I’ve worked out how it ends

I’m afraid much of my interest in the American election has disappeared now that I have worked out how it is going to end. Hillary will win the election, she will then be indicted by the FBI, she will be forced to resign and Tim Kaine will become President.

Here is the backstory.

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 more to the point, Obama has always 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. So she chose for VP who she was told to choose. The question therefore was not whether she would be indicted but when.

Comey the first time round did nothing, against all of the evidence and the clear views of the rest of the FBI. So Hillary 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. So what do we have, from The NYT even: Loretta Lynch to Accept F.B.I. Recommendations in Clinton Email Inquiry. Really? It’s not just that the law must be obeyed, but must be seen to be obeyed? Think how ridiculous this sounds in the middle of the crimes the Obama administration has routinely undertaken.

Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch, conceding that her airport meeting with former President Bill Clinton this week had cast a shadow over the federal investigation of Hillary Clinton’s personal email account, said Friday that she would accept whatever recommendations career prosecutors and the F.B.I. director made about whether to bring charges in the case.

Ms. Lynch said she had decided this spring to defer to the recommendations of her staff and the F.B.I. because her status as a political appointee sitting in judgment on a politically charged case would raise questions of a conflict of interest. But the meeting with Mr. Clinton, she acknowledged, had deepened those questions, and she said she now felt compelled to explain publicly her reasoning to try to put the concerns to rest.

“People have a whole host of reasons to have questions about how we in government do our business,” Ms. Lynch said at an Aspen Institute conference in Colorado. “My meeting on the plane with former President Clinton could give them another reason to have questions and concerns.”

Yes, here they are, the most ethical administration in history and would not wish to have any blemish of impropriety on its record. And then from a few days ago, there was even this: 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 on Weiner’s laptop, some of them highly classified and none of which he would have been sent by anyone, especially not by 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. He is anyway under lock and key somewhere and is guaranteed never ever to say anything that will upset the official version.

Lastly, with voting machines in place, boxes filled with pre-completed ballots, plenty of multiple voting, plus the illegals, there is no mechanism imaginable that Obama does not have everything sewn away.

Where it comes down to is this. Clinton will win the election and then be forced to resign making Kaine president.

An internationally recognised Australian hypocrite

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!

Raisin’ Kaine to the highest office in the land

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.

Is there nothing these people don’t corrupt?

In this case, we are talking about polling. The aim is to get people voting for Republicans not to bother since it’s all over. This is from Zero Hedge: New Podesta Email Exposes Dem Playbook For Rigging Polls Through “Oversamples”.

Now, for all of you out there who still aren’t convinced that the polls are “adjusted”, we present to you the following Podesta email, leaked earlier today, that conveniently spells out, in detail, exactly how to “manufacture” the desired data. The email starts out with a request for recommendations on “oversamples for polling” in order to “maximize what we get out of our media polling.”

I also want to get your Atlas folks to recommend oversamples for our polling before we start in February. By market, regions, etc. I want to get this all compiled into one set of recommendations so we can maximize what we get out of our media polling.

The email even includes a handy, 37-page guide with the following poll-rigging recommendations. In Arizona, over sampling of Hispanics and Native Americans is highly recommended:

Research, microtargeting & polling projects

– Over-sample Hispanics

– Use Spanish language interviewing. (Monolingual Spanish-speaking voters are among the lowest turnout Democratic targets)

– Over-sample the Native American population

For Florida, the report recommends “consistently monitoring” samples to makes sure they’re “not too old” and “has enough African American and Hispanic voters.” Meanwhile, “independent” voters in Tampa and Orlando are apparently more dem friendly so the report suggests filling up independent quotas in those cities first.

– Consistently monitor the sample to ensure it is not too old, and that it has enough African American and Hispanic voters to reflect the state.

– On Independents: Tampa and Orlando are better persuasion targets than north or south Florida (check your polls before concluding this). If there are budget questions or oversamples, make sure that Tampa and Orlando are included first.

Meanwhile, it’s suggested that national polls over sample “key districts / regions” and “ethnic” groups “as needed.”

– General election benchmark, 800 sample, with potential over samples in key districts/regions

– Benchmark polling in targeted races, with ethnic over samples as needed

– Targeting tracking polls in key races, with ethnic over samples as needed

The aim is to have the poll record as closely as possible the outcome they are intending to rig on the day. And what may be the most astonishing part is that were it not for the leaked emails, no one would have heard a thing about any of this even though hundreds of people must be in on the scam.

The glacial discrimination act

facial-discrimination-act

Mark Steyn has again weighed in on our Human (Last) Rites Commission: Punching Back Twice as Hard (Oz version).

I’m glad to see, following the latest attempt to use Australia’s disgraceful Section 18C to throttle freedom of speech Down Under, that The Australian’s Bill Leak is introducing the concept to the Antipodes. His latest cartoon (above) features Tim Soutphommasane, the totalitarian hack who trousers a third of a million a year as Oz’s “Racial Discrimination” Commissar. Mr Leak invites Commissar Tim Jong-Un to sue him for “facial discrimination”.

Free speech should mean you can say anything you want short of incitement to violence – or, if you like, shouting “fire” in a crowded theatre – without the full weight of the law falling on your head, in fact without even the most minimal weight of the law falling on your head. According to the online Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, under the entry Freedom of Speech, in Australia, apparently 18C is delimited by 18D, which states:

Section 18C does not render unlawful anything said or done reasonably and in good faith: (a) in the performance, exhibition or distribution of an artistic work; or (b) in the course of any statement, publication, discussion or debate made or held for any genuine academic, artistic or scientific purpose or any other genuine purpose in the public interest; or (c) in the making or publishing: (i) a fair and accurate report of any event or matter of public interest; or (ii) a fair comment on any matter of public interest if the comment is an expression of a genuine belief held by the person making the comment.

This attack on Bill Leak really does look like an underemployed HRC Commissioner trying to find some purpose in life, as discussed in August in The Oz: Tim Soutphommasane may be drumming up work as race hate cases fall.

When it comes to discrimination, context is everything. Words that might appear completely innocent can take on a very different character when the full context is understood.

Which brings me to the words of Tim Soutphommasane, the Race Discrimination Commissioner who encouraged people to complain about a cartoon by Bill Leak that appeared in this newspaper.

The commissioner advised the public that complaints should be directed to the organisation where he works, the Australian Human Rights Commission.

His attempt to drum up work for the commission was followed by a torrent of abuse against Leak, whose cartoon depicted an Aboriginal policeman returning a delinquent Aboriginal youth to his equally delinquent father. On Soutphommasane’s Facebook page, the commissioner reproduced Leak’s cartoon and invoked the heads of liability in section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act: “If there are Aboriginal Australians who have been racially ­offended, insulted, humiliated or intimidated, they can consider lodging a complaint under the ­Racial Discrimination Act with the commission.”

He had seemingly prejudged those complaints, which raises doubts about whether the commission itself can now deal fairly with this affair.

It appears to be his job to be offended on behalf of the community. If no one else will take offence, then he will just have to do it himself.

And she can square the circle using her perpetual motion machine

Here’s someone who gets it: Clinton’s Pledge on Debt Emerges as a Risible Claim, In Light of Her Platform.

The economic triad of rule of law, property rights, and sound money — which counter the nemeses of cronyism, interventionism, and redistribution — regained currency in the 1980s as supply-side economics and became indelibly known as the miracle of Reaganomics (and, in Britain, as Thatcherism).

Partisanship stand in your way? Dispel it through its nineteenth-century nomenclature, “the law of markets,” that reached its explicatory apogee in political economists J.B. Say and J.S. Mill. Exchange means exchange was its ethos and the inexhaustibility of demand its engine; rebutting with finality and prescience the latter-day Keynesian fallacy of demand deficiency, which served only as cover for political intrigue and aggrandizement under the guise of eliminating poverty.

Economic growth is the route to eliminating deficits and debt, the route to employment and prosperity (and immigration reform). Any other path is the wrong one and, unlike Hillary Clinton’s pledge not to grow the debt, no laughing matter.

There are many forms of insanity but political forms are the worst and largely incurable. If you are able to believe that she really can lower taxes, increase benefits, create more jobs and raise living standards all at the same time, then you are as politically deluded as it is possible to be.

Please share immediately

Normal political ad, right? Well then, read this: YouTube Hides and SLAPS WARNING on New Trump Ad About Hillary’s Health. Then go to the video at Youtube itself and there you really will see just those words when the video has finished:

“This video is unlisted. Be considerate and think twice before sharing.”

They don’t care what you think because they feel they have the 51% locked up. And if she wins, it will only get worse.

MURDOCH PRESS ADDITION: Another Murdoch shill, this time Janet Albrechtsen showing the same judgement she used in supporting Turnbull for PM: Hillary Clinton versus Donald Trump II was a debased freak show. The top comments do, however, remain a source of solace since common sense still prevails somewhere. Here is the first one. You can go to the link to read the others:

You are absolutely correct Janet. The disenchantment with ‘the establishment’ or sneering political class will still be there, if not swell to anger. You can feel it now. Here in Australia too.

But all this talk of seeking to understand us ‘deplorables’ (I’m a professional female and post grad qualified) smacks of patronizing condescension. Are we to be ‘fixed’ through more of the same? More spin, more dishonesty, what the left like to call communications and the rest of us recognise as PC propaganda. Of course ‘they’ know what’s best for ‘us’.

You know, I put myself in that “bucket” not because I necessarily support Trump but can appreciate his disruptive role. In the bigger context we have something of a social rebellion underway. This wave of disenchantment hasn’t peaked yet.

The media is part of the problem. They have played an active role in the US election, more so than Putin, I would argue – if indeed he even is behind the hacking but wasn’t it good to know the truth about Clinton thanks to her own emails?

The utter hypocrisy of the predominantly left media has been something to witness. Trump is fair game but not the equally repugnant Clinton. Such one sidedness can only propel the momentum of this social uprising.

You’re right however in picking that the self satisfied smugness of those who mistakenly think they’re superior beings will endure, for now.

I was thinking along the lines of sanctimonious swill as I read Janet, but “self satisfied smugness” will do just as well.

Free at last – all the goods and services they could possibly want free at last

Via Mark in the comments of a previous post: Vienna’s benefits system acts as a ‘magnet for refugees’. You cannot be surprised if this is making people really angry:

Reinhold Lopatka, political leader of the ÖVP parliamentary group recently said the social system is especially unfair in Vienna and that refugees who have been granted asylum status in Austria get more money from the authorities than farmers receive in pension benefits.

“A farmer who has been working hard his whole life has spoken with me. He now receives pension benefits of €620 and his son has to subsidise him so that he can feed himself. Currently migrants in Vienna receive €837.60, although they have never contributed to our benefits system”.

Nor will they ever.

Censorship in the modern world

A very interesting article by one of the supreme observers of the world today on From Orwell to Gladwell and Back. It is about censorship in the modern age and how we are shaped into certain beliefs unless we are vigilant and have a strong sense already about who we can trust and what is likely to be true. I am more than aware of this since it is already very apparent that things that show up on Google will disappear within days if they are not part of “the narrative”.

The narrative is the set of assumptions the press believes in, possibly without even knowing that it believes in them. It’s so powerful because it’s unconscious. It’s not like they get together every morning and decide “These are the lies we tell today.” No, that would be too crude and honest. Rather, it’s a set of casual, nonrigorous assumptions about a reality they’ve never really experienced that’s arranged in such a way as to reinforce their best and most ideal presumptions about themselves and their importance to the system and the way they have chosen to live their lives.

It is to see the world in the form of a novel where the good guys and girls are always on the right side of every issue and the bad ones are always on the wrong side. Facts are selected and shaped, other facts are ignored or suppressed, and the result is like a TV serial that is guaranteed to satisfy anyone who falls into the sway of the story in the way it is told.

There is more at the original link about how we are shaped by the information flow we are permitted to have. It amazes me all the time to listen to people who are on my side of the fence who quote the mainstream press or the left-media when they know – and they really do know this – that these organisations are lying to them. To read that only 27% of people don’t think the media is biased is different from the 95% of people who take a media story as largely true.

Redemption is always possible

Woodstock Nation meets the Jewish New Year: Sha Na Na Tova. Great title. The final para:

“They say you can’t go back again, but we did,” Cooper said a few weeks later when I ask him about that night. “It was just a magical night.”

On the day they performed at Woodstock, I was a long-haired New Left dragoon with no idea about anything except …. You know, I had no idea about anything but wanted to find out more so that I could know something. This chap now teaches religious studies. I teach free market economics. There is hope, but not for everyone.

My mantra on this has always been that I am very sorry that this transformation of our Western society happened at all, but if it had to happen, I wanted to be part of the transition team, which I was.