PDT day 1000

I have seen this marker nowhere else but at Gateway Pundit: After First 1,000 Days in Office President Trump Holds 50% Approval Rating — 5 POINTS HIGHER THAN OBAMA – Despite Impeachment Scam!. This related article goes through just how exceptional these thousand days have been. I will stick to the charts but you really should read the article.

This is how the article ends and while I would like to say, “who could disagree?” there are many who do disagree, whose lack of sense and proportion is astonishing.

President Trump charges forward in spite of liberal and Deep State harassment. His results have been down right miraculous.

Overall President Trump’s first 1,000 days in office were outstanding. He was attacked from all sides and stood tall and to his principles. America is stronger and greater than ever before. The economy is growing and the world is safer. President Trump is doing all he can to Make America Great Again!

“The people of this country don’t want …”

Full story: PELOSI, SCHUMER PLEAD TO TRUMP: ‘LET’S DEBATE’ BORDER FUNDS ‘IN PRIVATE’. Instead, very public with the best bits in the video above. Might also mention this as well: Pew Survey: Out Of 27 Nations Polled, Zero Want More Immigrants to Move to Their Country and that includes Australia. As for Trump and the Dems, here’s the transcript of the relevant bits on border protection:

TRUMP: “We need border security. People are pouring into our country including terrorists. We have terrorists — we caught 10 terrorists over the last very short period of time. Ten. These are very serious people. Our border agents, all of our law enforcement has been incredible, what they have done, but we caught 10 terrorists. These are people that were looking to do harm. We need the wall. We need — more important than anything, we need border security of which the wall is just a piece. It’s important. Chuck, did you want to say something?”

SCHUMER: “Yes. Here’s what I want to say. We have a lot of disagreements here. ‘The Washington Post’ today gave you a whole lot of Pinnocchios because they say you constantly misstate how much of the wall is built and how much is there, but that’s not the point. We have a disagreement about the wall, whether it’s effective or not —“

TRUMP: “’The Washington Post’ —“

SCHUMER: “— not on border security, but on the wall. We do not want to shut down the government. You were called 20 times to shut down the government. You said, ‘I want to shut down the government.’ We don’t. We want to come to an agreement. If we can’t come to an agreement, we have solutions that will pass the House and Senate right now and will not shut down the government. That’s what we are urging you to do. Not threaten to shut down the government.”

TRUMP: “If you don’t want to shut down the government —“

SCHUMER: “Let me just finish. Because you can’t get your way — let me say something, Mr. President. You just say, ‘My way or we shut down the government.’ We have a proposal that Democrats and Republicans will support to do a C.R. that will not shut down the government. We urge you to take it.”

TRUMP: “If it’s not good border security, I will not take it.”

SCHUMER: “It’s very good border security.”

TRUMP: “If it’s not good border security, I will not take it.”

SCHUMER: “ It’s what —“

TRUMP: “Because when you look at these numbers of the effectiveness of our border security and when you look at the job we are doing —”

SCHUMER: “You just said it is effective.”

TRUMP: “Can I tell you something?”

SCHUMER: “You just said it is effective.”

TRUMP: “These are only areas where you have the walls. Where you have walls, Chuck, it’s effective. Where you don’t have walls, it’s not effective.”

PELOSI: “Let’s call a halt to this. We have come in here with the first branch of government. Article One. The legislative branch. We are coming in in good faith to negotiate with you about how we can keep the government open.”

SCHUMER: “Open.”

TRUMP: “We are going to keep it open if we have border security. If we don’t have border security, Chuck, we are not going to keep it open.”

PELOSI: “We will have border security.”

SCHUMER: “You are bragging about what has been done. We want to do the same thing we did last year this year. That’s our proposal. If it’s good then, it’s good now and it won’t shut down the government.”

TRUMP: “We can build a much bigger section with more money.”

SCHUMER: “Let’s debate in private.”

TRUMP: “We need border security. I think we all agree that we need border security.”

SCHUMER: “Yes, we do.”

TRUMP: “See? We get along. Thank you, everybody.”

REPORTER: “You say border security and the wall. Can you have border security without the wall?”’

TRUMP: “You need the wall. The wall is a part of border security.”

REPORTER: “Can you explain what it means to have border security?”

TRUMP: “Yeah. We need border security. The wall is a part of border security and you can’t have very good border security without the wall.”

PELOSI: “That’s not true. That’s a political promise. Border security is a way to effectively honor our responsibility.”

SCHUMER: “The experts say you can do border security without a wall, which is wasteful and doesn’t solve the problem.

TRUMP: “It totally solves the problem and it’s very important.”

PELOSI: “This spiraled downward from when we came at a place to say how do we meet the needs of American people, who have needs. The economy, people are losing jobs and the market is in a mood. Our members are already —“

TRUMP: “We have the lowest unemployment that we’ve had in 50 years.”

PELOSI: “People in the Republican Party are losing their offices now because of the transition. People are not —“

TRUMP: “And we gained in the Senate. Nancy, we gained in the Senate. Excuse me. Did we win the Senate? We won the Senate.”

SCHUMER: “When the President brags that he won North Dakota and Indiana, he is in real trouble.”

TRUMP: “I did. We did win North Dakota and Indiana.”

PELOSI: “We came in here in good faith and we’re entering into this kind of a discussion in the public view.”

TRUMP: “But it’s not bad, Nancy. It’s called transparency.”

PELOSI: “I know. It’s not transparency when we are not stipulating to a set of facts and we want to have a debate about you, confront some of these facts.”

TRUMP: “You know what? We need border security. That’s what we will be talking about. Border security. If we don’t have border security, we will shut down the government. This country needs border security. The wall is a part of border security. Let’s have a talk. We will get the wall built and we have done a lot of wall already. It’s a big part of it.”

Shameful and a disgrace

Suppose we start with this simple question: Is it appropriate for a president to use the powers of government to spy on the opposition party during an election?

No one will say yes to that. So let us move on to another question: Is it a form of intolerable corruption to find that a president has actually used the powers of government to spy on the opposition party during an election?

To that question, everyone will say yes. It is absolutely an intolerable form of corruption. So let us ask one further question: If there is evidence that a president has used the powers of government to spy on the opposition party during an election, do you think such a claim should be investigated?

To this question, the answer is unfortunately becoming quite quite clear, but it is not the same answer for everyone. For parties of the left, along with the media, this is the answer: if the president who is accused of spying on the opposition is from a party of the right, then the answer is yes, it should be looked into as deeply and relentlessly as our forensic tools allow; but if it is a president from a party of the left, then the answer is no, absolutely not. For everyone else, of course, the answer is yes, this should be investigated as thoroughly as possible because protecting our constitutional democratic order must be our highest priority.

And that, I am afraid, that division between left and right, is the largest most intractable problem in politics today.

When I heard PDT say that the actions by the FBI and Department of Justice were that “people should be ashamed” my first thought was that shame was too weak. But then while I was thinking about the release of the memo, the thought that came into my head was that those who see nothing in all this worth worrying about, even as an abstract proposition, really were a disgrace and ought to feel genuine shame at their inability to understand what has been done and for which they are more than willing to give the all clear. The Democrats in collusion with the FBI and others were actively attempting to undermine and subvert the democratic process, the only process that gives a community its political freedom. Anyone not scandalised by such actions have shown themselves willing to let others take and hold power without the consent of the governed. They are fascists, Nazis, totalitarians. And to what purpose? In support of the most corrupt person ever to have run for president, to permit Hillary Clinton to continue the ruin Barack Obama had done so much to create.

This is the post I wrote a year ago that was recalled to life by Dr Fred Lenin. It was written on January 12, 2017, that is, even before the inauguration, even then titled, The Deep State, which must therefore have been a phrase already in use. The anti-democratic political instincts and actions of such people should deeply worry if not actually terrify anyone who values freedom and prosperity, which these people clearly do not. I am unable to discover where any compensating good for those who not just ignore these actions but actually condemn efforts to bring them to light, who are unable to see the crisis they have created by endorsing the actions of a sitting president to employ the powers a president has to destroy the democratic processes he was elected to protect. Here is the post I wrote then.

Russian tech expert named in report never even contacted!
GREENWALD: ‘Deep State’ Sabotage…

The last of these comes with the actual title, “The Deep State Goes to War with President-Elect, Using Unverified Claims, as Democrats Cheer”. Here is the opening text, but I have to say this is terrifying and in no sense politics as usual, unless this really is politics as usual, although we have never before seen it revealed so openly.

IN JANUARY, 1961, Dwight Eisenhower delivered his farewell address after serving two terms as U.S. president; the five-star general chose to warn Americans of this specific threat to democracy: “In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.” That warning was issued prior to the decadelong escalation of the Vietnam War, three more decades of Cold War mania, and the post-9/11 era, all of which radically expanded that unelected faction’s power even further.

This is the faction that is now engaged in open warfare against the duly elected and already widely disliked president-elect, Donald Trump. They are using classic Cold War dirty tactics and the defining ingredients of what has until recently been denounced as “Fake News.”

Their most valuable instrument is the U.S. media, much of which reflexively reveres, serves, believes, and sides with hidden intelligence officials. And Democrats, still reeling from their unexpected and traumatic election loss as well as a systemic collapse of their party, seemingly divorced further and further from reason with each passing day, are willing — eager — to embrace any claim, cheer any tactic, align with any villain, regardless of how unsupported, tawdry and damaging those behaviors might be.

The serious dangers posed by a Trump presidency are numerous and manifest. There are a wide array of legitimate and effective tactics for combatting those threats: from bipartisan congressional coalitions and constitutional legal challenges to citizen uprisings and sustained and aggressive civil disobedience. All of those strategies have periodically proven themselves effective in times of political crisis or authoritarian overreach.

But cheering for the CIA and its shadowy allies to unilaterally subvert the U.S. election and impose its own policy dictates on the elected president is both warped and self-destructive. Empowering the very entities that have produced the most shameful atrocities and systemic deceit over the last six decades is desperation of the worst kind. Demanding that evidence-free, anonymous assertions be instantly venerated as Truth — despite emanating from the very precincts designed to propagandize and lie — is an assault on journalism, democracy, and basic human rationality. And casually branding domestic adversaries who refuse to go along as traitors and disloyal foreign operatives is morally bankrupt and certain to backfire on those doing it.

“Morally bankrupt” it most certainly is and then some. “Certain to backfire on those doing it” is very optimistic. If this is how things are, Nazi is not going too far in describing what is going on. If the evidence were not before our eyes of the way in which the media and the CIA have worked with the Democrats to undermine Trump’s authority you would think all of this is impossible.

Less tax revenue in the hands of government; more money in the hands of business

If you have been in doubt whether PDT is a political genius, doubt no more: Sweeping tax reform PASSES the Senate: GOP scores major victory in 11th-hour vote for $1.5 TRILLION bill after Democrats said they had no time to read the 500-page, ‘scribbled’ small print.

Here’s the big print version: less tax revenue in the hands of government; more money remaining in the hands of business with which to invest and employ. The rest is detail. Here are the subheads on the article:

  • The Senate approved a sweeping tax overhaul in the early hours of Saturday
  • Vote passed by 51-49 as Democrats voted in bloc and one Republican opposed
  • Vice President Mike Pence announced passage at 1.51am to a round of applause
  • Final alterations to the bill were still being made late in the evening on Friday 
  • Democrats claimed they didn’t have time to read bill and tried to adjourn vote
  • Victory moves Donald Trump one step closer to slashing taxes for businesses
  • Democrats say tax overhaul will add $1.5 trillion to national debt over 10 years
  • Republicans insisted changes will be revenue-neutral as tax cuts spur growth

To listen to Democrats complain about the addition to national debt is particularly irritating since that has perennially been the last thing on their minds when adding to America’s massive debt. So let me just say for the record why this will lead to a massive improvement in the American economy.

  • There will be less public spending which invariably slows growth.
  • There will be more spending by private sector firms which adds to growth.
  • Public revenues will rise, all other things being equal, as tax rates fall.
  • Whether Congress will then use the additional revenue to increase spending or to lower taxes is the question, with the likelihood (alas) towards more spending, but at least further spending cuts will become possible.

Meanwhile PDT has his first major legislative win with others sure to follow, once Roy Moore is elected and the Republicans begin to think about the rage within their own constituencies if the Republicans fail to deliver what they had been promised.