Tulsi Gabbard on Hate Crime Hoaxes

Nancy Pelosi on Vulgar Calls for Impeaching President Trump

Newly elected House Speaker Nancy Pelosi tried to tamp down the controversy  created by freshman Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib's vulgar call to impeach President Trump.

Pelosi dismissed criticism of Tlaib's vow to impeach the "motherf*cker as being "No big deal" as it was free speech from an individual and is just the way people talk




However, Pelosi proclaimed that President Trump's rhetoric mattered as his words have a direct impact on people. Huh? Hypocrisy much?  

Perhaps Pelosi ought to consider the context of Rashida Tlaib's crude call for impeachment.  Even though Tlaib doubled down on her remarks as speaking truth to power, the reality was that her crude comment was directed to her young son.   So such free speech has no impact "on the children"?  Sure. 

h/t: MRC

"Young Turk" Rep. Rashida Tlaib Ready to Rumble in the House

Rashida Tlaib heckling Trump in 2016

First term Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib (D-MI 13th) rose to prominence being the first Muslim woman in the Michigan legislature.  She first achieved national notoriety for heckling candidate Donald Trump at a Detroit Economic Club luncheon in August 2016.  Tlaib parlayed that protest into winning the 2018 House Democrat primary in a crowded race for a seat that represents Dearborn, Michigan in a crowded primary , which has a large Muslim population.

Tlaib ran unopposed in the 2018 general election and was one of two Muslim women elected to the House. Tlaib was sworn in on President Thomas Jefferson's Quran. As Rep. Tlaib was sworn in, her brother spoke to CSPAN to say that he was proud of her being a fighter despite the fact the he was a Trump conservative. 




Tlaib certainly lived up to that young turk reputation on her first day in office.  While Tlaib did vote for Speaker Pelosi (despite what she said on the stump),  Tlaib did make waves by modifying her House provided world map by inserting Palestine, backing her position for a one state solution.

Later that day, Tlaib made headlines at a Move On.org  reception when she called for President Trump's impeachment by a profanity laced ejaculation.  Tlaib lived up to her reputation for cursing like a trucker. But Tlaib should only metaphorically be labeled a young Turk as she proudly professes her Palestinian identity.

Most politicos expected the 116th Congress to be totally focused on the upcoming 2020 Presidential election, full of investigations and efforts to oust President Trump. Democrats seem to be obsessed by Trump Derangement Syndrome.  The hope is to persuade enough establishment Republicans who are offended by Trump's abrasive style and perceived lack of comity to limit Trump's term as chief executive.

Establishment Democrats may try to tamp down impeachment efforts, as the chances to force Mr. Trump from the Oval Office with a 2/3rds Senate majority seem slim.  It is reasonable to presume that their game will be to continue to drive down President Trump's favorability numbers and to pressure those close to him that he will throw in the towel.  Alas that strategy will not satisfy radicals like Rashida Tlaib.

The problem that young turks like Tlaib pose is their persistent in your face vulgar approach is great for generating headlines (much the same for their nemesis Donald Trump).  But that turns off independents and establishment Republicans who embrace civility.  Ironically, Democrats condemned Republicans about their supposed lack of civility in the wake of the shooting of former Rep. Gabby Giffords (D-AZ 8th).

Moreover, the more prominence that  Democrat Socialist radicals like Tlaib and Rep. Ocasio Cortez (D-NY 14th) are given, it is likely that the Democrats will be driven to the left, which will produce a presidential nominee who who the base loves but alienates any remaining Blue Dog Democrats and fails to win back "The Great Revolt" Trump voters and loses in a landslide, much like McGovern lost to the great silent majority in 1972.

Karl Marx in a Dress?

As the Democrats assume the majority in the House of Representatives during the 116th Congress, Representative Maxine Waters (D-CA 43rd) is poised to become the Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee. 






Sotto voce, business barons may morsely mutter that it will be like Karl Marx in a dress running the Financial Services Committee but that is the new order in the peoples' chamber.

When Winning Isn't Enough for Ocasio-Cortez

Congresswoman-Elect Alexandria Ocasio Cortez (D-NY 14th), a 29 year old Democrat Socialist who hails from The Bronx, New York, won her general election with 78% of the vote.  Yet her initial comments either indicated an unpreparedness for victory or a pose to propagandize her brand.

Due to the demographics of the district, it was virtually fait accompli that Ocasio Cortez would win in November after surprising House Democrat stalwart Rep. Joe Crowley (D-NY 14th) by 15% in the June 2018 New York primaries.  Yet after she won, Ocasio Cortez publicly complained that she would not have income for three months, so it would be initially dicey for her to find digs in DC prior to her "inauguration" (sic). 

So an economics major from Boston University from Boston University could not budget enough buffer for a sure thing victory in order to have a place to stay in the District of Calamity prior to pulling her first paycheck  Sure.

Detractors of the rising Democrat Socialist star have derided her as Occasional Cortez, who they believe is not bright nor schooled in the political process.  However, the wording of her "too broke to move" sob story hint that it is contrived political posturing.

Ocasio Cortez comes from the Bernie Sanders wing of the Democrat Party (despite the fact that Sanders actually is no longer a member of the party).  Aside from her chops of being a community organizer, Ocasio Cortez tries to conjure the mien of being considered a working class hero.  What better way to identify with voters who live paycheck to paycheck to play up this wage gap before taking office?

This would not be the first time that Ocasio Cortez has played fast and loose with her bio to identify with the downtrodden.  Ocasio Cortez played up her roots in the Bronx, even after it became evident that she grew up living with her  architect father in well to do Westchester County while commuting to school in the Bronx. 

If Ocasio Cortez truly cannot afford an apartment before she is "viviendo del mamey" (Boricuan slang for living off the state budget, or living the easy life), she could follow the example of outgoing House Speaker Paul Ryan, who slept in his office.  Surely the DNC has a room that they can set aside for the newly elected working class leader.  Just make sure that you pay the average daily rate for lodging lest you get hounded and forced to resign like former Trump Energy Secretary Scott Pruitt.  Check that, ethics rules usually only apply for Republicans.

Ocasio Cortez's post election kerfluffle may hint at trouble for Democrats organizing in Washington.  It would seem that Ocasio Cortez is not content to be a back bencher while learning the ropes on Capitol Hill.  

 It seems that there are three contending factions in the Democrat Caucus:  The old school, like presumed Speaker Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA 12th) and current Democrat Whip Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD 5th), who are established Democrats who are eager to regain their powerful positions. 

While it is a relatively small faction, there are moderates like Rep. Tim Ryan (D-OH 13th), who seem like vestigial Democrats of old who champion patriotic union working class voters.  Their clout may be somewhat bolstered by the fact that many of the newly elected Democrats won because of their moderate credentials.  

Then there are the Young Turks, like Ocasio Cortez, who want the revolution now. Losing Democrat Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO), labeled them the crazies.  These rabble rousers will not wait their turn for power.  They may chaff at having their leadership being comprised of septuagenarian establishment types who want to protect their positions rather than upturning the system.  

The question is how the (Democrat) Congressional Black Caucus will side in the leadership battle.  On the one hand, the CBC has paid their dues and followed a strategy of rising to ranking member status by hanging onto office forever (save ex Rep. John Conyers, who was chased out of office in late 2017 after fifty years because of sexual harassment allegations).   Congresswoman "Auntie Maxie" Waters (D-CA 43rd) is in line to be the Chair of the Financial Services Committee, so she has strong motivations to line up with the establishment.  But Waters also was a driving force during the Midterms to chant "Impeach 45".   Ms. Pelosi was trying to tamp down those voices during the campaign.  If House Democrats intend to govern, leadership may strive to quash those sentiments, which could cause resentment and a change of alliance.

In the last 115th Congress, the CBC felt slighted in leadership.  House Democrats made up a faux leadership position for Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC 6th) as "Assistant Democrat Leader", but who had  a title but little clout.  It is unclear if that will be enough for the CBC now that they are back at the helm in the House. Fourth term incumbent Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY 8th) is vying  to succeed Joe Crowley for the number four position in the Democrat Caucus as Caucus Chair.  This might split the CBC as Jeffries competitor includes entrenched left coast progressive CBC member  Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA 13th). 

Next week, Democrats will return to the Capitol City and organize their caucus.  Either Ocasio Cortez will have to couch surf or get a cash advance to participate.   

On Re-Evaluating House Leadership

Democrats with a Loco -Motive (sic)

This loco label looms large in the mind of President Trump, as was echoed in his recent campaign rally in Johnson City, Tennessee. 

Senator Tom Cotton on FBI Background Checks

Mitch McConnell on Good Democrat Smears

Sheldon Whitehouse on Rules

On Trump and the Courts

Cory Booker on American Heartbreak

At the Netroots Nation conference conference in New Orleans, Senator Cory Booker's pensive philosophy intimated how may proceed on his path to the White House in 2020.

Pity that he was not more observant about with whom he was posing for photos.  

Booker claims that he did not know but the poseurs (sic) probably would embrace his critical cri-de-couer theme. 

The Old Grey Lady on the Ossified House Democrat Leadership

On Applying the Nuclear Option and Comity

Article II Section 2 of the Constitution gives the United States Senate the prerogative to give "Advice and Consent" in confirming Executive Branch nominations, especially the judiciary. For most of the Republic, confirmations of Supreme Court justices were not voted on in a markedly partisan manner. 

The Senate, which liked to consider itself as the world's greatest deliberative body, usually operated in a manner which vetted high court nominees in a conscientiously deferential manner to the President.  For example, Ruth Bader Ginsburg had been chief counsel of the ACLU and a noted feminist attorney, yet she garnered a 93-3 confirmation vote in 1993. 

Admittedly, this was not always the case. President George H.W. Bush's nominee of Clarence Thomas endured a contentious confirmation hearings  in 1991 which he likened to a "high tech lynching for uppity blacks".  

And  of course the vitriolic attacks on Robert Bork, President Ronald Reagan's 1987 pick to fill a Supreme Court opening, resulted in the verb "to Bork" to be added to the Oxford English Dictionary in 2002.  But the adamant opposition from the left stemmed, however peripherally, to nitpicking "flaws" in the nominees.

Much of the comity that the Senate enjoyed was due to Cloture Rule (Senate Rule XXII) which was instituted in 1917.  In order to end debate on a filibuster, three-fifths of Senators (today 60 votes) is required.  Applying that to judicial nominees, Presidents often picked less stridently partisan or controversial candidates, as some Senate Minority votes were needed in order to advance to the confirmation vote.  

Former Democrat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) found this 3/5ths Cloture requirement to be inconvenient in his effort to aid President Barack Obama in packing the judiciary (particularly changing the balance in the 4th Circuit, a.k.a. "The Rocket Docket").  Thus, in 2013 Reid exercised "The Nuclear Option" which abrogated Senate Rule XXII for judicial confirmations save Supreme Court nominees. 

 Reid was warned on the Senate floor by then Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) that you will regret using the nuclear option.   In the 115th Congress, when Senate Democrats became openly obstructionistic about any nominations made by President Donald Trump, Majority Leader McConnell extended the "nuclear option" to include Supreme Court nominees, which resulted in Neil Gorsuch being confirmed by a 54-45 vote.

After Justice Anthony Kennedy's announced retirement from the Nation's High Court, Democrats have campaigned for the Senate to delay confirmation hearings for the SCOTUS opening until after the 2018 midterm elections.  Their facile rationalization is that Republicans ought to follow the same standard used to deny Merritt Garland a confirmation hearing in 2016 because it was an election year.  Of course, this partisan plea ignores that it was a Presidential election year and had over 70 years of precedent.  In addition, Democrats are not in the majority and they set the agenda. Elections do have consequences.  

So does changing and exploiting rules.  Democrats might have some gravitas to their suggestion to stall SCOTUS confirmation hearing until after the midterms if they were not already slow walking nearly all Trump confirmations.   Senate rules allow for 30 hours of debate on each nominee.  Democrats have been routinely requiring the entire 30 hours of debate, which would mean that President Trump's picks could receive senatorial "advise and consent" in nine years. So the threat that Democrats will further slow walk Senate proceedings in retaliation or to forestall a SCOTUS confirmation vote is meaningless. 

The recalcitrant response of Democrats should be a cue to Majority Leader McConnell on how to react to the diminution of comity in the Senate.  If Democrats are going to slow walk everything in retaliation or retribution for the Senate leadership for exercising their "advice and consent" on Supreme Court nominees in a timely manner, then keep them in session.  McConnell already effectively cancelled the traditional long summer recess so they can meet their budgetary duties. So they get to spend the dog days of summer on Capital Hill and enjoy the swampy weather in the District of Calamity (sic).

But the lack of comity and the need for elected officials to do their job might mean spending more time on Capitol Hill.  Since Democrats seem to relish filibusters and slowing the process down, the Majority Leader should change how filibutsters are treated.  Instead of the failure of a cloture vote resulting in the legislation (or the nomination) being pulled, let the debate continue.  If legislators want to invoke "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" and talk until they are hoarse and drop from exhaustion, that is their prerogative.  But just as the nuclear option changed things in unexpected ways, tinkering with the filibuster might have adverse effects on Senate minority rights in the future.

Moreover, so that the Senate is not simply the place where legislation goes to and dies, remain in session through October instead of taking the election break.  From an objective standpoint, they will be doing their jobs (instead of concentrating on getting re-elected).  Politically, this hurts Senate Democrats (as they have 25 of 33 seats up, including 10 in states where Mr. Trump won).  And it might make obstructionism less appealing and allow incumbents to give comity a chance.

Is Mark Warner Intoxicated on Intelligence?

During a Majority Trust Retreat Dinner for the National Democrat Campaign Committee in Martha's Vineyard, Senator Mark Warner (D-VA), the Vice Chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee jested that if you gave him another glass of wine, and he would reveal tantalizing details about the Mueller Special Counsel investigation.



  While this cryptic comment can be passed off as sparkling wit during a wine, brie and rubber chicken fundraiser, this discounts the candor which is afforded to high rolling donors. Rush Limbaugh recalled attending a soiree for big donors to President George W. Bush.  Rush recalled that unlike his cautious, stammering public persona, "W" was entirely a different guy when cameras were not focused on him.  Once assured that the remarks were off the record, Mr. Bush spoke with candor and the President opined without notes for 45 minutes about serious subjects without stuttering. 

Limbaugh insists that teasing big money donors with bogus political bombshells is not done. Deceiving deep pocket donors risks alienating their pocketbooks in the future.  

This may be why President Trump chronicled Warner's supposedly tipsy insinuation.  

Taken at face value, Democrats are colluding with the Special Counsel. In addition, they are relying on precursors of impeachable offenses to base their midterm election campaign.  This could explain why Vanity Fair proclaimed that Mueller could give the GOP an October Surprise. 

If it is the case that Warner has advanced intelligence about the Mueller investigation, why is information on an active case being leaked to a key Democrat?   Is Warner intoxicated with illegal insider intelligence or just intoxicated on power?

President Trump on Immigration Bills

On Samantha Bee's Feckless Apology

As TBS Full Frontal comedienne Samantha Bee returned to television after attacking President Trump's daughter Ivanka Trump with obscene epithets and inappropriate innuendo, she offered an apology of sorts.

What a feckless Bee! Well, it was not much of an apology.  It was one of the "To those who might be offended" kind of regret.  Moreover, in this feckless mea culpa, Bee sought to justify using "the C-word" as a feminist way to reclaim the Anglo Saxon four letter word.  

The problem with Bee's BS expression of regret is that it ignores the context.  Many focus on the crudity of the "C word".  But Bee suggested that President Trump's daughter put on something tight and talk some sense into him because he listens to her.  This was uttered with a lurid archival photo in the background.  Incest innuendo- check.  Woman manipulating horny man insinuation -check mate?

Bee's insistence that she was trying to reclaim the "C word" is undermined by implying that Ivanka should use her feminine wiles to bend the will of her creepy father.  This may be pushing the bounds for an edgy comedienne and comedy isn't pretty.  But Bee still wants to be taken seriously on public policy, as her regret was taking attention away from the plight of illegal immigrant infants being separated from their mothers.  Sure.

I find it dubious that Samantha Bee and staff was truly sorry about insulting Ivanka Trump or crossing a line as it gave them so much publicity.  Full Frontal is a little watched late night comedy show which may be pulled off the air if it loses any more sponsors.  

What is culturally concerning is the progressive lack of civility combined with collective Trump Derangement Syndrome.  Politically correct panjandrums pontificate that it was acceptable for Bee to use the "C word" because she is of that class and is reclaiming a now pejorative phrase, while being blind to how much of America is revolted.

We live in a culture of outrage. Democrats have sought to maximize outrage to create a blue wave for the midterm elections.  One of the ways to do that is to use cultural levers to stoke up the bile. 

Alas, this is wasteful (sic) because it only appeals to true believers while alienating independents and traditional blue collar Democrats.  It is dubious that outrageous obscene attacks and feckless apologies will turn the tide and the blue wave might be down the drain like the  tidy bowl man. 

On Tolerance, Pardons, Politics and Dinesh D'Souza

In 2012, conservative polemicist Dinesh D'Souza contributed $20,000  via a straw donor for his friend Wend Long's quixotic campaign to become Senator from New York.   His infraction was zealously prosecuted by politically connected US Prosecutor from the Southern District of New York Preet Bharara.   

In 2014, D'Souza entered a plea for a one count felony charge. D'Souza's sentence was for eight months in a half way house, five years probation and a $30,000 fine. 

 This was perhaps the first time that someone was sentenced to prison for a minor FEC infraction.  Liberal Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz noted that such campaign violations were common and questioned if it was a proper exercise of prosecutorial discretion.   Many conservatives believe that Bharara threw the book at D'Souza as payback for cinematic success of  "2016: Obama's America" (2012).   Bharara was thought to be a front runner to replace Obama Attorney General Eric Holder in 2014. 

On May 31, 2018  President Donald Trump announced via Twitter that he would grant D'Souza a full pardon because  he was very unfairly treated by our government.

President Barack Obama granted clemency to 1,715 nonviolent criminals, many of them were for drug dealers and even a terrorist.  Obama granted more commutations  than the prior twelve Presidents. The mainstream media lauded the Obama Administration as being tolerant.  

It is dubious that the media accredited Democrat steno-pool will apply the same standards towards President Trump regarding Dinesh D'Souza.

Stacey Abrams on The Resistance

Student Activist Emma Gonzalez's "Modest Proposals" on Sensible Gun Reform Now

Emma Gonzalez, one of the prominent progressive student activists who emerged from the Parkland Florida High School shooting, participated in a panel on "Guns, Violence and Student Activism: A Push for Change" before the  Education Writers Association conference at the University of Southern California.

Ms. Gonzalez  has progressed from perseverating on her fifteen school mates and two teachers who were slain by troubled expelled former student during her emotional "Six Minute and Twenty Second" speech at the March for Our Lives in Washington DC.

Responding to instances of gun violence, Gonzalez shot her mouth off opining that it was cheaper just to have a gun grab.  What was more memorable than the pat answer to take away AR-15s was her profane exhortation that people who wanted to shoot such firearms should join the Army and defend their fucking country (sic).


\

Aside from the crudity of the comment, it is ironic that Gonzalez urges gun enthusiasts to defend America.  Gonzalez chose to attire herself at the big gun march in military gear wearing a Cuban flag patch.  Hmm.   Now she is advocating gun grabs by the government. Wonder where else this has happened? How about: Nazi Germany; Cuba; Venezuela

It is sad to see how the left continues to exploit Parkland High student activists like David Hogg and Emma Gonzalez to push for Gun Control.  These traumatized teens certainly had compelling stories when they could relate the travesty in which they had to endure.  But now that they opine on the political stage and advocate for broad public policy, it is no longer out of the mouths of babes and they are not bullet proof from criticism or skeptically challenging their suggestions.

Since the election of President Donald Trump, much of the radicalized Left in the Democrat party has sought to enflame their electorate through identity politics and mass movements.  The Women Who Hate Trump March the day after the 45th President's inauguration and the March for Our Lives in March 2018 were supposed to bring down the ramparts and inspire the masses to bring down this Presidency and his presumably backwards policies. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL 23rd) recently highlighted her alignment with the gun grabbing movement as an obvious wedge issue pitch for the 2018 Midterm Elections

Alas, both the Womens' March and the supposed students' March for Our Lives have not inspired sustained fulmination. If one looks to polling, the Blue Wave seems dubious and Trump Presidential approval ratings are increasing, despite a barrage of negative press from the mainstream media.

Using these students as tools to push for political change may well backfire.  David Hogg's profane pontifications to hurt those associated with gun rights (particularly the NRA)  has unwittingly spurred a multitude of new NRA memberships.  Emma Gonzalez's obscene observations about the AR-15 and seeming disparagement of serving one's country will reverberate in the minds of many newfound Great Revolt Trump voters  as did Senator John Kerry's (D-MA)  2004 "Get good grades or get stuck in Iraq" flak