Yearly Archives: 2016

How did Hillary get so rich?

Posted on by
Reply

Trump’s new ad via Instapundit:

CULTURE OF CORRUPTION: Trump’s Closer: How Did Hillary Get So Rich? “The Clintons made several millions off of book deals, but made a lot more off of their connections to power and monied interests, including $57.5 million during the four years Hillary Clinton served as Secretary of State. Donald Trump has occasionally made reference to this, but he’s making it an explicit argument in the final week with his new ad, “Corruption.” Washington Post analyst Chris Cillizza is impressed. . . . Don’t forget that the Clintons had been in federal office continuously from January 1992 to February 2013, a period of twenty-one years, while they amassed a nine-figure net worth. Only a small portion of that came from book advances, while their speeches and especially Bill’s consultancy income derived almost entirely from Hillary’s status as a Senator and later as Secretary of State. (See Laureate Education for an $18 million example, where Bill was paid eight figures to be an honorary chancellor.)”

How she gets a single vote remains beyond me. Have the last eight years really been that great that we should want four more like it, if not actually worse?

And also via Instapundit, which for the first time puts me in complete agreement with Obama:

obama-on-hillary

One can only hope.

My presentation on the American election

Posted on by
Reply

I spoke to one of the branches of the Liberal Party last night about the American election. They obviously chose me since they wanted someone who might speak positively about Donald, which is what they most certainly received from me. Here were my opening points:

1) If you are not for Trump and are even tempted to vote for Hillary, you ought to consider shifting to the Greens.

2) I do not prefer Trump in the sense of the lesser of two evils. I prefer Trump as the best imaginable choice to “Make America Great Again”, or more realistically, as the last possible chance to save Western civilisation from disintegration.

3) If you do not see this then you are blind to everything that is going on, almost all of which is hidden from view by a media that is almost as corrupt as Hillary.

I then discussed all of the policies that are in parallel with the Coalition’s. You know:

  • border protection
  • dealing with terrorism and Islamic jihad
  • market-based policies to encourage recovery
  • lower taxes and certainly no “death taxes”
  • reduced public spending
  • removal of Obamacare and an open national market for health insurance
  • Supreme Court appointments who are constitutional scholars
  • suppressing voter fraud
  • understanding climate change is a fraud
  • encouraging fracking and coal-based sources of power

You know, sanity for a change. The Q&A made it quite an evening, but I am happy to report, the sentiment of the room was definitely with me. A very unusual experience, I can tell you.

An internationally recognised Australian hypocrite

Posted on by
Reply

andrew leigh

The title is Labor MP Wrote Income Inequality Book Using Unpaid Interns at Buzzfeed, which was picked up at Instapundit. Both are American websites and there we are. Here is the Buzzfeed [!] subhead:

Labor MP Andrew Leigh has admitted to using unpaid interns to help write his books about the dangers of inequality to society

which the writer, Alice Workman which is probably a pseudonym, described as “rank hypocrisy from Labor and the unions.” And so it is. The article begins:

The shadow assistant treasurer has had roughly 55 unpaid interns through his office since he was elected to parliament in 2010.

Comprised mostly of high school and university students, the interns work without pay for periods of weeks to months. The interns are sourced through ANU’s Commonwealth Parliamentary Internship program, the ACT Department of Education, and Leigh’s Labor website.

Outside of general office work, the interns are tasked with “data-related issues” and “carrying out research” that has contributed to Leigh’s last four books.

As explained on Leigh’s website, he prefers economics students, and they need to bring their own laptop.

Even though it was on Instapundit, as soon as I saw Labor without the “u” I knew it had to be one of us, and so it was. “Equal pay for equal work”. What a laugh!

A sense of Huma

Posted on by
Reply

Which reminds me of the worldwide absence of “lone wolf” Islamist attacks anywhere in the world. May be just a coincidence, but it is eerie.

On the other hand, there is this: Islamic State-Linked Magazine Urges ‘Lone-Wolf’ Attacks in West to Avenge Mosul.

An Islamic State (ISIS)-linked propaganda magazine, published in English, Arabic, and French by the Nashir Media Foundation, is urging jihadists in Europe and the United States to carry out deadly “lone-wolf” attacks to avenge the terrorist group’s losses in Mosul.

In the second issue of the magazine, titled Nashir – Now Fight Has Come, the writers remind Muslims across the globe of the “privilege” they have residing “among our enemies who live peacefully in their countries,” notes the Foreign Desk (FD).

“Every soldier fights on the Caliphate land [in Iraq and Syria] wishes to be in your place. We can cut the tail of the snake but it will sooner grow again. But you have its head,” adds the magazine.

“Brave Mosul is bleeding. You should stop its bleeding by carrying out exhaustion operations of the Enemy’s power and blood … cut their heads by your knives, let us hear your guns blasting their heads,” it also states, according to FD.

But please, not until November 9th.

Raisin’ Kaine to the highest office in the land

Posted on by
1

Is all of this a charade to make Tim Kaine president? The evidence of how much that goes on is make-believe to fool the rubes is now massive. This is B-grade movie plot, but does fit the facts.

From the start, the selection of Tim Kaine was a curiosity since he is 100% from the Obama side of the Democratic Party and Hillary would never under ordinary circumstances have picked one of Obama’s closest associates. As in:

Kaine held the key fundraising position of Democratic National Committee chairman during the entire run-up to Obamacare’s passage, as the Democrats passed that unpopular 2,400 page legislation without a single Republican vote. But Kaine’s ties to Obama go back further. In November of 2005, during Obama’s first year in the Senate, Obama campaigned for Kaine in the Virginia gubernatorial race. Just over a year later, in February of 2007—as the Los Angeles Times reports—Kaine became the first statewide elected Democrat outside of Illinois to support Obama’s presidential bid against the Democratic heir apparent, Hillary Clinton.

The Clintons are not exactly known for their short memories. So how is it that someone who was among the first to break ranks with Hillary in 2007 was rewarded with the top prize that she could grant in 2016? Could it be that Clinton decided that the largely unknown Kaine was such a big political asset that she should let bygones by bygones? Or could it be that Clinton, who has tied herself to Obama and is highly dependent on his help in turning out the Democratic base, was told whom to pick?

Or could it be that Obama had the ability to short circuit any presidential ambitions Hillary might have had by getting the Department of Justice and Loretta Lynch to prosecute for unambiguous violations of national security laws that forbid government officials to use private email servers, which still comes down to whether she was told whom to pick.

Comey the first time round did nothing, against all of the evidence and the clear views of the rest of the FBI. So she owed Obama to no end, if for nothing else, for keeping her out of jail, since if Lynch (ie Obama) had said indict, indicted she most surely would have been. This time round, however, Comey has raised the possibility of prosecution. But more importantly, Obama has not condemned Comey for raising these issues now.

Earnest [Obama’s press secretary] did reiterate that President Barack Obama thinks Comey is a man of “integrity” who didn’t do anything to “intentionally” influence the impending election when he offered Congress sketchy details about a new line of inquiry into the scandal over Clinton’s use of a private email server at the State Department.

Do you really think that is designed to help Hillary or to set things up to have her in jail once she wins the election.

Third, let me note how incredible it is that 650,000 emails have ended up in Weiner’s laptop, some of them highly classified and none of which he would have been sent by anyone, especially not his estranged wife, Huma Abedin. So let’s add this in to the rest:

Abedin claims to be at a loss as to how her emails got onto Anthony’s laptop. That surprise could well be genuine. . . .

Weiner’s laptop contains 650,000 emails? If he sent or received 200 emails a day, 365 days a year–a considerable number!–it would take 3,250 days, or just about nine years, to accumulate 650,000 on the laptop’s hard drive. It is not clear–to me, anyway–what would cause such a large number of emails to reside on the laptop, absent some sort of bulk downloads.

Bulk downloads, you say. Who would do it? Who could do it? Huma is out of sight and probably has no idea what took place, while Weiner is facing many years in jail for sexting an underage teenager. Whatever she may know or wish, he is likely to be highly cooperative.

Where does it come down to? That Clinton wins the election and then is forced to resign making Kaine president. My hope is that this all ends as conjecture when Trump wins the election. But if she wins, then we will see whether all of this is out there waiting to happen.

A week is a long time in politics

Posted on by
Reply

It’s Melbourne Cup day in an American election year but the election is not today. The constitution determined that presidential elections should be held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November. I don’t know the official reason why but my guess is that back in 1787 they decided not to have the election the day after Hallowe’en so that everyone could spend the day righting their outhouses and cleaning the soap off the windows. But whatever the reason, it has meant that this year there is another week to go.

In my view, had the election been held today, Hillary would have won. The extra week has the potential to reverse this outcome, as the media are forced to report on the corruption and incompetence of Hillary Clinton, as revealed in the emails released. A week from now, it is possible that enough independents, and even some traditional Democrats, will have become sickened at the thought of a Clinton presidency to allow Trump enough of a margin to win in spite of the certain illegality of Democrat election practice.

And the stories provide nothing new, but with the FBI now saying that the investigation into Hillary is now open again, attention is being paid. And this is what even the New York Times, Washington Post and ABCBSNBC are being compelled to cover.

LA TIMES TUESDAY: FBI Investigators had planned to conduct new email review over several weeks. It now hopes to complete ‘preliminary assessment’ in coming days, but agency officials have not decided how, or whether, they will disclose results publicly… Developing…
CARVILLE CRACKS: Asserts FBI, GOP and KGB in Cahoots…
Podesta’s BFF At DOJ Will Be In Charge Of New Probe…
45% say scandal worse than Watergate…
BUCHANAN: Pres. Hillary would go way of Nixon…
Clinton unfavorable rating hits new high…
Pollster: ‘Dam About to Break’…
22 million ballots already in…
CITI: Black swan could throw vote off course…
STUDY: Networks Attack Comey Over Clinton 3 to 1…
TRUMP TARGETS DEMOCRATIC STATES IN FINAL ASSAULT…

And the straightforward fact is that even if elected, Hillary could not govern. These are not placid times, and is not too much to say that the fate of the West is being decided for us right now. More from Drudge:

BORDER BLOWN OPEN…
ILLEGALS FLOOD IN…
FEDS HIDE NUMBERS…
‘WORST WE’VE EVER SEEN’…
SESSIONS: 817,740 CROSSED LAST YEAR!
Leaked Images Show Illegals Strolling Across Open Border…

Merkel’s Germany descends into lawlessness…
‘Losing control of streets’…

Putin preps army of robots…
Nuke Sub Off Brit Coast…
NATO, Russia to hold parallel drills…

I know enough Democrat voters to appreciate how obnoxiously determined they are to vote for Hillary. We met a woman in a cafe yesterday who decided to join into a conversation I was having with my wife. Her issue. Trump treats women badly. The infuriating reality was that she knew no facts about anything. No facts at all about any of the policy matters that will determine the future of the Western world. We are staring at the fall of the American Republic and she is worried only about the sexual practices of alpha males. No analogy with Bill would even be entertained. My wife even brought up Bob Hawke and his womanising, but she was determined not to be dissuaded by anything anyone might say.

Yet it really is the policy differences that matter. For a rundown of what those differences are you can go to WHERE CLINTON AND TRUMP STAND – ON EVERY MAJOR ISSUE. Just looking at the list of issues ought to terrify anyone, and then there are Hillary’s policy positions which are inferior in every case.

Politics as the art of the inconceivable

Posted on by
Reply

Julie Bishop’s judgement is, as usual, bottom shelf. Having deposed Tony and instrumental in bringing in Malcolm, today’s AFR headline front page: Bishop warns on Trump. Is it her or her department of analytical morons? Trump has had virtually the entire military endorse him for president, at least those who are able to speak in public. So what’s Julie’s concern?

In her most forthright commentary yet on the US election, Ms Bishop appeared to back Hillary Clinton, whose campaign has been rattled anew by a fresh probe into emails she kept on a private server.

“US engagement in our region is important for us,” Ms Bishop told the ABC. “I believe that will continue under Hillary Clinton.

“It will be up to our region, including Australia, to persuade a Trump administration to focus on the Asia-Pacific.”

Ms Bishop talked up Ms Clinton’s regional credentials, describing her as the architect of Barak Obama’s famous pivot towards the Asia-Pacific region.

“She sees the US as having a global leadership role,” Ms Bishop said. “Candidate Donald Trump does not. He sees the US as having got a raw deal from globalisation and he would focus more on domestic matters.”

She has seen Hillary’s foreign policy judgement in action along with Obama’s and wants her to become president to replace the current disaster. There is a level of density here that defies explanation.

Meanwhile there is a bit of turmoil going on in the US which this might help to clarify: BREAKING TIES: Obama is Now Throwing Hillary Under the Bus. If so, anything is now possible. See the chart below which is from the article:

hillary-crack-up

To which there is this to add.hillary-rush

The top ten of the (so far) top 100 wikileaks

Posted on by
Reply

Via Andrew Bolt: The Top 100 Most Damaging Wikileaks (so far). There is nothing new in any of it for anyone who has been paying attention. What makes Wikileaks and now the Weiner additions so devastating is that the media cannot avoid covering them and therefore slowly – very slowly – the tide may be turning against the most morally corrupt individual ever to run for President from a major party. Here are the top ten of the (so far) top 100, but I’ve added in Number 100 to show what a deep bench there is. You should also go to the link to see the detail which really is overwhelming.

1. Obama lied: he knew about Hillary’s secret server and wrote to her using a pseudonym, cover-up happened (intent to destroy evidence)

2. Hillary Clinton dreams of completely “open trade and open borders”

3. Hillary Clinton took money from and supported nations that she KNEW funded ISIS and terrorists

4. Hillary has public positions on policy and her private ones

5. Paying people to incite violence and unrest at Trump rallies

6. Hillary’s campaign wants “unaware” and “compliant” citizens

7. Top Hillary aides mock Catholics for their faith

8. Hillary deleted her incriminating emails. State covered it up. Asked about using White House executive privilege to hide from Congress

9. Bribery: King of Morocco gives Clinton Foundation $12 million to have meeting with Hillary, 6 months later Morocco gets weapons

10. State Department tried to bribe FBI to un-classify Clinton emails (FBI docs)

100. Obama picked people in his administration from the suggestion list of CiTi bank advisor/Wall Street shill

The proof that the media have the astonishing power to hide and distort is shown by the polls that say Obama still has a plus-50% approval rate. After Syria, Obamacare, the open southern border and the state of the economy, and that’s just to begin with, you have to wonder what he could have done to make things worse. But elect Hillary and we may yet find out.

The right question is whether the media is off track

Posted on by
Reply

The great genius of the Clinton campaign is to make it seem that Hillary and Trump are just two of a kind, with no signifcant difference between them in what each would bring to the presidency. So when you read this [via Instapundit], remember Peggy Noonan supported Obama not just in 2008 but also in 2012. She is another Democrat shill pretending to be a Republican. This is what she wrote:

What I’m thinking about this week is a focus group led by Peter Hart, the veteran Democratic pollster, Tuesday night, in Charlotte, N.C., still a toss-up state. Present were a dozen late-decider voters, three Democrats, six Republicans and three independents.

What struck me about the group wasn’t its new insights, which were few. What was powerful was its averageness, its confirmation of what you’ve already observed. The members weren’t sad, precisely, but they were unillusioned. They were seeing things with clean eyes and they were disappointed. They wanted a candidate they could trust and believe in.

Which when you think about it shouldn’t be too much to ask.

Raise your hand, said Mr. Hart, if you like both candidates. No one did. Raise your hand if you like one candidate. No one did. Raise if you don’t like either. All 12 did. . . .

Mr. Hart asked: Will the next generation be better off? No one raised a hand. This is not news; it’s been a cliché since the crash of 2008. You get used to the data: Americans no longer assume their children will have it better than they did. But it was striking to see these dozen thoughtful people keep their hands down.

Asked what has been lost in America, one respondent said security for kids: “They can’t just go out and play.” “Innocence for kids,” said another. Parents no longer feel the world, even the immediate one, is a safe place.

What is missing in America? “A freshness,” said a middle aged man. He went on to speak of the 1950s, “Ozzie and Harriet,” when things seemed newer somehow and assumptive of progress.

Is America off track? They all nodded.

The people she describes are so deluded that it is breathtaking.

Donald Trump and Jennifer Hawkins the before and after

Posted on by
Reply

This is the video of Jennifer Hawkins introducing Trump in 2011 at the National Achievers Convention in Sydney.

And this is the video that has made the rounds.

But who of the millions who have been lied to about the reality will ever get to find out? And to see what has been made of the story, this is from The Australian: US election 2016: Donald Trump sexually humiliates Jennifer Hawkins.

But the comments at The Australian shows that at least some of these are onto it. These are the top comments in order from the top rated, which are almost all from two days ago which was when the story was released.

james 2 days ago
I am still waiting for The Australian to retract this nonsense with a full apology to Trump, Hawkins and us, the suffering readers, putting up with these hack jobs.

Trump talks about draining the swamp, we have a a few swamps in various Australian news rooms that need draining.

My subscription money can easily be invested elsewhere and I have to say, I am seriously thinking about it. I think it a privilege to be able to comment about articles and opinion pieces, but it does not rule my decision making.

To The Australian editors: Clean out your staff and clean up your act!

Sandra 2 days ago
Oh please. What a carry-on over nothing. I swear this paper is getting worse every day.

Timothy 2 days ago
Just a couple of objective points … that is, if objectivity in “news” is still acceptable.

1. The ‘author’ of this “news” article seems to have forgotten to put their name to this piece but then again, can you blame them given the ‘quality’ of this piece.

2. The ‘author’ of this “news” article seems to have either never listened to the audio or they have intentionally left out more than one line of the back and forth dialog clearly to make the actual event appear more risqué so as to suite their own purpose rather to inform the readership.

3. The ‘author’ of this “news” article seems to have either never watched the video or they have intentionally failed to make the observation that Hawkins appeared to be enjoying the banter and further, that Hawkins on several occasions while standing very close to Trump, did, in fact, make intentional physical contact with Trump first in what appeared to be signs of affection.

4. The ‘author’ of this “news” article seems to have either never watched the video or they have intentionally failed to make the observation that Hawkins could clearly have either not come up on the stage or left the stage at anytime before saying “Thank you.” to the audience before returning to her seat if she had, in fact felt bullied, intimidated, sexually harassed, etc.

5. The ‘author’ of this “news” article either intentionally or intentionally has mislead the readership when they say “The video is the latest of a number that have emerged in recent weeks, showing Mr Trump making crass remarks about women and boasting that he can grab and kiss them without consent because of his fame.” (emphasis added)

I both fear and hope that what has happened here is that some intern has managed to get a “news” article published on-line without it having been reviewed by a ‘real’ journalist and/or even the most junior of editors. I would hate to think that The Australian has stooped to this level and call it “news”. We can but live in hope.

John 2 days ago
I’m no Trump fan BUT…..

Your narration of what the video shows is unhinged and dreadfully unfair.

It’s not – as you claim – Trump sexually humiliating Jennifer Hawkins. Watch it and its actually an amusing, good hearted roast. She doesn’t seem the slightest put out.

Will 2 days ago
Since I know you won’t publish my comment let me say this. I am appalled by the way the dinosaur media have sold their souls to support the obviously very, very corrupt Clinton family and all their minions including those in the FBI, the State department, the department of Justice and the White house. Whoever wrote this crap didn’t even have the decency to put their name to it. Its time to put on the big boy pants, ignore your special interests and actually report the bloody news!

Jean-Pierre 2 days ago
I have “perused” almost all the comments posted below and came to the conclusion that the OZ has shot itself in the foot with this – anonymous – piece of garbage. Refund/termination of subscription is an option I am about to contemplate…… What an utter crap……

Ian 2 days ago
Will you give it up, please?

The number of people I know who are cancelling their Australian subscription after the outcome of the US election – you don’t want to know.

Why you so slavishly repeat the Clinton-owned MSM propaganda, I will never understand.

Have they really bought you too?

Barry 2 days ago
Why is Australia’s leading newspaper giving up on journalism? This is the kind of juvenile muck usually associated with what University newspaper editors think is print worthy.

Come on “The Australian”, lift your game.

Peter 2 days ago
memo to the australian media . . we don’t vote for the US president so strop throwing your biased rubbish down our throat

Ben 2 days ago
This is the final straw. This rag has spent months and months looking for the tiniest story on trump. Yet ignoring the fact we are up to the podesta email leaks 21. Now she’s under investigation again by the FBI and you hardly touch on it. Come Monday I’ll cancel my subscription and source my news via social media, Wikileaks and Russia today. Your hatred for trump is too transparent.

Nick 2 days ago
This is a horrendous article. Writer too spineless to attach their name. You can have your subscription back

James 2 days ago
I’m dropping my subscription. The video showed that both of these people had humour. Who would have thought that when standing in front of a crowd you would embellish a story for a bit of entertainment! Trump seems completely reasonable here in this context. It’s a shame the Australian has lost its integrity.

Frank 2 days ago
Having watched that video, whats the problem? He is telling a joke. A little bit risque. So what? The audience is laughing right along with him. The model doesn’t seem offended. No BS or PC nonsense with Trump. What you see is what you get. Fantastic.

Joan 2 days ago
Big story on corrupt Hillary so what do they do, try a itty bitty Donald is a pervert story. We are on to you.

Anne N 2 days ago
If you want the TRUE story of that video. Google!

I did and found the event in Sydney in 2011 at the National Achievers Convention. Jennifer was on stage for several minutes waving and playing the crowd and then she introduced the next guest, Donald Trump.

He walked out and she greeted him by kissing him on the cheek, then he kissed her on her cheek as her face was turning toward the camera.. He did not lay a hand on her.

She then walked off stage leaving him to talk.

The video is on Youtube dated Oct, 2, 2011.. You will also see this latest edited versions if you Google,, that may even have it’s audio edited to suit the agenda/ but the original is all anyone should be interested in., that is if you are only interested in true facts.

The tape is 1min 58 seconds long.

Lynda 2 days ago
This is an absolute disgrace and insult to our intelligence- you are going to lose HEAPS of subscriptions over this one! We are over it.

John 2 days ago
Interesting…I just watched the video in it’s entirety and it’s nothing like what has been portrayed…indeed, the exact opposite.

I see only two possible alternatives…either the article was written by a junior journalist not capable of doing the most basic research or “The Australian” has an agenda.

Which is it?

Colin 23 hours ago
Disgraceful reporting trying to get attention like the trashy USA media. I was there in the audience and I actually have a similar recording. It was nothing like what this paper is portraying it. Anyone can take a 2 min clip from a longer presentation and twist it to fit. Very disappointed.

John 2 days ago
Is this it, this what I never finished reading? Pathetic. How desperate are these leftie gits going to become? Boy they are worried.

What a rubbish article. Did Clinton pay for this?

What a beat up. It’s all good natured banter.

Donald Trump – National Achievers Congress 2011″ and watch the whole talk.

Then you can see for yourself how stupid this article is and how dishonest the video excerpt provided really is.

Like many other subscribers I’m also thinking of cancelling my subscription. I thought I was paying for journalism and thoughtful opinions. Not propaganda and hit pieces.