Eleven years ago this month, I started writing in a personal blog. Looking back at one of the first posts, I ran across this statement:
How a President and his wife (now a Senator) were able to avoid jail while they committed perjury is beyond me except for “connections.”
How things haven’t changed…
It’s also interesting that eleven years ago, Trump had a reality show, he made some pretty bad statements that were recorded, and he was a Democrat, and this was all after a President was impeached for lying about having inappropriate sexual relationships with an intern.
I cannot and will not defend Donald Trump for his foul mouth – he is the one that owns that particular chunk of bad manners. He has made public apologies, and that should be the end of it…except it wont be.
The Media, always drawn to any sleaze involving Conservative or Republicans while ignoring the Democrats or Progressive/Liberals for similar or worse actions, will milk this for all its worth while looking for anything else to smear Trump. It won’t matter how much the Hildebeast is exposed for the shady dealings, lies, and outright treason that she has committed, the Media will continue to shield her as much as possible.
And I cannot for the life of me understand why. I can speculate, but I do not understand why the Media would support a person that does not respect the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the laws of this land. For instance –
During the second debate, both candidates were asked “What would you prioritize as the most important aspect of selecting a Supreme Court justice?” The answer (in part) from the Hildebeast was telling where her priorities and loyalties lie:
“This is one of the most important issues in this election. I want to appoint Supreme Court justices who understand the way the world really works, who have real-life experience, who have not just been in a big law firm and maybe clerked for a judge and then gotten on the bench, but, you know, maybe they tried some more cases, they actually understand what people are up against.
“Because I think the current court has gone in the wrong direction. And so I would want to see the Supreme Court reverse Citizens United and get dark, unaccountable money out of our politics. Donald doesn’t agree with that.
“I would like the Supreme Court to understand that voting rights are still a big problem in many parts of our country, that we don’t always do everything we can to make it possible for people of color and older people and young people to be able to exercise their franchise. I want a Supreme Court that will stick with Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to choose, and I want a Supreme Court that will stick with marriage equality.
“I want a Supreme Court that doesn’t always side with corporate interests. I want a Supreme Court that understands because you’re wealthy and you can give more money to something doesn’t mean you have any more rights or should have any more rights than anybody else.
“So I have very clear views about what I want to see to kind of change the balance on the Supreme Court. And I regret deeply that the Senate has not done its job and they have not permitted a vote on the person that President Obama, a highly qualified person, they’ve not given him a vote to be able to be have the full complement of nine Supreme Court justices. I think that was a dereliction of duty.”
I would like to point out as many other people have is that the Constitution or the Bill of Rights did not figure in the Hildebeast’s answer to this question. If anything, her answer – when carefully read – reveals that she wants to appoint Justices that will support a Progressive/Liberal viewpoint which is actually counter to the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, despite what her follow-up response to the Second Amendment:
“And I just want to quickly say, I respect the Second Amendment. But I believe there should be comprehensive background checks, and we should close the gun show loophole, and close the online loophole.”
Her statement about the Second Amendment is absolutely false – she does not respect the Second Amendment, and has stated as much in earlier speeches and policy conferences. She would, in essence, appoint Justices to overturn the Heller and McDonald rulings, and sign legislation such as H.R.4269. What doesn’t get legislated away and supported by a Leftist Supreme Court, she will ban and confiscate by Executive Order. These would gut the Second Amendment rights of the People without touching the Amendment itself. These statements and strategies are all in the public domain should you search for them.
Back to the original response – Overturning the Citizen’s United ruling is a blow against the First Amendment’s freedom of speech and press. Stop and think about that – the Media is for a candidate that is against corporations, unions (!), and other organizations stating their opinions by running ads against or for candidates. If overturned, then could censorship of the Media be far behind? Giving the Liberal/Progressive penchant for government control of everything, it’s not a stretch, and the media should be very aware of the company they are keeping.
A good example of this is the recent Obamacare fiasco. Insurance companies are losing money hand over fist, and have petitioned the Government for assistance per legislation. The Government is refusing, so the insurance companies are withdrawing from the exchanges, leaving many people scrambling for insurance. There are several examples of the Government reneging on promises, legislation, or treaties throughout history. Just ask the Indians…the Veterans…or Michelle Malkin (who just had her third insurance carrier bail on her).
To rely on the government for anything long-term is stupidity at best and insanity at worst. – Tom Roland, Equal Diversity
My friends, I am beyond concerned – I’m genuinely frightened at a Hildebeast presidency. With the polls as they are against Trump and Republicans running for the hills trying for self preservation, a Felon in Chief is more than just possible. We cannot depend on the Republicans to hold the line in the House and Senate against a Hildebeast presidency – they have overturned only one Presidential veto in the almost 8 years of an Obama presidency, and that was for a no-brainer. The Republicans have been squishy at best, absent at worst, and ineffective most of the time. But they’re still better than the Democrats being in charge.
In closing, there’s this from Mark Davis at Townhall.com:
There is plenty of fair criticism of Trump on the right. Some of his conservatism seems recently cultivated, and he has only fitful fluency in its language. Doubt is not unreasonable. And some of his pronouncements, from trade policies to the minimum wage, are soundly unconservative.
But his priority list offers a shot at conservative results more satisfying than we might have seen from perhaps half the field he defeated. Immigration, Obamacare repeal, a serious war against global jihad, a Reaganesque tax plan, job creation—if he bats only .500 on these, we will see a far better America than under her malicious stewardship.
And that’s before we get to the issue that will give the next president an imprint on America lasting until the grandchildren are grown: the Supreme Court. It is an unpardonable disconnect for any constitutional conservative to show nonchalance or outright approval as Hillary Clinton plots a savaging of the Bill of Rights.
So Trump is coarse. So he has said some offensive things. So he won’t mix well at George Will’s patrician cocktail parties. So he causes the elites to clutch their pearls and get the vapors. So what? We have a country to save.
And there are two kinds of conservatives right now: those who will take up the fight to save this nation from Hillary Clinton, and those who won’t. From the halls of Congress to the cubicles of punditry, many will be judged for years to come by their choices in the coming days.
And let’s be clear. Taking up the fight means taking up the fight. It does not include mere restraint from savaging the nominee. It does not mean playing Paul Ryan head games containing tepid good wishes wrapped in a refusal to endorse.
Taking up the fight means making it abundantly clear to all who listen that every voter should pull the lever for Donald Trump. Anything less leaves America’s door unlocked for the home invasion that will accompany the Hillary Clinton inauguration.
Folks, I don’t know what it will take for you to get through this election – clothespins on the nose, an ice-cream binge, Jack Daniels, or what ever else – we do need to vote for the one chance that this country has, no matter how uncouth or unpalatable their actions have been in the past. And that person is Donald Trump, (and yes, vote for any and all Republicans running for Congress, state, and local offices).