million settlement after wrongfully accusing a Muslim activist of being anti-Islam, because the activist resisted anti-Semitism and resisted terror-linked groups like CAIR. SPLC was supporting anti-American terrorists and anti-Semites and radical Muslims. Yet supporting people who love Female Genital Mutilation and acid attacks against women somehow isn’t bigotry, according to SPLC.

The only reason the Left, like all those people quoted by NPR, decided to start caring about illegal immigration is because they know it means votes, it means flipping districts, it means POWER. That’s why their solution is to force illegal immigrants on a death march to this country, force many of them to leave their loved ones dead in the desert on the way here, leave a trail of bodies stretching to central America, and endure all kinds of abuse and rape just to get here. Do you hear the Left saying “hey, if they need to flee these countries why don’t we cut aid to them or go and fix them ourselves?” No, that is NOT the Left’s solution (well, Julian Castro had an idea like that, but he’s polling so low that you wonder if only his campaign staff support him). The Left’s solution is to drain them of anyone who’d affect change in those countries, and bring such people here to vote Democrat. Revolutions happen when people can’t tolerate the social conditions and have no way out. Democrats are deliberately giving them a way out, to prevent revolution and to ensure they have a never-ending stream of future Democrat voters. The Democratic Party is profiting off human suffering, and works to perpetuate it so that they may continue profiting from it. And the people they force to endure this suffering, the people whose countries they ensure are unstable hellholes, all happen to be nonwhites. Democrats are deliberately making nonwhite people suffer, to profit off them. Isn’t that one of the big problems we had with slavery? Well, historically (and presently) Democrats were the guys who supported that institutionalized human suffering, and as a teacher of mine used to say “a leopard doesn’t change its spots”.

Defending Miller’s Sources

I’ll start by saying that for some of these sources, we don’t really know how Stephen Miller came to be aware of them. Does he regularly Google subjects that these sources support so they keep showing up? I mean, my Google results always include links to the Washington Post but I hate them and don’t actively seek out their lies, unless there’s relevance to what I’m writing. So is it like that, with these results just constantly appearing because they’re the only ones talking about what Miller is looking for? Or does he actually check these sources routinely? Or did some guy he knows forward them to him? That is not made apparent by SPLC, either because they don’t know or because the answer would hurt their narrative.


What do they have on Stephen Miller? According to The Hill, the most scandalous stuff is that he coordinated coverage with Breitbart, and The Hill cites stories from VDare as being examples of white nationalism. (Sigh) I have to defend THEM now? Look, their tone is crude, and they pick on immigrants of all kinds by reporting negative info on them, but you know what? SOMEONE has to. If it were up to the Left, you’d think everyone with white skin was a Nazi trying to kill people and that everyone without white skin had a spark of divinity. You hear them saying MS-13 are angels, but never white people. Always on the attack against white people. So if THAT’S not racist, then surely pointing out legitimate flaws in people coming into this country, whites included since VDare wants ALL immigration to stop, isn’t racist.

Oh wait, the guys saying everything a white person does is racist are the ones who follow SPLC. Nevermind. Remember: the people saying VDare is racist, saying Miller is racist, saying SPLC should be obeyed, they’re the same ones who not only excuse racism in their own party, but also believe that criticizing a non-white lawmaker for ANY reason, legitimate or not, is an act of racism. According to them, if you attacked Kamala Harris’ record on putting blacks in jail, you’re a racist. BUT, according to them, if you attack Dr. Ben Carson and call him an idiot you’re NOT a racist.

Do you understand NOW who these people are saying these things are racist? If they weren’t out silencing facts and silencing dissenting opinions and silencing debate by saying everyone who disagreed with them was a bigot, if they were neutrally reporting facts on non-whites and immigrants of all kinds legal and otherwise, then we wouldn’t NEED a buncha crude people to get together and form sites like VDare that, while delivering hard evidence on these matters, comes off with such a harsh tone and no finesse. If the truth was already being reported, if the truth were not being suppressed, if you weren’t called a racist for believing truths that Barack Obama and the rest of the Democratic Party believed a mere 13 years ago, then people would be way less motivated to come up with sites like VDare, so really it’s a creation borne of the Left’s relentless inquisitions. When you suppress knowledge, people hunger for it, and will listen to anyone telling the truth, even if they have a lousy delivery.


According to The Hill, another problematic organization was the Center for Immigration Studies. I shouldn’t even have to defend them, they’re not far-right and the only reason you’d call them a racist is if you supported open borders and thought that somehow America’s welfare system can sustain 7 Billion people. I know them quite well.


American Renaissance is another group I guess I have to defend (spoiler alert: I can’t. Though sometimes they make legitimate, data-backed points, their framing is often repugnant- they are Don Lemmoning it. So rather than defend them I’m going to wonder at why you aren’t defending them because you’re as much a racist as they are.), so let’s twist it up and use the Left’s own rhetoric to defend it. NPR (I almost laughed when a popup asking me to donate to support NPR’s “independent journalism” came up. It’s funded by the government thus beholden to Democrats that believe in expanding money for it, and most if not all of their reporting seems like a reprint of DNC talking points) says AmRen’s big racist issue is that it acknowledges races are different. That’s how NPR frames it anyway. They could have just quoted the site, they aren’t shy about thinking whites are superior and have a bunch of stats backing it up. But instead, NPR says the idea that having too much testosterone makes you more aggressive has been debunked. So NPR basically said anyone complaining about toxic masculinity is a liar. They also say it’s a problem to think races are different, even though that’s the entire thrust of why the Left says whites can’t comment on black or Latino issues. Oh well.

But if viewing one race as superior is a problem, then why is it that only Black Lives Matter, not Latino Lives or All Lives? Why did Ocasio-Cortez favor Latinos with her Latino Supremacist Green New Deal? Why do Asians face hardship getting into college that others don’t? Why do Latinos get to flout the laws with sanctuary cities that release murderers while American citizen murderers are kept in prison? Also, how can it be wrong to view races as being different when liberals will tell you all the time how evil white people are. White people are a race too, y’know!

So clearly the problem the Left has with AmRen isn’t that they acknowledge races are different, or even that they believe one race is better than another, it’s just that AmRen backed whites over the others. And remember in the opening how I mentioned liberals see their opponents as an inferior “other” that must be exterminated? AmRen might see other races as inferior but they don’t advocate concentration camps. The Left on the other hand

As to my own thoughts on American Renaissance, this one is more problematic as it does openly favor whites. But at the same time they show favoritism towards anybody that wants to be part of American culture, at least as the site defines it. By the way- they support Democratic Presidential Candidate Julian Castro’s plan to help Central American countries fix themselves, which I ranted about earlier since Democrats don’t want that. So… since Julian Castro has the backing of a white nationalist group, does that make him racist too?

Anyway, AmRen actually is kinda racist (I can say “kinda” because of all the examples of racism I’ve mentioned regarding liberals that liberals have no problem with, which are much more egregious than here, for example unlike Rashida Tlaib and CAIR, AmRen does not advocate or support people who advocate exterminating entire races. AmRen is perfectly willing to co-exist with likeminded races from what I read, but with the idea that whites are better, and from what I’ve heard in black entertainment awards ceremonies about blacks being superior I think we can let AmRen get by with this relatively harmless if not narcissistic variant of white supremacy) though some stuff AmRen publishes might make legitimate points, tainted as they may be by the site’s underlying ideology. Afterall, the Nazis proved that cigarettes kill you, does the fact that they were Nazis mean they were wrong about cigarettes and they’re actually good for you? Consider that- racists actually can make good points. As mentioned in other posts I’ve linked to, liberal, you’d agree on that point because you and David Duke both support Ilhan Omar.

Some French Novel No One Heard Of (not the one that started Planet of the Apes)


A TV show based on a movie series based on a movie based on a book based on a planet where apes evolved from men? Image from

Both NPR and The Hill agree that part of the problem is Miller liking some French fictional story about immigrants destroying civilization or whatever. But isn’t that EXACTLY what the Left says happened? To the Native Americans, by white people? Isn’t that why they want to get rid of Columbus Day and Thanksgiving Day? For the very reason that those days celebrate white immigrants destroying the culture and civilization of the natives? But now that’s RACIST to say?! I’d ask if we needed a playbill to keep up, but there is a very easy formula to the Left’s ideas in case you hadn’t noticed: “white people bad, nonwhite good”. That makes this little fragment of hypocrisy make sense: the French novel is bad because it depicts the destruction of white civilization as a bad thing but it’s actually GOOD and what the Left WANTS, but the destruction of nonwhite civilization by whites is bad so ban Thanksgiving and ban Columbus Day.

Defending Miller

I like how NPR says the reaction on the Right is “muted”. Fake news, from where I sit. I’m on the Right and I’m ready to make the nearest Lefty spit teeth. I’d make this entire post full of caps and exclamation points and swearing, but none of that is conducive to readability. But I’ve also been at this too long, so my nerves are shot and tolerance is at zero- I was paying attention since 2008 when the Left said you were a racist because you did NOT vote for the candidate who said illegal immigrants hurt our country, as I hammered home in previous posts linked previously in this post.

The Hill points out an email from Miller emphasizing the race of a shooter, where Miller wanted that angle played up in reporting, as if that were racist. Well, guess what, if that’s racist then linking all these other shooters to white nationalism and saying white people have a problem with producing mass shooters as the media loves to do is racist too. I covered and debunked that garbage already, at length, somewhere in all these posts (pssssst: by the way, this is where all the “Obama is a white nationalist” arguments are). But somehow, Miller trying to counter the narrative that all white people are mentally unhinged mass shooters is an act of racism.

According to the article in The Hill I cited above, SPLC’s big beef seems to be with rolling back TPS protections. TPS = Temporary Protected Status. Meaning someone can come into the country with that, then get lost somewhere and never leave. Just another way to cheat the system. See, I KNOW a non-white immigrant who has been trying to get into this country the RIGHT way for years now. When Obama was giving amnesty, this person was being denied by Obama’s immigration judges. It’s like liberals want to punish you for trying to come here legally. And oh how they praise those who do come here illegally! How many stories do you see celebrating ILLEGAL immigrants who cheated the system and whose entrance into this country was memorialized by giving our laws, law-abiding citizens, and law-abiding noncitizens the finger? Now how many times does the Left celebrate in their “news’ media people coming here legitimately? Crickets. NOW, how many times has the Left conflated “illegal immigration” with “immigration” to make it look like hating the criminal one was the same as hating the legal one?


I suppose it would be Pelosi of all people to say MS-13 was composed of angels. Her city believes the NRA is a terror group and criminals should be called the “justice-involved”.

There you go. The Left rewards lawbreakers, at the same time they’re trying to impeach Trump for allegedly breaking the law. Why does the immigrant class of lawbreaker get protection while citizen lawbreakers don’t? That is blatantly unconstitutional, as it has something called the “equal protection clause” which says outright the law won’t favor one group over another. But that’s not what the Left is about, but you saw that earlier when I tore into SPLC.

What’s Your Conclusion?

One legitimately racist source, the rest are ok despite the Left’s lies. I really didn’t even want to believe AmRen was racist because statistically it was just the Left crying wolf again, but unlike liberals I actually looked at the problem and found yeah they are. Not in the “exterminate everyone” way, but in the narcissist “we’re just better” way. And that’s it, that’s the best they have on accusing Jewish Stephen Miller of being a Nazi. They don’t even know how he got to that site or if he’s seen the problematic posts by them. Was he just following links sent by a friend? Did Google direct him there? Who knows, but if it’s something you can make a big deal about then do it! Turn this into a Steven Scalise situation.

Whereas on the other side, you have people that think The Beatles and Barack Obama are racists saying Stephen Miller needs to be fired for acknowledging the problems with immigration in general, illegal immigration in particular, our immigration system overall, and challenging the anti-White narratives the media deals in.

At best, neither side is right and neither side is fit to comment on the racism of the other. Maybe they cancel out and that’s how equality happens, though Miller would need to do a heck of a lot more to match the modern Left’s racism.


Veterans Of The Democratic Party


Rep. Elaine Luria (D-VA) Image from wikimedia commons

I was reading earlier today about a Congresswoman from Virginia named Luria who supports impeaching Trump. She is a veteran of the Navy, and tried to hide her partisanship behind her Navy uniform. She claims she is serving a higher calling, protecting the Constitution, saying she swore 7 times to protect it. She picked Veterans Day as the day to release this message. Turns out she must have had her fingers crossed all 7 times. We’ll look at this impeachment she is supporting, and the allies that she chose to join because they share her values. And how she basically punched every veteran in the face with her partisanship and support of the America haters.

A Few Words On Impeachment

She’s not the only veteran in Congress and the Democratic Party who supports impeaching Trump. I made a timeline earlier of how the impeachment thing played out so far, at least the current thrust centered on the Ukraine. That was a few weeks ago so let’s look at some updates from that front. Spoiler alert: they don’t support the Democrats unless you’re on the same Trump Derangement Syndrome-induced fever trip that they’re on.

  • The “whistleblower” colluded with Ukraine in 2016 to help Hillary Clinton win.
  • The Obama Administration colluded with Ukraine to help Hillary Clinton win.
  • The “whistleblower” is tied in tight with anti-Trump Intel Community liars like John Brennan and America haters like LTC Vindman, in addition to liars like Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) as discussed in the last post.
  • We can finally see some of the transcripts for testimony in the impeachment hearings, and… they say nothing supportive. Overall either the witness says they heard things from other people, or they said “in my anti-American partisan opinion, it might mean this”.
  • The leader of the impeachment committee, Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), told witnesses not to answer questions from Republicans (after trying to stop Republicans from asking questions at all, as I mentioned earlier).

And now we have a veteran say that serving this farce is protecting the Constitution. Maybe she didn’t read it. There’s a bunch of stuff in there related to something she may never have heard of- it’s called “due process”. They’re some weird concepts about being allowed to face your accuser, a bunch of stuff in there about due process, a bunch of stuff about being allowed to cross-examine witnesses. Trump has been denied all of that, and the Democrats threaten to continue denying it to him. Instead of lawyers for the defendant, a few Republican congressmen are allowed to be present at the hearings, but they are NOT allowed to call witnesses and in some cases can’t even ask the questions they want to ask.

Now yes, the President in an impeachment hearing isn’t really entitled to any rights like due process since it’s not really a criminal proceeding, but yes Democrats- the party that Luria chose to join because she agrees with their values- believed Bill Clinton SHOULD have had due process rights applied when he was impeached and with the accusations of sexual assault against him, yet right now Democrats are giving Trump fewer rights than Republicans gave Bill Clinton while claiming this is fairness! But keep in mind that Democrats tried to do this with Brett Kavanaugh during his confirmation hearing, and were accusing him of a very serious crime similar to Bill’s. In other words- Democrats only believe their own side should have rights. The old saying goes “you practice how you play”. So how will liberals like Luria play when it comes to real trials?

  • Another practice swing- Democrats worked to deny college students due process rights, though granted they really just worked to make it easier for colleges to circumvent criminal courts where due process and the need for evidence would come into play and attack students baselessly accused of crimes on their own. In light of the following, it makes you wonder if they were training kids for the “new norm” as they’re so fond of saying.
  • Now they’re at bat: the Democrats told the Supreme Court that if they don’t judge cases the way Democrats want them judged, then Democrats will alter the Supreme Court so that it will give results that the Party finds acceptable.
  • There’s the old chestnut where Democrats tried to attack Constitutionally-protected things the 2nd Amendment and due process rights at the same time.
  • Once Obama came into office, the Democrats expanded President Bush’s anti-due-process-anti-terror rules.
  • President Obama’s military commissions for civilians, instead of courts (ostensibly for terrorists in a warzone, but according to San Francisco that means any NRA member)
  • President Obama skipping the military commission and ordering the execution of an American citizen without giving him any form of due process or trial, at least trial as we understand them. Several times.
  • Worth mentioning is Obama’s bailout of Chrysler was in defiance of due process. So first Democrats defied due process to payoff some big business millionaire friends, and then they defy due process to murder someone.
  • Obama’s “rocket docket” idea defied due process.

And due process isn’t the only Constitutional right (under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments) that the present crop of Democrats like Luria have worked to deny you, Democrats who cosplay as members of the military and tell the equally-as-big lie that they are protecting your rights. They’ve gone after the First Amendment, Second Amendment, the sixth amendment, and the recess appointments clause. Is this what veterans like Luria believe they took an oath to protect- the Democratic Party and its agenda instead of the Constitution? Did they take the Chinese oath to serve?

Stolen Valor

So, do the veterans in the Democratic Party like Luria (picking on her because, like I said with AOC a while ago, it helps if you can point to a specific face rather than generalize the evils of a group overall) believe that a citizen is NOT allowed a fair trial and that the prosecutors get to decide what witnesses they can call and what evidence they’re allowed to use and who the defendant is allowed to cross-examine, if the prosecutors even allow the defendant to be present at the trial? Well, they backed it for Obama and for Schiff’s impeachment and they back Democrats demanding the Supreme Court tailor its decisions to Democrat Party values so…

Does Luria believe that she fought to protect the right of the government to have a partisan who works with liars come forward and make an unsupportable accusation in secret followed by secret hearings to in order to convict someone of a crime? Because that’s what Democrats support. They don’t just support ending due process for Trumps or Kavanaughs either, we see this going on with liberals at the local level. And THIS is the totalitarian system of government, the unconstitutional system of government, about which people like Luria say “I’m a Navy veteran and I support this evil, so you should too.” Maybe I just didn’t do my research on her- maybe she was a zampolit in the Soviet Navy. Or not, because some of them actually were honorable.


Image of liberal Jane Fonda mocking American soldiers  to entertain North Vietnamese butchers. She is still a favored liberal/Democrat personality. The veterans in the Democratic Party know this is who they are supporting. Image from Patriotpost

As you saw from the reference to Lt. Col. Vindman, just because someone wears a uniform it does not make them pure and good. Why, even you liberal would agree with that, remember Lt. Col. Oliver North? Besides, liberal, the rest of your party hates the military anyway, hated them for a while, thinks they’re the same as terrorists or worse. So even YOU don’t believe it. And note that THESE anti-military people who hate America are the ones that Rep. Luria and other Democrat veterans side with. They weren’t forced, they VOLUNTARILY became Democrats because these Democrats who hate this country SHARE their values. These dishonorable veterans BELIEVE in the same cause that the anti-American crowd who spits on veterans believes in. And how do these anti-veteran anti-military anti-American veterans sell themselves to the public? They don the uniforms that their party hates, and claim it makes them credible somehow.

Liberals are supposed to be smarter, studies have been done to show that, so I don’t believe for one second, and neither should you, that these liberals somehow aren’t aware of the beliefs they’re promoting, somehow not aware of the despicable anti-veteran causes they now serve.



A Historic Oppression


Pope Sixtus IV, after whom the Nintendo 64 was named. He’s the guy who authorized Catholic monarchs to begin the inquisitions. Image from Wikimedia Commons

Reality is just the same event happening over and over. Or as L.Q. “Sonny” Clemonds once said “it’s the same dance, it’s just a different tune.”

I present to you some history: the so-called dark ages came about because the Catholic Church was losing power and didn’t know what to do. They weren’t strong enough to fight their geopolitical foe, the Muslims. Their first crusade was a success, but the next three failed. They were cutoff from the rest of the world, with Europe surrounded at sea and on land by Muslim forces, with Spain and Italy being invaded outright and the Christian bulwark of Constantinople being sacked.

(Irrelevant to the rest of this post, but this story ends with the Europeans eventually overtaking the Islamic forces. I suppose we could say the final nail in the coffin was World War I. It’s also worth noting that the first overseas engagement of the United States military, that wasn’t related to fighting the British, was against these Islamic forces- the Barbary Wars. So when you hear that Muslims played an important role in U.S. history, they surely did, they gave our military one of its first victories on the world stage after this country was founded, a victory remembered in the Marines’ Hymn by the line “to the shores of Tripoli”. Islamic leaders believed that since Americans were not Muslims, then the Koran made it ok for them to enslave Americans and steal our property, until we sent our military in to beat them up. Amazing how the more things change the more they stay the same.)

Anyway, I redirect your attention to that early iteration of Islam vs the West. In particular, how the West reacted. The Catholic Church was the big power at the time, pretty much a government on its own. They reacted with what the Left likes to call the “dark ages”, an age of repression and intolerance and where no progress was made, as the narrative goes. But why did this come about? Well, the Catholic Church saw their power being challenged abroad and domestically, so they came down hard to maintain it. Inquisitions, heretics under every bed, all that sort. Intense paranoia and brutal oppression.

The Left likes to scold and mock Christians over that, ignoring how if the narrative holds (it’s been challenged, but that’s something I probably won’t ever cover because it’s irrelevant, though I will note this interesting idea here about how the Catholic Church’s policies made Europe way different than the rest of the world in a positive way) then Catholics were just reacting in an all too human way. The way liberals are today.

The Trumpish Inquisition


Grand Inquisitor Adam Schiff (D-CA) tells Amb. Volker that things would go easier for him if he cooperates. Image from Encyclopedia Britannica

Look at their primary race. The weaker moderates are being jettisoned, with Biden only having any staying power because he’s a darn cockroach and you should at least respect everything he’s gone through in his life even if he himself has terrible policy ideas and a weird gropiness about him. They don’t want anyone anything close to Trump. Heck, look at how they’re trying to take down Rep. Gabbard now: they’re trying to say she’s evil and unelectable because she allegedly was up for a position in the Trump Administration. They’re going all Spanish Inquisition up in here. Moderates are purged if they don’t bow to the far Left, who are running the show now much like the Catholic extremists during the Inquisition.

Look at all the people who have had to apologize for ever saying anything even remotely different from the party line. Pretty much the only thing protecting Biden is his relative electability as perceived by the establishment, and his ability to pretend to be for some leftwing ideals though from what I saw in the debates he had limits, limits that might win the needed independents.

Aside from purging their own party, look at the fifth and seventh crusades the Left have launched against President Trump. Impeachment over the Mueller Report until it was a dud, now impeachment over Ukraine which I’ve gone over twice as being a dud.

And when did this all start? When they lost power in 2016. Like the inquisitions of the Christians, the Left’s inquisition began when they lost their political power. They were riding high on the age of Obama, they could do no wrong. They thought it’d be an easy election and they’d keep their power and influence, and most importantly control over lots more money- the American taxpayer’s. But then disaster struck. Like when the Muslims sacked Jerusalem and Constantinople, Trump won in 2016. And like the Catholic Church eventually did, Democrats reacted with inquisitions. Aside from those against Trump and the ones mentioned earlier, we had #MeToo which tore apart several moderate Democrats and moderate Democrat donors. The inquisition for ideological purity continues- Former President Obama commented on it quite recently.

But it was only a natural, and quite human, reaction. They went from top of the world to facing a real challenge, and they turned to fear and paranoia to face it. And now we see the Left ushering in a dark age.


No more free speech. Oh sure, you say now that it’s a moral imperative to fight “hate speech”, but who defines what “hate speech” is? You? Or the people in power making the laws. Remember, liberal, folks like Bernie Sanders were once oppressed by the party that you’re trying to put in office. If they had the power, they’d have said in 2015 that all speech supporting him was “hate speech”, citing sexism perhaps, so as to make sure Hillary Clinton had a smooth ride to the top. You saw how corrupt they were. Now you want these same people to decide what “hate speech” is?

What happens if you turn out to be a bit too much of a Bernie Sanders for the Elizabeth Warren that controls what defines “hate speech”? You want to face jail time or worse because you’re the wrong kind of socialist? Don’t laugh, because that’s how Leon Trotsky met his end. That’s how China and the USSR split. All were communists, but they disagreed on what kind of communists. Do you want your brand of communism to be defined as hate speech if your rival does a better job at convincing people they’re right? No, I didn’t think so. That’s why speech of all kinds is protected- because it’s so subjective that anyone could find any kind of speech to be “hate speech”, and with enough Twitter followers they can make it look like everyone agrees with them. Remember- a small Twitter mob can force the New York Times to change headlines. What could a mob with that much power do to you if you were the wrong kind of socialist, with the backing of your laws banning hate speech?

And speaking of oppression, anyone get a look at who runs the internet? I’ve gone after Google before, and Facebook and Twitter aren’t any better. Microsoft and Apple are ran by some of the Inquisitionites too. So how about that speech, eh? Shadow bans, bans, repressed search results, all directed against political opponents. Physical mobs storming heretics. Physical mobs attacking heretics. The same kind of oppression you saw during the “dark ages”, that same rejection of what we’d later call “Enlightenment Values”.

I would also be remiss if I didn’t point out the academic issues, namely suppression, that the Left engages in. ANYTHING that counters ANY PART of their narratives, no matter how factually correct, is suppressed. Students are self-censoring. Try stating a neutral, nonjudgmental sentence about being trans on YouTube- you get censored for hate speech. Or try publishing studies that counter the narratives of trans activists vying for political power- it gets suppressed by an angry mob.

So who are the real liberals- the ones oppressing you like the Catholic Church in the dark ages? Well, that seems to be what you liberals believe.


The requisite pitchforks and torches were traded in for… well, I don’t see any pitchforks at least. Images of Liberal Inquisitionites from AP, RWC, Fox News, and Quora


Impeachment Hot Air


i think I’ve mentioned before that ever since 2017 I’ve grown to hate this pencil-necked baldy. And his head looks like a balloon, befitting the hot air contained therein. Image from CSPAN.

What if I told you that during the Obama Administration, a whistleblower tied to the Republicans came forward and claimed Obama did something corrupt. The whistleblower made a specious complaint that was only accepted because of rule changes made possibly days before he filed the complaint. Then the Republican-controlled House held secret hearings to impeach Obama, where Democrats had limited power, could not even call witnesses to refute the claims of the Republican-approved witnesses!

Sounds like those evil racist Republicans and their helpers in the Intel Community really wanted to get Obama out, doesn’t it! Well guess what liberal, replace “Obama” with “Trump” and “Republican” with “Democrat”, and you have what your people are doing right now.

Before I start my tirade which may have some lack of clarity, let me just give a quick summary of the matter in chronological order.

  • 2000– President Clinton asked EXPLICITLY for a political favor from UK PM Tony Blair, asking him to directly influence some dispute because it would help Al Gore win. There is no controversy in a President asking a foreign leader to interfere in a matter to help him politically (remember these words for when you see what Pelosi says September 24 2019)
  • January 2016 – Barack Obama’s Administration requests that Ukrainian prosecutors investigate a member of the Trump Campaign, claiming he is corrupt. Obama’s Admin also requests that Ukrainians drop the Burisma corruption probe (Burisma is the company Joe Biden’s son worked for).
  • March 2016– Joe Biden withholds aid allegedly to fight corruption in Ukraine, saying they won’t get the aid until a prosecutor is fired, and further saying there was international support for firing the prosecutor. This prosecutor happens to be investigating Biden’s son’s company, the investigation Obama asked Ukraine to drop 2 months prior, and lawyers for Burisma admitted that the prosecutor was merely smeared as corrupt by American politicians and apologized for it. Furthermore, a top diplomat testified that the prosecutor was fired solely because of the U.S. applying pressure, NOT because of the international community. Also, the new prosecutor was as corrupt as the original one allegedly was, but the Obama Administration deemed him fit enough after the Burisma matter was dropped, with Biden himself saying he approved this new corrupt prosecutor.
  • January 20 2017– Washington Post reports that Democrats began trying to impeach Trump while Obama is still President.
  • Early 2018– Ukraine begins investigating Joe Biden’s son’s company again, prompted by Joe Biden’s remarks in January of that year about withholding aid to get the original prosecutor fired.
  • May 2018– Democratic Senators demand Ukraine help Robert Mueller’s partisan witch hunt investigation into Trump’s corruption. If Democrats apply Rep. Adam Schiff’s (D-CA) interpretation of the partial transcript of Trump’s call with the Ukrainian President to the letter their own Senators wrote (which more or less said the same thing that Trump said), it was clearly a “mafia-like shakedown“.
  • February-March 2019– The United States government is aware that Ukraine is investigating Joe Biden’s son’s company (Burisma) again.
  • May 5– Rep. Al Green (D-AL) warns Democrats- in light of a poll showing that 66% of the public did not want impeachment- that if they fail to impeach Trump, he will get re-elected, and he’ll justify it by saying Democrats couldn’t find anything wrong with him despite spending his entire term investigating him.
  • Sometime before July 18– Trump decides to withhold aid from Ukraine partly because Europe isn’t doing its fair share, and partly because of concerns over corruption there, and how the corrupt officials might line their pockets with it. Investigating what Ukraine did to help Democrats in 2016 is part of his idea of corruption in Ukraine. The Ukrainians are NOT made aware that the aid is withheld, let alone the reason for it, until August 28 or 29.
  • July 25– Trump chats with the Ukrainian President. Trump says Europe isn’t doing its share. Trump asks Ukrainian President to look into what was going on there in 2016 as it relates to our elections. Ukrainian President starts talking about corruption in his country. Trump says that as part of that corruption crackdown, the Ukrainian President should look into what happened with Joe Biden’s son. No mention was made of aid being withheld.
  • August– Whistleblower rules for the Democrat Swamp loyalist intel community are changed so that hearsay is accepted. The Ukraine Whistleblower submits his complaint in this month. Also in this month, one of the whistleblower’s Intel Community co-workers from the White House is hired by Adam Schiff to be part of his staff. The Ukraine Whistleblower worked with Adam Schiff’s staff to put through his complaint. Schiff himself is made aware of the complaint and its contents to an extent.
  • August 28 or 29– Ukraine learns aid is being withheld.
  • Before September 10– Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) threatens Ukraine, telling them that there will be consequences if they help Trump find dirt on Biden.
  • September 12– Prior to this date, Trump had decided to release the aid to Ukraine afterall, as emails obtained from this date show instructions to diplomats about the money’s release.
  • September 19– Anonymous sources tell the Washington Post that there is a whistleblower, saying this person heard other people talking about Trump’s Ukraine call, saying these people said that Trump threatened to withhold aid from Ukraine unless Ukraine investigated Joe Biden and his son. A “quid pro quo” arrangement. This Ukraine Whistleblower had strong ties to Adam Schiff’s office, and ties to Joe Biden.
  • September 24– Nancy Pelosi announces that the House will begin an impeachment inquiry into Trump, claiming it’s because he tried to force a foreign government to do something that would help him politically. She does not note that what Trump allegedly asked Ukraine to do was already known by the U.S. to have been done 5 months before the call.
  • September 25– Ukraine President denies there was pressure, and Trump releases the partial transcript showing that nothing happened..
  • September 26– Adam Schiff is selected to lead the impeachment investigation over the Ukraine Whistleblower’s allegation. The investigation is based on the alleged “quid pro quo” arrangement, under the belief that it is an impeachable offense that Trump would use his office to get a foreign country to investigate a political opponent because it interferes in an upcoming election.
  • October 3– By now Trump, the Ukrainian President, Ambassador Volker, and the partial transcript of the call emphatically deny that any quid pro quo took place. Adam Schiff makes a “mafia-like shakedown” threat to Volker that he is “making this much more complicated than it has to be” with his refusal to tell Schiff what Schiff wants to hear: that Trump’s actions would have been perceived by Ukraine as forcing them to investigate Biden. Liar Adam Schiff’s secret hearings, such as this Volker one, involve attempts by him to block Republicans from asking questions and denial of witness’ right to counsel. Republicans are not allowed to call witnesses for any of the hearings. Also on this day- days after Adam Schiff said his colorful dramatization of Trump’s phone call was just a parody, Nancy Pelosi claims that Schiff was directly quoting and none of it was at all a parody.
  • October 8– White House gets it together and sends a letter explaining why they don’t have to cooperate with Democrats’ subpoena’s. Simply put- since Democrats are not making this a full impeachment investigation (in which case Republicans would also have subpoena power), then their subpoenas are invalid since they do not have the authority to send them, lacking an investigation for which the subpoena would relate to. And a bunch of other stuff, but unlawful use of subpoenas by Democrats is the biggest takeaway.
  • October 15– Joe Biden’s son says that he would not have been at Burisma in the first place if his father were not Vice President Joe Biden. Thus, confirming a bit about the Ukraine-Biden corruption narrative.
  • October 17– We learn that the alleged “quid pro quo” that by legal standards could never have actually happened because Ukraine never knew about the aid being withheld was actually tied to investigating what happened in 2016, not Joe Biden. Democrats declare that this is an admission of Trump’s guilt and he should be impeached, forgetting that they originally wanted to impeach because Trump was allegedly forcing an investigation into Biden, and forgetting that threatening Ukrainian aid over an investigation of things a political opponent did in 2016 is exactly what multiple Democrat Senators did in 2018. Forgetting that Obama asked Ukraine to interfere in the 2016 election back in 2016. Forgetting that Joe Biden claimed his threat to withhold aid was related to corruption, just like what Trump said his reason for withholding aid was about.
  • PREDICTION FOR THE FUTURE: Republicans won’t pester the Democrats about their hypocrisy, and if Trump is impeached Republicans won’t rightly demand Democrats be impeached for their similar behavior, and won’t rightly demand that Biden be disqualified for running for President for having done the same thing.

Got all that? Are you all up to speed? Time for my various screeds, written as news was breaking over the past three weeks.


Someone explain to me why Democrats don’t want this guy investigated anyway? Warren’s in the lead, the media loves her, and the candidates have already attacked Obama many times while Biden’s only standout qualification is that he was with Obama. Image from PJ Media

Democrats threatened to withhold aid from Ukraine if they did not investigate the 2016 election. And apparently Trump’s thing with the Ukraine aid was ALSO over the 2016 election. Apparently it’s horrible when Trump does it but it’s laudable and brave when Democrats do it. Oh right- Democrats wanted to withhold aid because they thought Ukraine had dirt on Trump, whereas Trump wanted Ukraine to investigate something that helped Democrats. That makes all the difference in the world! You’re a hero if you withhold aid to help Democrats, but you’re impeached if you withhold aid to help Republicans. I’d also like to point out that there STILL was no “quid pro quo” because as Rep. Ratcliffe points out, the Ukrainians kinda needed to be AWARE that there was something going on for it to work! To quote Ratfliffe, it is “legally impossible” for their to be a quid pro quo if the other party has no freakin’ idea it’s happening!

How do you force someone to do your bidding if they don’t even know it?! They didn’t know their aid was missing. Seriously, how many kidnappers make the ransom demand without saying someone was kidnapped? Because that’s thematically what Democrats want us to believe Trump did.

Oh, and I’m getting ahead of myself by forgetting one small detail- TRUMP NEVER FOLLOWED THROUGH ON TELLING UKRAINE THEY’D GET THE AID IF THEY COOPERATED. So now we have the kidnapper forgetting to even make the ransom demand!


I uh… I’m not comfortable with the way he’s looking at me… I think I might be on his hit list. Either a drone or my laptop would explain that strange buzzing I hear… Image from

Moreover, the investigations into 2016 that the media now cries “see? Quid pro quo even if it isn’t what we said it was!” over were actually linked to corruption in general in Ukraine- would the aid be used as it should or just to support a corrupt government? So Trump tethering the aid to fighting corruption is perfectly legitimate, because that’s what you say BIDEN did when he withheld aid to get Ukraine to fire the “corrupt” prosecutor and you say he was GREAT for doing that!!!! So again, liberal, your narrative has it the Democrats are wonderful people for doing what you want to IMPEACH Trump for doing! What next- will you demand Trump be impeached if he uses a drone to kill an American citizen without a trial or due process like Obama did?

The only difference between what Trump did and what Democrats did is that Trump’s actions hurt Democrats while Democrats’ actions helped Democrats. Thus, by your own measures, it seems simply being a Republican is an impeachable offense. That analysis is further validated by how the Washington Post reports you were plotting to impeach Trump since before he even took office. “Not a Democrat” is an impeachable offense.

Oh, but it gets even better! We also learn that “Not a Democrat” means you have no legal protections. Even House Democrats say they have an open impeachment inquiry and under House rules the Judiciary Committee has oversight over such matters, Adam Schiff prevented a Republican member of the Judiciary Committee from being involved because he was not on one of the three committees Schiff approved.

Worse, Democrats can hold these unlawful tribunals in secret where only Democrats are allowed to call witnesses, where Democrats can spread lies about what goes on behind closed doors to make it look damning to their enemy (can you really trust Schiff to be honest, he didn’t even have to lie about this but did anyway!), and where eventually they can close off their secret investigation by holding a secret impeachment vote, or perhaps hold a general vote to impeach claiming it was based on the fabricated lies from the secret hearing that the public believes are true thanks to the Left’s lies, before passing it on to the Senate. Trump will never face his accuser as you charge him with high crimes based on the secret whistleblower who was actually a Democrat operative, we now know, and who apparently lied about everything based on what we do know about the events. Schiff even tried to make it so that Republican members of the approved committees would not be allowed to ask questions! So… conducting the interrogation in secret, wanted to stop sympathetic people from asking questions, and didn’t allow a lawyer to be present. Does that really sound “Democratic”, liberal? This is what fascism looks like. But he’s supposed to be fighting it!


Mueller 2.0: This Time, He’s Handsomer (seriously- Schiff has a better face and better teeth, I’ll say that much for him).

I think it’s Mueller Probe 2.0 myself. An unstoppable investigation with unlimited funds and power, the deck clearly stacked in favor of Democrats who claimed going into it that there was ample evidence Trump colluded with Russia… and then nothing comes from the Mueller Probe. So now, Democrats are trying again. Only they get to call witnesses; the media only reports their side of what happened in the secret tribunals as the truth. They don’t even want Republicans to ask questions of the witnesses that ARE called. And yet, after over two weeks of these kinds of hearings, Democrats have NOTHING. Again.

A partisan liar claims something happened, a secret partisan witch hunt lies to the public without actually showing its proceedings, and finally they plan to impeach the legally elected President they promised to impeach pretty much the day he won the election. Does that sound “Democratic” to you? Is that the kind of people you want running your life, liberal? Look at the 2020 Democratic Debates- these are the people that want to run YOUR life. These are the people that will decide if YOU have too much wealth and pay too little in taxes. These are the limousine-riding, jet flying people YOU want telling YOU and poor minorities to starve in total darkness in order to reduce your carbon footprint. These are the people that want to send police door-to-door to YOUR homes confiscating your weapons. But as you know liberal, these are the same racist police who massacre blacks, so now you want the Party of secret tribunals and liars to be in a position to cover-up more police shootings as the officers implement their agenda. Think about that for a moment. Do you truly care about minority communities? I suppose not…

I’ve made mention of the media being in cahootz with Democrats above, how the media guarantees that only the Left’s narrative on impeachment will be heard. Well, aside from the usual “they’re all Democrats” factoid (and how some refuse to believe statements by people involved solely because those statements match what Trump says), here’s some more evidence. Parroting of Democrat talking points. The DNC issues a statement, and “trusted journalists” parrot the statement verbatim while pretending it’s their personal take on the situation. I guess when journalists say they’re trustworthy and fair and accurate, they only mean in relation to what the DNC tells them to say, that they hardly deviate from that script. In which case I concur- they are fair to the talking points, balanced to the talking points, and repeat accurately what the talking points say. They just lie about it being their own view and it being the truth.

It’s rather baffling at first, that House Speaker Pelosi would be shocked that Trump was rude to her. She spends all her time blasting him and encouraging an impeachment of him, then expects him to be nice to her and is surprised he isn’t. Yeah, right. That’s not the first time either that Pelosi lied about what happened in a meeting that she “stormed out of”. Now, for a real account of what happened, ask this guy.

I saw headlines from leftwing outlets saying that “whiny Republicans” were complaining about the Democrats violating impeachment process. Some outlets said that it was just tradition Democrats were violating, not the rules. Others say Republicans only complain about procedure because Trump is clearly guilty and they want to distract from that. If you’ve read up to here, you know that one’s way off! So Fox News analyzed how this is actually a politically good strategy for Dems, to not have an impeachment vote. That would make the hearings public, that would mean people had access to the unbiased narrative via CSPAN. People could fact check for themselves what was going on. Democrats want absolute control over the narrative.

I’ll speculate here- maybe that is the lesson they took from Mueller, that his silence and the lack of leaks from active members of his staff meant that Democrats lost the narrative war, so they decided to control everything now with the impeachment probe. Control, control, control. They plotted to overthrow Trump before he was in office, they are holding secret hearings where they control the narrative, their 2020 candidates talk about ways Democrats will control your life and your money. I suppose that’s why a majority of Democrats favor socialism- clearly they value the Stalin model, and are already implementing it with impeachment while their candidates promise more.


Amb. Volker, image from the State Department. I expect my Kurts to be bald.

Expanding on the October 3 Volker testimony: Volker kept saying that Schiff was mischaracterizing the situation. Schiff kept saying “if they learned aid was withheld, then would Trump’s investigation request get more significance” and Volker kept saying that is not what happened. Schiff kept pushing the hypothetical, because we know he’d use a “yes” for that to mean a “yes that’s what happened”. But Volker continued denying to the point where Adam Schiff, quote the man himself, gave a “mafia” type statement with “Ambassador, you’re making this much more complicated than it has to be.” Funny, just two days before I heard someone say the same thing: it was an episode of Charlie’s Angels in which some mob guys were walking a blackmailer out into the desert. Hear from someone who witnessed Volker’s testimony- it cleared Trump… again. Despite everything clearing him, Democrats still rely on the third-hand Democrat whistleblower who heard things that other people told him they heard, even though all firsthand knowledge shows nothing happened.


They want a secret impeachment hearing, no votes held, and are known for lying about what they have and what they will find (collusion with Russia that Mueller debunked but they still claim otherwise, Democrats parroting NPR lie about Ukraine call transcript, Schiff lying about the whistleblower). And they want that before the 2020 election. Democrats don’t believe anyone in the primary field can beat Trump, so they figure just impeach him.

How about an anonymous source accusing someone of a crime, followed by not allowing the accused the right to defend themselves, while demanding the accused gets the death penalty. How about THAT for a threat to Democracy? Democrats don’t even want the whistleblower to appear to Congress, they just want “written testimony”. I’m starting to wonder if there even IS a whistleblower, if it’s not just Democrat lawyers in a backroom sending out letters pretending to be whistleblowers. If Democrats have such an open and shut case against Trump, why are they opposed to voting on impeachment, to having each one of them sign their name to the idea? Why are they opposed to letting Republicans mount any kind of defense or argument? If they’re on the right side of history and have all the facts, how can the Republicans possibly win in an impeachment hearing? The only time you need secret trials sentencing people to die is when you have NO evidence for it and just want to remove someone in your way. Trump is in their way.


Egad! He looks like someone ironed Mueller’s face! From Getty Images, obviously.

Don’t let the fact that I mocked Democrat views on Republicans by my remarks in the opening let you believe I’m not annoyed with Republicans. It sounds like the NeverTrumpers are having a field day right now. Everything they’re doing right now is why I voted for Trump in the first place- they’re letting Democrats and the media get away with bullying and lying about one of them. They have less spine than an invertebrate. Maybe they’re too scared or too stupid to realize, but if they let the Democrats get away with Kavanaughing Trump then Democrats will just do that to ANYONE they don’t like. They’ll know it’s a winning strategy. So those pathetic little gutless worms squirming about media scrutiny right now will easily be stomped out of existence by the Democrats in the next elections. Part of that though will just be due to the Republican base being too busy vomiting in disgust at their pathetic leadership.


It begs the question though- what do people like Bill Kristol and Mitt Romney think they gain? It’s a term that’s gone out of favor, but they’re basically Judas Goats. A “Judas Goat” is an animal that’s used to lead other animals to the slaughter, while the Judas Goat itself is not slaughtered. As you see by the media salivating over Mitt Romney, the same media that tried to Kavanaugh him back in 2012, Mitt Romney gets to survive if he leads his party to the slaughter. Same with Bill Kristol- he lost his magazine, but he still is warmly welcomed in MSNBC’s studios. When you see your alleged shepherds dining with the wolves, you should really reconsider who you are putting your faith in.

By the way, listen to a REAL whistleblower and listen how liberal heroes Robert Mueller and Peter Strzok attacked him, as did MSNBC and CNN who called him a “CIA Leaker” (whereas Fox News protected him). Moreover, the whistleblower is being represented by a CIA establishment lawyer, exactly the opposite of what would happen if he really was a whistleblower. And note that while Democrats protect their Ukraine “whistleblower”, they were nowhere to be found when this REAL one exposed CIA misdeeds under President Obama and was JAILED for 23 months!

On Sept. 24, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced the impeachment inquiry of President Donald Trump, saying, “This week, the president has admitted to asking the president of Ukraine to take actions which would benefit him politically. Therefore, today, I’m announcing the House of Representatives is moving forward with an official impeachment inquiry. I’m directing our six committees to proceed with their investigations under that umbrella.”

We have mutual legal assistance agreements with Ukraine and Russia, so even if Dems think Russiagate and Bidengate are partisan, if Trump is legitimately concerned on these issues they warrant a legitimate investigation. Or are these things only legit when Dems have an accuser who no one can backup and has a story full of holes and contradictions, like Dr. Ford and their anonymous Ukraine Whistleblower?


Millenials think they’re too smart to have to listen to their elders anyway.

Democrats used secret testimony from anonymous individuals to impeach Trump, and are denying Republicans and Trump the ability to mount a legal defense, and they are and the media have been caught straight up lying about what happened, and when they aren’t lying they’re saying you’re an evil subversive if you challenge their narrative. For all of you good communists who don’t think your party will deny you a right to defend yourself, I remind you that Nikita Khrushchev once lamented out many good communists met with a similar fate. Secret trials, no legal defense, some committee makes a judgment and you’re dead. All you’re allowed to do is sign a confession admitting to the crimes, and right on cue to make this a perfect parallel Jimmy Carter told Trump to do exactly that.


You wonder what liberals mean when they claim the Supreme Court is too Conservative, you wonder why liberal Senators write to the court ordering them to rule the way Democrats want them to rule on a case, you wonder what kind of judges Democrats would stack the court with if they get power? Look at what they’re doing to Trump. Look at what they did to Kavanaugh, or even with their “no fly no buy” list where an anonymous accusation can prevent you from buying a gun or flying on an airplane and you would not be able to challenge it. They want the kind of Supreme Court judges who would overturn the whole idea of due process. They want Supreme Court Justices who’d uphold the determination of a secret meeting by Party officials that concluded someone needed to lose their position or die. If you let this happen but find you can’t keep up with their daily changes on what is and isn’t acceptable (remember- it was acceptable for Obama to have Ukraine investigate Trump’s 2016 campaign, and acceptable for Democrat Senators to order Ukraine to help investigate) then you too might end up being sentenced by one of these secret committees, knowing an appeal to the Supreme Court would be futile.

MSNBC speculated that impeachment of Trump would lead to impeachment of Pence for the same corruption, opening the path for Pelosi to be President. Hey, didn’t I say that last year?

Bye bye 6th amednment! So Dems want to violate Due Process, have laws violating 1st Amendment (NYC) and now are in the process of violating the 6th Amendment. Also raises a good point- why did no one care about the security of Clinton’s accuser when he was impeached? Why is it only now that people say Trump is threatening violence or whatever?

Shocking poll from USA Today shows that maybe all but 4% of Democrats support impeaching Trump. The poll shows that 44% of people surveyed support impeaching the President. Assuming Democrats would get the usual 48%ish support, that means that 4% of Democrats polled do not support impeachment. I suppose that’s the real story. But as you see in the article, the survey was kinda small and the details about the Ukraine issue that USA Today provided when talking about the poll were severely flawed. So even with a mildly doctored poll, USA Today STILL can’t show all Democrats backing impeachment.

I speculated in an earlier post that Trump might’ve used this whistleblower thing as a political gotcha. I forgot to take into account the blind partisanship of Democrats. I suppose I didn’t learn my lesson from the Mueller Report, because despite what it says Democrats STILL claim Trump colluded with Russia even after they spent two years telling us that Mueller would have the final word on collusion.

If under President Obama, the laughably partisan Intel Community changed guidelines on whistleblowers so that all you had to do was say you heard an anonymous source tell you something in order to become a whistleblower, and then a registered Republican whistleblower went to a Republican Congressman with his complaint, and then the Republicans there helped the Republican whistleblower file the complaint, and then a Republican or at least anti-Obama Inspector General said that the Republican whistleblower complaint was horrifying, and then the Republican Congressman whose office helped write the complaint subpoenaed the Obama Administration for it while claiming they never saw it, and then said the Obama Admin was obstructing justice by not turning over the complaint even though Intel Community guidelines STILL had it outside the ability of the Director of National Intelligence to turn over the complaint to Congress (because the complaint was about someone not in the Intel Community), what do you think would happen? What do you think would happen if the Obama Admin released a transcript of the phone call the Republican whistleblower complained about and nothing he said about it was true?

The media would pounce on the Republicans. The media would say they’re not fit to be in office. They would say it was an assault on Democracy. There might even be demands to purge Republicans from the Intel Community, claiming they were too hyperpartisan and a threat to national security. Democrat ranks would grow from this blatant effort as Democrat politicians piled on Republicans and the media gave every last one of them a microphone and free airtime to attack Republicans.

The problem is- in that hypothetical above, it was the Trump Administration as the target, and Democrats doing the whistleblower stuff. So instead, Democrats say that what the whistleblower complained about was hidden in the transcript- you have to be as “smart” as a Democrat in order to read what was happening. And in case you weren’t that smart, Democrats like Rep. Adam Schiff (CA) and Democrat propaganda outlets like NPR LIED about what the transcript said, lied about the actual wording by claiming that when Trump explicitly asked for a favor it was to investigate Biden when really the favor, as is clear in the text and word order of the transcript, was to investigate interference in the 2016 election. It wasn’t even easily misinterpreted, basically the transcript said “Do me a favor, investigate these guys involved in 2016. Ukraine Prez and Trump babble on and on and on and then Trump finally says oh yeah, you should look into Biden ordering one of your prosecutors fired.” That’s not what NPR or Adam Schiff said though. They lied.

And after the transcript that I had predicted would vindicate Trump came out, Democrats and the media started screaming even LOUDER. With Obama, it would’ve been open and shut, not even Republicans would’ve been saying impeachment anymore.

Speaking of Obama- the general premise has been that Trump asking Ukraine to investigate a 2020 election opponent is an impeachable offense. Well, Obama in January 2016 asked Ukraine to investigate the Trump Campaign. Why was that not impeachable? Democrats STILL say Obama led a “scandal free” administration, even though in their own words Obama committed an impeachable offense!


The guy on the left is Connecticut Resident Vince McMahon. The guy on the right is either Vince McMahon cosplaying as an early-stage Gwyllm Griffiths from “The Sixth Finger” or Connecticut Senator Chris Murphy (D). I’m staying away from Connecticut. McMahon image from prowrestlingstories, Murphy image from gstatic.

As I mentioned, Democrats who aren’t lying about what the transcript says claim that just because Trump didn’t threaten action against Ukraine if they failed to investigate Biden, that doesn’t mean the threat wasn’t implicit. One such Democrat being Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT). Murphy, who seemed to feel it was a startling revelation that mass shootings involved guns, so perhaps we can forgive him for not spotting what I’m explaining, is saying that Trump implicitly threatening Ukraine is horrific and we need to impeach him now. Except that (as I said earlier) Murphy EXPLICITLY threatened Ukraine. Murphy TOLD Ukraine that Democrats would stop supporting them if they helped Trump with investigating Biden.

Think of that- the Biden corruption matter is really an internal issue in Ukraine, where they may have let their officials be influence by the Obama Administration to the detriment of their own legal system. So Chris Murphy threatens their national security by saying Democrat support for things like military aid against Russia would disappear if Ukraine continued its internal corruption probes. Then Murphy says that Trump is evil for even implying that Ukraine might face any kind of consequence. And then Politifact lies to you and says Murphy didn’t really threaten anything, even though the statement was apparently explicit, and even IF it were implicit then by Democrat’s own standards Murphy would STILL have threatened Ukraine, yet the partisans at Politifact want you to believe them (and the partisans at Google who love to make Politifact the top search result).

So, Trump did nothing wrong. Democrats are currently and in the past doing everything they accused Trump of doing and MORE. Yet, this is not blowing up in their faces. Why? Because when CBS/ABC/NBC dedicate their morning and nightly news and talk programs to impeaching Trump, when CNN and MSNBC parrot Democrat talking points 24/7, when Huffington Post, New York Times, Washington Post, Slate, Daily Beast, Daily Kos, The Root, Salon, New Republic, New York Magazine, New Yorker, National Journal,  Los Angeles Times, Boston Globe, Baltimore Sun and countless others spend their print and online issues spreading Democrat propaganda, when the majority of blogs are leftwing and seemingly the majority of forum and comment section users are leftwing, when the Right has no freely accessible TV channels and maybe like 4 actual news channels that you have to pay for and a minor blog presence and a pathetically small number of online and print news outlets, when Twitter bans people on the Right and when Google skews its searches to favor liberals and when Facebook makes sure only DNC-approved news stories are seen, well… you can see why it’s hopeless that the truth would come out in all this. Republicans need a lot more than the truth on their side. Remember: the Jews had the truth on their side too in Nazi Germany, fat lot of good it did them.

So with Democrats creating this partisan impeachment cloud, after already establishing that Trump and his supporters are racists responsible for mass shootings (bogus narrative debunked in my “of the gun” posts), do you think the truth will be of much help to you? And that’s why I should’ve realized that even though Trump is 100% clean in this latest fake scandal, it wouldn’t matter. One of the rare times I can agree with MSNBC’s Chris Hayes: Republicans have no defense, but not for the reasons that he thinks.

Why The Furor?

What a stupid question. They were mad they lost in 2016. They had money riding on Hillary winning- when Democrats win, their cronies win. Remember Solyndra? Siga Technologies? Remember the Clinton Foundation? But they also thought they had won the culture wars and won dominance; their heads were shoved far up their… uh, bubbles.

Also, it distracts from the Democratic candidates who want to tax everything whether or not the Constitution allows it- Guns, speech, travel. Their policies will keep the poor in the poor house and give them a hefty amount of middle class company down there (but socialism kinda calls for eliminating the middle class so…).

Since Democrats can’t stop the socialist wing of their party from taking over and ruining their chances at winning in 2020, they’re trying to take out Trump so that the public will have no choice but to vote for them. Or, to borrow the phrase they used to smear John McCain, “if you can’t paint yourself as someone to run towards then paint your opponent as someone to run from”.


Run.                        Image from


Impeachment In The Air


I was going to have an image of Pelosi to start this post since it starts off talking about her, but the first word below is “hot” and I don’t want to sicken any readers by associating that word with her image. So instead, here is an image of some literal hot air as liberals burn things down because they were “sad“. Images from AP, RWC, Fox News, Quora

Hot air anyway. Amazing how times change, only 19 years ago did the Lefties at The Simpsons have Lisa say that “it’s… irresponsible to present rumors as facts”.

Of all the things to impeach over, why did Pelosi pick the whistleblower complaint? They have Mueller give them 10 points of alleged obstruction of justice they could impeach over, complete with research and all. Instead, Pelosi chooses to impeach over something Trump is alleged to have said, alleged by some guy who didn’t even hear it, alleged by some guy with a political bias against Trump according to the Inspector General, an allegation not backed by the transcript. Heck, the media has to lie about what the transcript said and selectively edit quotes from it to make it look bad! Further showing that she doesn’t know up from down on the issue, Pelosi said that the acting DNI broke the law by not referring the matter to Congress, even though the matter does not involve bad actions by intelligence officials, and might not even have been WITNESSED by an intelligence official unless that’s who the whistleblower got his second-hand information from.

In a real court the whistleblower would not be allowed to testify, anyone who went to law school would have it thrown out as hearsay, assuming the case even went to trial since both the victim (Ukraine) and accused deny that it happened, the transcript of the call shows nothing happened, and there is no other evidence contradicting this, to the point that the Washington Post even said the call “had nothing to do with a quid pro quo”. But impeachment isn’t about “facts” or even “laws”, otherwise as I’ll get into later Democrats would’ve had to impeach Obama and Biden would be polling at 0. Instead, Democrats feel impeachment is about letting a partisan rumor overturn an election you don’t like. Because the riots I started this post with pictures of failed.

You’ll also notice that once the transcript came out, the goal posts were immediately moved (or in some basket cases, the Left and NeverTrumpers just went with the tried and true “dog whistles” idea, saying that “see, we were right, but you just have to believe that these words that clearly mean something else mean what we tell you they mean, but you have to be smart like me to see it. And you’re smart, right?” Other basket cases like the New York Times wrote misleading headlines like “Trump Asks Ukraine’s Leader to ‘Do Us a Favor’ and Also Urges Inquiry of Biden” making it look at first glance like the quid pro quo was about Biden, when really the favor was about something from the foreign interference in the 2016 election that Democrats had in the past wanted investigated. They also make it sound like Trump was pressuring Ukraine on the Biden matter when the Ukrainian President was the one who brought it up in the first place. Then NPR went and outright LIED about what was said- they directly connect Trump’s “do us a favor” remark with Biden’s son, when the remark as I just said HAD NOTHING TO DO with Biden. NPR ironically says their edited remarks, the same editors behind the Charlottesville lie no doubt, provide a “kernel of truth” about the whistleblower story. I don’t know why NPR linked to the transcript right there, it DIRECTLY CONTRADICTS their reporting.). It went from being “Trump should be impeached for threatening to withhold aid unless a foreign leader interfered in the election” to “Trump should be impeached for asking a foreign leader to investigate corruption in their country involving a Democrat”. As I’ll get into shortly, their new goal post would make Joe Biden unfit for office by the Left’s standards because he did more than just ask about an investigation in that same foreign country; he outright got their prosecutor- who was going after his son’s company- fired!

Is This Their Best Shot?

Democrats have been saying since day one that Trump needs to be impeached. They tell you he obstructed justice, they tell you that despite what Mueller found he colluded with Russia, they tell you that he is violating the emoluments clause. So what do they proceed to impeachment with? Some guy says he heard through the grapevine some stuff happened, and those with direct knowledge of the event who spoke about it say what that guy said was not true and are backed by the transcript. Basically, this is the Left’s attitude on the matter (except it was not absurdly found to be true for the sake of humor and story).

For those thinking “of course Ukraine would lie since Trump was blackmailing them”, the best I can say because I’m not a mind reader is read the phone call’s transcript and that his present stated rationale matches his moves for NATO and the UN and what he was talking with the Ukrainian President about in the transcript. And kinda represents one of the reasons people like me voted for him. Ukraine hasn’t come out swinging against Biden, yet they got paid anyway a week before this whistleblower complaint hit the news. And if you think Trump faked the transcript (it sure reads like it’s verbatim as this author notes) then there’s not much I can do for you.

This story also has more potential backblast than a M72 LAW. If Democrats are asserting that Trump asking a foreign leader to provide dirt on Biden is an impeachable offense, then Obama should have been impeached when he did the same thing with the British and Italians (even if you claim the intel communities were helping Hillary not necessarily under Obama’s orders- which shows Obama’s incompetence if that’s your argument- Obama would’ve known), and Hillary should have been thrown out as a candidate once she did the same thing with the Ukrainians, Russians, and Australians. Biden shouldn’t even be showing his face in this race.

And Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) should be impeached too, because he threatened to hurt Ukraine if they helped Trump’s 2020 campaign, meaning he threatened a foreign country if they helped his party’s political opponent, which is kinda what his party wants to impeach Trump for doing. Also, Democrat Senators Menendez, Durbin, and Leahy.

Rep. Maxine Waters gets her own sentences for her statement that “when you talk about Russia, you have to bring in Ukraine”. Because if those two are so inextricably linked then how could Clinton working with Ukrainian officials not tie her in with Russia (as if she needed help being connected to them)?


Batting a thousand with the Left these days, ain’t ya? Image from Techcrunch

Aside from attacks for hypocrisy, Democrats risk calling attention to Biden’s possible misdeeds. That is what Trump was allegedly blackmailing the Ukrainians into doing, so people would be asking what it was Trump wanted the Ukrainians to look into, right? Unless you’re a Democrat in which case you feel betrayed when the New York Times mentions Biden’s potential bad conduct. You can hear and read more about the allegations elsewhere, but the story basically goes that Biden’s son was with some corrupt people and the Ukrainian government was set to prosecute until Vice President Biden stepped in and threatened to withhold aid money unless the Ukrainians fired the prosecutor. Biden admits to threatening the Ukraine over the prosecutor, but didn’t mention that his son was involved.


Anyway, if you’re saying that it warrants an impeachment inquiry that Trump merely talked about his political opponents to another foreign leader, not necessarily acknowledging that the quid pro quo part happened, I have to ask: why? He’s chewing the fat with someone who just won an election, so what? And he tells the guy he should investigate Biden’s dirty ties in his country, after that person mentions his willingness to cooperate. Ok, what’s wrong with that? Obama funded Netanyahu’s political opponent and Obama campaigned against Brexit, at rallies in the UK. Obama allowed UN poll watchers to make sure he won in 2012 or whatever (I’m intentionally hyperbolizing here) and Obama allowed our government to help Hillary by using foreigners and Obama allowed the Russians to interfere in the 2016 election because he thought Hillary would win. So… what’s your problem with what Trump did? Is it just because you don’t like him?

Forget Impeachment, Execute Him!

Excecute Trump for treason, because he chatted with a foreign leader? Or execute for treason because he asked a foreign leader to look at a potential 2020 rival? Because if that is the case, then Obama and Biden and Hillary will be next in line for the firing squad because in 2016 they had the British, Ukrainians, Italians, and Australians helping them against Trump. And Bill Clinton will be in line too, because of all that money the Chinese gave him and his delivery of our missile secrets to them. And if  Democrat hero Ted Kennedy were still alive, HE’D be in line for the firing squad.

So… how many Democrats do you want to kill just to get rid of Trump? Oh wait, I see the flaw in my assumption. You’re not going to apply the laws equally. Hillary Clinton (jokingly I hope) in 2016 promised to sell off Republican districts to China; if she had actually done that you would back her 100%. When your Democratic leaders reached out to foreign countries to spy on their 2016 Republican rival, you celebrated and later buried the move. But when Trump is only RUMORED to have pressured a foreign leader to investigate some very shady Biden things that even the New York Times felt it worth mentioning, that’s worth sending Trump to the gas chamber over!

I know, I know, Weld is a Republican, but what he said was pretty welcome on the MSNBC set. Also, to those NeverTrumpers like him who think Trump should be executed, you’d have to do Mitch McConnell and Elaine Chao next because China has them wrapped around its finger.

So go ahead Weld, kill everyone who disagrees with you. Go ahead Dems, kill everyone who disagrees with you. Kill everyone who’s BETTER than you. You’ll be sending hundreds of millions to their death, but that IS what socialism’s biggest accomplishment has been so I guess I shouldn’t be surprised. I thought liberals were pretty vicious, but these NeverTrumpers are just as much the psychopath. After hearing Bill Weld, I’m not sure if I should say “I’m no longer a Republican, just a Trump fan” or if I should say “NeverTrumpers are not Republicans”.

I think the former, since NeverTrumpers are just Abe Lincoln Republicans- “do what I say or I will hurt you”. I’m not talking about the Emancipation Proclamation so don’t get started on your fake outrage about racism Democrat (your website claims that protecting slavery was a civil rights cause), I’m talking about Lincoln’s and his subordinates’ liberal attacks on people/journalists who spoke fondly of the Confederates, because remember: the nation was only split for a few years. If you had family in the Confederacy that you loved, or even if you thought it ironic that the man saying he’s fighting to save the Constitution was suspending its provisions, you could be imprisoned for expressing these views under Lincoln’s laws. Of course modern liberals don’t really understand the family ties part, how could they if they want to be able to murder their own kids months after they’re born? So I don’t think they’d quite get the problem with what Lincoln did. Maybe this analogy will help: it’s like if a President Ocasio-Cortez wanted you executed for saying you still love your spouse even though they voted for white nationalist Obama with his xenophobic bigoted border policies and homophobic bigotry in 2008.


From their own website, they said (as of I think 2017 when I first saw this, or maybe 2016) that “[f]or more than 200 years” they have “led the fight for civil rights”. Included in that 200 years is the time that Democrats formed their own country to protect the institution of slavery, claiming that was protecting the civil right to own property, soooo… here they are celebrating their own racism.

What’s This Impeachment Outbreak Really About?

On Trump’s end, I think he kept the mystery going until the Democrats were ready to impeach, just to pull the rug out from under them and make them look crazy. CNN tried to do a little damage control the night before the transcript’s release, saying that it was a victory and the Trump Administration was finally crumbling to Democrat pressures. NPR flat out lied about what the transcript said, as referenced in a parenthetical in the first section of this post. NeverTrumper Mitt Romney probably got away with saying what he said simply because of all the “if trues” he put into it, but NeverTrumper Bill Kristol went farther out on the limb so hopefully he plummeted.

As for the Democrats, Trump struck too close to home. Biden is the candidate that establishment Dems like Nancy Pelosi want. If Ukraine reveals that the corruption there is true, that Biden really did force out a prosecutor in a foreign country by threatening to withhold aid because that prosecutor was going after his corrupt son, then his already tenuous lead will slip and establishment Democrats will be left with a candidate they’ve decided is unelectable. So naturally Democrats themselves are threatening the Ukraine if they do reveal any info about the Biden allegations, thus becoming guilty of the very thing they accuse Trump of doing. It’s about, in a word, “desperation”. That’s why this bit of hot air was enough to set off their impeachment dynamite, rather than the possibly lit matches from the other stuff.

This explains some other things too. Why are NeverTrump “Democrats in disguise” like Romney and Kristol talking impeachment? Why is Trump’s NeverTrump GOP challenger saying Trump needs to be executed? Because they want Biden, like they wanted Hillary in 2016. And they’re terrified too that this will put an extremist in who’ll lose the election and give us four more years of Trump.

The hope is that by hitting Trump with impeachment and having all the media talking heads stuck yabbering about that, then Biden can quietly win the Democratic Primaries since no one is talking about his corruption, with the bonus that anyone who does hear about it will merely assume it’s part of the collusion between Trump and Ukraine. Normally it’d be a problem that the closest thing to evidence they have is “this guy says these guys said Trump said it”, but as you saw in Pelosi’s statement she’s talking like it’s a fact that Trump did say this stuff, so maybe they’re hoping that if they say it happened many times people will forget that it’s a lie.

Like, what if I told you that some guy told me some guys told him that Biden is a serial rapist and Pelosi acts as a pimp to make sure he gets a lot of underage girls? I now have as much evidence as Democrats have for impeachment, more in fact because there’s nothing like a transcript refuting my allegations,  and I have a slight edge since the victims are women and we’re supposed to believe all such accusations according to Democrats. See the problem here? If not, I can guess your IQ has as many digits as “IQ” has letters, and speaking of letters I can authoritatively say you only vote for people with the letter “D” appended after their names.


There are of course… other reasons why my accusation might be more believable than the High School gossip Democrats are using to impeach Trump. Image from PJ Media

PR Spirit (of the gun)


This is the party you trust with depriving us of our 2nd Amendment rights? Image from flickr

What does Public Relations (PR) have to do with mass shooters? Why would they care about it? If they have a manifesto, they care. In fact, they might be doing the shooting just to draw attention to their cause, which makes it an act of terrorism. The El Paso shooter expected a lot to be made out of his manifesto, as he explained when he took pains to distance himself from Trump. The Dayton Shooter didn’t have a manifesto, but a friend of his said he possibly did the shooting because he wanted to create another anti-gun talking point (one which is candidate of choice, Elizabeth Warren, turned him into a martyr for by fundraising off his violence).

The PR War

It’s been noted that media coverage of the Dayton shooting dropped significantly after it was found the shooter was not a white supremacist, much like how the only time you hear about the mass shootings in Chicago is if the mayor wants to blame Republicans as I covered before.

Here’s MSNBC interviewing a shooting-survivor who thinks the villains who let the shooting happen, both by deliberately ignoring red flags in that kid’s background due to liberal policies as well as the Lefty law enforcement officer who hid while the shooting happened (Hey liberal, isn’t one of your arguments that we don’t need guns because the police will protect us? Whoopsie, one of YOUR avowed liberal officers refuted your point, and his liberal boss didn’t even train his officers for this situation!). This kid knows a lot about PR (And apparently the American government was genocidal up until… well, I don’t really know why he says we’re post-genocidal since right now the Left accuses Trump of being genocidal, and at the same time Bernie Sanders is calling for genocide (women in third world countries need to have a lot of kids so that at least one survives to adulthood… or are you saying those countries are paradise, in which case why would we grant anyone asylum coming from them?), and media outlets like CBS are cheering the genocide of people with Down’s Syndrome. Personally, I think he just reached into a hat and pulled out some strips of paper with liberal buzzwords on it and made a sentence out of it). He managed to turn his tragedy into a PR success story, speaking here and in Canada about the need for gun control on the Left’s dime and getting a nice deal with an ivy league college… not that those are anything more than daycare for the elites while their parents line up trust funds and high-paying jobs for them after they graduate.

PR and RF Laws

RF meaning Red Flag laws- the Left wants to be able to put you on a secret list, without your knowledge, that would deny you your Second Amendment rights if they don’t like you or if a neighbor or family member doesn’t like you. These are the so-called “red flag” laws.


Can someone womansplain to me why in this era when Trump is worse than Hitler, Mao, and Stalin (as cited elsewhere in this post) liberals want to lose their right to own guns? Hmmm… I think I answer that actually towards the end. Hint: it’s not the liberals that lose their rights. Image from

New York State follows a model like other areas, so some highlights are: a teacher, ex-girlfriend, police officer, therapist, former roommate, family member, and many others can declare you violent and immediately you lose your 2nd Amendment rights and can’t even challenge that until the hearing happens. If you can’t afford a lawyer in this case, one WON’T be appointed for you, and the judge decides what counts as evidence. If someone lies to force this onto you, they will go unpunished even if it’s discovered they committed perjury. Also, if a teacher decides they hate YOU, they can say your kid is a possible mass shooter and YOUR guns will be confiscated until you can go through the legal process of getting them back. In other words, you are guilty until proven innocent. And as you saw in that article, New York has a more lenient version of the Red Flag laws.

More extreme attempts at these laws include the idea that if you’re on the no-fly list, you should not be allowed to buy a gun. As you’ll note in that article, it took months for a State Senator to get his name off such a list, and that’s AFTER a government official involved in it told him that he can neither get his name off the no-fly list nor be told why he was on it. The Left wants THAT to be the model for denying you your Second Amendment rights.

Now for those of you saying I’m being extreme because you can’t read, let me get to where the PR part comes in. San Francisco, full of Democrats who supported no-fly no-buy lists, labelled the NRA and all involved in it as terrorists (anyone remember when San Francisco pretended to care about civil liberties? Or maybe, as I’ll note later, it’s because they have an affinity for Islamic terrorists but just hate Republicans). That certainly would put you on a no-fly no-buy list, one that as I said above a State Senator was told he couldn’t get off. Moreover, CNN’s Don Lemon implied that white people in general should be on such lists wholesale. The Left is using it’s public relations arm to make sure that you believe that anyone in the NRA, or anyone who’s white (as Lemon said, and as I’ve noted with their efforts to paint whites as mass shooter white nationalist terrorists), deserves to be on a terror watch list. So… if you vote Republican, you’re on the Left’s terror watch list between Don Lemon, the mainstream media, and San Francisco’s determinations on the topic.


The New York Times says a lot of things, things to make liberals wish they had a gun rather than wish to fight the Second Amendment. Image from techcrunch

We already know that the Left does not apply these standards equally. Like I mentioned last time, San Francisco labelled the NRA a terrorist group while declaring that rapists were not felons but rather “justice-involved persons” (and they gave arts funding to a video where various non-whites advocated for genocide against white people). But let’s look at another group- Islamic Terrorists. We saw in the New York Times’ coverage that they think it’s white nationalists behind the shootings (as well as the guns), but when it’s Islamic terror it’s just the planes themselves that magically lifted off the ground and flew into buildings. Even Rep. Ilhan Omar at least said “some people” were involved, instead of just blaming the planes for not being smart enough to fly high or whatever.

Also, notice that San Francisco DID NOT label Antifa a terrorist organization, in fact, notice that they labelled the NRA a terrorist organization at a time where it could be interpreted as a response to the Trump threatening to label Antifa as a terrorist organization? Imagine that. The Dayton shooter was a big Antifa supporter (which by the Left’s very loose standards for the El Paso shooter being Trump’s fault means Dayton was Antifa’s fault), and CNN praised an Antifa terror cell. While Antifa exists to cause violence and incite people to riot, the NRA promotes gun safety. Yet San Francisco said that the NRA was the group inciting violence. So… a liberal terror cell encouraging others to spread violence isn’t labelled a terrorist group and would have the right to own guns if San Francisco Democrats had their way, BUT the NRA and all its members would be denied the ability to own a gun and be unable to challenge that if San Francisco Democrats had their way. Because they are winning the PR war.

Taken in whole, what you see in this article is that while liberals oppose watch lists for potential school shooters (the Parkland links), Islamic terrorists, and Antifa, they WANT NRA members and white people on watch lists.


Getting In The Spirit (Of The Gun)


Picture from Pinterest of what former Democratic Presidential Candidate Eric Swalwell wants to do to people who own guns.

I want to point out that if any of the shooters were illegal immigrants, this would not be a news story. How do I know? Kate Steinle was shot by an illegal immigrant. The illegal lied to police multiple times about what happened. The jury of the sanctuary city found him innocent of all charges except illegally possessing a gun, which was later thrown out by an appeals court. The media did not see this as worth a mention, in the middle of a public conversation about gun control and how people SHOULD be facing penalties for such things as illegally having a gun. So… an illegal immigrant blows off the face of a probable Democrat voter with a gun he illegally has, and Democrats cheer that he has NO consequences over it. Whereas, a liberal Leftwinger shoots multiple people in El Paso, and now all Republicans are white nationalist Nazis because of it, and all white people are terrorists too, and the Left demands more legislation to stop people from getting guns.

This brings us to today. Another shooting over the weekend, again in Texas. There are few details about the shooter as of yet, other than he had a criminal record of some kind and was white and previously failed a background check for owning a gun so legally he probably shouldn’t have had one, so I can’t really talk much about motivations, and the media has kept it down to just pushing gun control. Hurricane Dorian seems to be blowing away much of the coverage.

Taken As A Whole

As I mentioned before, for those keeping score that means 2 mass shootings and 1 attempted mass shooting in Texas since July. While this statistic would actually be considered a miracle if it were applied to liberal utopia Chicago, it’s a bit odd seeing it from Texas. (For those who say the U.S. has more mass shootings than any other nation that Obama and Hillary didn’t ruin for no reason, a shady study by one liberal professor isn’t enough for evidence of that, and the real numbers available indicate that you are more likely to die of a mass shooting in Norway and Switzerland than the U.S. Since I’m on a roll with this, I’ll also mention that the idea the Assault Weapons Ban is some catch-all solution is nonsense, as proven in a study, plus only 7% of the weapons used in these incidents are obtained from a licensed gun dealer. Also, other Leftists ironically including the guy who did a study comparing the U.S. to other countries re: mass shootings have said that such comparisons are hard or impossible due to differing definitions of what a mass shooting is. In fact, even in the U.S. you’ll see headlines just a day apart telling you we’ve had 251 and 292 mass shootings. No, liberal, we did NOT have 41 mass shootings on August 3… well, maybe in Chicago…)

Statistically the thwarted mass shooter was probably a Democrat (I explained before how easy it is to predict a person’s voting habits by their race in some cases) and the El Paso mass shooter was a 2008-style Democrat with a bit of Ocasio-Cortez in the mix. All that’s known about the third shooter is he’s a criminal who probably legally should not have had a firearm, but since Democrats believe making it legal for felons to vote will boost their chances in the election (and 70% of convicts DO register to vote Democrat if they can) it’s safe to say that the ex-con killer was likely a Democrat.


Chicago, Chicago   Image from ABC7 in Chicago

Plus you have the Dayton shooter who was (as anyone reading my posts for the last four weeks would know) a Liz Warren/Bernie Sanders Democrat, and there is a 61.9% chance that the person behind the shooting in California was a Democrat, and there is an 80% probability that the Virginia Beach mass shooter earlier this year voted Democrat for the last three Presidential cycles as I discussed in a post referenced in the above paragraph. It is a near-certainty that if the Chicago shooters did vote, they’d vote Democrat, as that party has a stranglehold on the city, and in particular the areas the shootings happened in. (And no, liberal, gun violence in Chicago is NOT the fault of Republicans. 1. You believe blacks are too stupid to get an ID to vote, so clearly you must also believe they’re too stupid to get a gun from a Republican state. 2. It’s your voters that are pulling the trigger, the gun is merely a tool, a dedicated person with a knife killed 8 in China, and another killed 4 in California, all within the last month. Oh, and like many of the Chicago shootings, the California stabbing was gang-related. 3. If it’s the fault of Republicans, how come Dallas does not look like Chicago? If the fault lies solely with access to guns, then Dallas should be covered in blood by now, Chicago should look as safe as a hospital in comparison. 4. You don’t want the police to enforce the laws on the books, you HATE them, so even if you had effective gun control laws how would they be implemented?)

With it being a known fact or high probability that the newsmaking mass shooters of the past 3 months were Democrats, what does that say about the party? Perhaps that explains why their focus has been on banning guns and blaming Republicans and attacking Christians (for their thoughts and prayers). They don’t want to admit the darkness their ideology brings.

And isn’t it interesting how in Virginia, the Democrats in charge wanted to make it EASIER for convicted criminals to obtain guns? 63.8% of violent criminals released from prison will be arrested again, on average within 18 months of their release. These are the people that Democrats want to have easy access to guns. Yet their number one rallying call after every shooting is to make it HARDER for law-abiding citizens to obtain firearms.


They even want a convicted criminal for President, one who fantasized about murdering children. Image from CBS Dallas

Are you noticing a pattern here? They want violent people to get guns, but they don’t want you to have one (violent felons are “justice-involved individuals” while gun owners are “domestic terrorists”, unlike Antifa evidently). They want an illegal immigrant to go free after he murdered a woman (because I guess it’s a woman’s right to die by the hands of an illegal immigrant, just as it’s a woman’s right to be raped by illegal immigrants… #MeToo I guess) but they talk about how great violent acts against millions of Americans would be, just because those Americans don’t believe in open borders (because the Left says anyone who agrees with having border security after El Paso is a white nationalist). They think it is ok for an illegal immigrant to possess a gun illegally, they want to make it easier for violent felons to get a gun, but want to prevent non-criminal American citizens from legally obtaining guns.

So if you think violent ex-criminals should be allowed the temptation of a gun, if you think illegal immigrant rapists and murderers should be in this country and shouldn’t be punished for their crimes (remember: Montgomery County, where the 7 rapes in 6 weeks by illegal immigrants mentioned above took place, lets rapists go free rather than turning them over to ICE, the liberals in Montgomery County think you are a TERRORIST if you believe illegal immigrant rapists should be jailed or deported), but you think the average non-criminal American citizen should lose their rights to own a weapon and their right to speak freely about illegal immigrant crimes, then you are a Democrat. That’s what the party has made itself about. They serve lawbreakers, rapists, and citizens of foreign countries before they serve the people who voted for them.

Now ask yourself- given how that is the demographic that Democrats have been catering to, is it any wonder that from California to Chicago to Texas to Ohio we see Democrats murdering people? And is it any wonder that the media hides this by blaming Republicans and the NRA?

Former Marine Sgt. Andrew Paul Tahmooressi entered Mexico illegally BY ACCIDENT, was detained for 7 months, abused (until he slashed his neck in a suicide attempt and was moved to a better facility). The media reported on it pretty neutrally in some articles and brief news segments since it was on Obama’s watch, even smearing Fox News as an “echo chamber” for its reporting on the events, and even blamed him (as snopes did, and snopes called him a liar over his claims of abuse) for illegally entering (but you shouldn’t blame illegal immigrants for coming here deliberately and permanently loaded with drugs and kidnapped children and a record of rape a thousand miles long, snopes will come after you for that even if it is true). But the media DOES care if a non-citizen illegally entering the country is detained, that’s TERRORISM according to liberals. All we did is what Mexico did, better in fact since the illegals were detained at special facilities, not thrown in with the prison population.


Liberals tell you that this is paradise and the people that liberals help love to live here, and you are a bad person if you don’t want to live here too. Does that sound like what a friend would say? Image from Google Maps.

Liberals HATE you. They don’t care if you’re raped or killed by an illegal, they don’t care if you’re arrested and battered by one of the countries these illegals come from, they believe these other people are SUPERIOR to you. The Left serves the interests of these other countries and supports them, but does NOT support the Americans they are elected to represent, the Americans they deliver news to every day, the Americans whose money keeps their media conglomerates afloat.

I’ll just wrap it up with CNN. As I said before, they supported a terrorist group that went on to commit an act of terrorism. Well, CNN also supported an illegal immigrant who went on to butcher a father. And CNN supported Pelosi when she said MS-13 consisted of divine beings.


Living In Spirit (Of The Gun)


Image if military-style weapons from the Tank Museum in Danville, VA

Well, this list didn’t pile up so much these past 10 days or so, but here we go one more time for all this! I had a big chunk of stuff I wrote here, but realized it would be more appropriate for something else I’m working on, so of course that made this take even LONGER. Well, that and I think I’m burnt out from all of this. You’ll notice I refer to the last two gun posts a lot. Like I mentioned before, this all was ONE post, but I ended up splitting it because these things got to be very very very big.


Let’s just start with some general media talking points that emerged:

  • They want to condemn everyone who says “illegal immigrant” now, even though that is what the people matching that definition are. They aren’t “undocumented”, they committed a CRIME to get into this country. They showed total disrespect for our laws, the immigrants who abide by those laws when seeking entry, and the citizens themselves who are bound by those laws.
  • ABC said Trump needed to answer for the El Paso shooting which he caused. As explained several times now, no Trump did not cause it.
  • CNN agrees with ABC, and believes that if you aren’t white then a white person will kill you unless the government confiscates everyone’s guns.
  • CBS agrees
  • NYT agrees, and wants black voters to vote against Trump, basically telling them they’re next if they don’t.
  • MSNBC declares that the media has been too soft on conservatives, because they are ALL Hitlerites, from Trump down to every last man and woman and child supporting him. Reid has yet to say something similar about Farrakhan’s supporters in the Congressional Black Caucus. I guess all them hymies, as civil rights icon Jesse Jackson would say, are ok to hate. She isn’t alone- Democratic candidate Buttigieg also attacked the deplorables as racists.
  • Noted racist Spike Lee went after Trump as well, on CNN.
  • Robert O’Rourke said Trump is terrorizing communities, and you will be killed in your sleep by him or his supporters.
  • White male Republicans are the greatest terrorist threat this country faces.

I’m so glad the media is telling us now about how powerful someone’s words are (even if Trump never actually said them), because as I’ve noted in the last two posts they were preeeetty quiet when it was their own guy shooting up Republican Congressmen, and were pretty quiet when their Presidential candidate Warren was fundraising off a mass shooting one of her supporters committed.

Now, I have a question here- if Trump’s rhetoric that allegedly promoted white nationalism, that allegedly promoted bigotry against Hispanics, that allegedly demonized every Hispanic, if that rhetoric was responsible for the El Paso shooting, then what are we to make of the Left doing the exact same thing to whole groups of people? Above you see them demonizing their enemy, telling you you’re an evil person if you support their enemy. Now we get to some threats they make:

  • Burn down the GOP, leave no survivors. This is from the Washington Post, on MSNBC.
  • Steven Colbert threatened to attack President Trump.
  • Mitch McConnell is receiving death threats from liberal protesters, and Twitter is letting the hashtag #MassacreMitch run unabated while at the same time they deleted McConnell’s campaign account because he posted a video of liberals threatening to #MassacreMitch
  • Destroy white people because they supported Trump. Do not negotiate with them, just destroy them.

And just look at all the violence liberals do. Yet somehow, when the Left does exactly what they claim the Right did to trigger a mass shooting, and there is violence linked to such hateful rhetoric including an attempted mass shooting, the Left is NOT held accountable and liberals feel there is nothing wrong with their words. So by their own judgments of Trump and his supporters, liberals must WANT violence and mass death, and condone it when their own people do it for them. I’m not saying my view, I’m saying that’s their view in their own words. If they believe that words cause violence, then they MUST believe their own words cause violence, thus they MUST believe they are responsible for that violence and MUST WANT that violence to happen otherwise they’d tone down their rhetoric.

Here’s another example. Democrats are saying ICE agents are terrorists and Nazis, so naturally the media doesn’t say that there is a connection when one of their liberal flunkies shoots at an ICE facility. Trump said a couple of illegal immigrants are bad apples, media says he is responsible for a racist shooting Latinos. Demcrats and the media say ICE agents are terrorists and Nazis, ALL of them, and ignore it when Antifa launches a terrorist attack and when someone fires rounds into an ICE building. I guess they think ICE deserves it? I guess the media thinks people need to die?

Tying into all of the above, we have the NYT encouraging cop killers. But that’s not dangerous. Using the standard the Left likes to apply, since Cory Booker isn’t condemning this dangerous rhetoric he must support it.

Robert O’Rourke said Trump was “depraved” for visiting the El Paso victims because the Left says he is responsible. “Depraved” is you blaming Trump when as I’ve mentioned the El Paso shooter had nothing to do with Trump, had MORE to do with Democrats. And if you want depraved Robert Francis, how about we talk again about that little child murder fantasy of yours? What’s also depraved is you fundraising off El Paso, but even worse is your fellow candidate Elizabeth Warren fundraising off the massacre in Dayton that HER OWN SUPPORTER committed.

I had a bunch of material here about how, if words have meaning as the Left keeps saying about Trump, then liberals themselves are responsible for both the Dayton and El Paso massacres. I’ve probably said the same thing dozens of times between this and the last two posts. Maybe if I say it as many times as the Left says Trump is to blame, someone will hear it.


The media and fellow Democrats said that the Dayton shooter who supported Warren was a white nationalist. So… White Power? Image from Vox

The Dayton guy was a Satanist, which Leftwing PBS celebrated once (they didn’t celebrate him, they celebrated Satanists). He was a gun control advocate, and after his mass shooting the Left and media capitalized on it by calling for gun control, effectively making him a martyr for the cause in a weird way (the Dayton shooter’s friend said he suspected the shooting was done just to prove the need for gun control). He was a supporter of Elizabeth Warren, whom NBC favored during the debate they hosted. Unlike the El Paso shooter, the Dayton one is solely the responsibility of the Left. So naturally they also blamed Trump for him as I mentioned before.

You’ll see at the end of this paragraph why this is relevant, but give me a little leeway to start. Liberals love that “if it saves just one life” argument with gun control. Question: if stopping illegal immigration saves just one life, shouldn’t we do it? If it saves just one woman from being raped, shouldn’t we do it? If doing the common sense thing of enforcing our borders as every other nation on this planet does saves just one life and stops just one rape, isn’t it worth doing? Also, the El Paso shooter said immigration was destroying the environment. So if shooting a bunch of Hispanics in a mall saves the Earth and thus the human race as was kind of his reasoning, shouldn’t we do it?

Liberals believe Biden and Obama are a billion times smarter than Trump. So… does that mean that they knew Obama and Biden’s white nationalist rhetoric that I’ve been repeatedly pointing out the El Paso shooter was motivated by would cause death? Does that mean the blood of El Paso is really on Obama and Biden’s hands, since the El Paso shooter was inspired during the Obama-Biden Administration?


Come to think of it, maybe the NYT IS white nationalist… image from techcrunch

New York Times wants to blame Rush Limbaugh and claims that the El Paso shooter’s usage of ideas Limbaugh has means Limbaugh inspired the shooter, and further means that any negative comments on unrestricted immigration makes you a racist mass shooter creator. The problem of course is that the El Paso shooter shared lots of words in common with liberals, or at least liberals of the past. And remember: in his manifesto the shooter said he was inspired long before Trump, in other words back when liberals had this belief. Back when liberals voted Obama into the White House because he had these beliefs. The NYT loved Obama, so does that mean the NYT supports white nationalism? By their own logic, they do. And let’s throw in Ocasio-Cortez too, because her call for everyone to riot because that’s the only choice left and her fearmongering on the climate certainly match aspects of the El Paso shooter’s manifesto.

Kamala Harris says that Trump “tweeted out the ammunition” for the El Paso shooter. Except that as I say over and over Obama was given a Grammy in 2006 for “Best Ammunition”. and Biden and Ocasio-Cortez were helping load the shooter’s clips.

Cory Booker said you can’t just say you aren’t racist, but need to be active in attacking racists. So… does that mean Obama wasn’t enough? Because he didn’t do anything. Obama complained a lot, but he did nothing. His DOJ couldn’t even solve the problem of racism in Ferguson. And if Obama did do enough, then the El Paso shooter would’ve been rehabilitated or arrested under Obama. Come to think of it, isn’t Obama a white nationalist since the El Paso guy’s manifesto reflects Obama’s remarks from 13 years ago?

CNN’s Jake Tapper said Republicans can’t handle his interviews after gun massacres so they stop coming on his show. It’s not that, it’s that they can’t handle show trials. No one can. Tapper criticizing Republicans for not being able to handle show trials is like criticizing one of Stalin’s victims for not being able to handle a show trial.

Kamala Harris is out promoting that unconstitutional idea that if you are on a secret government list of suspected terrorists you should not be able to buy guns. The kind of list where if your neighbor doesn’t like your haircut they can get you on it, and it would take years for you get off it. Now, you read above how liberals believe every white male is a terrorist, right? So now Kamala argues all suspected terrorists should lose their 2nd Amendment rights. All white men are suspected terrorists, so under Harris they would lose their 2nd Amendment rights.

Gillibrand, who thankfully dropped out, was approaching this from a different angle. She just wanted to outright jail anyone who had a gun that she didn’t like. Interesting approach: illegal immigrants rape and kill, but we should welcome them in and you’re a racist if you say even one of them committed a crime. Whereas we should just jail U.S. citizens who are abiding by the law. If it saves just one life, put Americans in prison, but if it saves just one life to keep illegal immigrants out forget it, you’re a racist for even suggesting it. Because illegal immigrants are superior.

Tying-in with all the charges of racism, MSNBC tells you that all of Trump’s supporters are just rich white people who want to be richer and don’t mind that they’re supporting a racist. I’m not rich, I have negative amounts of dollars because I’m in debt. I still support Trump. And blacks and Hispanics are getting richer too thanks to Trump. Are they racist? Well… that’s a bad question to ask actually, because if you support a Republican and are a minority Democrats go after you with much of the ferocity they aimed at blacks trying to vote during Reconstruction. Except Democrats stop short of killing them.

Whether it’s useless background check laws or ineffectual assault weapons bans, the Left keeps giving bogus solutions to gun violence. They are exploiting the tragedies to get you to vote for them. “Vote for me, I have a plan! You just want people to die if you don’t support my worthless plan that might increase crime.”

Kamala Harris said that you can’t even debate if Trump is a white supremacist, that by virtue of her declaration he is one now and forever. You know, despite the many times he condemned white supremacy as noted above. By the way Kamala, speaking of who has been helpful to white supremacists, let me ask you a question. Under your oversight, a lot of blacks were locked in prison for years, decades even, with harsh sentences for nonviolent crimes and you even withheld evidence that would get people released, whereas under Trump we had criminal justice reform beneficial for the black community, we had black people pardoned rather than imprisoned as you did, and the black community is seeing its lowest unemployment rate in decades.

So if Trump is a white supremacist he’s doing a bad job of being one, and if you’re NOT a white supremacist you did a REALLY bad job at not being one. How many black lives and black families did you destroy? Trump certainly helped more than you ever did, by initiating reforms that run counter to what you were doing with your clear attempts to bring the black community to heel. Interesting how you supported Hillary in 2016 too, with her husband’s criminal justice policies enabling your reign of terror. And here you sit criticizing Trump after spending decades as at best an unwitting tool of white supremacists, and at worst an outright ally to their movement. Tsk, tsk.

And speaking of no empathy Kamala, where was yours when you were withholding evidence to make sure a black man stayed in prison, stayed separated from his family? Or do you only have empathy for Hispanics separated from their families? Is it their lighter skin that makes them relatable to you, Ms. White Husband? Maybe they remind you of the white backers gave you your power to begin with?

NBC’s Chuck Todd stated that President Trump has not made Hispanics feel safe in this country. So Trump says “illegal immigrants bad”, and that means ALL Hispanics are unsafe, when he’s clearly talking about illegal immigrants, meaning YOU’RE the ones making Hispanics feel unsafe by lying about what Trump says, either that or you think ALL Hispanics support illegal immigration and open borders just because they look like the people coming in. After all, you say it’s racist to support having a border wall, so it would totally be racist if over 33% of Hispanics believed in that… 1 in 3 Hispanics think there should be some kind of wall? But they can’t be racist! Oh well, I know you’ll just say they watch too much Fox News or something and dismiss it.

MSNBC believes that Trump is giving “subliminal orders” to white supremacists. See, Trump doesn’t SAY what the Left wants him to say, so they just tell you that he’s got hidden messages and lie about what he actually does say, as with the Charlottesville speech where he condemns white supremacy and neo Nazis, and does NOT say they are “fine people” if you bother to actually listen to that part.


Broken human being? The Right’s been calling him that for years. Neo Nazi? Well, if you guys on the Left say so… Image from

Trump made a teleprompter speech, condemned the El Paso shooter, said have pity for the families, condemned the evil ideologies, and said they were looking into reforms. Liberals say he is a “broken human being” because of that response. Obama made teleprompter speeches, condemned the shooters under his watch, said have pity for the families, condemned the evil ideologies, and said they were looking into reforms. So… now Obama is a broken human being? I thought the Left was saying that the RIGHT was the group that kept getting more radical, now they’re saying Obama was a “broken human being”. And of course it was open season on Obama at the debates as Biden lamented. Obama hasn’t even been gone 3 years and already Democrats are attacking him at debates and calling him a “broken human being”. But it’s the Right that’s been getting more radical, not the Left, according to the Left. I guess that means Obama was a neo Nazi? Good to know I guess.

Whitey Richy Rich Robby O’Rourke who was trying to stop minorities from being President on Heil Hitler day August 8 says that Trump is the real white supremacist. Hey O’Rourke, who’s the one dehumanizing whom here? You’re lying about Trump’s remarks, and saying he and this entire country are racist. Also O’Rourke, you’re out here saying open borders and saying ICE is evil, and sure enough a liberal decided to try and blow up an ICE facility and murder ICE agents. Why aren’t you taking responsibility for your rhetoric which triggered that attack? Also O’Rourke, you’ve made it clear your a Latino Supremacist. Adopting a Latino name to hide your white heritage, insulting your white heritage, saying the whites in America are racist and only white America is racist, certainly not any of the pure Latino peoples coming in, and your lust for open borders to allow all of these Hispanics in to the detriment of our communities which already can’t handle the amount of illegal immigration we have as non-white Obama said.

Mayor Pete Buttigieg told a black audience that white people were the problem, after the El Paso shooting. Kind of ignoring how blacks have a disproportionate share of the mass shootings, while with whites it’s terrible but at least kind of what you’d expect population-wise. Also, is Buttgeek (it might sound homophobic, but it actually came from an accidental mispronunciation I had of his name. I assure you, I am in no position to use “Buttgeek” as a slur without a severe measure of hypocrisy.) is a white dude himself. So he is saying that a white person needs to solve the national problem of racism, that blacks are incapable of it? Also, if it’s solely a white problem as he says here, how does the audience know he won’t become part of it? If non-whites are immune as Buttigieg says, doesn’t that mean people should vote for a non-white? It’s his own logic on the issue.

You want to talk about radicalization? Senator Carper, Democrat from Delaware, one of Biden’s buddies, outright said Americans were lazy, unskilled, unethical, and drugged-up while illegal immigrants are pure angels descending from utopian paradises to grace our economy with their munificence. Isn’t that exactly what the Left says white nationalists are evil for saying about non-whites, or is it ok because Hispanics are the heroes this time and Americans are the villains?

Why does someone who wants to be a leader in this country think the people he’s leading are evil and encourage foreigners to illegally enter this country to take jobs from those living here that this politician is supposed to be representing the interests of? And why did Biden not call out this Senator, Biden’s fellow Senator from Delaware, on this? Why did Biden continue with this by saying that white people, and ONLY white people, are sexist racist oppressors incapable of leading fairly? Why does Biden believe 60% (the whites) of this country is evil? Why does Biden attack the 40% or so people of this country who voted for Trump as racists? Why is Biden demonizing so many of the citizens he is trying to represent? “I hate all of you based on your gender and skin color, now vote for me! Oh yeah, and I’m a great unifier even though I hate you, while this guy who has brought more prosperity to blacks and Hispanics (as I cited much earlier) is an evil divider who needs to be cast out because it’s a bad thing that he gave them prosperity and I will undo that when elected.” That is Biden’s campaign message. Pretty much the Democratic Party’s message as a whole. “60% of this country are racists, 30% are sexists too, so vote for us because we hate you.”

And while the Left spreads its message of hate, normal people sit around and see it. They know millions are absorbing it. They feel that we’ve lost the culture war. They feel this is what everyone believes. They see their teachers, their news anchors, and maybe even their friends repeating the hateful things liberals spew. They know it’s a lie, but they don’t have a voice. The Left’s vast numbers deny them a voice. The anger silently gathers inside them. What can they vent at that would do any good? The anger stays, becomes a feeling of helplessness.  Eventually they wonder- what recourse do they have but to grab a gun and try to solve the problem themselves? By the way- if you think I’m a white nationalist for saying this, that this is just an excuse, then you are a racist because this is how you guys on the Left justify the fact that the African American community has gifted this country with 51% of its total murders as I mentioned earlier. Oh wait, nevermind. It’s ok if it’s a non-white, perfectly justifiable, only white people are evil according to you. That’s why your reasoning for a non-white group does not work when applied to whites. Because according to you, all races are equal, except whites are inferior. And you wonder why whites go on these rampages.

Also, if it is racist to persecute illegal immigrants, isn’t it also racist to have an immigration system altogether? Why are you forcing some people to go through the system, while letting others come in with no problem? Aren’t sanctuary cities racist for discriminating against legal immigrants? Why aren’t sanctuary cities simply treating legal and illegal immigrants the same way? Is it because we get more legal immigration from certain countries than we do illegal immigration? Then why are you forcing those legal immigrants who generally are not Hispanic to go through the process while letting Hispanics cheat the system? Isn’t that racist? Or are you now telling me that you can be racist against Hispanics, but you can’t be racist against Indians or Somalis the same way you can’t be racist against whites?


A picture from Elijah Cummings’ district. This is far from uncommon there. Image from Google Maps

And by encouraging illegal immigration, aren’t you aiding the cartels? Isn’t that racist against blacks? Afterall, cartel drugs enter our inner cities, the largely black areas, and lead to various drug-related crimes from selling to shooting (both shooting up and shooting each other). So why are you protecting a source for death in the black community? Why is Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD) complaining that it’s too hard for cartel members to enter this country while by his own admission people in his district are dying from the drugs those cartel members are bringing in? Do you care more about Hispanics now, and don’t care if blacks die in the streets? It sure looks that way.

You certainly don’t want them to have good paychecks or welfare: Obama said increased illegal immigration would depress wages and strain welfare. Now, being smarter than us, you MUST have known that your President who won a Grammy for saying that was telling the truth, yet now you encourage all that. Why? What did the black community do to deserve lower wages, welfare issues, and more drugs? Because that’s what you’re punishing them with.

Pelosi said MS-13 gang members, whose motto is “rape, kill, control”, who controlled a town called Mendota in California with fear by dismembering and murdering various citizens, are divine beings (as discussed before in other posts). Sen. Carper said that Americans are filth, and illegals are needed to replace this American filth. Biden said whites are sexist and racist and have been for hundreds of years and it’s embedded in their culture. All of them then say Trump is the one dividing this country.

Like I said before, Democrats encourage fighting, shooting, and blood in the streets which a shooter obliged by attacking Republican congressmen. Ocasio-Cortez says ICE is evil, so a member of liberal-supported Antifa attempts a terrorist attack on them. Socialist Ocasio-Cortez says oppressed peoples have no option but to riot, and a socialist in Dayton shoots people. Ocasio-Cortez says we have only 12 years to save the planet with her green new deal and says oppressed people need to riot, so a socialist ecoterrorist shoots up a Walmart in El Paso. Yet the media blames Trump for that, citing its own LIES about what Trump says as evidence that he caused the attack, and IGNORES the ones that are clearly linked to THEIR OWN creation of a divided and violent environment. Pelosi was saying it was disgusting that Republicans linked the congressional shooter to Leftwing rhetoric, yet here we have them doing exactly that with Trump. So according to Pelosi, she and the rest of the party are disgusting. I agree.

Biden attacked President Trump’s use of the term “invasion” to describe the various caravans and border surges. Ok, fine Biden. It’s not an invasion. It’s a bunch of people who have no right to be here that you’re telling black Armicans they need to pay for, when black Americans can barely lift themselves out of crime and poverty.

Also, Biden thinks so little of his campaign and his chances against Trump that he said by watching Biden’s speech, Trump was showing he had no life. Not taking the time to study an up and coming adversary, but rather Trump was just wasting time because Biden will never amount to anything. Glad he’s honest. By the way Biden, how far is it from Ocasio-Cortez saying oppressed people have no choice but to riot to the socialist Dayton shooter leading a one-man riot? Not far at all. How far was it from rhetoric like yours saying whites will put blacks in chains and telling women that white culture is sexist and oppressive and white culture is why Anita Hill did not get a fair chance to a black man becoming a serial killer targeting whites? Not far at all.


Image of Joe Bidens from New York Magazine

Biden condemned division. Democrats abandoned the idea that we are one people long ago. The entire party’s history consists of them trying to oppress an untermensch, whether it was non-whites or catholics or Republicans. Under Obama, we saw liberals telling us that Republicans were mentally inferior and that was science. Also Biden, when you say this is about separating people based on race and whatnot, just a day before you made that statement the Democratic Socialists (at their convention, I wish I could find the link but I heard over the radio about this) were separating people based on race, gender, ability, and unseen oppression points just to do something so mundane as ask a question. Don Lemon, on the very network Biden is speaking, was saying white people are the source of all problems. Biden himself gave a speech attacking whites and whiteness, saying whites can’t represent minorities.

Biden also says of Anita Hill that people thought she deserved what happened. No, Biden, people didn’t BELIEVE what happened. Same with Dr. Ford, who as I pointed out was probably lying. And what about Keith Ellison’s accuser, Biden? Where were you on that one? Also, Biden, at least the English culture gave that “rule of thumb”. I’m sure a cane that does not leave permanent damage is preferable to FGM and acid attacks, which came about decidedly independent of white influence. Or maybe you think that’s ok, and sexism is only evil when whites do it.

Speaking of racism and dividing, Biden, remember when you were dehumanizing these poor helpless people as “illegals”, and said they were all drug dealers bringing in “tons tons tons” of drugs? Remember when you were happy to brag about voting for 700 miles of fence?

Remember how I keep citing Obama’s book “The Audacity of Hope”? He won a Grammy for saying “many blacks share the same anxieties as many whites about the wave of illegal immigration flooding our southern border… this huge influx of mostly low-skilled workers threatens to depress further the wages of blue-collar Americans and put strains on an already overburdened safety net.” “Wave” of immigration, “flooding”, “threatens”. Obama tells his black and white readers that illegal immigration will hurt their poorest. Seems like he dehumanizes them a little here. And you gave him a Grammy for reading these white supremacist rants.


Wrapping this up with my favorite picture of him, courtesy of CBS’ Dallas affiliate.

To Robert Francis specifically over his remarks blaming Trump for El Paso, I have to say this: you are lying about what Trump says, and if you stopped lying people would stop hearing what you want them to hear. I have to assume you are smart, you tell us you’re smarter than the Right, thus you must know that by lying about what Trump is saying you’re making these racists think he has their back. And you must KNOW this and WANT this to happen, and the fact you’re out campaigning on the results… well, I have motive, opportunity, and saw you doing it. And we see you profiting from it. So really, right now, you are guilty of murder by our laws. Your actions in misleading people into thinking that Trump supports what they’re doing in order to profit from mistrust in the public has resulted in a murder. By our laws, if your action results in a murder, we at least have you on manslaughter. And since you lefties are so much more smarter than us, you must have known this would happen and wanted it to happen, you sure were ready to profit when it did, so that actually would up the charge to murder since this was clearly an outcome you wanted and NOT just an accident.



Writing In Spirit (Of The Gun)


One fallacy the gun control club spreads is that if we’re using guns to resist a hostile government, it would wipe us out quick. I think there’d be a good chance against the aluminum-skinned Bradley, pictured here at the tank museum in Danville, VA. This is a joke at the military’s expense, much like the Bradley itself. Implicit in the gun control club’s use of that argument is their willingness to use the military against American citizens for exercising Constitutionally-protected rights, and the Left’s stupidity because of how they started buying guns to #Resist Trump while still demanding an end to the 2nd Amendment I guess so that tyrant Trump can oppress them. An ex-Democratic Presidential Candidate even suggested using nuclear weapons against people who did not surrender their guns, which I’m sure would play great if one Republican in the middle of Democrat Baltimore refused to surrender. Not that there’d be much difference between Baltimore before and after the Democrats nuked it. This is afterall the party that says you can kill a human if you never really accepted them, at any age, so I doubt they’d mind nuking their own party members just to prove a point. In the long history of Leftwing socialist tyrants, one constant was a disregard for the lives of the people they ruled. So when we see socialists like Swalwell or AOC encouraging the same stuff, you understand why the Right gets a little nervous.

This is part 2 of the post I put up on Sunday. It was looking very very very long, so I split it when I realized it was 7am and I had been working at it for 9 hours in a row after spending much much much more time than that during the week pulling together the misc sources and quotes and whatnots. Believe it or not, what you see below is still only about a third of what I had left to address.

There’s a common fallacy that I want to address (or re-address, I don’t remember). Liberals keep blaming Trump and Fox News for spreading white nationalism. They keep blaming conservative opinion leaders for any dissent against Democrats. I must be a man alone on this one, because my judgments come straight from Democrats. I see their quotes, I see what their people are saying, and I am disgusted. I am driven to an angered frenzy. “How can they get away with lying like that?” “How come no one’s calling them out?” “I feel so helpless…” and so on. The lies I see from the Left’s media outlets serve to divide this country and promote economic ruin for us all, and serve to advance what appears to be an attempt to install a Stalinist regime. They want show trials of their enemies, every liberal from TV to twitter said as much with Kavanaugh. We often see them demonizing their political opponents, dehumanizing them as some “other” that needs to be “exterminated” as you’ll see one of their Congressman said below.

They don’t believe in free speech or a free exchange of ideas: if they disagree with you on anything it’s not up for debate, you are automatically labelled a bigot and/or mentally incompetent. An enemy or an inferior, either way someone who needs to be isolated from the population, someone whose ideas cannot be allowed. The Left’s own intolerance, their own thirst for power, is what pushes me so far into Trump’s camp that at this point I’m voting for him just to keep Democrats out, rather than for anything Trump has done. Trump hasn’t called for any mass exterminations or for any particular race to become second-class citizens, whereas when it comes to their political opponents Democrats have called for exterminations and when it comes to whites Democrats have demanded that they become second-class citizens, and blame this country’s problems on them as you’ll see between this post and last week’s post picking up remarks about how everything from sexism to mass shootings is the fault of white people according to prominent Democratic Party figures. As I said last time, 32% of the Democratic Party already believe that white people are never right if it conflicts with what a non-white politician says; 32% of the Democratic Party believes race determines whether you are factually correct on a topic.


Granted, it’s a shorter trip from far Right to far Left than it is to the Center. Image from DemocracyNow

You want to talk radicalization? I knew someone who was borderline alt-Right. Not a neo Nazi, not a racist, but pretty harsh on illegal immigration and all that. Within three months of joining a liberal forum, this person openly told me they were ready to murder everyone at the Heritage Foundation, wanted mass rapes and executions for every citizen of the state of Alabama, and wanted to murder everyone in the One Percent, and believed white people were to blame for every problem in the world. Those views were common amongst the forum-dwellers this person associated with. I pointed out the extreme violence involved, that not everyone was evil, and the response I got was a dehumanizing justification, saying that none of them would bow to this person’s demands if asked so they all need to die. So yeah, I’ve seen the face of the Left. The Dayton Shooter and El Paso shooter do not surprise me. And why all the murder? Because this person wanted free stuff. That’s it.

So let’s move on to this item that thematically sets up the rest of this post. At the first link, the author talks about some lie about white supremacists opposing abortion, easily debunked by the fact that a white supremacist founded Planned Parenthood to kill black kids. But the author here goes on to mention the Left’s habit of lying. They just spew out like machine gun fire into a line of British soldiers attempting a breakthrough. The tactic is simple- overwhelm and devastate. How can you defend yourself when everyone from Hollywood to the nightly news to the 24/7 DNC propaganda outlets MSNBC and CNN to their newspapers are spewing lies. Now add in social media. For the average person out there, they just see the lies, and even if they see the corrections there is still this impression left in their head about you. And it’s impossible to protect against the lies anyway. Humans evolved in limited tribes, our brains aren’t ready for this interconnectedness, so you have a caveman brain used to dealing with maybe 150 people in their lifetime dealing with 63 million enemies out for blood. As you’ll see below, blood is what the Democrats want. You’ll also see in only 10 days, even when cut in half between two posts, the accusations just kept piling on. Many are similar. Some different. Democrats discovered a corollary to that “Big Lie” theory attributed to Hitler’s propaganda minister- you tell a lie over and over until the public believes it, but even if they don’t they’re still left with the impression you’re a bad person just from all the bad things they hear even if they know all of it’s garbage.

How does this sound for calls for blood? Twitter even censored it when Sen. Mitch McConnell’s team posted it. They said it was glorifying violence even though it was posted by McConnell’s campaign team to condemn violence. Meanwhile, Twitter has done nothing to stop #AssassinateTrump which is a supreme glorification of violence. But it’s one Twitter agrees with. Twitter openly declared their bias and activism, so it should be no surprise they’d use the McConnell thing as an excuse to ban his account and hide videos of liberal protesters threatening McConnell and his family. Kills two birds with one stone. I’ll have more on Twitter in another post that I’ve been gradually assembling over the months, that will finally end up looking something like this probably.

To tie it all together for you, this relates directly to the whole gun violence and mass shooting topic from last time. You might recall (and you’ll see later) that liberals keep saying Trump is a violent man encouraging hate and mass shootings and they say he has blood on his hands. Anyone who listened to Trump knows this is a total lie, like what I debunked last time about how the Left lied on what Trump said in the wake of Charlottesville (they lied about that “good people on both sides” part, Trump specifically said right there in the speech before and after that he was not talking about white supremacists when he said that).

An interesting aside here- the Left loves to say Trump’s hateful rhetoric sparked the mass shootings, that Trump encourages Neo Nazis and the like. The problem is Trump DOESN’T. If you listen to his speeches and not the media’s spin on them, he’s really saying little more than you would’ve heard out of Democrats up until 2010 or so. And then awkward moments are caused when Nancy Pelosi says rapist killers are angels because she got caught up in the Left’s web of lies about what Trump says. Or maybe it was just a Freudian slip, revealing that folks like Epstein and MS-13 are the core of the party.


The Left’s idea of an angel makes them devils. Image from wikimedia

Remember how Kavanaugh was obliterated by the Left as an inhuman monster? Remember how the Left said Republicans deserved to die for supporting Kavanaugh because of an unproven rape accusation? Well here we have those SAME liberals saying a gang of rapists and monsters deserve our love and affection and our deepest respect since they are people like us. They show KNOWN rapists and killers more consideration than a Republican accused with very shaky evidence. And like I pointed out then, they have ignored or hidden or downplayed accusations like that against members of their own party. Believe all women, unless you need the MS-13 vote or they accuse one your own.

Pelosi is supposed to be a feminist icon, but there she was saying rapists were angels. Well, she was pretty quiet about the Epsteins and Weinsteins and Clintons of the party, as are the other liberal women until it’s convenient for them to speak out and oppose these folks. So I guess rape doesn’t matter if it’s a Democrat or people from a desired demographic doing it, they’re angels. They want to relax the voting laws to the point where convicted rapists can vote for them. Seems like the party of women is courting a very anti-woman demographic. But keep in mind, Islamic purist Linda Sarsour who believes in female enslavement (Sharia) is considered a good Democrat and feminist icon.

The Dayton shooter took part in Antifa-type activities. The media encourages that behavior. Though he’s not a member of any particular Antifa terror cell, he often expressed support for them and ideological solidarity. Given the loose brotherhood that Antifa is, he certainly qualifies as a member as much as anyone else. It’s like Bernie Sanders pretending to be an independent despite always siding with Democrats and running for the Democratic Presidential nomination twice- do you have to be a member to earn the label? So far, crickets from the Left. You don’t hear CNN saying “oh boy, did we goof by supporting this group?” Liberals are smarter than us, as I keep repeating, so maybe CNN didn’t goof at all and got the result they want. Based on CNN’s own assessment of how “hate speech” works, CNN’s own network has been trying to cause extreme acts of violence. Just like how the media and Democratic Presidential candidates are, by their own standards of how it works when Republicans talk, guilty of spawning various near-fatal attacks on ICE.

In fact, CNN arguably already did and have been very silent on it. They gave glowing coverage of an Antifa group who’s member that the host was seen with later tried to murder ICE agents. That Antifa group SUPPORTED the attempted massacre by their man. CNN glorified the Antifa member, CNN consistently demonizes ICE agents as inhuman monsters that are evil incarnate, yet when an Antifa member they glorify acts on those words, somehow there’s no connection. Just like they made no connection between that terrorist’s words and the very similar words of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY). Whereas when the El Paso shooter openly says Trump had nothing to do with him, CNN says that Trump is responsible for the attack. After lying about all the times Trump denounced hate crimes and the like, claiming Trump only encouraged them. Hey, I wonder if CNN will hold itself to its own standards and claim responsibility for when an illegal alien murdered 5 people while dodging ICE agents after CNN glorified him. That’s twice in two months that someone CNN profiled killed/attempted murder/praised an attempted murderer.

As for El Paso… so the shooter believes immigrants strain welfare and hurt jobs, like Obama said as noted last time. The shooter believes races need to remain separate like black students at Williams College and like leftwing icon Spike Lee and like Obama/CBC/Cory “Moral Clarity anti-Semite loverBooker buddy Louis Farrakhan and like many people at Obama’s alma mater Columbia University. The shooter blamed overpopulation for environmental damage like Ocasio-Cortez. The shooter decided to riot/fight in the streets/spill blood like Ocasio-Cortez/Tim Kaine/Loretta Lynch, respectively. So where in all of that do you get “Trump is the bad guy”? The shooter even said in the manifesto that he WASN’T inspired by Trump! He said is ideas predate Trump, much like Obama’s ideas.

“[O]ur lifestyle is destroying the environment of our country,” 
Crusius writes. “Corporations are … shamelessly overharvesting 
resources. … [M]ost of y’all are just too stubborn to change. … 
So the next logical step is to decrease the number of people 
in America using resources. If we can get rid of enough people, 
then our way of life can become more sustainable.”

That’s an eco-terrorist talking. That’s Ocasio-Cortez talking, as linked above.

So is it also encouraging violence to demand Trump be “eliminated“, as a Congressman did? We won’t hear about it, CNN didn’t want to condemn death threats against McConnell that I mentioned above. The Left wants everyone opposed to them to be “eliminated”. Speaking of elimination, that lie by an MSNBC anchor I think I mentioned last week about Trump wanting to exterminate Hispanics, it turns out her apology rings pretty hollow since that’s been the network’s position.

Tying-in with my rant above about how Democrats stomp on women, here we have them throwing all their female victims under the bus in an effort to attack Trump. Bill Clinton flew with Epstein on his plane of underage girls at least 27 times. A member of the Clinton Admin and a Democrat Senate Majority Leader both had sex with an underage girl, according to that girl. Now, maybe Cory and Joy at the link above forgot, but we’re supposed to believe all women. Or do we not believe this one because she was a little girl at the time? This same victim said to her knowledge Trump had nothing to do with the operation, and didn’t even flirt with the sex slaves. You’ll notice that in the link, New York Magazine uses the Mueller precedent of “guilty until proven innocent”. To sound smart, they even pretend they know how to be law-talkin’ guys by quoting Mueller’s “totally exonerate” line and applying it to this matter. In fact, Trump was the only one who cooperated. Trump also banned Epstein from Mar-a-Lago after unconfirmed reports he fondled an underage girl there. Whereas Bill flew with Epstein’s underage girls.-Yet despite that ban, MSNBC’s Joy Reid still insists Trump was friends with Epstein, and insists on ignoring Democratic ties with him. Why is that- do victims of Democrats matter so little that Reid has to invent scandal around Trump to make people hate Epstein? Real victims aren’t good enough so she has to lie about Trump who actually took some action against Epstein, and who agreed to fully cooperate with federal authorities against Epstein unlike many of those subpoenaed? Maybe Democrats hate Trump now because he tried to help the little girls that Democrats were raping?

CNN says anyone opposed to them, and anyone supporting Trump, is racist. New York Times outright said all Republicans are white nationalist terrorists. MSNBC says in one show (and says even before the mass shootings) that Trump supporters are all racists, MSNBC says in another show they are all stupid, and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) says they are all racist AND stupid.  So, across the vast spread of liberals, they believe anyone with contrary views are racists, stupid, and terrorists. They sling these terms around with no support, except the occasional lie about a quote as I mentioned last time with the Charlottesville thing. They’re lying to dehumanize and delegitimize their opposition. No one wants to be known as a racist or a terrorist, so they tell viewers that if they disagree with the Left on anything that’s what they are.


Liberals think you’re this type of Deutschlander if you don’t goose step with them. Also, when they say they want to ban military-style rifles, keep in mind that all rifles at some point in history were considered military-style going back to the musket. So they pick on the AR-15 now, but then mass shooters will just use another type of gun. The another.  You get folks like those at the LA Times who look on us with such disdain that they think we’d buy their insipid arguments that certain guns need to be banned and that’s all the Left is after. Firstly- liberal political leaders and their public said that wasn’t the case, but secondly: really any gun that you don’t need a trained minuteman to load can be used in a mass shooting. The guy who shot JFK got off three rounds in 7 seconds, and his was a bolt-action rifle. That’s a type of rifle where the bullets don’t load automatically after firing, instead you pull a bolt back and that lets the next bullet enter the chamber. And if you’ve seen some of Clint Eastwood’s spaghetti westerns, you’ve seen how fast a revolver can be fired, and while revolvers are definitely “military style weapons” given how they were used for like 150 years by the military, they’re not a “military style assault weapon” or “assault style weapon”. And look at the evolution of that term too. Assault rifles to assault weapons to military style rifles and assault style weapons. Gets vaguer and vaguer and vaguer. Almost like the AR-15 and its kin weren’t there only target. Hmmmmm…

To instill fear in the conquered populations, the Romans would take three random criminals and crucify them. That would send a message that the Romans meant business and you should just shut up and do what they command, otherwise you’ll end up crucified. That is what the tolerant Left wants. Out of one side of their mouths they claim that disrupting their speech in any way is harmful to Democracy, but then out of the other side they verbally crucify anyone who disagrees. They don’t do it with facts; they do it with accusations and lies. They dehumanize you and make you someone no one wants to defend, until you’re no longer a bother. When was the last time Cortez asked “do Trump supporters have a point on this issue?” Never, she says they are stupid racists and not worth listening to. Life unworthy of life.

That’s what the Leftist establishment believes of anyone opposed, you’ve seen plenty about what they say to reach that conclusion. They don’t even give you the dignity of addressing the merit of your idea, they just dismiss you as a worthless stupid bigot and move on after screaming that loud enough to scare away any support. And then they complain about Democracy dying if they perceive someone is impacting their rights in some way, after they trash the subhuman others, after they threaten to destroy the subhuman other, after the Left’s mobs attack the subhuman others with support of the Left’s establishment. As bad as Stalin was, the best case you can make offhand for him thinking groups of people were inferior is that he liked Georgians and trusted them more than other varieties of Soviets, so to say what the Left is doing is pure Stalinism leaves out that inferiority component. No, that part of the Left’s ideology is lifted directly from Stalin’s contemporary in Germany, who himself got it from American progressives- the intellectual elites we see today supporting Antifa. Liberals with beliefs like Planned Parenthood’s founders.

Let’s do a contrast here, in light of this recent story about illegal immigrants raping a little girl. The Left wants to pass anti-gun laws, no matter how ineffective, because “if it just saves one life it’s worth it”. But they want open borders, so that more 11 year olds will be raped. Even if you believe that illegals aren’t criminals like the rest of the American population (an assertion I debunked last time), you MUST concede that if they were not present at all then crimes like this where two illegal immigrants rape an 11 year old would not happen. So what if the crime figure from illegal immigrants is lower; the reason we have a border is so that figure will be zero!

And liberal, if it means one little girl isn’t raped repeatedly over several months, isn’t it worth it? Just like if your useless gun laws save one life, they’re worth it? Or do you believe taking away peoples’ right to defend themselves is more important than protecting 11 year old girls from rape? What’s wrong- does it only matter if the claim is against a Republican? Well, I guess we saw that answer when you said anyone not voting for rapist-enabling Hillary in 2016 was sexist but then tried to lynch Kavanaugh in 2018 over an event with even less evidence than what Bill’s accuser had.

All women must be believed… only if they accuse a Republican. All illegals must be protected, right? You’d gladly sacrifice your own body or your daughter’s body or your mother’s body for them, apparently, based on your desire for open borders.

Am I characterizing all illegals as rapists? You characterize every white Trump supporter with a gun as a potential mass murderer based on a couple of mass shootings done by liberals, so I don’t see why I shouldn’t characterize illegals as rapists. And I can certainly skew the stats any way I want since we have black-centric-liberal-favorite news outlet NewsOne saying “Reminder: White People Commit Mass Shootings Way More Than Any Other Group” despite the fact that, as stated in my last post, black men are TWICE as likely to be a mass shooter than a white man.

Remember: more incidents of sexual assault were committed by illegal immigrants in 2018 (80) than fatalities from white nationalists by any means in 2018 (49), so if anything I’d be even MORE justified with claiming all illegals are rapists than you are with your slander/libel. And those stats are just based on what illegal immigrants in the U.S. are convicted of doing: on the way here, over 180,000 rapes are predicted to happen at the hands of traffickers and fellow illegal immigrants though there’s sometimes overlap between those categories.

But I don’t believe that about all illegals, like Trump said some are good and some are bad. Isn’t that true about all groups? Don’t Trump supporters have the same “Spark of Divinity” that Pelosi said MS-13 rapists have? The only difference is that the illegal immigrants should not be here for us to roll the dice on if they’re good or bad. Guns are protected in the Constitution, but illegal immigrant rapists are only protected by liberals. “Spark of divinity” is what you believe they have; obviously you don’t believe their victims have that, or even matter, otherwise you’d adhere to your “if it saves just one life” policy and be standing guard on the border yourselves until a wall was built.

Irony. Joe Scarborough says that Elizabeth Warren is better than Trump because she won’t inspire mass shootings. Except in Dayton. And I guess her anti-ICE rhetoric won’t inspire any more terrorist attacks on ICE facilities either. Also, that entire segment was about how they oppose Trump because he is assaulting the Constitution, and by doing so they WANT to vote in a Democrat who will be just a bad, they openly say it doesn’t matter how bad the Democrat is. So according to MSNBC, only Republicans inspire mass shootings and terror attacks so Warren must be a Republican and so must the media otherwise a few items I’ve talked about here wouldn’t have happened, and it’s ok if a Democrat burns the Constitution as long as they beat Trump because Trump is a threat to the Constitution. As long as the threat is a Democrat, it’s not a threat. MSNBC’s anchors proudly declared that belief. CNN said a recession is awesome, all those job losses and everything, because it will hurt Trump. Remember last time how I mentioned that liberals DO NOT CARE what happens to you? Who do you think a recession will hurt? The poor minorities that Democrats claim to represent, or the rich white Republicans they want the recession to hurt?

In fact, CNN WANTS it to hurt the poor minorities so they’ll keep voting Democrat, they said as much. They said they want a recession so that it hurts Trump, right? Well how would it hurt Trump if it weren’t hurting people who’d vote for him? And how would it hurt people who voted for him without hurting people who vote Democrat as well? Exactly. They want their own voters to suffer, to lose their jobs, to starve in the streets, just so they can get rid of Trump who hitherto had been doing a good job with the economy.

I honestly can’t remember if I mentioned this last time, or if this here is what I wanted to mention last time but instead transferred to here. Or maybe I just linked to it as part of another topic and moved on. It bears examining here though- Ex-Rep. Robert Francis “rich and white” O’Rourke said racism in America and intolerance is common and has always existed here. Racism and intolerance by white people.


Normally I’d say of Robert O’Rourke’s appearance what my mom says about Daniel Craig’s: he’s an ugly man with a stupid face. But I genuinely think this is the best picture taken of him; his face is the least goofy in it. Why yes, this image from CBS’ Dallas affiliate IS a mugshot. Rich White Robby was arrested for burglary (charges later dropped because he is a rich white kid, do you think Kamala Harris or Cory Booker at that age would’ve gotten away with it? How about someone Hispanic named Beto, would THEY get away with it?), and drunk driving/crashing his car/fleeing the scene of the accident. Now he’s running for President. Democrats did want the felon vote. Also, as a 15 year old little Bobby wrote a nice long fantasy about murdering children.

So if all whites are racist, why are you running? Do you think you, some idiot rich white kid who was a backbencher in Congress for 6 years (I didn’t even know he existed until he ran against Ted Cruz, and I’ve been looking at this garbage for over 8 years now), is superior to a person of color like Cory Booker who was a Senator (which you failed to achieve) and a mayor? Or do you think you are superior to a woman of color, Kamala Harris, who is also a Senator (which you failed to achieve) and before that was attorney general for a state? Why do you think you’re more qualified than they are? Objectively speaking, comparing resumes, I’d honestly say Cory Booker is the most qualified (Kamala ran the prosecutor’s office, but wasn’t mayor or governor. President is closer to mayor than it is to prosecutor). Kamala and Cory are definitely more qualified than YOU Robert, so why are you still in the race except to steal votes from minority candidates, except to oppress those minority voices you are running against? Why do we need a rich white failure (or another rich white failure depending on your views on Trump) in the White House? Huh, Robert? Why are you superior to these other people, because it really looks like white privilege is the only thing you have over them.

I have another problem to pose about the Left’s sexism; it’ll take a moment to get there. Enjoy the ride.

So why is it that when a white person shoots up a place with motives coming from both sides of the aisle it’s solely Trump’s fault, yet when a Muslim cites the Koran and shoots up a gay nightclub you make his homophobic extremist father that doubtless inspired the attack an honored speaker at your Presidential convention, and then you say any condemnation of anything Islam is evil and Islamophobic even if the various jihadists cite the Koran as motivation? You go out of your way to connect Trump to El Paso, yet when a Muslim commits jihad and quotes their own religious texts you go out of your way to protect them, you even invite people on from Hamas-offshoot CAIR to tell us how bad we are for associating Islam with violence. Then you associate Trump and whites with violence and terrorism.

Are you saying whites are inferior? Are you saying they are untermensch? White males in particular, you love attacking them, are you saying that is the lowest form of life on the planet? So what happens when a white woman decides she is trans and wants to be a man? Are you saying that person is evil, or mentally unstable? Afterall, in your view white males are scum, life unworthy of life, so if a female wants to transition to male then that would be inflicting harm on them, according to everything your media and celebrities and just the average liberal on Twitter have been saying about whites and white males. One of your Presidential candidates even said that violence stems from evil male testosterone only. So are you saying that a white female-to-male transsexual isn’t actually trans in that case, but just sick in the head? Or do you believe that a white FTM is superior to white cisgendered men? If so, then aren’t you saying that a FTM does NOT truly become a man?

How can a female-to-male transsexual be superior if the transition is complete as you tell us it is? Why are you trying to trigger an attack of gender dysphoria by telling that FTM they are different from the biological males? Or are you now saying that all men and women are really equal? That it’s just toxic masculinity that’s the problem? If so, how can men and women truly be equal if only MEN are capable of suffering toxic masculinity? And can a FTM suffer from toxic masculinity too? No? Then I guess they don’t really become men, since you say all men are susceptible. So you’re not really tolerant of the trans community, are you liberal.

Here is a montage of Obama attacking whites and telling his supporters to get into the faces of their opponents, and also tells Republicans they need to sit in the back of the bus. We also have Obama smiling next to Louis Farrakhan, the black David Duke. Obama never had to answer for it. AOC and her staff never had to answer for quoting and supporting actual Nazis. Yet because a shooter acted based on what the media says Trump said, not what Trump actually said, Trump is evil. And the Left is not, even though the Dayton shooter was one of theirs and an Antifa member tried to launch a terrorist attack, and the Bernie Sanders terrorist shot at Republicans. The Left has produced acts of terrorism, and they’re fundraising off them, while saying Trump is evil for something he never even encouraged, unlike the Left which has encouraged its terrorists in mainstream outlets.

Jesse Watters has it right, in case you hadn’t been paying attention. AOC says we need to riot, a socialist shoots up an ICE facility. AOC says ICE agents are Nazis, an Antifa member tries to blow them up. Yet the Left did not link AOC to those events. Trump… makes no real racist statements and does not support white supremacy except in the media’s fantasies, yet the Left tells you that any rhetoric not supporting a Democrat or their policies will lead to a mass shooting. I was liking Donna Brazille up until her rebuttal of Jesse Watters’ point on that. Jesse was correct as you’ve seen me point out above and elsewhere, and if Donna was listening then Fox News would not be the only place she heard the Left denying culpability while blaming the Right for everything.

Honestly, Donna just has to check out New Republic. If you look at their pages you’d think that Chicago didn’t exist and the Dayton shooting never happened! You’d think the only people who even owned a gun in this country were white Trump supporters,  based on some of the headlines over there. They try to say gun culture is solely from white people, but have that not listened to a single rap song in their entire lives? I’ve listened to 5 DMX albums, one G-Unit album, one 50 Cent album, and one Coolio album. I can safely assert rap is pretty dedicated to gun culture. But the New Republic and other liberal outlets have a whiteness blind spot. Basically if they see white, that’s what they focus on to the exclusion of all other issues and detriment of racial unity.

I’ll stop with this odd one. An MSNBC analyst criticized Trump for the delivery of his speech. As if reading off the teleprompter is bad and shows Trump was forced to say what he says, does that mean Obama enabled black supremacists who wanted to kill cops? No? Also, his spiel about 8-8 sounds utterly insane, and Brian Williams sounds even worse. WHO THE HECK WOULD MAKE THESE CONNECTIONS?! This guy might as well say Trump is a Neo Nazi because he ate a Reuben on Hitler’s birthday! Actually, Obama is a Neo Nazi for ordering bombings of non-whites that started on 8-8 according to NBC’s stoic analyst.

Or how about this? I’ve decided that “NBC” stands for “Nazi Broadcasting Company”. Whoops, by YOUR logic it looks like you guys had better change your companies name! Especially since “MSNBC” stands for “Mengele’s Special Nazi Buchenwald Clinic”. So if these definitions spread among white supremacy groups and we start twisting everything you say to be a racist white supremacist dog whistle, does that mean you’ll apply the same standards you do to Trump and condemn yourselves? Nah.

I will say I agree with Brian Williams. It is chilling that people could be as stupid as they are. And for those of you who disagree with Jesse Watters on the idea that the Left is trying to criminalize all speech against it, here’s evidence in support of Watters. We can’t even count to 88 anymore without being Neo Nazis, and apparently everything we do August 8 is symbolic to Neo Nazis so we should erase that date from the calendar. The Left is willing to stretch to great lengths to call Trump a racist.

I’ll do one better. If the measure is “we can’t do anything that Neo Nazis interpret as enabling them”, and if raising an American flag on 8-8 counts as supporting Neo Nazis, then I assume being white and speaking English on 8-8 must also count as support. Afterall, it’s kinda their thing. Racial supremacy, English as our language and all that. So Brian, are you going to enable Neo Nazis by doing your show on 8-8? Even being white is triggering and a sign of hate according to the Left, thus it must be a sign of support according to Neo Nazis, certainly a more realistic sign of support than raising flags on 8-8, so why are you even doing your show? In fact- why do you have one to begin with? You realize a wise Latina would be better able to do that show for you, right, and that your occupation of that time slot is stealing it from someone who needs it more. Right?

My mother pointed out that on 8-8 we had a pro-democracy uprising in Myanmar and the forming of the liberal-lauded ASEAN. So I guess those are also white supremacist dog whistles since they happened on 8-8.


Using the same geometric logic that Jewish-owned NBC’s analysts and pundits used to determine that Trump is a neo Nazi because he did something on 8-8, I have determined that the analyst is secretly an agent for Mossad. Only after drawing the picture and writing all this and putting the links in did I realize that it looks kind of like I’m saying the Fredo in this picture has a big nose, which is a stereotype of Jews. So I guess now I’m anti-Semitic and anti-Italian despite being like fourth or fifth generation of each. Maybe I should declare myself a Democrat now and a trans or homosexual, the outrage mob won’t go after bigots if it’s their own party and they have one or two oppression points like that. Image from MSNBC.

Jews are secretly Neo Nazis too according to NBC. Hanukkah lasts 8 nights, and celebrates an occasion where enough oil for one night was divided into 8 nights. 8-8. H-H. So making the same leap of logic NBC might, NBC must believe that the Holocaust never happened because the Jews have a religious ceremony commemorating Hitler. Maybe NBC believes that the Jews fabricated the Holocaust once the Nazis started to lose, so that nobody would blame them for World War II. I mean, given what NBC believes about 8-8 and given their support of anti-Semites like Omar, Tlaib, and Farrakhan and their allies, it stands to reason that NBC would believe this too, and it even works according to NBC’s own logic.

Also, if you saw any coverage NBC and MSNBC do of Hamas’ attacks on Jews (because remember: exterminating Jews is in their charter, which is why Pelosi said Hamas was a humanitarian organization, because she believes it is humanitarian work to murder Jews and she believes MS-13 rapists and killers are divine beings) you’d think NBC and MSNBC thought that Hamas consisted of God’s chosen people. They have on people from CAIR, an offshoot of Hamas, all the time. If David Duke’s deputy founded an organization for the rights of oh I don’t know white men and the people in the organization said they wanted to wipeout all non-whites in the U.S. and Fox News had them on, you’d certainly claim that it was proof Fox was white supremacist. Yet you do the same with an organization that wants to eradicate all the Jews in the world whose members said they wanted to eradicate all religions aside from Islam from the United States. Somehow it’s ok when the targets are Jews and non-Muslims, but it’s wrong when the targets are Muslims and non-whites? Liberal logic- genocide is ok if the right group wants it. NBC’s logic- Jews deserve to die.

Speaking of preachy sanctimonious outlets, how come after warning of doom and gloom for the environment the Washington Post and New York Times are still polluting with their papers? The forests are being harvested, the plants that manufacture the millions of newspapers sold are belching pollution into our skies and require cars and trucks and resources to build them and require land that could be used as a nature preserve, then we get to the cars and trucks and airplanes carrying the papers to their destinations, and finally the used papers taking up landfills. This is leaving a hefty environmental cost just so that we can get the daily preach about how we need to help the environment. It’s like how Obama’s EPA saved the environment by polluting a river; I guess it makes sense to liberals.

That was a bit of an aside. How about we go back to Democrats and horrible reactions to shootings? Elizabeth Warren immediately rose to the top of monstrousness. The shooter in Dayton was a hardcore supporter of her and of gun control, so Warren sent out an email fundraising off the shooting, basically turning the man into a martyr for Warren’s cause. What message does that send? “Shoot people so that my campaign can get money!”

Bringing it all the way back to the top of this section, why haven’t you told that stupid-faced rich kid Robert O’Rourke to pack sand since he’s competing against non-white candidates on 8-8, trying to say he’s better than them even though he clearly isn’t. He is literally saying a white person is superior to non-white people with better resumes, and he’s doing it on 8-8! How is THAT not a Neo Nazi dog whistle?


How is it not a dog whistle that this sea of white faces is trying to say they’re all better than a latino man, black man, and black woman? How is it not Neo Nazi that nine of the white faces here are trying to convince you they’re superior to the Jewish man pictured? How is it not a white nationalist neo Nazi dog whistle that this is all happening on 8-8?