The killer instinct

Let’s go to what he is reported to have said: Trump: Maybe ‘Second Amendment People’ Could Stop Clinton From Picking Judges.

Trump said at a rally in Wilmington, North Carolina, on Tuesday that if Clinton gets to pick federal judges as president, there is nothing that can be done to protect the right to bear arms.

But then he adds without elaboration that maybe supporters of the Second Amendment could figure out a way. . . .

My first reaction on hearing that he had said this was to think that it was the first time I had heard him utter a defeatist word, hypothesising that Hillary might win in November. But then I have watched the reaction across the media, and even among the supposed conservative media, accepting the left-media’s interpretation of what Trump had said, that he had been advocating some kind of violence against Hillary. There are political morons everywhere, I’m afraid, but the left-media must be amazed at how stupid the conservative side of politics is. I will go to the logic of what Trump is supposed to have said, which is that:

  • if Hillary is elected
  • and she gets to choose the next Supreme Court justices
  • and she chooses nominees who are opposed to the second amendment
  • then, what?

It ought to be obvious that if she is already president, her death would have no effect on who is chosen for the Supreme Court. Suppose she nominates Judges X and Y and then another blood clot to the brain carries her off. The same nominees will go forward under President Kaine.

The thing that makes Trump so different from all of the other Republicans is that he is not gun shy of a serious fight. He must be no little dismayed and quite a lot disgusted by the Republican first eleven who are weak beyond measure and who have no fight in them. The way the story continues is how it looked to me even as I read his words:

Trump himself seemed unaware of the controversy in an interview shortly after the rally, but he repeated that his point was that Second Amendment advocates are a powerful lobby. Former Mayor Rudolph Giuliani also came to Trump’s defense.

“I think you are talking about — I’m not sure because I haven’t’ heard this question — but I think you’re talking about the power of people that are in favor of the Second Amendment, and they have tremendous political power,” he said.

When asked about Democrats’ statements equating the remark to condoning violence, Trump said: Oh no, no. This is political power.”

Giuliani added, “I mean, this is the Clinton trick book that you fall for all the time.”

Trump senior communications adviser Jason Miller told CBS News’ Major Garrett the accusations the GOP nominee was calling for violence are “completely ridiculous.”

“Donald Trump was obviously talking about American voters who are passionate about their Second Amendment rights and advocating they use that power at the ballot box,” Miller told CBS News. “The Clinton campaign is desperate and is obviously throwing all sorts of outrageous charges. I am surprised so many reporters are falling hook-line-and-sinker for what is obviously a ridiculous charge.”

I’m not surprised, of course, and I would be surprised if he really were surprised. The media are Trump’s most relentless enemies.

What I like about Trump is that he brings a gun to a knife fight. He does not back down. He’s new at this political game, but what he is not new at is fighting to win. You want to win yourself, you want to get your policies up even with the gale force media winds in front. It disgusts me to see how weak his support is. Here it is, you dummkopfs. We are down to the last two, and if it’s not Trump then its Hillary. Don’t tell me about all of your concerns with this and that. If you are not all in for Trump, then do me a favour and just shut up.

Unfit to be president in many ways – here’s one more

Donald Trump suggests that political pressure could be applied to a President Clinton on the selection of supreme court justices in relation to the 2nd amendment and every unhinged journalist goes off the deep end accusing him of advocating violence. The story: Trump: Maybe ‘Second Amendment People’ Could Stop Clinton From Picking Judges.

Trump said at a rally in Wilmington, North Carolina, on Tuesday that if Clinton gets to pick federal judges as president, there is nothing that can be done to protect the right to bear arms.

But then he adds without elaboration that maybe supporters of the Second Amendment could figure out a way. . . .

Like, say, through the Senate rejecting a nominee, maybe. Anyway, here he is:

Trump himself seemed unaware of the controversy in an interview shortly after the rally, but he repeated that his point was that Second Amendment advocates are a powerful lobby. Former Mayor Rudolph Giuliani also came to Trump’s defense.

“I think you are talking about — I’m not sure because I haven’t’ heard this question — but I think you’re talking about the power of people that are in favor of the Second Amendment, and they have tremendous political power,” he said.

When asked about Democrats’ statements equating the remark to condoning violence, Trump said: Oh no, no. This is political power.”

Giuliani added, “I mean, this is the Clinton trick book that you fall for all the time.”

Trump senior communications adviser Jason Miller told CBS News’ Major Garrett the accusations the GOP nominee was calling for violence are “completely ridiculous.”

“Donald Trump was obviously talking about American voters who are passionate about their Second Amendment rights and advocating they use that power at the ballot box,” Miller told CBS News. “The Clinton campaign is desperate and is obviously throwing all sorts of outrageous charges. I am surprised so many reporters are falling hook-line-and-sinker for what is obviously a ridiculous charge.”

I’m not surprised, of course, but who can be so disciplined in everything they say so that nothing cannot be twisted to make it seem anything you like.

Then there is this story which, as always, shows up in The Daily Mail and thus will have virtually no impact in the United States: Child rape victim comes forward for the first time in 40 years to call Hillary Clinton a ‘liar’ who defended her rapist by smearing her, blocking evidence and callously laughing that she knew he was guilty. The story is an old one but not the statement of the 12-year old victim of a rapist who was defended by Hillary Clinton. The victim is now 54.

  • ‘Hillary Clinton is not for women and children,’ says Kathy Shelton, 54, who was 12 years old when she was raped by Thomas Alfred Taylor in Arkansas
  • Clinton was the rapist’s defense lawyer, pleading him down to ‘unlawful fondling of a minor’
  • The 41-year-old drifter served less than a year in prison
  • The plea came after Clinton was able to block the admission of forensic evidence that linked her client to the crime
  • Shelton says she’s furious that Clinton has been portraying herself as a lifelong advocate of women and girls on the campaign trail
  • Clinton accused Shelton of ‘seeking out older men’ in the case and demanded that she undergo a grueling court-ordered psychiatric examination
  • The presidential candidate later laughed while discussing aspects of the case in a recently-unearthed audiotaped interview from the 1980s

Have a listen to the interview below from the 1980s.

Go to link for a complete wrap up of the events.

A free press and an informed public

hillry climbing stairs

Talking American politics with anyone who does not look at various right-of-centre blogs is a depressing experience. The picture is from this blog: SHOCK PHOTO: Multiple staffers help unstable Hillary up stairs where it was found on Drudge which carries the story further.

And then there’s this: Clinton discussed executed Iranian scientist on email.

Hillary Clinton recklessly discussed, in emails hosted on her private server, an Iranian nuclear scientist who was executed by Iran for treason, Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., said Sunday.

How many other policy disasters have followed from every foreign government having immediate access to everything Hillary illegally wrote as Secretary of State on her private email accounts. Ah well. What you don’t know can’t hurt you, I suppose. Or at least not right away.

He may really be the great negotiator he says he is

Think of how nicely the ducks are falling into line:

WE ARE FAMILY: Trump endorses House Speaker Paul Ryan…
Expresses support for McCain and Ayotte…
Escalates attacks on HRC…
Plans biggest tax cuts since Reagan…

I still think it will be the debates that settle the issue, one way or the other. But if the Republicans can now all start supporting each other, there is no telling how well this could go. The Facebook ad, by the way, has had more than two million hits in less than 24 hours.

The largest issue remains the phenomenal dishonesty and bias of the American media. An important example here: Pat Caddell on ‘Cooked’ Reuters Poll: ‘Never in My Life Have I Seen a News Organization Do Something So Dishonest’. There is nothing in any mainstream news report you can trust but if the media can do it, they will get Hillary over the line.

Any lie will do

This is picked up from John Hinderaker at Powerline: ON IRAN, ISRAELIS SAY: OBAMA IS WRONG. This has large implications and will add to the tensions between the US and Israel, but sometimes clarity is more important:

Israel is rejecting remarks by President Barack Obama contending it no longer opposes the nuclear deal that world powers struck with Iran in 2015.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Friday that “Israel’s view on the Iran deal remains unchanged.”

Israel’s Defense Ministry reportedly compared the deal to the 1938 Munich Pact ahead of World War II, which Britain and France signed with Germany and which averted war at the time but effectively gave then-Czechoslovakia to the Nazis.

The final point made in the post is the right one: “We have entered a bizarro world in which facts seemingly make no difference. Any lie will do, as far as the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton are concerned.” How Israel, or the rest of us for that matter, are going to survive this period of history is now anyone’s guess.

Pathetic and disgusting

Compare and contrast:

Obama on Iran payment: ‘We do not pay ransom’.

Freed Iranian Hostage: Iranians Told Me They Were Waiting For Another Plane To Arrive Before Letting Us Go.

I wonder who is telling the truth.

On Thursday’s broadcast of the Fox Business Network’s “The Intelligence Report with Trish Regan,” Saeed Abedini, one of the four hostages released from Iran back in January, stated that on the night he was freed, his captors told him they were waiting on another plane to arrive before letting him go.

Abedini said, “I just remember the night that we’d been in a[n] airport, just take hours and hours there. And I asked one of the…police that was with us, that, why are you not letting us to go to the…plane? And he told me we are waiting for another plane, and if that plane take off, then we’re going to let you go.”

He added, “[T]hey told us you’re going to be there for 20 minutes. But it took like hours and hours. We slept at the airport, and when I asked them why you don’t let us go, because the plane was there, pilot was there, everyone was ready that we leave the country, they said we are waiting for another plane, and until that plane doesn’t come, we never let you go.”

Abedini was then asked, “Were they effectively waiting for the money to come in before they then let you take off?” He answered, “Yeah. They didn’t talk about money. They just told us about the — they told me about the plane. … So, the reason that they said you’re here in the airport is — was just because we are waiting for another plane.”

Abedini was also asked if he believed a ransom was paid, to which he stated he was grateful for his freedom, but there are others still left behind in Iran.

AND A BIT MORE ON OBAMA’S CHOSEN SUCCESSOR: From a quite compelling article by Darly McCann at Quadrant Online: The Audacity of Crooked Hillary. From which, but you owe it to yourself to read the whole thing:

The corrupt cabal that currently rules – and betrays – America and the entire West is not going anywhere. Hillary Clinton magnanimously invited the supporters of Sanders to put aside their acrimony and get with the strength. Bernie, who had always been too gentlemanly – or should we say too PC? – to confront Clinton on the meaning of the private server and the deleted 30,000 emails, now meekly submitted. Hillary Clinton has not participated in a proper news conference for over nine months and yet over and over again, during the televised Democratic debates, Bernie Sanders passed up the opportunity to address the record of the woman in the spotlight immediately adjacent to him. His faint-heartedness, we could conclude, amounts to a form of complicity.

Obama paid $400 million ransom to Iran

How could this be even remotely true? U.S. Sent Cash to Iran as Americans Were Freed: Obama administration insists there was no quid pro quo.

The Obama administration secretly organized an airlift of $400 million worth of cash to Iran that coincided with the January release of four Americans detained in Tehran, according to U.S. and European officials and congressional staff briefed on the operation afterward.

Wooden pallets stacked with euros, Swiss francs and other currencies were flown into Iran on an unmarked cargo plane, according to these officials. The U.S. procured the money from the central banks of the Netherlands and Switzerland, they said.

The money represented the first installment of a $1.7 billion settlement the Obama administration reached with Iran to resolve a decades-old dispute over a failed arms deal signed just before the 1979 fall of Iran’s last monarch, Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi.

The settlement, which resolved claims before an international tribunal in The Hague, also coincided with the formal implementation that same weekend of the landmark nuclear agreement reached between Tehran, the U.S. and other global powers the summer before.

“With the nuclear deal done, prisoners released, the time was right to resolve this dispute as well,” President Barack Obama said at the White House on Jan. 17—without disclosing the $400 million cash payment.

It’s not just that they lie to you but that the media never says a word of complaint but just swallows it whole and repeats back whatever a Democrat administration chooses to say.

THE DAILY MAIL VERSION: You won’t get it properly reported in the usual media, but there is still the UK’s Daily Mail: US delivered $400m in CASH stashed inside wooden pallets to Iran on same day as American hostages were freed but the Obama administration DENIES it paid a ransom. Of course they deny it; they always lie.

100 days to go

How dangerous would Hillary be as president. This dangerous:

“In my first 100 days, we will work with both parties to pass the biggest investment in new, good paying jobs since World War II. Jobs in manufacturing, clean energy, technology and innovation, small business, and infrastructure.”

If this kind of cross between Keynes and Alinsky doesn’t worry you, you don’t know when to be worried. And that is the least of my concerns about what a third Clinton presidency will include.

For another take, you can try Roger Simon on America’s First Major Socialist Party Debuts in Philadelphia. Guess which party that is.

Meanwhile, Trump may have his nose ahead in the polls but he will have to win by a lot to overcome the vote early, vote often approach taken by the residents of local cemeteries.

Valerie Jarrett – the story continues

And having discussed Valerie Jarrett the other day, I find her mentioned at The American Thinker in an article on Valerie Jarrett was our First Female President. I will only add here to what I have already discussed, and begin with this, weakly put though this is:

She arguably has more influence over Obama than anyone with the possible exception of Michelle Obama herself.

This is followed up by the following quote which comes closer:

Her influence is shown by an account in Richard Miniter’s book “Leading From Behind: The Reluctant President and the Advisors Who Decide for Him.”

It relates that at the urging of Jarrett, Obama canceled the operation to kill Osama bin Laden on three occasions before finally approving the May 2, 2011, Navy SEAL mission. Seems she was concerned about the possible political harm to Obama if the mission failed.

Miniter writes that the president canceled the kill mission in January 2011, again in February and a third time in March, in each instance at the urging of Jarrett.

Miniter cites a source within the Joint Special Operations Command who had direct knowledge of the operation and its planning.

Edward Klein, author of the best-selling book about Obama, “The Amateur,” once asked Obama if he ran every decision by Jarrett, and the president responded, “Absolutely.” A former foreign editor of Newsweek and editor of the New York Times Magazine, Klein describes Jarrett as “ground zero in the Obama operation, the first couple’s friend and consigliere.”

Another quote:

Obama has said he consults Jarrett on every major decision, something current and former aides corroborate. “Her role since she has been at the White House is one of the broadest and most expansive roles that I think has ever existed in the West Wing,” says Anita Dunn, Obama’s former communications director. Broader, even, than the role of running the West Wing. This summer, the call to send Attorney General Eric Holder on a risky visit to Ferguson, Missouri, was made by exactly three people: Holder himself, the president, and Jarrett, who were vacationing together on Martha’s Vineyard. When I asked Holder if Denis McDonough, the chief of staff, was part of the conversation, he thought for a moment and said, “He was not there.” (Holder hastened to add that “someone had spoken to him.”

Jarrett holds a key vote on Cabinet picks (she opposed Larry Summers at Treasury and was among the first Obama aides to come around on Hillary Clinton at State) and has an outsize say on ambassadorships and judgeships. She helps determine who gets invited to the First Lady’s Box for the State of the Union, who attends state dinners and bill-signing ceremonies, and who sits where at any of the above. She has placed friends and former employees in important positions across the administration — “you can be my person over there,” is a common refrain.

And Jarrett has been known to enjoy the perks of high office herself. When administration aides plan “bilats,” the term of art for meetings of two countries’ top officials, they realize that whatever size meeting they negotiate — nine by nine, eight by eight, etc. — our side will typically include one less foreign policy hand, because Jarrett has a standing seat at any table that includes the president.

Obama is a cypher of no account other than he can be elected. If you wish to understand what has mattered, following Jarrett and her circle will give you a far better understanding of who the Americans have been governed by and the principles, as such, that have guided what they have done.