Your next president

by baldilocks

It will be over soon, this joke of an election. At that point, each American will be able to make specific plans for self and for family—assuming some folks have been waiting around to see who will be in the Oval Office for the next four years before make life plans. (Some of us have not been waiting for this “blessed” event.)

That brings me to this observation: the identity of the person who sits in the office of the presidency should not be as important as it has become. I’m not learned enough to determine whether the executive was always so crucial to the health of this country—some say that the pronounced authority (authoritarianism?) of the presidency began with Lincoln and was further fortified by Wilson and FDR. But, in whatever manner the strength of the executive branch developed beyond its reasonable boundaries, here we are with two candidates for president who…let’s just that the proverbial dog-catcher role might be dangerous in either set of hands. Either way, we will have a megalomaniac driving the soup-up ship of this nation-state. Comforting, no?

What I am looking forward to: The Night of the Long Knives (digitally speaking only…hopefully) on the losing side. That should be at least as jaw-droppingly entertaining as the breaking apart of the Republican Party has been.

Oh by the way, now we’re going to pay for the wall and Mexico will reimburse us.  And, oh yes, Hillary Clinton and all of her associates and minions are crooked. No more question.

We will see what becomes of us with either of these excessively flawed humans at the helm. I say that we have more power than we think.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng blogs at baldilocks. (Her older blog is located here.) Her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game, was published in 2012. Her second novel will be done in 2016. Follow her on Twitter.

Please contribute to Juliette’s JOB:  Her new novel, her blog, her Internet to keep the latter going and COFFEE to keep her going!

Or hit Da Tech Guy’s Tip Jar in the name of Independent Journalism—->>>>>baldilocks

Blogger outside of Wrigley Field
Blogger outside of Wrigley Field

By John Ruberry

“Bias has always been a factor in journalism. It’s nearly impossible to remove. Humans have their thoughts, and keeping them out of your work is difficult. But 2016 saw the remaining veneer of credibility, thin as it was, stripped away and set on fire.” Derek Hunter, Townhall, October 23, 2016.

“A free press can, of course, be good or bad, but, most certainly without freedom, the press will never be anything but bad.” Albert Camus.

Both men are right.

I’ve known for many years that the mainstream media, consisting mostly of leftists, is biased, but I’ve also long suspected that these leftists have been colluding with the Democrats. Thanks to WikiLeaks we know that to be true.

The 2016 World Series, an intriguing matchup between the Chicago Cubs–of whom Hillary Clinton used to be a fan of–and the Cleveland Indians, begins Tuesday.

Which got me thinking: What if the self-righteous media guardians, umpires you might say, were in charge of baseball’s fall classic?

When the Chicago Clintons come to bat, their batters will earn a walk after three balls, Cleveland, Donald Trump’s team, will need five balls to gain a base on balls, and they’ll strike out after two strikes.

The media umpires, when the Clintons are in trouble, will take out their smartphones during the games and pass on actionable advice to their manager, who will quickly reply and request more pointers. Player after player for the Trumps will be ejected because the umpires will reveal decades-old sexual assault allegations just as the Cleveland team takes the field. Another Cleveland Trumps player will be ejected because he may not have paid federal income taxes. The umpires will claim it was only just then that they learned about about this tax issue.

Meanwhile charges that the Clintons are taking large cash payments from outsiders that could destroy the integrity of Major League Baseball are for the most part ignored–and not acted upon. And even though the umpires know that the Clintons destroyed evidence of their improprieties, they’ll deem it “old news.” The umpires will overlook the lies from the Clintons about their crimes.

When the fans in the ballpark complain, they’ll be rudely dismissed by the umpires as morons who don’t know how the contest is played.

But the truth is the public knows all too well that the game is rigged.

As Walter Cronkrite used to end his CBS Evening News broadcast, “That’s the way it is.”

And the way it is stinks. We need a new media.

John Ruberry regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit.

Director Comey speaking at the Coast Guard Academy.

As a sponsor family to a Coast Guard Academy Cadet, I have access to some unique opportunities. One such opportunity presented itself on Tuesday when my cadet texted me. “Director Comey is speaking at the Coast Guard Academy on Thursday. Would you like to come?”

Who wouldn’t! Despite a long day at work, I put on a service dress uniform, met my cadet on campus, and walked together up to Leamy Hall. Since the cadets were allowed to ask questions, I asked him what ground rules had been set by the Academy.

“They said the focus was race, and to not ask anything about Hillary Clinton.” I thought the race part was interesting, and no surprise about Clinton. I explained that even if a cadet was brash enough to ask, the Director would likely deliver one or two prepared sentences and move on, and you would have lost the opportunity to get a legitimate answer to a question.

cga_comey_upstairsThe view from my seat.

Director Comey started his hour talking about leadership, specifically that good leadership requires both kindness and toughness. He is a very good speaker, and obviously very comfortable getting in front of crowds. He’s also really tall, FYI.

Then he talked about race, specifically the issues surrounding African-Americans and police enforcement. His first big point was that we needed more accurate data to get an idea of how to tackle this problem. He brought up the Harvard study that showed lethal force was more likely against whites, but non-lethal force was more likely against blacks. He wants police officers out of their cars, because “It’s hard to hate up close.” He worried that if policing becomes viewed as an undesirable occupation, then he will struggle to attract good men and women to the force.

cga_comey_lineupCadets line up to ask Director Comey questions.

Then he brought up Hillary Clinton, which was a surprise. He hit a number of points:

  • That he assigned some of the best people to that case.
  • That they rendered their decision without political pressure.
  • That seven layers of managers agreed with it before he did as well.

He also brought up the most important point of the evening, that even if Hillary Clinton had been an FBI agent, while she would have been disciplined, she wouldn’t have been prosecuted, because we historically don’t prosecute people for those crimes.

He has a point. We’ve had a number of high level people mess up classified handling, and while they get fined, most never serve jail time.

“But this guy was fired from the military!” Yes, that is true in plenty of cases. But the difference is that the military is exercising Non-judicial punishment and Courts Martial authority. It’s NOT a trial. The removal from the military in most cases is done at an Administrative Separation board. While it’s not pretty for the person involved, it doesn’t result in jail time.

So I can see Director Comey’s point. But that brings up a bigger issue. We spend billions to generate classified information, then we fail to protect it because we let people off when they exercise poor judgement. It’s sad when you spend more efforts attacking law-abiding citizens then prosecuting chumps that hide classified in their socks.

If Congress is so enraged over Director Comey’s decision, then start by clamping down on our fickle laws over classified information. Add minimum sentences to mishandling, especially for politicians and other civilians. Start putting people in jail for gross mishandling.

What Hillary Clinton did was wrong. There is no denying that. Personally I find it terrible, and it sickens me that most people seem to shrug it off, not understanding the damage that was done. The fact that it’s happened in the past so many times, without Congressional action to fix it, makes it even worse. At some point, we as a nation need to decide how much we care about classified information and how it is handled.

The views expressed above are of the author and do not reflect the views of the Department of Defense, Department of the Navy, or any other government agency.

You should check out my blog here, and hit up Da Tip Jar!

An interesting thing happened Thursday afternoon.

Having woken up hungry just before 3 pm and finding the house empty I headed down to Happy Jacks restaurant to, after a 30 day fast from meat, reacquaint myself with the joys of their $5 after 3 pm menu.

I got there around 3:15 and the place was pretty empty, the lunch crowd was long gone and the normal Thursday dinner rush was hours away (thus the $5 menu 3-6 PM & 9-close menu). Seeing no servers handy and being alone for a change I sat myself at the bar sharing it with three woman, the bartender, who had worked there since it was the old Border restaurant at their previous location, one to my right and one across from me.

The bartender greeted me, and after taking my wings and diet coke order, she, knowing that I had been covering the race and who I was voting for asked: “How’s Trump doing?”

I said it would be a hard slog, with the media united against him and their willingness to bury Clinton’s corruption and the revelations from both Wikileaks and Project Veritas, I added that even if he managed to win beyond the margin of fraud, when you added the possibility of Evan McMullin taking Utah and an election thrown to the house (which doesn’t mean a Trump win, but that’s another post) it’s an uphill fight.

My mention of McMullin caught the interest of the lady to my right who asked who he was. She was drinking a beer while enjoying one of the excellent meal choices. She looked a few years older than me, had a pleasant face that seemed to have a bit of sadness behind it.

I told her both of the Never Trump people and their candidate, a worthy enough man, but I also argued that the reality is Jill Stein and Gary Johnson et/al notwithstanding we have a binary choice between two candidates that most americans find unacceptable and that if you want to make a choice rather than duck it, the options are Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton.

She sighed, she talked about her support for Bernie Sanders, how she absolutely loved the man, found him honest and was frustrated that her choice was, in her mind, to either write him in or vote for Hillary Clinton, who she neither liked nor trust, over Donald Trump who she also didn’t trust.

I took the liberty of acquainting her with the fraud in Florida broken by Fausta last week at the blog and then suggested that if she found both candidates untrustworthy then the obvious choice for her, even as a Sanders supporter was NOT Hillary Clinton but Donald Trump.

That got the attention of all three ladies in the place who had been listening to my story of democrat deceit in the spanish community and were generally curious as to my argument. She asked why she should vote Trump if she doesn’t trust either nominee.

“Consider” I said, “We have one major candidate who if elected will have his every move scrutinized by the press, scrutinized by law enforcement, scrutinized by political enemies…” As I put it if he so much as thought of putting a foot wrong the entire weight of all of them would come down on him. No presidency in history would be under a stronger microscope.

“Meanwhile we have a different candidate who we know is dishonest, who we’ve already established will be protected from the consequences of her actions by the FBI, the press, by pols etc…” and I repeated things the various Clinton scandals, the lies, the wikileaks revelations and noted that in every case the powers that be had either enabled her or shielded her from the consequences of her actions.

I could see that all of them were paying attention to what I was saying so I closed: “That being the case, if you don’t trust either major candidate the only choice is to vote for Donald Trump because if he tries to do something wrong, you KNOW he won’t be given a pass on it unlike Hillary Clinton who you know will.”

There was a pause, the bartender seemed impressed, the woman sitting opposite of me had said little as a talked but was staring intently as if processing my argument, but the Sanders fan was clearly struck by what I said. After a few moments she broke the silence that had followed my argument.

“I had never thought of that.”

You could see the faintest change in her, as if she had been bearing several weights on her shoulders and had just been relieved of one of them. She expressed admiration both for my argument and my oratory skills. I introduced myself, mentioned my blog and invited her to check out the writing here when she got a chance and we chatted briefly on non political matters before I had to excuse myself, I needed to get home.

I spoke to the woman across at the bar, hoping my political talk had not disturbed her meal, on the contrary, she said, she found it very interesting and didn’t disagree with anything I had said. The bartender said the same as she cashed me out.

As for the woman to my right she thanked me with a slight smile. She had been was frustrated by her electoral choice before, she wasn’t any more.

There are a lot of people who are unhappy with their choices this election season, I don’t know how many have been moved by the arguments on this blog or the podcast. But while in the grand scheme of things what was said in that nearly empty restaurant was a tiny insignificant thing, heading home I knew that at least one mind and one vote had been changed.

I submit and suggest that the last best card to play is not a pro-Trump or an anti Hillary argument, it’s the pro-accountability argument to people who have little trust in Washington, the government or the press.

Those of us who want a government accountable to the people and to the law over the next four years should go out, meet people in your community at your local bar, at the barber shop, and even on your facebook page. Make the case for accountability in your everyday encounters over the next few weeks.

If we each move just one disenchanted voter in our community we can make a difference.

If you’d like to help support independent non MSM journalism and opinion please consider hitting DaTipJar

Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. Right now our subscribers consist of 1/50 of 1% of our total unique visitors based on last years numbers.

If we can get another 150 subscribers at $10 a month (another 1/10 of 1% of those who have visited this year) We can meet our annual goals with no trouble, with the same number of subscribers at $20 a month I could afford to cover the presidential campaign outside of New England firsthand.

And of course at that price you get the Da Magnificent Seven plus those we hope to add on and all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.

Choose a Subscription level

Guns. Supreme Court. Abortion. Immigration. Those were the first four topics in the first three questions from Wednesday night’s debate (2nd Amendment and the Supreme Court were squeezed into the first question). On these issues, which are arguably the four most divisive between the two candidates, Donald Trump was composed, informed, and surprisingly eloquent. He was able to portray his thoughts intelligently without sounding too rehearsed. With Chris Wallace at the helm asking questions about issues, the first 30 minutes of this debate were the best 30 minutes Trump has had in any debate, including the primaries.

He exuded the presence of a President more than he’s ever done in his life.

It went downhill from there, though not as badly as it will be portrayed. Mainstream media will condemn him for declaring that he won’t necessarily accept the results of the election. I’ll cover that more shortly, but let’s look at his other mistakes:

  • When she called him a puppet, his inner middle-schooler said, “No, you’re the puppet.” It’s already a viral Vine with hundreds of thousands of loops and rapidly rising.
  • When asked about entitlements, he talked about improving the economy and jobs which absolutely won’t fix entitlements without a major overhaul.
  • Lastly, he called her a nasty woman. She is, but that’s not going to help him score points with women, especially after drawing chuckles from the audience when he said nobody has more respect for women than he does.

There were other little mistakes, but all in all this was his best, most error-free debate. It also showed something to the conservatives in the #NeverTrump crowd: he might not be as far from their perspectives as they’ve been led to believe. His grasp of Heller far exceeded hers (no, Heller was not about toddlers, Hillary). His attack on partial birth abortion was spot-on and Hillary botched her response. Then, his vow and reiteration of appointing conservative pro-life Supreme Court justices was reassuring.

In those first 30 minutes, the all-important undecided Republicans and conservatives were given everything they would need to lean in his direction. Now, we’ll get to see the media playing up his unwillingness to definitively state that he’d accept the results of the election.

It will be an ineffective attack. To understand why, we have to look at the psychological effects that his stance will have on each type of voter.

Those firmly in the Clinton camp will take those words and move their chances of voting for him from 0% to -1%. Nothing lost there.

For those firmly in Trump’s camp, they’ll be cheering him on. Darn tootin’ they won’t accept the results if Trump doesn’t. It’s war!

Undecided Republicans will be a little affected by the notion, but the reiteration that election fraud is real combined with not accepting the results will push more towards him than away.

Undecided Democrats and Independents – here’s where it gets a little weird. Most of them won’t care enough to be swayed by the notion, but some will unconsciously lean towards him as a result. Why? Because it reinforces their feelings that the system is broken, that he’ll fight the system, and that they don’t want added chaos. Whether they realize it or not, the more that the media covers it, the more the undecided Democrats and Independents will consider Trump. Those who are undecided on the left are undecided because they really don’t like Hillary.  If they liked her, they’d already be supporting her. The fact that they’re considering Trump means that his defiance to the system and antagonism of Clinton will be a plus.

Does this mean Trump will win? Unlike many self-proclaimed pundits, I don’t see this election as one that can be determined until election day. Nate Silver puts Trump’s chances below 20%. I tend to see it as still a tossup because 2016 is insane but more importantly because Trump is outperforming her on the issues. Tonight, it wasn’t even close. The only times Clinton sounded half-decent at all was when she was attacking Trump and/or pandering to women and minorities. On the actual issues, she sounded like a 3rd semester political science major with average grades and a crush on her professor. Trump sounded like he knew the issues.

Today is the final Debate between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. Because of my work schedule I will be able to watch only the first hour of the debate while listening to the final hour as I drive into work.

Here are some pre-debate thoughts

This is likely the last chance that Donald Trump will be able to address the American people outside of the filter of the MSM before election day. That means he needs to point the debate to items the MSM wants to ignore from the Project Veritas tapes to the Wikileaks revelations.

This is the first time that there has been a debate with a moderator from FOX. Hillary Clinton is going to have to be prepared to be actually challenged on issues by a moderator for the first time in, well forever.

It is pretty safe to assume that regardless of what actually happens at the debate the MSM as a whole will state the election over and Trump doomed.

If by some chance Hillary underperforms greatly than I guarantee the media will be unified in blaming FOX and insisting they should be excluded from now on (Even if she does well this is a likely post debate meme).

One of the myths of this election cycle has been that “If only the GOP didn’t nominate Trump the MSM would be talking Wikileaks, Project Veritas etc” I guarantee that if the Trump tapes where not out there the media would find a different reason to ignore all of the above.

Based on the CNN reactions we can assume that if the veritas tapes come up in the debates you will see the words “convicted criminal” be repeated over and over with O’Keefe.

Very curious if the National Enquirer stuff will be brought up, I’m sure Trump is waiting for Clinton to dismiss them with a “That’s what John Edwards said” line.

The apparent decision to bring James O’Keefe to the debate is an excellent idea and put the MSM in a position where they are forced to comment on the “why” thus the “convicted criminal” business.

I’d bet real money that Hillary congratulates the Cleveland Indians in her opening statement before Trump gets a chance after all Hillary operatives aside there are no votes in Toronto.

Who wants to be that most of the post debate stories of the MSM have already been 60-707% written? The only real mystery left is what the MSM meme will be to spin the results, but within 30 minutes of the end of the debate I suspect every network will be using the same one.

This is exactly what happened:

Yesterday afternoon in sunny and hot Miami my friend answered the doorbell. I kept an eye from the window.

An average-sized man in his thirties, wearing a pink polo shirt and khakis, holding a clipboard, immediately said hello in Spanish, and asked her if she was [her name], registered at that address. She said yes.

At that point I moved closer to the entrance but he could not see me. I could hear the conversation very clearly. The entire conversation was in Spanish. He spoke very clear, native-speaker quality Spanish.

The man did not identify himself nor did he declare any affiliation with any political party or committee, polling organization, or business of any kind.

He handed her a cell phone with questions that he claimed were “on the issues affecting our community”, but the list of five questions in English were all negative statements about Donald Trump, “I do not like how he treats women,” “I do not like his stance of immigration,” among them. The statements were in large enough bold print she could read them without her reading glasses. He asked her to check the ones she agreed with.

Her reply was that she does not answer political questions, and gave him back the phone. She had to repeat this a couple of times, until the guy finally realized he was getting nowhere.

He then asked her if she would prefer that no further polls be conducted at her house. She said yes.

The man, still speaking Spanish, pulled a sheet of paper from his clipboard and asked her to fill in a form, telling her that, if she signed that form, she would not be approached again with any polls.

My friend was not wearing her reading glasses so she took the form indoors. I went to the door (this is the first time he saw me), excused myself and locked the door.

I did not stop long enough to see whether the man carried or wore any ID tags or anything showing any affiliation. None were apparent at first glance. I just wasn’t going to leave an unlocked door unattended.

I looked at the paper my friend was holding. It had three copies on one page of a form saying, in English,


followed by some more text in English, and three lines for the respondent to fill in their name and address.

Again, I repeat, the entire conversation was in Spanish.

But the form was in English. Only in English, with no Spanish translation anywhere.

I read it to her aloud, returned it to her and she opened the door, gave back the form to the man, and told him she did not appreciate being mislead. He asked her what she meant, and she told him that the form was a pledge to Hillary, not a do-not-call request.

He had the nerve to ask her why wouldn’t she pledge to Hillary, to which she curtly replied that she would not pledge for any political candidate since her vote is private. “Even for the best candidate?” he asked. She again said, “my vote is private.”

At this point, the guy thanked her, said good-bye and left.

I don’t know – and certainly I’m not about to ask – who she’s voting for, but Hillary did not make any friends there yesterday.

Parting questions: If there’s no intention to deceive, why no translation on the form? Why no disclosure of who he works for? Who is behind that survey?

Fausta Rodriguez Wertz writes on U.S. and Latin American politics, news, and culture at Fausta’s Blog.

UPDATE DTG: I just read this piece and I don’t think Fausta gets what’s going on here. The reason for the form is obvious and that reason is fraud.

  1. Step 1: Go door to door in the spanish community for the purpose of getting signatures on a form pledging the non english reading voters for Hillary Clinton with the name and address and an authentic signature
  2. Step 2: Submit absentee ballots in the name of the above person for Hillary Clinton.

If the voter doesn’t show at the polls, perfect, they’re absentee ballot is counted for Hillary no questions asked.

If they show up the vote and attempt to vote causing said ballot to be questioned for any reason the signature sheet is produced.

This is actual fraud straight up and every person in that neighborhood is being targeted, and you can bet if it’s done at your friends house it’s being done everywhere else.

Fausta your friend needs to call the Florida AG and the local media STAT.

If you’d like to help support independent non MSM journalism and opinion please consider hitting DaTipJar

Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. Right now our subscribers consist of 1/50 of 1% of our total unique visitors based on last years numbers.

If we can get another 150 subscribers at $10 a month (another 1/10 of 1% of those who have visited this year) We can meet our annual goals with no trouble, with the same number of subscribers at $20 a month I could afford to cover the presidential campaign outside of New England firsthand.

And of course at that price you get the Da Magnificent Seven plus those we hope to add on and all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.

Choose a Subscription level


Dominic You: We need no friends, and fear no enemy!x
British Captain: I may have been misinformed. I understood Mr. LaFitte commanded at Barataria.
Jean LaFitte: If your offer is good it will stand up under fire

The Buccaneer 1958

The time to take over the GOP (state by state) or set up a real third party (let’s call it the conservative party, like NY state), is NOW, after a historic election that demonstrated the ineptness of the “Wizards of Smart”.

The time NOT to talk about and vote for a third part candidate, or stay home and pout about rules that work against you is DURING an historic election, when one of the evils is immeasurably worse than the guy you can’t quite warm to.

Mike Rogers of Granite Grok

To a person completely unfamiliar with the blog, yesterday’s post by JD Rucker might cause some confusion as his statement concerning the election contradicts my own from by Double Down Trump post. Let me begin by informing such people that my writers are informed up front that with these exceptions:

  1. They may NOT advocate or enable Abortion
  2. They may NOT advocate or enable Radical Islam
  3. They may NOT attack (Ie: The Catholic faith and church is evil and must be destroyed) although they may critique (Ie: Here is my problem with Bishop’s X or Pope x position or action or here is why I disagree with this Catholic doctrine) the Catholic Faith.
  4.  They may not violate the law & get me sued (It’s my prerogative not theirs to choose to take that risk)

When people are accepted as writers here, they may write what they wish on the subject that they wish and say what they think with no thought or fear that if I disagree with it I will censor it,  after all, this isn’t Twitter.

But while I agree with JD’s piece in many respects, particularly in terms of what we should do post election his argument against voting Trump in this election is not plausible because wild speculation not withstanding the truth is this:

 Baring sudden death either Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton will be the next president of the United States

For a conservative to come to the decision to either vote 3rd party or to leave the ballot blank under the theory:  “Donald Trump is unfit therefore I shall not support him even if it means a Hillary Clinton victory” strikes me as the argument of Code Pink vs fighting ISIS or a British Pacifist during World War 2.  “War is evil and I won’t aid it”.

And to that argument CS Lewis gave an excellent answer

for those who are unwilling to sit through the entire CS Lewis doodle (which I’ve been looking for an excuse to show you for weeks) let me get to the nitty gritty quote.

In the liberal society the number of pacifists will either be large enough to cripple the state as a belligerent or not.  If not you have done nothing, if it is large enough, then you have handed over the state which does tolerate pacifism over to its totalitarian neighbor who does not.  Pacifism of this kind is taking a straight road to a world where there is no pacifism.

Or put simply, all staying home or voting 3rd party does to a conservative is to enable someone who wants to destroy you and give them the weapons to do so.  Conservatism of this kind is taking a straight road to a country where conservatism is not allowed.

Now you might say, “But DaTechGuy, I believe Donald Trump is unfit and my personal honor does not allow such a vote?”

Well that answer comes from this exchange between the 4th Doctor and a man named Tremas in the episode the Keeper of Traken.   Let me set the scene.  A powerful device which gives a person literally power over a series of planets is about to be taken over by an evil malevolent force.  Having escaped temporarily from its clutches the Doctor and his party find their way to Tremas’ quarters where he is looking for a way to stop him.

4th Doctor: Well, the new regime seems to be making rather a mess of things. Tremas. Tremas.
Tremas: Huh?
4th Doctor: Blueprints. Master plans. Do you happen to keep them here?
Tremas: What plans in particular?
4th Doctor: Well, the master plans to the Source manipulator, of course.
Tremas: Yes, in the atmosphere safe. The secrecy of the Source manipulator is a sacred trust.
4th Doctor:  Tremas, we must stop Kassia becoming the Keeper, and for that we need the master plans.
Tremas: But I swore an oath, Doctor.
4th Doctor:  Well of course you swore an oath! Now you have to choose. Your personal honour against the safety of the whole of Traken.
Nyssa: Yes, father.
Tremas:   I can’t, Doctor.
4th Doctor: Well, that’s fine. That’s fine, Tremas. I mean, when this thing has taken over the entire Source you’ll have the consolation of knowing that you kept your honour intact.

As a vote for Trump is not aiding and abetting mortal sin (thus violating the primary duty of a Christian to God) the situation and the decision here is identical to the Doctor and Tremas.

I submit and suggest that when Hillary Clinton and those who enabled her flouting of federal law have been given power, when the IRS is again used as a tool to disable conservatives, when the full power of the federal government is used to either silence Christians, and/or force them to choose between their souls and their ability to function in public places or business, when the Muslim Brotherhood is enabled and America continues its retreat from the world and when the supreme court is packed to make sure that even if a Ted Cruz or a Scott Walker should be elected in 2020 their attempts to reverse these actions will be ruled unconstitutional,  those who have decided to stay home and allowed all this to happen will have the consolation of knowing that they kept their personal honor intact.

I’d say that price is too high.

FYI 1:  If you enjoyed the first part of that CS Lewis doodle on “Why I am not a pacifist I embed part 2 here for you.

FYI 2: In case you’re wondering the exchange between Tremas and the Doctor ends, like this.

[Tremas goes to a blank piece of wall, puts his hand through and removes a scroll.]
Tremas: The original design of the Source manipulator. The means that gave power to our Keepers.
4th Doctor: Good.

FYI 3: (minor Doctor Who spoiler alert) Some Doctor Who fans might wonder if my invoking of the episode of Traken means I’m comparing Hillary Clinton to the Master either in his emaciated decaying state from that episode or the current regeneration as Missy who is just as evil and murderous. That is certainly not the case.

The Master/Missy evil wholly fictional character while Hillary Clinton is an awful terrible fact.

If you’d like to help support independent non MSM journalism and opinion please consider hitting DaTipJar

Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. Right now our subscribers consist of 1/50 of 1% of our total unique visitors based on last years numbers.

If we can get another 150 subscribers at $10 a month (another 1/10 of 1% of those who have visited this year) We can meet our annual goals with no trouble, with the same number of subscribers at $20 a month I could afford to cover the presidential campaign outside of New England firsthand.

And of course at that price you get the Da Magnificent Seven plus those we hope to add on and all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.

Choose a Subscription level

There are hardcore supporters who have been there from the beginning for Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. It was these supporters who helped propel each to their party’s nomination and nothing that comes out between now and election day will change their minds. Most of the rest of us have been forced to take a hardline approach as well. In this late hour, the accumulation of October surprises will not change our voting preference. The surprises are THAT bad; Trump’s locker room talk is countered by Hillary’s Wikileaks corruptions which counter accusations made against Trump which counter Hillary’s attacks on the pro-life movement which counter… you get the point.

In other words, a large percentage (I’d put the number north of 50%) of the electorate will vote for a candidate that they only support because they believe the other major candidate would be worse. Never has any living generation of Americans seen a full-fledged race to the bottom like this one. This election won’t be won. The next President will be the candidate that loses less. We’re stuck having to fake enthusiasm for one candidate because we can’t imagine America with the other candidate in charge. I know many of the readers are full-blown supporters of Trump and that’s your prerogative. I will never support, endorse, or vote for Hillary, so at least we have that in common.

Regardless of who wins on November 8th, it’s imperative that on November 9th we evaluate what brought us here and make the choice to never let it happen like this again. I’m not talking about figuring out how Hillary evaded jail or why the best batch of conservative candidates the GOP has ever seen were summarily dispatched by a liberal and his wall. It’s time to take a look at the fundamental problems in Washington DC and across the country that prevent the obvious solution of Constitutional conservatism from having its day leading in the halls of government. As Bobby Johns pointed out in his passionate attack on liberalism in Congress, only three Senators and fourteen Congressman score an “A” on Conservative Review’s scorecard. Most GOP Senators and Congressmen score an “F” which means that they are slightly right-leaning at best.

This is why President Obama has never had a problem getting every single thing he’s ever wanted in the last eight years budgeted, including over the two years that Republicans have held a majority in both chambers.

This is why Planned Parenthood always gets funded.

This is why the internet is no longer under U.S. control.

This is why the one time Congress was able to reverse a Presidential veto, it was on a bill that affects less than 1% of 1% of Americans. The only reason it succeeded was because retiring Harry Reid was the only Senator willing to side with Saudi Arabia over families of 9/11 victims. In an election year, the President never had a chance. His veto was symbolic.

The problem isn’t that we don’t have enough Republicans in office. The problem is that we don’t have enough principles in the people holding those offices. We need a party that holds conservative principles at the highest level, that throws political expediency out the window. We need voters to learn the principles that propelled this nation to its pinnacle. Most of those principles are found in the words of the Constitution. Others can be found in the examples of the men and women who defend them. Any politician who refuses to wholeheartedly keep the oath of defending the Constitution does not deserve our vote.

This year, it’s too late. Principles have been abandoned by both major parties. This is why it’s important to build a new one. If the party of Lincoln, Coolidge, and Reagan has moved so far to the middle that conservatism has become a co-opted punchline used during campaign season, then examining our course through the lens of principles is our best course of action after the election.

Update (DTG): As you know I don’t censor my writers and respect their opinions but tomorrow morning I’ll give a short answer as to what he’s missing here.

I’ve been reading Ed Klein’s new book, Guilty as Sin: Uncovering New Evidence of Corruption and How Hillary Clinton and the Democrats Derailed the FBI Investigation, which I highly recommend, but this is not a book review.

Klein, who previously wrote The Truth About Hillary: What She Knew, When She Knew It, and How Far She’ll Go to Become President, knows his subject well. This title is almost ironic, since “truth” and Hillary parted ways a long time ago.

When you read either book, you get to the point where reading page after page of all of the Clintons’ crimes reaches critical mass and you are struck by the venality, perfidy and corruption of the so-called journalists, prosecutors and investigators that for decades have turned a blind eye, because it is their enabling that allows Hillary to be where she is now.

What Klein reports on Guilty As Sin, namely the complicity of the U.S. Attorney General, the head of the FBI, and the White House, defies any conspiracy theory a fevered mind could cook up.

Wikileaks has been releasing hacked, i.e., stolen, emails confirming the information Klein reports in his books. This adds to my revulsion, since – and it’s worth repeating – the Wikileaks are by definition stolen information.

Never mind the wreckage Hillary left as Secretary of State.

Meanwhile, there’s much pearl-clutching and gnashing of teeth over Trump’s character, a character (or lack thereof) that has been in public view since Trump first started appearing in Howard Stern’s show in the 1980s. Where were the Republicans during the primaries that they didn’t bring this up last year?

So for all of us who would prefer a campaign discussing issues such as national security, the economy, and foreign policy, we better get used to this fact: The first postmodern election may become a map to future ones.

Fausta Rodriguez Wertz writes on U.S. and Latin American politics, news, and culture at Fausta’s Blog.

Every pundit will have an opinion based upon their own biases and their news agency’s preferences. Some will highlight the move Donald Trump made to threaten Hillary Clinton directly. What they probably won’t mention is that from a purely strategic perspective, his charge that as President he would appoint a special prosecutor to “look into” Clinton’s “situation” was absolutely brilliant.

A large percentage of American voters generally do not like nor trust Hillary Clinton. The same could be said about Trump, but there’s a difference. They don’t like Trump for his personality, privilege, and/or policies. They don’t like Hillary because she should almost certainly be in jail. For three decades, she has evaded the law. The accusations against her are numerous and many of them are extremely serious even if you discount conspiracy theories about her alleged “hits” on political liabilities. She has been demonstrated to be a liar and a cheat, but it’s worse. She’s gotten away with things that others could not and that makes her scorned even by people who want to vote for her.

Undecided voters now have something to weigh against Trump’s damaging recordings from last week. Do they want to harm Trump for his misogyny or do they want to empower him to take out Clinton? Whether undecided voters realize it or not, the notion of seeing someone in power held accountable is extremely appealing to them from a psychological perspective. They don’t like it when the powerful get special treatment. They don’t like it when the powerful get away with things that average Americans could not.

By itself, his call for a special prosecutor was a strong statement, but it was his mic drop moment a couple of minutes later that really punctuated it in the minds of undecided voters:


It won’t matter who pundits say “won” this debate. In reality, it was a debacle from start to finish thanks to poor moderators and mostly terrible questions. Nevertheless, the winner when it comes to putting sway on undecided voters was, through the subtle effects of his promise, Donald Trump.

If you’d like to help support independent non MSM journalism and opinion please consider hitting DaTipJar

Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. Right now our subscribers consist of 1/50 of 1% of our total unique visitors based on last years numbers.

If we can get another 150 subscribers at $10 a month (another 1/10 of 1% of those who have visited this year) We can meet our annual goals with no trouble, with the same number of subscribers at $20 a month I could afford to cover the presidential campaign outside of New England firsthand.

And of course at that price you get the Da Magnificent Seven plus those we hope to add on and all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.

Choose a Subscription level

roy-beanJudge Roy Bean:  I understand you have taken exception to my calling you whores. I’m sorry. I apologize. I ask you to note that I did not call you callous-ass strumpets, fornicatresses, or low-born gutter sluts. But I did say “whores.” No escaping that. And for that slip of the tongue, I apologize.

The Life and Times of Judge Roy Bean 1972

Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.

Saul Alinsky

Patton: Hell, I know I’m a prima donna — I admit it. What I can’t stand about Monty is he won’t admit it.

Patton 1970

Yesterday while so many in the GOP are cutting and running I re endorsed Donald Trump for president of the United States.

But while I’m sure at the moment the Trump campaign appreciates even the smallest bit of support at this time, the more important question given the debate is:  How do you handle this when the media will want to talk about nothing else?

The first clue to the answer of this question came  from Jazz Shaw at HotAir both in terms of the tape itself

Where did the tape come from? There are already long, scholarly pieces being written on the subject. The phrases I’ve heard repeated most often this morning on both CNN and MSNBC are variations of, a tape stored on a dusty old shelf at NBC. Give me a break. This is part of an oppo file which has been out there since last year and held in reserve until the timing was right to inflict maximum damage and distract from any other bad news about Clinton. And given the decades that Donald Trump spent in the limelight giving interviews such as this one, going on the Howard Stern show and dealing with everyone from Hollywood, New York and Washington glitterati circles there are probably enough such pieces to drop one every three days from now through the election. You can expect to see plenty more.

And in terms of its timing

Going back to the whole convenient timing thing, we should also note that a new batch of Wikileaks documents dropped last night which contain all sorts of goodies about Hillary Clinton, including outtakes from some of her paid speeches to Wall Street. (We’ll have more on that later today.) Is anyone leading their cable news broadcasts with it this morning? Nope. There’s barely a peep. You can write all that off to coincidence if you like, but this sort of “accident” is a rare beast in American politics. All we can really say to the Clinton team at this point is… well played.

The second clue comes in two parts, part one from a piece I wrote a bit ago about Bill Clinton appearing on Morning Joe the day that Herman Cain (remember him) was dealing with accusations of sexual harassment:

Today there is a big press conference with Herman Cain addressing the now specific accusations against him. By an odd coincidence MSNBC’s Morning Joe had President Bill Clinton Scheduled for the 8:15 tine slot.

They had him on for 30 minutes and they talked economy, trade etc, yet not a person on that set asked him a question about the issue leading the news today, how he would suggest Cain deal with it and what lessons he learned from it.

That really says it all, Morning Joe and MSNBC have Bill Clinton, the single most famous political sexual harasser, a man who is still 15 years later the butt of jokes on the subject.

And part two from January of this year when everyone in the MSM was saying talking about Bill Clinton’s misdeeds was “Beyond the pale”

This reaction is of course completely understandable because if one does not have this reaction it begs the question that nobody in the MSM wants to ask or be asked:

If what Bill Clinton did to women was “disgraceful” and “unacceptable” then why did the media elites and Democrat pols not only defend him at the time but spend that last 15 years treating the ex president as if he had never done a wrong thing?

I submit and suggest that people from Podesta, to Andrea Mitchell to Harold Ford and many others all know the answer to that question, which is why they can’t bear to have it asked.

The third clue comes from item 10 in Scott Adams response to Erick Erickson’s snarky tweet concerning Trump:

10. Most male Hollywood actors support Clinton. Those acting skills will come in handy because starting today they have to play the roles of people who do not talk and act exactly like Trump in private.

And the fourth from the same piece item 13:

13. My prediction of a 98% chance of Trump winning stays the same. Clinton just took the fight to Trump’s home field. None of this was a case of clever strategy or persuasion on Trump’s part. But if the new battleground is spousal fidelity, you have to like Trump’s chances.

The fifth clue comes from last night’s post of Democrats lining up behind Bill Clinton after he was impeached on Dec 18, 1998.
And the final clue come from the movie quote that leads this post.

The Clinton’s are expecting some kind of direct attack from this move, I think Mr. Trump would be better off being subtle.

The first step is to, if she or any of the others are willing, make sure that Jennifer Flowers, Paula Jones and especially Juanita Broaddrick are at the debate.

The 2nd is to be ready when the question of his remarks come up and deliver the following two answers.

When (not if) asked to again apologize for these remarks, either by the moderator or by Secretary Clinton, he needs to give the following answer:

“I am happy to apologize here before the American people and to America’s women for my intemperate private remarks on that tape and in that same spirit I invite Mrs. Clinton here and now before the American people to apologize to them, to america’s women and to the woman concerned, some of whom are in the audience tonight,  for her and her surrogates intemperate private and public actions to defame these women for political gain.”

The rehearsed outrage response from the Clinton camp and the media should bring a response from Donald Trump reminding them that in her own speeches Mrs. Clinton has stated that woman who claim sexual harassment should be believed, if she and the media no longer believe this then perhaps you should say so now to the American people who are watching.

When the media presses on this issue, asking Trump and his surrogates if his words were appropriate he and or his surrogates answer should be in the mold of Judge Roy Bean’s quote above:

I understand that many have taken exception to my/Donald Trump’s private remarks on that tape a decade ago.  I ask you to note that I/he did not leave Americans calling for help to die in Libya, Nor did I/he enable the rise of ISIS.  Nor did I/he lie to the American people about a private server an leave national security secrets open to be hacked by my enemies, nor did I/he help enable those who have come to this country illegally and have killed innocent americans like Katie Steinle .  But I/he did speak vulgar remarks privately concerning women on that tape No escaping that. And for that, I/he apologize/apologized.

and when the media attempts to call this a dodge the stock response should be this.

I understand that the Clinton team and their media allies believe the words of Donald Trump are more relevant than the Actions of Hillary and Bill Clinton when deciding on who to choose for president, I think I trust the American people to decide if a poor choice of words are going to make them less safe at home and abroad and less financially secure than a slew of bad actions and decisions.

Or as Juanita Broaddrick put it:

Furthermore Trump’s team should immediately target Hillary surrogates, particularly those in media, politics and entertainment and ask them if they have ever used such language in private.

Make every single one of them make that denial in public on camera or make them give their “no comment”.  Make sure they function under the standard that they are holding Trump  and them in this age of camera phones and instant recording wonder if any Trump like recordings exist before and after they give that answer.

Finally I would identify each Democrat in this video, many of who are still in office

and have them answer this question: Do you regret lining up behind Bill Clinton after impeachment and would you like to apologize to the american people for doing so?

If I was on Trump’s team, that is how I would suggest he deal with this problem.

Of course Don Surber has a simpler more concise soundbite read answer :


“I certainly regret that remark but you must remember I was a Democrat back then & a friend of Bill Clinton”  That’s the type of sound bite that gets a lot of airtime and fits in a tweet.

Now some of you might say:  But DaTechGuy, we shouldn’t have to even be dealing with this type of thing, let alone defending it.

I quite agree and if GOP voters had followed my advice and chosen Ted Cruz during the primaries or even my 2nd 3rd or 4th choices Rick Santorum, Scott Walker or Bobby Jindal we would not have to. Furthermore if the Democrats had nominated a person of character and honor who was not hostile to people of faith, unborn children or the defense of this county I would not have to do so.

But the GOP voters did not choose Cruz, Walker, Jindal or Santorum, and the Democrat party that produced candidates of character who were not hostile to faithful Christians, unborn children or national defense has not existed since the days of my youth.

So instead I’m faced with a binary choice between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton and right now Mr. Donald Trump is the only thing standing between us and the economic, social and military disaster for the nation in general and conservatives in particular that a Hillary Clinton administration will bring and it’s our duty as responsible citizens do all we can to avert that Clinton disaster for the sake of ourselves and our children.

You have to deal with reality as it is, not as you would like it to be.

And to those who missed my update to yesterday’s post, let me repeat verbatim why trying to get Trump to pull out or distancing oneself from Donald trump is a recipe for disaster.

  1. No matter how much you dislike what Trump said on that tape, he won the primaries.  He was legally and legitimately chosen as the nominee of the GOP.  Unless he drops dead or has a stroke or something it would be an illegitimate act to replace him on the ticket, particularly with someone, however qualified, who did not draw a single vote in the primaries.
  2. No matter how much you dislike the Trump voters, if you are a GOP incumbent or candidate in any state or country but the most red, you will need their votes to win an election.  Going after Trump is not going to win you any liberal leaning voters and is going to cost you conservative ones, you would be much better off saying something like this

    “I am happy to accept Donald Trump’s apology to America’s women for his intemperate private remarks on that tape and in that same spirit I invite [insert opponent’s name here] to demand that Secretary Clinton apologize to American people, to america’s women to the woman abused by her Husband and defamed by the Clintons and their surrogates for political gain.”

  3. Finally do you really think the Democrats are going to allow Trump to be replaced on the ballot at this stage?  There will be lawsuits in 50 states challenging any attempt to pull him and the Bob Torricelli precedent notwithstanding you aren’t going to see a judiciary upholding such a move.

Things are what they are and we have to deal with them as such, the best move is to accept Trump’s apology and move on.

If you would like to support journalism that is not driven by the MSM template please consider hitting DaTipJar

Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. Right now our subscribers consist of 1/50 of 1% of our total unique visitors based on last years numbers.

If we can get another 150 subscribers at $10 a month (another 1/10 of 1% of those who have visited this year) We can meet our annual goals with no trouble, with the same number of subscribers at $20 a month I could afford to cover the presidential campaign outside of New England firsthand.

And of course at that price you get the Da Magnificent Seven plus those we hope to add on and all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.

Choose a Subscription level

The Clinton campaign has aimed an ad right at Trump’s underbelly: assorted negative comments made by him about women. Clinton’s kicker: “is this the President we want for our daughters?”

Careful of that glass house you’re living in, Mrs. C.

This from the campaign of a woman who likes to say that women’s rights are human rights. At the same time, she promotes abortion, which effectively makes human rights conditional on whether an individual is “wanted.” My daughters know better. Does hers?

She touts the “Affordable” Care Act every chance she gets, which is not the same thing as supporting health care. Ask the women with high deductibles who are about to hear from their insurance companies how much more they have to pay for health insurance next year. I doubt that I’m the only woman who is avoiding urgent-care medical attention because it’s unaffordable. I haven’t heard Trump applaud that.

She’s determined to keep the “Affordable” Care Act’s HHS/contraceptive mandate in place. Remember that the ACA considers contraception for women to be “preventive” care, which implies that women are broken and need to be fixed. The same mandate is what’s keeping the Little Sisters of the Poor (among others) in court. Prosecuting nuns for exercising their right to choose not to subsidize employees’ contraceptive use? So much for standing by women. I don’t see Trump taking aim at nuns.

Clinton wants to eliminate the Hyde Amendment. The more public funding of abortion, the better, in Hillaryland. Don’t like that? Prepare to pay up and shut up during a Clinton Administration. Conscience rights be damned. Trump takes a different view of Hyde.

And then there’s Clinton’s recent gleeful question about Trump: “what kind of genius loses a billion dollars in a single year?” I guess that’s the shiny object that’s supposed to divert me from a more substantive question: what kind of Secretary of State “loses” tens of thousands of emails and gets away with it? Do we want our daughters governed by a politician who thinks she’s above the law and will not come clean about her actions?

As for remarks about women, it wasn’t Trump who called Gennifer Flowers “trailer trash”  or Monica Lewinsky a “narcissistic loony tune.” In this campaign, Clinton has said that women who have endured sexual assault have the right to be believed. Tell it to Paula Jones, Juanita Broaddrick, and Kathleen Willey.

Is this the President we want for our daughters?

It’s a fair question to ask about Trump. It’s an urgent question to ask about Clinton.

Anyone who reads this site knows what I think of Hillary Clinton. Her election would enable and reward some of the most vile and corrupt behavior that we’ve ever seen from a potential president.

That being said I don’t see anything wrong with this:

The Clinton campaign has gotten a lot of flack for it:

Politico first reported that the Clinton campaign had planned to spend $63,000 on Weather Channel ads in Florida over a five-day stretch starting Thursday, just as the storm nears the coast.

Politico noted that Donald Trump and other candidates have advertised on the same channel this year. But the bid to capture support from anxious Florida residents in the path of a deadly storm that has triggered mass evacuation orders and is expected to strengthen soon into a destructive Category 4 created a bit of an optics problem.

“If they’re out being too political at a time when the country has its prayers with the people affected, I think it could backfire,” Rep. Greg Walden, chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, told Fox News earlier Thursday, before the delay was announced.

And has cut and run on:

Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign said Thursday that it is asking cable systems in Florida not to run its advertisements on the Weather Channel with Hurricane Matthew bearing down on the state — after Republicans seized on the planned ads as opportunistic.

And many of my fellow conservatives are crowing:

Just a few nights ago VP candidate Tim Kaine made the pitch that Hillary Clinton was defined by a lifetime of public service. Kaine said, “As a civil rights lawyer in the South, with the Children’s Defense Fund, first lady of Arkansas and this country, senator, secretary of state, it’s always been about putting others first.”

It doesn’t look like that’s what her team was doing in Florida. It looks like they were advancing her politically by any means necessary. I’m sure we’ll soon hear how she knew nothing about this. Some junior staffer did it without consulting anyone. If pressed perhaps her team will blame it on Colin Powell.

Now politics isn’t beanbag and we’ve seen plenty of spin by the left to turn nothing burgers into scandal and you never know what is going to move voters.

But it seems to me that unless the Weather Channel is going completely without ads I see no reason why a Hillary Clinton ad is any more offensive than an ad for dog food, viagra or  NiQuil.

Hillary Clinton is a vile person who has made herself rich off of her public “service”, left Americans to die when they called for help and been a dismal failure as secretary of state, there are plenty of reasons do despise and critique her.

But in my opinion running ads on a channel because people are watching it isn’t one of them.

Closing thought:  What does it say about the voting public that the Clinton Campaign figures that the things I’ve listed aren’t moving voters to reject her but they’re afraid this ad buy will?

Repairs to my car cost $526. If you’d like to help me defray that cost please consider hitting DaTipJar

Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. Right now our subscribers consist of 1/50 of 1% of our total unique visitors based on last years numbers.

If we can get another 150 subscribers at $10 a month (another 1/10 of 1% of those who have visited this year) We can meet our annual goals with no trouble, with the same number of subscribers at $20 a month I could afford to cover the presidential campaign outside of New England firsthand.

And of course at that price you get the Da Magnificent Seven plus those we hope to add on and all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.

Choose a Subscription level

By:  Pat Austin

SHREVEPORT – I simply cannot talk politics this week; of course as I say this, I will of course gloss over politics because while I have read Gail Collins’s most recent column in the New York Times, I truly hate to draw attention to it by addressing it, but I can’t let it go.

Disclaimer: I loathe both candidates.  I’m voting for Trump because I can’t stand to vote for Hillary.  I believe the Clinton machine is dangerous and I believe she is inept (see Benghazi). My personal belief is that she has no soul.

Both candidates are terrible.

I think what bothers me about the Gail Collins column, and so many other liberals, is that so many have a devoted commitment to convincing not just me, but also themselves, that Hillary is a competent and deserving candidate.  There are others who truly believe in her; I’m related to some of those people and we simply don’t discuss politics. I know there are readers of this blog who will be Clinton voters and that is, of course, your right.  I personally think she is a terrible candidate and unqualified for office.

(I know, Trump isn’t a good candidate either.  Acknowledged.)

Collins writes:

Hillary Clinton is an imperfect candidate who is, nevertheless, extremely well qualified to lead the country. Every day, dozens of prominent Republicans say they’re going to suck it up and vote for her because they think she can, if nothing else, at least keep the country safe.

That is stunning to me, given Benghazi and given the Clinton body count.  (If you Google “Clinton Body Count” you get 9,750,000 results.  Of course most of it is hokum and wild conspiracy theory by tin foil hat people, but in some of those cases, where there is smoke…).

And as far as Ms. Collins’s reference to “prominent Republicans” who are voting for Hillary – I’m sick of them, too.  “Prominent Republicans” are primarily to blame for the fact that Trump is now our nominee.

Ms. Collins also suggests that a vote for Trump means you are just like Ted Cruz and only interested in the repeal of Obamacare.  I’m no fan of Obamacare or socialized medicine but that is so far down my list right now that it is insignificant to me, and for Ms. Collins to dismiss my position so flippantly is borderline offensive.

Like I said – I hate politics right now.  I loathe both candidates, I am disgusted with the ill-informed, apathetic people who got us to this point, I am sick of party leaders who manipulate primaries, sick of Republican leaders who don’t endorse conservative candidates, and disgusted with a leadership that has led to a near indistinguishable difference between our two parties, and now, perhaps for the first time in my life, I understand why people stick their heads in the sand and dream of England.


Pat Austin blogs at And So it Goes in Shreveport.

By John Ruberry

Last night the New York Times, using an illegally obtained copy of Donald Trump’s 1995 tax return, speculated that because of a $916 million loss listed on that return, the Republican nominee may have, yes, may have, avoided paying federal income taxes for 18 years.

With help from his wealthy father, not the government, Trump, a real estate developer, built an international business empire. And because of his Apprentice television franchise, even before his presidential run Trump was likely the most recognized business person in the United States.

Hillary Clinton is also rich. Her business–make that racket–is influence peddling. While her husband was attorney general, and then governor of Arkansas, Clinton was an attorney at the Rose Law Firm in that state’s capital city. The Clintons, aided by the Rose Law Firm, used its clout to protect themselves and Jim and Susan McDougal, their investment partners. While they didn’t make money in Whitewater, Arkansas’ first couple did their best to cover up the Whitewater scandal, which led to the convictions the McDougals, Bill’s successor as governor, and Webster Hubbell, a partner at the Rose Law Firm and a close friend of the Clintons.arkansas-sign

The McDougals ran Madison Guaranty Savings and Loan in Little Rock, which failed in the 1980s. They chose, of course, the Rose Law Firm to defend their thrift.

After emerging from the White House “dead broke,” the Clintons were still able to purchase a mansion in Westchester County, New York, one of the most expensive real estate markets in the nation. In 2001 the Clinton Foundation was formed, by this time of course Hillary was a US Senator from New York. The foundation traded off of Bill’s status as an ex-president–six-figure public speaking fees to him went to this “charity,” which offered high-priced salaries to Clinton family cronies and served as a lucrative waiting room for those Clintonistas between government jobs.

The former first couple learned that influence peddling, not property investments, was their pathway to wealth.

While Hillary was serving as Barack Obama’s secretary of state, foreign donors poured money into the “charity,” probably using their cash as down payments for favors from Madame Secretary. It worked. A majority of the non-governmental meetings Hillary had at State were with Clinton Foundation donors, which is why the foundation is commonly referred to as a slush fund.

In Illinois, where Hillary grew up, that’s called pay-to-play.

John ruberry
John “Lee” Ruberry of the Magnificent Seven

There’s nothing like this type of sordidness in Trump’s background.

After leaving State, it was Hillary’s turn to collect the big-money speeches, with Wall Street firms being some of her most lucrative clients. Without having been a major government figure–or the spouse of one–Clinton’s speech income just might have matched that of a Times Square busker, such as the Naked Cowboy.

In 2014 just 5.7 percent of the Clinton Foundation budget was spent on charitable grants.

Where is that story, New York Times?

Oh, do you know anyone who doesn’t try to pay as little income tax as possible?

John Ruberry regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit.



Took the wife to breakfast this morning after church and work and tried to sleep with no luck but eventually crashed in the afternoon and woke up to find that Donald Trump complaints about his microphone during the debate, that everyone derided him for making, were valid:

On Friday afternoon, the Commission on Presidential Debates confirmed that Trump did indeed have a microphone that was at least somewhat defective.

“Regarding the first debate, there were issues regarding Donald Trump’s audio that affected the sound level in the debate hall,” the commission said in an unfortunately brief one-sentence statement.

John Sexton at hotair says this:

I’m not going to engage in any conspiracy theories about why Trump’s mic went out but I do wonder why it took the Debate Commission until Friday afternoon to put out this brief statement admitting it happened. Clearly they knew this was a problem Monday. They also must have known it became an issue once the media began reporting Hillary’s dig about complaining about the microphone. That would have been the appropriate time for the organization responsible to come forward and admit there was in fact a problem.

Given that the debate commission’s silence for a week was a defacto in kind contribution to the Hillary Clinton campaign and their release of their statement on a Friday afternoon admitting Trump was right seemed to me in the tradition of news dumps meant for minimum exposure, I take offense at the use of the words “conspiracy theory” in that paragraph, but in all the crow eating and told ya so’s there’s an important point everyone is missing here that perfectly illustrates the difference between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton.

Donald Trump has decades of experience in broadcasting and because of that experience he was able to recognize a defective microphone in front of him and had no problem saying it was so in the face of the derision of everyone else around him.

Hillary Clinton has decades of experience in government at the highest possible levels yet was not only unable to recognize her handling of classified material as defective, but kept insisting it was proper even anyone who had any experience in handling such info knew it wasn’t.

If you want to support conservative writers please consider hitting DaTipJar

Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. Right now our subscribers consist of 1/50 of 1% of our total unique visitors based on last years numbers.

If we can get another 150 subscribers at $10 a month (another 1/10 of 1% of those who have visited this year) We can meet our annual goals with no trouble, with the same number of subscribers at $20 a month I could afford to cover the presidential campaign outside of New England firsthand.

And of course at that price you get the Da Magnificent Seven plus those we hope to add on and all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.

Choose a Subscription level

by baldilocks

I did not watch last night’s debate between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. For the record, I didn’t watch Monday Night Football either; I had a third option.  The specifics of my option do not matter, but that I had more than two options with respect to how I chose to occupy my time is glancing commentary on the election itself.

And here is some commentary that does more than merely glance: “we” managed to pick two candidates—one from each party who are willing to violate the Second Amendment.

I won’t even bother quoting Mrs. Clinton’s stance on the right to bear arms, but here’s an example of Mr. Trump’s position with respect to the topic. From the debate:

The back-and-forth between Trump and debate moderator Lester Holt about the legality of New York City’s now-defunct stop-and-frisk policy is irrelevant. That Trump wants to take guns away from “bad people” is what matters.

Who are the “bad people” and how does a law enforcement agency determine the alleged badness of “bad people?” By how they look? That sounds like the evil, dreaded profiling to me.stopanfrisk_590_356

What about probable cause and the fourth amendment? I know that it’s likely that I’m speaking a language that is foreign to Mr. Trump.

What was that bon mot about liberty versus security? Oh, yes…

They who can give up liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

There’s some doubt about whether this is an actual Benjamin Franklin quote, but that doesn’t matter. And, in reality, whether a given set of people deserve liberty and safety or not is also irrelevant. (‘Deserve’ is one of my least favorite words.)

What needs to be faced is that we have no major candidate for president who is a true proponent of the freedom of self-defense. Whether we deserve freedom or security or we don’t, both are in grave danger.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng blogs at baldilocks. (Her older blog is located here.) Her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game, was published in 2012. Her second novel will be done in 2016. Follow her on Twitter.

Please contribute to Juliette’s JOB:  Her new novel, her blog, her Internet to keep the latter going and COFFEE to keep her going!

Or hit Da Tech Guy’s Tip Jar in the name of Independent Journalism—->>>>>baldilocks

screen-shot-2016-09-27-at-9-04-05-amFor all of the true debaters out there, let’s face it: this was not an actual debate.

The American Debate Association describes how a debate is supposed to work. The debate focuses on a statement, such as “The United States needs a new tax system to create jobs.”

For example, Donald Trump gets first crack in the affirmative, followed by Hillary Clinton in the negative. Each has nine minutes to discuss the question rather than the two-minute soundbites of last night’s debate. Then each one gets to question the other. Then the two debaters get to rebut the other’s argument.

The argument is between the two parties rather than through a moderator. In fact, in an actual debate, there is no moderator. The judges are supposed to stay out of the way.

Since I was in high school, these rules have been the standard. I have no idea why presidential debates don’t use this approach.

It’s probably because the longstanding rules for debate would probably bring more substance without the useless presence of some media darling who has virtually no expertise in the area of domestic and foreign policies.

Despite my misgivings about the format and substance of last night’s debate, I generally think it was a draw, which probably works in Donald Trump’s favor. The MSM gives the nod to Hillary, but that’s not unexpected.

Trump did a relatively good job of explaining his policies on trade and policing, but he fumbled through his response on the birther issue. He rambled as he often does. But he had the best line: Hillary has a lot of experience, but it’s bad experience.

Clinton failed to move the needle on what to do about the self-proclaimed Islamic State and race relations. At times, she seemed robotic.

On more “substantive” matters that usually decide who won and who lost the debate, Trump’s audio was bad at many times during the discussion; both had terrible makeup jobs; the split screen clearly favored Clinton.

What’s amazes me is that the moderator, Lester Holt, failed to ask any substantive questions about emails, Benghazi or the Clinton Foundation. If anything underlines how unnecessary a star moderator is, Holt’s avoidance of certain issues demonstrates why actual debates don’t have moderators.

Howard Kurtz of Fox News provided a relatively good analysis of the debate at

Kurtz argued that Clinton stayed on the offensive while Trump countered with serious issues.

As CBS’s Bob Schieffer put it: Trump didn’t lose any voters; Clinton didn’t gain any.

That seems about right to me.

Christoper Harper, a recovering journalist from The Associated Press, Newsweek, ABC News and The Washington Times, teaches media law.

I’m not going to get a chance to see the entire debate tonight because of work but here is what things are going to come down to one thing: Will the caricatures of the two candidates be confirmed or refuted.

1. Trump: Is he crazy, is he presidential?

These two questions are what the American people want the answer to. Hillary Clinton the media and the left (but I repeat myself) has been trying to sell Donald Trump as an uncontrolled loon for the last year or so, completely unprecedented and unable to deal lead. That caricature took a huge hit thanks to his mexican trip whose live feed completely disappointed the left has the Donald not only sounded strong but competent. While this was no surprise to me as a person who is running business on an international scale has to know how to deal with foreign leaders this is totally contrary to what the MSM has said.

The goal for Donald Trump therefore is to appear presidential enough on TV to make a lie of this. I predict that he will have very little trouble doing so due to his massive TV experience.

2. Clinton: Is she corrupt, is she well?

There have been two memes with Hillary Clinton that has been out there, the first is corruption, while the email scandal has not had legs with the MSM it HAS with voters. Clinton needs to give answers that suggest there is no there there. This should actually not be a hard thing to do as she has decades of experience dissembling before reporters, however it is the viewing audience and not the press that she has to sell this too. My gut says she should be able to do this but the real question is, have her consultants prepped her for the press or the people? That will be the determining factor.

The second factor can’t be wargamed. Clinton’s health. I’m sure that Hillary has rested herself to the max and her medical and makeup team will have put out full effort to make sure that she is in the best physical shape possible or tonight.

All that being said if she starts coughing, if she starts to fall, if anything happens that says “unwell” that will be the final nail in the coffin for her. This is the overriding factor above all else. Can she manage to stand there for 90 minutes without seeming ill?

I predict she will manage to do so but the reality is we have no idea on this. It is the wild card in this debate.

The Clinton advantage MSM: The biggest advantage for Hillary Clinton is the MSM. As long as Hillary Clinton doesn’t cough up a lung, start drooling on the stage or physically collapse, the media will pronounce her well and declare her the victor in tonight’s debate. It doesn’t matter what she says or how she says it this is going to be the media narrative that the press will be selling.

The Trump Advantage the audience: It appears this is going to be one of the most watched debates in the history of history. A large amount of people who would not normally bother will politics will be drawn to it. Furthermore I suspect most of those people will not be bothering with much of the pre-debate or post-debate coverage. This means that Trump will have an excellent change to make his case directly to the people, particularly those who will not be bothering with the post-debate spin. If he doesn’t commit an obvious gaffe, and by gaffe I mean something that normal people, not the media, not the media, consider a gaffe. He will be fine.

My prediction. Barring a physical collapse by Hillary, this debate is going to be pretty much a wash by normal debate standards. However a wash in the debate is a win for Trump because the main question in the mind of people who don’t like Hillary is: Is Trump Qualified. If he passed that bar, he win…

…it should be pointed out that the MSM is going to declare Hillary the victor in this debate (again barring a physical collapse) I wouldn’t be surprised if most of those stories have already been written and just need the odd bit of space filled in. Howie Carr has nailed it:

Whatever happens on Long Island, Hillary will immediately be declared the winner by 98 percent of the press. The headlines are already written, the phony-baloney polls and focus groups are ready to roll.

Hillary has to accomplish only two feats in Hempstead. The first one is to get off a couple of canned zingers for her adoring fans in social media to run with Tuesday morning.

What’s the over/under on how many minutes it will take her to say, “I’m a grandmother”? Comrade Chris Matthews and Andrea Mitchell will lap it up with a spoon. Oh, she so humanized herself, blah blah blah.

Hillary’s second task may prove more daunting: She has to remain vertical for 90 long minutes, with no oxygen mask or iron lung up there on the stage.

Alas for the Clintons we live in an age where people will have already formed their opinions and shared them online long before the pundits are able to push these stories.

Update: PowerLine reports they are getting panicked fundraising requests and says

with a hundred million people set to tune in to tonight’s debate, the Democrats have even more to worry about: what if millions of those viewers don’t find Trump scary or dangerous, and they see no reason to consider him a “racist, sexist bigot”? If I were a Democrat, I’d be worried too.

I’m enjoying this much too much.

If you want to support conservative writers please consider hitting DaTipJar

Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. Right now our subscribers consist of 1/50 of 1% of our total unique visitors based on last years numbers.

If we can get another 150 subscribers at $10 a month (another 1/10 of 1% of those who have visited this year) We can meet our annual goals with no trouble, with the same number of subscribers at $20 a month I could afford to cover the presidential campaign outside of New England firsthand.

And of course at that price you get the Da Magnificent Seven plus those we hope to add on and all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.

Choose a Subscription level


By John Ruberry

“I’m not an actor, I’m a movie star!”
Peter O’Toole’s Alan Swann character in My Favorite Year.

A couple of writers I usually agree with, the Chicago Tribune’s John Kass and Breitbart’s Joel Pollak, the latter unsuccessfully  ran for Congress six years ago in the Illinois district where I live, are predicting a Hillary Clinton win in Monday’s presidential debate at Hofstra University.

Kass and Pollak acknowledge Clinton’s extensive debate skills, she was a victorious US Senate candidate in 2000 and 2006 and Clinton came very close to winning the Democratic nomination in 2008. The latter contest had numerous debates, including some one-on-one contests between Hillary and Barack Obama. Donald Trump has never participated in a one-on-one debate.

But Americans have heard this song before. While Kass acknowledges the 1960 John F. Kennedy–Richard M. Nixon debates set the standard for future matchups being about style over substance; Nixon was the more experienced debater, but Kennedy, still the most telegenic president in American history, emerged the victor. Nixon won the substance battle–the comparatively few radio listeners to the debate agreed–but the Age of Television began over a decade earlier.

Blogger Ruberry with Joel Pollak in 2012

And what is largely overlooked from the first Kennedy-Nixon debate, which coincidentally was held 56 years to the day ahead of Monday’s faceoff, is that Nixon had some minor health issues on debate day–a knee injury suffered on the campaign trail and a subsequent infection earlier that month led to the Republican being hospitalized. Then Nixon contracted the flu. His rotten luck continued when the GOPer banged that same knee on a car door as he was entering the debate studio. Even in black-and-white, Kennedy looked tan and fit during that first debate, although his bronze skin tone, rare among those of Irish descent, was probably because he was suffering from Addison’s disease. Nixon looked pale. He was sweating, and it appeared that he needed a shave.

The better debater–and ironically the healthier man, lost the initial and of course most important of the 1960 debates. Nixon had to wait eight more years to win the presidency.

Trump, at age 70, is the Energizer bunny of the 2016 presidential campaign. The brash teetotaler clearly has the stamina to last 90 minutes standing on the debate stage.  But three times this month Clinton, age 68, had public bouts of unhealthiness that were captured on video–a four-minute long coughing fit, a collapse as her legs uncontrollably wobbled, and a Marty Feldman-wild eyes moment.

Can Clinton endure 90 minutes on her feet with no commercial breaks? Or bathroom or coughing breaks? While waiting for an opposing quarterback to throw an interception is generally not the best tactic of a successful NFL game plan, it certainly works well for the opponents of the Chicago Bears since Jay Cutler became their QB.

As for the Age of Television, and its cousin internet video, Trump is the master here. The billionaire real estate businessman hosted his popular Apprentice franchise for 11 years on NBC. Clinton, after nearly 40 years in public life, even on her increasingly few good days, still seems uncomfortable in front of TV cameras. Just as Nixon was, ironically. I mean this as a compliment: Trump is not a politician, he’s a TV star.  A skilled negotiator, Trump knows that if you get inside an opponents head, you’ve hobbled that person. Can Clinton debate the Trump on stage and the one in her head simultaneously?

Yes, Hillary can talk about details of police better than Trump. Will that matter?

John "Lee" Ruberry of the Magnificent Seven
John “Lee” Ruberry of the Magnificent Seven

Sure Trump can blow it for himself by meandering into an insult rant during the debate, or worse, he could offer a cruel quip if (or when?) Clinton shows another sign of ill health, which would probably result in voters sympathizing with the Democratic nominee.

Moving beyond Kennedy-Nixon, in 1980, Ronald Reagan–an actor by the way–appeared far more presidential than the policy wonk incumbent, Jimmy Carter. In 2000,  Al Gore’s imperiousness mixed with too much wonkishness gave voters the impression that he had been running for president since 1969.

Come to think of it, Hillary Clinton has been positioning herself for a presidential run since then too. You could not say that about George W. Bush in 2000. And of course you can’t say that about Donald Trump either.

Not that Trump is dumb, he isn’t. But people don’t like smartass know-it-alls.

John Ruberry regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit.

It’s been a couple of days since riots hit Charlotte over a black police officer shooting a black man.

There has been violence there has been looting but for a moment lets note one other thing.

One of the biggest worries for the Hillary Clinton campaign has been the indifference of black voters to her as a candidate. This has been a constant worry for national Democrats as they fear a drop in black turnout will hurt candidates all the way down the line. If they are to retain their power and influence and the money that comes from it, it is VITAL that the black vote be energized.

That’s why the facts in Charlotte don’t matter.

No amount of physical evidence concerning the suspect being shot will matter, no amount of looting caught on camera matters, no amount of violence by protesters matter, all that matters is advancing a narrative that energizes the black voter and prompts them to turn out to vote for Hillary clinton.

Now my newest writer JD Rucker things that this is a bad idea rather than a good one for the Clinton campaign:

Hillary can neither distance herself nor embrace them. She’s walking the tightrope of appearing to be sympathetic without sounding as if she approves of their activities. Her Twitter account the last couple of days has had reactions designed to appease every side, followed by a flurry of unrelated Tweets to bury her perspectives away from scrutiny.

and his opinion is supported by this fact:

Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton condemned the police shooting of Charlotte resident Keith Lamont Scott, but has yet to comment on the rioting which spread violence throughout the North Carolina city on Tuesday and Wednesday.

Rioting she dare not condemn.

But in the end I suspect the reality is that Clinton is in a lot more trouble than the MSM will admit and the big swing to Trump represented a lot of people who are no longer afraid to say they’re with him. Thus turning out the Black vote becomes even more vital, not only for Clinton but the Democrats as a whole and as they can’t point to actual progress for Black America in the Obama years the only way to do so is to create a racial incident in the hopes of generating anger.

For this reason I suspect national Democrats consider Charlotte a godsend, a risky one to be sure, but as their panic in the party increases any methods however risky will be considered legit.

Fyi: If you wondered why the left has embraced the idea of relative truth, now you know.

If you want to support conservative writers please consider hitting DaTipJar

Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. Right now our subscribers consist of 1/50 of 1% of our total unique visitors based on last years numbers.

If we can get another 150 subscribers at $10 a month (another 1/10 of 1% of those who have visited this year) We can meet our annual goals with no trouble, with the same number of subscribers at $20 a month I could afford to cover the presidential campaign outside of New England firsthand.

And of course at that price you get the Da Magnificent Seven plus those we hope to add on and all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.

Choose a Subscription level

Those of us who view Hillary Clinton as an existential threat to the United State of America can list dozens of reasons she is unfit for President without breaking an intellectual sweat. The question of whether or not she is better than Donald Trump is something that undecided Independents will answer to determine who wins in November. For many, it will come down to who they dislike or mistrust the least. Depending on what happens between now and then, the out-of-control Black Lives Matter movement may be the one factor that drives Independents to lean towards Trump.

For the sake of her party and base, Hillary has allowed herself to be attached to Black Lives Matter. As hard as this is for many Republicans to accept, I do not believe that she’s actually sympathetic at all to the cause (even a liberal is capable of seeing the indefensible damage they’re doing), but she wouldn’t dare to condemn them in any form or fashion. She needs them to not hate her, to not bring the message to the masses that they prefer one of the third party candidates.

Her problem is quickly manifesting in Charlotte. If reports of a dashcam video showing Keith Scott brandishing a firearm before being shot turns out to be true, then the violence and rioting will be another example of unrighteous anger, destruction of property, and unwarranted violence stemming from the reactionary lack of reason demonstrated by the group.

Hillary can neither distance herself nor embrace them. She’s walking the tightrope of appearing to be sympathetic without sounding as if she approves of their activities. Her Twitter account the last couple of days has had reactions designed to appease every side, followed by a flurry of unrelated Tweets to bury her perspectives away from scrutiny. She’s trying to address the issue with a wave, then change the conversation as quickly as possible. It takes a lot of scrolling to get down to this Tweet:

All of this brings us back to the choice facing Independents. They have a wildcard in Trump and an untrustworthy liar in Hillary. Their cores negate each other in the eyes of many of these voters, which leaves them with a choice based upon emotion. Every time there’s a riot that draws lines between race rather than justice, it’s a reminder that she’s going to perpetuate the problems and magnify the hatred. Just as Trump needs a portion of minority voters to support him, so too does Hillary need Independent white voters to not see her as a threat to their safety.

Riots like the ones in Ferguson, Baltimore, and now Charlotte are reminders to voters that Black Lives Matter can strike them in their own cities. Hillary will be perceived as a supporter of Black Lives Matter no matter how deep in her profile she buries her Tweets. These truly undecided voters will make their final decision based not upon Trump’s rhetoric or Hillary’s scandals. Everyone is well aware of those. They’ll make their final decision based upon how each candidate will directly affect their lives. Every BLM incident, terrorist attack, and crack in Obama’s economy will push them closer to holding their noses and voting for Trump even if they don’t like him.

After all, they really don’t like Hillary, either.

I’ve been a regular visitor at Real Clear Politics for many years. It’s a very interesting website, especially when you look at the trends in headlines.

One emerging trend is the combination of the words fail (or failure) and Clinton. You find it three times today:
Will Democratic Success Breed Clinton’s Failure?
Clinton Air War Fails to Sink Trump
Hillary Clinton Is a Failure at Fighting Terrorism

In the first article, Michael Barone asks,

The Obama 2012 campaign showed that organization and data-mongering are most useful when messages are conveyed not by TV spots or robocalls but by actual volunteers concerned about similar issues. How many of these can Hillary Clinton inspire?

In the second article, Niail Stanage points out that Clinton’s campaign is outspending Trump’s 5:1, to little effect,

When outside groups supporting Clinton’s candidacy were included, the total spend on her side reached $156.6 million. The comparable figure for all pro-Trump advertising was $33.6 million.

Clinton is a slight favorite in the race, but the huge disparity in spending has failed to break the contest open. Data website FiveThirtyEight gave Clinton a 56 percent chance of winning as of Tuesday afternoon, while the RealClearPolitics average of national polls showed her with an edge of about 1 percentage point.

In the third, Charles Hurt describes Hillary’s tenure as Secretary of State as

a woman who has been a cornerstone of the current administration’s foreign policy who failed to develop even the slightest strategy for fighting terrorism or, at the very least, keeping it off of America’s shores.

But wait, didn’t the media and the Dems (but I repeat myself) assure us that Hillary was unstoppable?

Could it be that a larger segment of the American public finds her dishonest, untrustworthy, a liar, and gasp! unlikeable enough they won’t vote for her?

I don’t know about the polls. I do know that last Friday Donald Trump managed to convince 8,000 people to attend his Miami rally. Now, let me point out a number of things:
Friday night is a big night in Miami – lots and lots of clubs and restaurants attract thousands of regulars.
Last Friday night there were two big concerts, Kanye West and Meghan Trainor. Traffic was expected to be so bad the Miami Herald ran an article telling people to stay away from downtown.

Eight thousand people showed up on short notice anyway; many were turned away at the door. Trump took Hillary’s Deplorables theme and ran away with it. Before the rally he visited Little Haiti.

The last time Hillary held a rally in Miami, 1,500 people turned up. This week Hillary is canceling events, no reason given.

We’ll see if she shows up at the debates.

Fausta Rodriguez Wertz writes on U.S, and Latin American politics, news, and culture at Fausta’s Blog.

Crashed like a rock this afternoon and so instead of FINALLY getting back to the story of my trip to alabama (whose story was partially destroyed in the great website crash of this week.) let’s take a look at three stories dripping with Irony this election season.

BLM matter leader mugged by reality:

There is an old saying that a conservative is a liberal mugged by reality. I guess this applies to Black Lives Matter members too:

A University of Houston grad student active in the local Black Lives Matter movement is suddenly all for police patrols in his neighborhood — after he was robbed at gunpoint outside his apartment.

That can’t be right, we all know that the primary danger to young black men are evil police aren’t they?

Jerry Ford Jr., described as one the leaders of the BLM movement on campus, tells KTRK that he spotted the young man loitering outside his apartment one evening last week but thought little of it. But when he went to unlock the door, the man pulled a gun and stole Ford’s wallet and cell phone.

Ford lives at an apartment complex just a few blocks from the UH campus in an area that has seen a spate of robberies and thefts in recent weeks, including the burglary of dozens of vehicles. Because the housing is off-campus, it is not patrolled by University of Houston police officers. Ford says that needs to change.

Of course even being robbed doesn’t change some things

“I would’ve gave him money,” he said. “I would’ve talked to him because the real crime is why is he in that position that he feels the need to come and hang out at a college campus and rob people of stuff they worked for.”

But this doesn’t make things any less ironic

Ford, who is running for Texas State Representative, is one of the leaders of the Houston chapter of Black Lives Matter. The group has, among other things, supported the divestment of police forces around the country

and And the ultimate Irony:

Houston police say the suspect is a black man around 30 years old, 5’6 to 5’7, around 150 pounds with medium dreadlocks. He was wearing dark shorts and a camouflage shirt. If you have any information on this robbery, you’re asked to call Crime stoppers at 713-222-TIPS(8477).

this explains why CNN et/all doesn’t consider this a national story. I suspect this young man will go all Jessie Jackson when walking the streets in the future

Even Rev. Jesse Jackson once said, “I hate to admit it, but I have reached a stage in my life that if I am walking down a dark street late at night and I see that the person behind me is white, I subconsciously feel relieved.”

Meanwhile it seems that it’s not just Black lives matter folks being mugged by reality as some Hillary Clinton donors have discovered that just because Hillary spends so much time with wealthy fund raisers that she’s not an elitist. She treats the poor the same as the rich, as a permanent source of revenue:

Hillary Clinton’s campaign is stealing from her poorest supporters by purposefully and repeatedly overcharging them after they make what’s supposed to be a one-time small donation through her official campaign website, multiple sources tell the Observer.

The overcharges are occurring so often that the fraud department at one of the nation’s biggest banks receives up to 100 phone calls a day from Clinton’s small donors asking for refunds for unauthorized charges to their bankcards made by Clinton’s campaign. One elderly Clinton donor, who has been a victim of this fraud scheme, has filed a complaint with her state’s attorney general and a representative from the office told her that they had forwarded her case to the Federal Election Commission.

And these small donors are giving us a preview of what a Clinton administration will look like

The fraud specialist said that Clinton donors who call in will attempt to resolve the issue with the campaign first but they never get anywhere. “They will call the Clinton campaign to get their refund and the issue never gets resolved. So they call us and we just issue the refund. The Clinton campaign knows these charges are small potatoes and that we’ll just refund the money back.”
The source said that pornography companies often deploy a similar arrangement pull. “We see this same scheme with a lot of seedy porn companies,”

Shades of Bill in that last line.

I’m reminded of Mel Brooks old 2000 year old man bit with Carl Reiner when he said that Robin Hood rep for giving to the poor was only due to his PR man Marty that Robin in fact: “Stole from everyone and kept everything.” (see 17:05

That’s our Hillary an Equal Opportunity money grabber.

If you like what you see here and want to help cover these costs and others please consider hitting DaTipjar. I promise not to pull a Hillary and keep charging you without your consent.

Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. Right now our subscribers consist of 1/50 of 1% of our total unique visitors based on last years numbers.

If we can get another 150 subscribers at $10 a month (another 1/10 of 1% of those who have visited this year) We can meet our annual goals with no trouble, with the same number of subscribers at $20 a month I could afford to cover the presidential campaign outside of New England firsthand.

And of course at that price you get the Da Magnificent Seven plus those we hope to add on and all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.

Choose a Subscription level

Mary Cooper: Don’t tell me prayer doesn’t work

The Big Bang Theory The Electric Can Opener Fluctuation 2009

Last week at the time of this post I was getting ready to visit the EWTN studios where I would be part of the audience of Fr. Mitch’s TV show (as opposed to heading to the Shrine of the Blessed Sacrament when this post was originally written before the great blog crash totally destroyed it) things were very different.

While Donald Trump had narrowed the gap a bit Democrats were feeling pretty confident. Hillary Had a solid lead. The impenetrable wall the MSM had put around her and her record was holding, she had avoided major gaffes and despite the Labor day FBI release of data showing not only more Hillary lies but that she had actual medial episodes affecting her memory and video of coughing fits the MSM had definitely and in unison declared that any person saying there was an issue with Hillary Clinton’s health was a conspiracy theorist as Stacy McCain noted:

This was a question raised last month by former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani in an interview on Fox News Sunday with host Shannon Bream:

“She has an entire media empire that…fails to point out several signs of illness by her. All you got to do is go online.”
Bream countered that Clinton’s campaign has vehemently denied the unsubstantiated claims she is in poor health, releasing medical records last year to prove her fitness.
“Go online and put down, ‘Hillary Clinton illness,’ and take a look at the videos yourself,” Giuliani responded. . . .
Giuliani’s comments on Sunday came after a week in which Trump himself questioned Clinton’s “physical and mental stamina.”
The Democratic nominee’s campaign has accused Trump and his team of “peddling deranged conspiracy theories in a desperate attempt to change the subject – this time with absurd and debunked claims about Hillary Clinton’s health.”

In response, Farhad Manjoo of the New York Times took to Twitter to advocate that search results for videos about Hillary’s health should be suppressed: “Google should fix this. It shouldn’t give quarter to conspiracy theorists.” Is it Farhad Manjoo’s job to help elect Democrats?

Well, yes — yes it is. This is why New York Times pays his salary, because electing Democrats is what the New York Times is about.

Seven days later how things have changed.

Hillary found herself on the defensive as Matt Lauer questioned her on her record (causing the left in unison to attack him) her bucket of deplorables line has energized and engaged her opponents (to the point where the media is looking to identify individual bad actors out of tens of millions of Trump supporters to justify it) and above all thanks to video of her in physical distress causing her to leave a 9/11 ceremony in NY her health issues that the MSM could not deny they have officially stated her health is a legit issue and are openly talking about replacing her in case of a health emergency while at the same time trying to spin Mrs. Clinton “Pneumonia” as a sign of strength.

While this has been a horrible week for Hillary it can be said that the it has been almost as bad a week for the MSM that protects her as Larry O’Connor put it in a piece titled How the media failed America with the #HillarysHealth story.

But, despite the appearance of mea culpas from the likes of Chris Cillizza who just last weekchastised his colleagues (all from right-leaning outlets) for daring to ask questions about the ongoing coughing fits of the nominee. After a video captured the harrowing moment when Clinton collapsed while prematurely leaving the 9/11 event, Cillizza wrote on the same pages of the Washington Post that now, in his determination, these questions were legitimate.

Only now, because Cillizza says so.

And there in lies the problem. What fact-based source was motivating journalists for the past several months to not only ignore the questions regarding Clinton’s health, but, to aggressively and publicly shame and humiliate any reporter writing about their observations that, perhaps, Clinton was not the picture of health?  The good word of the Clinton campaign and the candidate, herself.

That’s right, the candidate with the lowest trustworthy ranking of any modern presidential candidate. The person known to skirt the truth if not lie outright on any issue that might make her or her husband look bad gave her own personal assurance to reporters that her health was fine.

And that was enough for them.

The real question is the title of the piece, was he referencing the media’s failure to report facts or the media’s failure to despite their best efforts to hide or spin them when the public was exposed to them before a spin could be agreed on (thus the whole “power through” meme) and CNN deciding Jake Tapper discovering that team Hillary didn’t bother with a doctor until she left her daughter’s apartment and went back home.

all of this brings to mind the Second Book of Samuel and what the Lord through the prophet Nathan said about David’s sins.

You have done this deed in secret, but I will bring it about in the presence of all Israel, and with the sun looking down.’

2 Samuel 12:12

It appears the same thing is happening with the media’s sins of omission.

Closing thought: I had thought that God had decided to honor the request of our cultural leaders to leave America alone, but perhaps he has decided to wait to make a final decision until after this election. But either way I will continue to when I pray the 4th Sorrowful mystery to ask both Mother Angelica and Justice Scalia to pray that decade with me for our country.

I would recommend this devotion to any other catholic out there.

It’s been a tough 24 hours here. We had a serious crash and burn that kept the site down for 8 hours and we had lost 9 months of work reduced to three posts, this being the 2nd one re-created. It cost $150 bucks to get things back up and I’m still getting bills from the Alabama trip.

If you like what you see here and want to help cover these costs and others please consider hitting DaTipjar

Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. Right now our subscribers consist of 1/50 of 1% of our total unique visitors based on last years numbers.

If we can get another 150 subscribers at $10 a month (another 1/10 of 1% of those who have visited this year) We can meet our annual goals with no trouble, with the same number of subscribers at $20 a month I could afford to cover the presidential campaign outside of New England firsthand.

And of course at that price you get the Da Magnificent Seven plus those we hope to add on and all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.

Choose a Subscription level

Be careful what you wish for, Republicans. Hillary Clinton’s medical episode today, officially diagnosed as a result of a three-days of pneumonia, has raised serious questions about her future as the Democratic nominee for President. Pundits are speculating. Some conservative publications are saying, “told you so!” Even some of her most ardent defenders in the press have to admit that it’s worth reporting.

The last thing the GOP should want is for Hillary to drop out. She’s the best possible candidate for Donald Trump to to compete with and possibly the only one who is hated enough for him to defeat. If she’s replaced, the repercussions could be devastating up and down the ticket.

There have been a handful of reports discussing the possible ramifications, most of which are either false or ill-conceived so I won’t link to them from here. Instead, let’s look at this logically and read what the rules say about such things. First, the DNC does not have the same type of established rules that the RNC has in the event of their candidate dropping out. Their bylaws grant the Democratic National Committee broad powers between conventions, including the responsibility to “fill vacancies,” though the nature of those vacancies are not discussed. This is uncharted territory for them. While they do not have the power to replace a candidate that has been nominated at the convention, they have all the power they need if she vacates.

Bernie Sanders supporters are pushing. Speculation about Elizabeth Warren is strong. Tim Kaine’s name has been floated as being pushed to the top of the ticket. At least one publication even considered 36-year-old Chelsea Clinton as an option. Clearly, the most likely replacement, the one that the DNC and power brokers in the Democratic Party would want, is Vice President Joe Biden. Uncle Joe has said that he “regrets every day” that he decided not to run. With under two months to go, his regrets may be reversed as a Biden-Kaine ticket is the most plug-and-play option the Democrats have.

It’s pretty obvious that something is being considered. It would put them in a position that they crave: being the victims of circumstance.

Trump has been compared, erroneously so, as another Barry Goldwater waiting to happen. While that particular debacle of an election has not been possible before, these circumstances change things. Many historians are wrong when they claim that Goldwater lost so horribly because he was too radical which is why most comparisons between Goldwater and Trump are incorrect. Goldwater lost in a landslide because we’ve always been a sentimental nation. John F. Kennedy’s death less than a year before election day guaranteed a huge victory for Lyndon B. Johnson. If Hillary drops out and is replaced by Biden, we might not see the same level of a defeat that Goldwater experienced, but the odds will definitely shift in the Democrats’ favor.

Hillary has lost all momentum and Trump is picking up steam. While it’s futile to speculate what will happen in this topsy-turvy election cycle in the final two months, Trump should be considered the favorite at this point as long as he’s facing Hillary. If a switch is made, we could be seeing Trump TV on the horizon.

911-des-plainesBy John Ruberry

This morning Hillary Clinton suffered what is being called a medical episode in lower Manhattan where she may have fainted, but she certainly had to be helped into a van by campaign aides as her knees wobbled, as you’ll see in a video. She’s was in New York to attend a Ground Zero 9/11 memorial service.

The Clinton campaign claims that the Democratic nominee was “overheated,” but so far there are no reports of anyone else among the thousands in attendance at the somber event being overcome by heat. Temperatures were in the late 70s in New York this morning. Today’s incident comes just six days after a four-minute long coughing spell during a Labor Day speech in Cleveland by Clinton, followed by a shorter one on her campaign jet, which the campaign blithely brushed off as related to allergies. Even hardened liberal Chris Cilizza of the Washington Post says that questions about Hillary’s health are legitimate ones, not just fodder for conservative conspiracy theorists.

Henry Wallace was pushed aside for Truman

It’s been said that Clinton is the most dishonest person to be a major party nominee since Richard M. Nixon. It’s now fair to say that she’s the unhealthiest one to run as a major party choice since another New York state Democrat, Franklin D. Roosevelt, won his his unprecedented fourth-straight presidential election in 1944.

Party bosses knew that FDR was sick in ’44, and fears that Russia-loving leftist Henry A. Wallace, his vice president, could succeed FDR as president was the primary reason Democratic leaders convinced him to dump Wallace as his running mate for Harry S. Truman. The press was rabidly pro-Democrat–sound familiar?–and it had for years covered up that Roosevelt was unable to walk, so it of course assisted in obscuring the president’s newer health concerns. But the what we now call the media didn’t convince everyone. So FDR was compelled to strenuously campaign in the autumn of that year–while of course America was at war–which likely further weakened him.

And how sick was Roosevelt?

In World War II Behind Closed Doors: Stalin, the Nazis, and the West, Lawrence Rees wrote in 2009 about Roosevelt’s health at the Yalta Conference in 1945:

Much has been written about Roosevelt’s physical state at the conference. Those who worked closely with him, like George Elsey, had noticed a profound deterioration of the president’s health over the previous months, and Churchill had remarked on how sick Roosevelt looked at the Quebec meeting in September. At Yalta, Lord Moran, Churchill’s doctor, recorded: “Everyone seemed to agree that the president had gone to bits physically…I doubt, from what I have seen, whether he is fit for his job here.”

John "Lee" Ruberry of the Magnificent Seven
John “Lee” Ruberry of the Magnificent Seven

Roosevelt was clearly duped by Joseph Stalin at Yalta, where he handed eastern Europe to the communists, including Poland, for whom Great Britain and France went to war after the weaker nation was invaded by the Nazis, which of course is how World War II began.

Do we want another ill–or yes, I’m going to say it–dying president to be swindled by another Russian leader? Or by Iran? (Of course, that is what happened with a presumably much healthier Barack Obama.) Or by anyone?

Roosevelt, as we all know, died three months after being sworn-in as president for the fourth time.

Oh, yes, I’m aware the John F. Kennedy had Addison’s disease, which was hidden from the public, but he had suffered from the ailment since the 1940s. His sister, Eunice, also had Addision’s, she died at 88. JFK’s health problems were partially attributed to his abuse of prescription drugs.

John Ruberry regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit.

I saw this at redstate via hotair earlier today.


Hillary Clinton apparently suffered from some kind of medical issue today at an event to commemorate the events of 9/11 on this, the 15th anniversary of the attacks. It includes her having to physically be helped into her van as she appeared to be fainting.


The piece included tweets from fox’s Rick Leventhal saying this:

I instantly started checking the tV but saw nothing on it, later Redstate updated their story with this tweet.

Finally I saw this report on Fox

I then turned to CNN to see how they would report this, Fareed Zakaria was on so I went back later during reliable sources wondering how Brian Stelter would handle it.

Now I’ve been doing this for nearly 8 years and I’d like to think I’ve reached the point where the bias of the media doesn’t surprise me anymore. But bless his heart Stelter and company did their best to do so.

I’ve just sat through a Mr. Seltzer and a panel of three discuss the story, the only person I knew off the top of my head was the ultra far left Katrina vanden Heuvel of the Nation. UPDATE: another was David Zurawik of the Baltimore sun and the other Tara Sotmayor) They had very little to say about Hillary Clinton but a lot to say about Fox news. They had no problem using words like “conspiracy”, “irresponsible” and were united in painting the Fox story as poorly soured, overblown and attacking the network for reporting it. Nowhere on the panel was any person defending the story, or providing any balance and let me remind you this is a show about taking an unbiased look at the media.

Oddly enough they had no problem repeating the Hillary campaign claim over her being overcome by the heat without question. In fact as I type this at 11:44 AM they have just done so again before pivoting to hit Fox news again on a different story.

As of now 2 hours after Hillary Clinton’s “episode” 11:42 it is 83 in NY according the I’ve seen reports that it was 78 degrees at the time of the episode but either way I’d be very interested in hearing if there was anyone else in the crowd overcome by heat.

Now you might think that a show called “Reliable sources” would be very interested in not looking partisan particularly in an election year.

But lately the polls have been looking pretty bad for the Clinton’s and the episode was reported before the left could agree on spin, so there wasn’t time to put on the mask.

Even as I type Brian Stelter just talked about Hillary’s health issues being reported by “conservative outlets” but some reporters too as if any reporter who is a conservative can’t be trusted.

Journalists my ***

Update: Instalanche Thanks Glenn, Just back from Alabama covering a pilgrimage to EWTN lot of videos at my Youtube channel and several posts coming, meanwhile in a disasterous devleopment for the Clinton Campaign Jake Tapper is now live on CNN meaning that the network will practice actual journalism for a while.

In fact he just played the video of her stumbling.

Chris Cillizza hardest hit.

Hillary Clinton’s health just became a real issue in the presidential campaign

That will leave a mark.

Update 2: The video

Update 3: If Hillary continues her freefall (in more ways than one) these new words from Glenn will be prophetic:

I’m seeing enough Dem pundits running with this as suddenly being a big story that I wonder if they’re looking for an excuse to dump her for someone who might beat Trump easily.

Hey they could have had Bernie who would have been a disaster for the country but could have beaten Trump with the MSM help but I think Tim Kaine would be able to win this election and if the Democrats come to that conclusion then I think Hillary is gone.

Update 4:
From the Washington Post article whose headline I quoted above:

“Secretary Clinton attended the September 11th Commemoration Ceremony for just an hour and thirty minutes this morning to pay her respects and greet some of the families of the fallen,” spokesman Nick Merrill said. “During the ceremony, she felt overheated, so departed to go to her daughter’s apartment and is feeling much better.”

What that statement leaves out is that a) it came 90 minutes after Clinton left the ceremony b) reporters — or even a reporter — were not allowed to follow her and c) the temperature in New York City at the time of Clinton’s overheating was in the low 80s. (A heat wave over the eastern United States broke last night/this morning.)


One wonders, too, what will happen if she is unable to continue as the Democrats’ nominee. Is there a federal statute governing withdrawal of a presidential candidate? Is it up to the party to determine how to select a substitute nominee? I don’t know, but it is time to start researching the issue.

and a different writer updates.

I have the same questions as John. It’s one thing to replace a senate candidate (Torricelli, New Jersey), quite another a presidential candidate when each state has different ballot access rules and different deadlines for finalizing the ballot.

Legal Insurrection:

Well if nothing else it takes the conversation away from the “deplorable”

Scott Adams: “unelectable

when it comes to American psychology, there is no more powerful symbol of terrorism and fear than 9-11 . When a would-be Commander-in-Chief withers – literally – in front of our most emotional reminder of an attack on the homeland, we feel unsafe. And safety is our first priority.

Hillary Clinton just became unelectable.

but as Twitchy notes others “unexpectedly” disagree

Note the time stamp he’s saying this not before additional information was available.

Update 5: The Hill reports the same thing I did with a VERY different take

CNN’s Brian Stelter explained his network’s waiting game in the below clip. He led a panel of guests, all of whom slammed Fox News for what they deemed to be irresponsible coverage. Most prominently, the Baltimore Sun‘s David Zurawik denounced Fox News’ quick characterization of the event as a “medical episode.” Indeed, that term immediately started trending on social media following the Fox News report. Zurawik described his reaction to hearing the term used by a mainstream outlet like Fox News:

While the entire video of the report was included read the story and note how they legitimize the whole critique to make CNN seem “reasonable” as their panel cries “conspiracy”

I’ll let you judge deal reader whose interpretation of CNN’s actions is correct, the Hill’s or mine.

If you like what you see here and want to help cover the costs please consider hitting DaTipjar

Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. Right now our subscribers consist of 1/50 of 1% of our total unique visitors based on last years numbers.

If we can get another 150 subscribers at $10 a month (another 1/10 of 1% of those who have visited this year) We can meet our annual goals with no trouble, with the same number of subscribers at $20 a month I could afford to cover the presidential campaign outside of New England firsthand.

And of course at that price you get the Da Magnificent Seven plus those we hope to add on and all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.

Choose a Subscription level

donthinkYou know he’s right…

Confidential. Secret. Top Secret. We hear these terms thrown around concerning Hillary Clinton’s emails. But what do they really mean? If you don’t handle classified information (and most of you don’t), it’s hard to understand the impact of losing classified materials. Worse, most security people aren’t going to comment on it, and aren’t even allowed to visit sites like Wikileaks.

To attempt to demonstrate the damage disclosure can have, let’s use a football analogy. Imagine you’re a college football coach and play against other rival teams in your conference. You are trying to keep your plays and recruiting strategy hidden from the other teams, who are trying to figure these out in order to beat you. By the way, you’re doing your own spying on them as well.


Confidential information is classified information that if revealed would cause damage. In our analogy, imagine if a rival coach got ahold of your weekly schedule while you were recruiting. He could see where you were traveling and who you were meeting, which he could use to craft a better deal to try and steal those people away from you. But if he only had a one-week schedule, it might damage your recuriting, but only for a limited time.

Recruiting in the south huh….not a chance!

Secret information would cause serious damage if revealed. If one of your players used a hidden video camera to tape a rival teams practice and key plays, that would give you a massive advantage over them. Not only that, but it would take some time for the team to build new plays, practice them and roll them out, which allows your team to pummel them during the season.

footballpracticeTriple option? Nobody uses that!

Top Secret information causes grave damage if revealed, and is often used to protect “sources and means.” In our example, imagine if we had hidden a wireless video camera that was capturing our rival teams every practice. If the rival team discovers that we have a video of one practice, they might not know about the hidden camera, just that someone at some point took a video. They might spend time building higher fences or trying to conduct practice at night, even though none of those actions block our hidden camera, because they only had access to our Secret information.

Yup, keep building those walls higher…

But, if they discovered the existence of the hidden video camera, that would be really bad. First, it probably took us a lot of time and money to hide the camera, which is now wasted. Worse, what if our rival team is really cagey? They could run a fake practice where their team uses lineups that they know will make it into our hands, only to use different ones during an actual game. Their knowledge of the source of the information makes it Top Secret and gravely damages our ability to win a football game.

There is one more type of classified information called a Special Access Program. SAP is so sensitive that there is a separate access list for who can access the information. In fact, SAP may be so protected that unless the program manager tells you about it, you won’t even know it exists, and not even know its cover name.

specialaccessNext thing you’ll tell me is that it costs millions of dollars…

A football SAP would be if you as coach had a rival player that you were paying off to pass information about that rival team. You wouldn’t risk telling your players about it. If your rival coach figured it out, the player could be banned and you could face expulsion from the conference and get fired. Disclosure would be catastrophic and cost you dearly.

So while the loss of any classified hurts, there is a scale for it. Confidential hurts in the short term, Secret a lot more, and Top Secret and SAP will almost definitely get people killed and cost millions of taxpayer dollars to fix. So when Snowden sells our Top Secret information to the Russians, he is not just a traitor, but he is costing you and every other taxpayer millions of dollars for the intelligence community to try and rebuild new access.

When the breach consists of multiple thousands of emails, containing information ranging all the way up to SAP and was caused by gross negligence, yes, you should be angry.

This post solely represents the view of the author and does not represent the official views of the Department of Defense, Department of the Navy, or any other branch of the US government. It also doesn’t contain any classified information, unlike some people’s emails floating around on the Internet.

If you liked this, you might like reading my thoughts on Darth Vader, and maybe even buy my Kids Book on the Navy.

Katherine McClintock: [after walking out of her bedroom to find G.W. and Mrs. Warren at the bottom of the stairs] What’s going on here?
George Washington McLintock: [Intoxicated, with Mrs. Warren sitting on his lap] Now Katherine, are you going to believe what you see, or what I tell you?

McLintock! 1963

While I was traveling to Alabama for the WQPH Pilgrimage retreat at St. Bernard Abbey & the EWTN Shrine of the Most Blessed Sacrament yesterday interviewing business owners and monks, Hillary Clinton was on the campaign trail and reminded everyone why her campaign doesn’t like questions about her health:

Now I give her full comic marks for the “Every time I think about Trump, I get allergic.” line, but this can’t be a good thing the weekend that an FBI report came out with Mrs. Clinton claimed her inability to remember briefings was due to a concussion and reports that Dr. Drew lost his CNN show for questioning her health.

Now of all the reasons why I object to Hillary Clinton as a potential president her health is the one I blame her the least for, it is what it is and that’s likely not in her control, but what I CAN do is call out NBC for this pathetic attempt to explain this coughing fit away:

Clinton’s conservative opponents have sought to raise questions about her health, though they have produced no evidence to indicate she is unwell.

That last line is pretty cute as it is Mrs. Clinton her own remarks to the FBI that has produced evidence that she is unwell not to mention that the article itself said the following two paragraphs previously

The former secretary of state has suffered from coughing fits at times throughout the Democratic presidential primary, but has not had a public coughing fit recently. However the frog in Clinton’s throat on Monday was one of the most aggressive she’s had during her 2016 run and left her almost unable to finish her remarks.

So I guess technically that line was true, her opponents have not produced evidence that she is unwell Mrs. Clinton has through her own testimony to the FBI & this public coughing fits.

But of all the lines in this story the most comical one was this:

After the event, campaign aides attributed it to allergies. Allergens were high in Northeast Ohio on Monday, according to

Well, if allergens were high in Northeast Ohio according to and NBC is going to report this as the reason for her cough and then provide evidence to suggest it’s not odd that she’s coughing due to the pollen count there is one obvious question I have for them:

Where are all the other coughers?

It would seem to me that if a news organization is going to give credence “oh it’s just allergies” line and backs it up with a pollen count there should have been plenty of other people in the crowd coughing, or sneezing etc.   In fact given that allergies are pretty common and a large crowd at such an event (at least large by Clinton standards vs Trump standards) it’s inevitable that there should have been plenty of people in the crowd coughing up a storm just like Hillary and not only in the crowd but among the campaign staff and with the press corps.

So I’d like to know where NBC has the video of all the other people so overcome by the pollen count in the crowd coughing, wheezing etc due to the pollen count?  I’d be delighted to see it and I’m sure everyone else would too, unless of course you are going to argue that the members of the general pubic, the press corps and the Hillary Clinton staff has access to anti-allergy drugs that are either unavailable or more effective than those available to a former first lady.

Closing thought:  How much to you want to bet that the next time this happens a member of staff starts coughing for the sake of the “pollen count” meme?

Update: A great question on twitter as I announced this post as upcoming

Hey it’s not like we have 30 years of Hillary clinton video to look for this stuff do we?

My Trip to Alabama involves missing a week of work (and pay) not to mention the actual cost of the trip if you would like to help mitigate said costs please consider hitting DaTipJar below.

Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. Right now our subscribers consist of 1/50 of 1% of our total unique visitors based on last years numbers.

If we can get another 150 subscribers at $10 a month (another 1/10 of 1% of those who have visited this year) We can meet our annual goals with no trouble, with the same number of subscribers at $20 a month I could afford to cover the presidential campaign outside of New England firsthand.

And of course at that price you get the Da Magnificent Seven plus those we hope to add on and all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.

Choose a Subscription level

Sheldon:  Hello Penny. I realize you are currently in the mercy of your primitive biological urges. But, as you have an entire lifetime of poor decisions ahead of you, may I interrupt this one?

The Big Bang Theory:  The Electric Can Opener Fluctuation 2009

As a general rule one tends to give young people some slack. Young inexperienced people make foolish decisions and hopefully said decision don’t destroy their lives.

But I draw the line at celebrating bad decisions that give one a social disease for the rest of one’s life:

A Google search for “Ella Dawson herpes” produces more than 50,000 results. Why would parents pay nearly $50,000 a year for their daughter to attend college when the result of her “education” is that she becomes notorious for having an incurable sexually transmitted virus?

Also one would think the editor of a campus sex magazine gender/feminist/sexuality studies major : ” Planned Parenthood volunteer, a sexuality studies major, and everyone’s go-to friend when they had questions about losing their virginity.”  would know that the only type of “careful” that prevents genital herpes is to not have sex with infected people.

Of course I tend not to give a pass for one who considers aiding and abetting  the deaths of children for profit as a virtue but be that as it may.

The decision to try and comfort people who have made the same bad decision you have and are paying for it, is in fact a good thing (although I think encouraging folks to publicly inform the world of their disease is only good in the sense of warning a potential sexual partner) since self-hatred leads to horrible things.

But all other things aside (including the censorship of those who don’t agree with her) I’m certainly not going to give her a pass on this:

I’ve been a Hillary Clinton supporter for years now, but the importance of her campaign for President didn’t hit home with me until I watched her speech last week in Reno. I know so many writers who are terrified to even mention Breitbart by name online because we so often pay for it. There Hillary was, literally reading Breitbart headlines from the podium as the audience gasped. She was unafraid of the Alt-Right’s vulgar, distorted conspiracy theories, their character assassinations, their sexist photoshopped memes. And despite her fearlessness, she was able to recognize their danger without validating their ideology.

Think for a second what that paragraph means:

 It suggests that liberals are afraid to talk about because they are unwilling to defend their opinions in the public square.

 It suggests that the critiques of Hillary Clinton are a bunch of conspiracy theories

 It suggests that speaking to a friendly crowd attacking one of the few outlets not in the tank for her is courage.

This is ignorance and idiocy on a grand scale and deserves an answer more detailed than the standard Stacy McCain putdown since many young people will read it and unfortunately buy it.

First of all the market place of ideas is where we decide what things are worthwhile and what are not.  If your ideas.  If your opinions which are constantly validated by major media all over the nation can’t stand critique by the readers of a single web site without you collapsing in terror than the problem is with you and your ideas which apparently have never been challenged.

Life is full of challenges, and the sooner one realises the thing to do is to face them the better, even more important one learns the most by defending one’s opinions, by critique.  If you never have those opinions challenged than when decisions based on said opinions fail you can’t cope and an inability to cope leads to an unhappy life.

And seriously you want to talk being silenced or harassed over speaking up talk to my youngest son who is your age about being a conservative on facebook.

Second when it comes to “conspiracies” concerning Hillary Clinton, I’m almost tempted to give her a pass as she was barely born when Bill Clinton was playing with Monica and wasn’t born when Hillary was helping him enable his assaults on Juanita Broaddrick.  Odds are she’s been spoon fed the “conspiracy” stuff since she entered school so I will live her and her readers with these questions:

Are the parents of the Americans left to die at Benghazi pushers of conspiracy theories?

When the FBI part of a conspiracy theory when they said your choice for president, Hillary Clinton was “careless” with classified data?

Is the act of aids to the secretary of state smashing one’s cell phones and ipads with hammers, per the FBI report, consistent with the idea that suggesting she had something to hide is a “conspiracy”

As Mrs. Clinton’s asserted to the FBI that her inability to remember key information was due to her concussion, does that make her part of the “conspiracy” concerning her health?

And that’s not even comparing the video of what she was claiming a year ago to what is now known to be true per the FBI.

Finally the idea that Hillary is showing courage by critiquing her critics in front of a friendly crowd.


You have a woman who has not held a press conference in 2016 because she is afraid of facing questions from a press corps that overwhelmingly favors her election and you think she’s courageous for telling a group of people who love her that a group of people they mutually hate are bad?

Yeah that takes a lot of courage.

You want a brave woman try  Pam Geller.  She is constantly challenged, harassed and even deals with attempts to murder her, yet she doesn’t falter, doesn’t whine or even try to censor her foes.  No she stands up in the marketplace of ideas and fights.  She stands up to people trying to kill her even as the majority of the media blast her for it.

That is a strong woman.  Not a wealthy protected pol who has spent the last 20 years being affirmed by everyone in sight.

Now again Ms. Dawson is only 23 or 24 years old and I thought I knew a lot more than I actually did at her age so perhaps we can chalk it down to the ignorance of youth.

But if you are a young person may I submit and suggest that taking the advice of one displaying said ignorance, particularly one who is not able to handle being challenged on it, is a very bad idea.

Closing thought, feel free to disagree loudly both here and on twitter, I promise not to try to have you silenced for it although I reserve the right to edit any vulgarities you choose to leave on my site.

If you like what you see here please consider hitting DaTipjar

Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. Right now our subscribers consist of 1/50 of 1% of our total unique visitors based on last years numbers.

If we can get another 150 subscribers at $10 a month (another 1/10 of 1% of those who have visited this year) We can meet our annual goals with no trouble, with the same number of subscribers at $20 a month I could afford to cover the presidential campaign outside of New England firsthand.

And of course at that price you get the Da Magnificent Seven plus those we hope to add on and all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.

Choose a Subscription level

Do people with nothing to hide destroy their electronic devices with hammers?

And remember it’s not me saying this, it’s the FBI.

When Clinton supporters deny wrongdoing or even the intent of wrongdoing they insult my intelligence for the sake of the narrative, like these guys.

I’m asking this question now because by this time next year It might be illegal to do so.

FYI for those Pro-Hillary folks who with righteous offense answer with “Well what about Trump?”  The difference between us is plain. I don’t pretend Trump is anything other than what he is nor insist on anyone believing convenient fictions to justify a vote for him .





disillusionedby baldilocks

It’s an odd feeling to begin to believe that you wasted your youth. It’s what I’m beginning to believe about my own.

Back when I was a skinny little critter, I wasn’t popping out illegitimate babies or selling/smoking weed or selling/shooting heroin or streetwalking or being a groupie to sports/pop music icons. I spent my youth as an enlisted woman in the USAF, and held a compartmented security clearance during the last “battles” of the Cold War.

We won, they tell me.

My DD Form 214—Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty—states that I had these two specialties (jobs): 1) Germanic Crypto Linguist, and 2) Slavic Crypto Linguist, Russian. Long-term training is required for the languages alone; that part comes first. Then there’s the second part of the training, the classified part–the part which one doesn’t even get to experience if something icky is uncovered in the background check. (When that happens, the person is pulled out of training altogether and, if they are lucky, they’re assigned another specialty. Unluckiness gets one kicked out.)

In this other part of the training, we learned all about our security clearances, how to handle classified information, the penalties for mishandling classified information, and what to do when mistakes are made. This very pertinent information is instilled and measured–tested–before any sensitive information is revealed to us.

It isn’t rocket science and, if I recall correctly, it takes only a few days. Most of us had high school diplomas only or a bit of “higher” education and very few of us were over 25 years old. It’s true, however, that we qualified for the specialty because of our measured high ability to remember when to breathe and remember when not to.

After that, there was the job itself. Stressful at times, but the great thing about it was that we knew why we were doing it and we knew who our enemies were–or so it seemed at the time. And after the victory was won, it was comforting to have been a tiny part of that.

Again, so it seemed at the time.

It was good for my personal self-respect to know that I was capable of loyalty and able to keep a secret—and not just because I would go to jail if I didn’t, but because I had given my word. These days, this is called adulting.

There are a few who held the linguist specialty who broke their word; the one referenced in the link defected to East Germany, had to spend some time in prison and, poetically just, is stateless. (Allegedly, he’s here in the USA and is, I guess, just another illegal alien.)

The rest of us are proud of what we achieved…but, as I look at the Labor Day weekend sub rosa news, I wonder whether we really achieved anything.

Hillary Clinton, wife of a former US President, a former US Senator, a former US Secretary of State, and the 2016 Democrat Party nominee for US President herself, has blatantly and openly violated everything for which I and many of my oldest, dearest friends stood.

But she hasn’t been charged with any of the TENS OF THOUSANDS security clearance breaches which she knowingly and willfully committed. She says that she can’t remember anything about it.

My black ass.

And the worst thing is that the investigative arm of this government admits it and will do nothing. She won’t serve time for treason or spend any time stateless. And she knew that long ago, knew before the first server was planted in her house. And now, so do we.

I should have spent the 1980s smoking weed.

BTW: Day 25 of not smoking anything.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng blogs at baldilocks. (Her older blog is located here.) Her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game, was published in 2012. Her second novel will be done in 2016. Follow her on Twitter.

Please contribute to Juliette’s JOB:  Her new novel, her blog, her Internet to keep the latter going and COFFEE to keep her going!

Or hit Da Tech Guy’s Tip Jar in the name of Independent Journalism—->>>>>baldilocks

As a husband and father who works far too many hours during the week, I’m a huge fan of making holiday weekends special for the family. These half-dozen or so big holiday weekends should be spent recharging our batteries and reconnecting with those aspects of life that often get lost in our productivity-focused and digitally distracted society. These are the times to let the world be the world so we can focus on the things that are closer to home.

For Labor Day 2016, I’m asking everyone to make an exception.

Yesterday’s big release by the FBI of Hillary Clinton’s email interviews was timed to allow the weight of her deceit and incompetence to fade away with everything else over the long weekend. When the government wants something swept under the rug away from our collective conscience, they do so in a very particular manner. Standard operating procedure is to release it midday on Friday, preferably before a long holiday weekend, so it gets the attention of the press but is pushed aside by a good chunk of the population that has their minds set on hot dogs, family, fireworks, and beer. The story gets coverage when nobody’s looking and then gets tossed in favor of holiday stories. A new week starts on Tuesday when the press has mostly moved on.

Hillary’s email story is one of corruption, lies, and mental breakdowns unbecoming of a President. It must not be swept under the rug. Here are some of the highlights that too few people will see because of the precise timing of the release:

This is all part of a bigger problem in the relationship between mainstream media and the U.S. government, particularly the Democrats. We’ve already seen reporters canned while asking taboo questions about her health. We’ve watched Bill Clinton’s liabilities filtered by mainstream media. We have to dig deep into the realm of obscure conservative media before seeing the reality of Obamacare’s failures.

On this issue of Hillary’s utter failures as a politician and a human being manifested in the way she’s handled and subsequently lied about her emails, we can’t let the media and the government get their wish. As much as it pains me to say so, this weekend is a time to discuss politics even if only in passing. Between the hamburgers and ice cream cones, make sure your cousin knows she lied when she said she set up the server so she could use one device; she had 13 mobile devices attached to her emails. While you’re on your way to see one of the terrible movies Hollywood is offering this weekend, ask your buddies if it’s okay that she wiped her email servers only after the NY Times reported about it. When you get back to work on Tuesday, tell a coworker that you can’t trust someone to be President of the United States if they claim they had no idea how classified intelligence actually worked while Secretary of State.

As some of you know, I’m not a fan of Donald Trump. That fact should compel you to share this story and keep the pressure up on Hillary despite the attempt to turn this scandal into a nothingburger. It’s not just Trump’s biggest fans who are gloating about her failures. Even those of us who aren’t sold on him are utterly aghast at his incompetent competitor.

Mother Teresa will be canonized on September 4, giving formal acknowledgment of the obvious: she led a life of heroic virtue in service to others. She’s worth emulating. Her work took her around the world, and she spent time with all kinds of world leaders. In 1994, she was the main speaker at the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington. President and Mrs. Clinton were there. Mother Teresa’s words moved nearly everyone in the room to give her a standing ovation at one point. Remaining seated were the Clintons, who couldn’t quite work up the same enthusiasm for what they were hearing.

One wonders what will go through Hillary Clinton’s head as the canonization nudges her off the “trending” list for an hour or so. Will the event rate a remark from the presidential candidate?

Mother Teresa started out mildly enough at the prayer breakfast, with the prayer of St. Francis. “Make me an instrument of your peace…” Then she spoke about human dignity, service to the poor, aid to the dying, support for families. Who could object? But then she just had to get to the topic everyone knew she would, however much it might make her listeners squirm.

“…I feel that the greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion, because it is a war against the child…I will tell you something beautiful. We are fighting abortion by adoption – by care of the mother and adoption for her baby. We have saved thousands of lives. We have sent word to the clinics, to the hospitals and police stations: ‘Please don’t destroy the child; we will take the child.’ So we always have someone tell the mothers in trouble: ‘Come, we will take care of you, we will get a home for your child.’ And we have a tremendous demand from couples who cannot have a child – but I never give a child to a couple who have done something not to have a child. Jesus said. ‘Anyone who receives a child in my name, receives me.’ By adopting a child, these couples receive Jesus but, by aborting a child, a couple refuses to receive Jesus.” [Find the full transcript at]

Boom. That’s when the ovation began. It went on without Hillary Clinton’s participation. That much made the evening news.

Last January, Sean Fitzpatrick writing at Crisis magazine offered a postscript about the encounter between Mother Teresa and the First Lady.

“The address concluded, Mrs. Clinton noted the pointed nature of the nun’s words. ‘Mother Teresa was unerringly direct,’ the First Lady recounted. ‘She disagreed with my views on a woman’s right to choose and told me so.’ Tell her so she did; but though she was direct in her disagreement, she also offered something that Mrs. Clinton could applaud. Although Hillary Clinton was, and remains, a supporter of legalized abortion, she agreed with Mother Teresa that adoption was a preferable alternative. Speaking to her afterwards, Mother Teresa told Mrs. Clinton of her desire to continue her mission to find homes and families for orphaned, abandoned, and unwanted children by founding an adoption center in Washington, DC. She invited the First Lady to assist her in this endeavor, and brought Mrs. Clinton to India with her to witness her work firsthand.

“Mother Teresa’s motions were not wasted. When Hillary Clinton returned to Washington, she took up Mother Teresa’s request with a will. Keeping in contact with the saint who called her regularly to receive updates on her ‘center for babies,’ Hillary Clinton did the necessary legwork and succeeded in opening The Mother Teresa Home for Infant Children in 1995 in an affluent section of Washington, DC. Mother Teresa joined her for the opening, and two years later passed into the arms of her Lord. But she left a bright mark on the career of Hillary Clinton, who saw something remarkable in the tiny nun, and chose to do her bidding to help save lives. Mother Teresa inspired Mrs. Clinton to do a truly good work in spite of her dedicated promotion of Planned Parenthood’s agenda for ‘safe and legal’ abortions.

The center was quietly and unfortunately closed in 2002.”

The canonization will give Hillary Clinton an opportunity to point out Mother Teresa’s opposition to abortion, which she can contrast with her own reproductive-rights song and dance. Or, Hillary Clinton can take the high road, recall the work she and Mother Teresa did together, and say something like “let’s be more like her.”

Of course, if she doesn’t want to see more people like Mother Teresa, she could say that, too.

Ellen Kolb writes about the life issues at When she’s not writing, she’s hiking in New Hampshire. See her earlier posts for DaTechGuyBlog: Ethics and PP’s Campaign Cash, Putting a Know-Nothing in His Place, Ads Say the Darnedest Things, Worried About the Court? Then Worry About the Senate, and Sunday Best. 

A note to readers: This is my last pitch as one of DaTechGuy’s Magnificent Prospects. DTG will be judging the entries in Da Magnificent Tryouts by hits-per-post and hits to DaTipJar. If you hit DaTipJar after reading one of my posts, please mention my name so Da Boss knows I’m earning my keep – and thank you! (Look for a tip jar link at the right side of the page if it’s not visible below.)

Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. Right now our subscribers consist of 1/50 of 1% of our total unique visitors based on last years numbers.

If we can get another 150 subscribers at $10 a month (another 1/10 of 1% of those who have visited this year) We can meet our annual goals with no trouble, with the same number of subscribers at $20 a month I could afford to cover the presidential campaign outside of New England firsthand.

And of course at that price you get the Da Magnificent Seven plus those we hope to add on and all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.

Choose a Subscription level

and if you want to fight the MSM company store join the Have Fedora Will Travel pledge drive to send me to cover Donald Trump on the road

Donald Trump heads to Mexico today to meet with president Enrique Peña Nieto. The ninety minute meeting is scheduled for 3pm Mexico time (2pm Eastern), after which Trump flies to Phoenix for his immigration speech.

Whether you like Trump or not, you must admit Trump has guts.

This week Mexican media have been obsessing over the sudden death of singer Juan Gabriel. Normally Spanish-language media in the U.S. dedicate most of their air time taking out the sledge-o-matic and going full Gallagher on Trump, but they are pikers compared to Mexican politicians and Peña Nieto himself, who has compared Trump to both Hitler and Mussolini.

By going to Mexico before today’s speech on immigration, Trump has everything to gain.

Larry O’Connor explains (emphasis added):

This is a chance for Trump to show that he can play the role of statesman and diplomat.

A fearless one at that,

After all, if he’s willing to meet with the Mexican President after all of the rhetoric from his campaign and the vitriol from critics of his order security policy, he could do business with anyone. The meeting cuts directly across one of the more effective memes of the Clinton campaign in which the former Secretary of State has been able to capitalize on the perception that Trump is an inexperienced loose cannon who would embarrass the United States on the international stage.

If Pena Nieto decides to grandstand and trash Trump after the meeting by suggesting that he is unqualified to deal with international issues, he could actually help Trump by making the GOP candidate look like “the bigger man” and allow the billionaire real estate magnet to proclaim that it’s the Mexican government that is intransigent and this is why the US needs to take a hard line.

And, to top it off, Trump can claim in his immigration speech that he pressured Peña Nieto into listening to him.

Never mind that Peña Nieto invited both candidates; “The world is run by those who show up”, and Trump is the one who showed up for the meeting.

The Hillary campaign is having conniptions. Trump went to Louisiana to bring flood aid, while Obama played golf. Trump’s now in Mexico while Hillary seethes.

While Hillary is trying to run the clock to the November election, don’t forget there’s the “days since she gave a press conference clock,” too.

Fausta Rodriguez Wertz writes on U.S, and Latin American politics, news, and culture at Fausta’s Blog.

You hadn’t exactly gone out of your way to call attention to them had you? I mean like actually telling anyone or anything.’ But the plans were on display…’ o n display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them.’ `That’s the display department.’ `With a torch.’ `Ah, well the lights had probably gone.’ `So had the stairs.’ `But look you found the notice didn’t you?’ `Yes,’ said Arthur, `yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying “Beware of The Leopard”.’

Douglas Adams The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy 1979 — Douglas Adams.

On Tuesday I led with a piece concerning the hilarity of crying “security” with Anthony Weiner and Huma when Bill Clinton is about to be let back into the white house. In that piece I had a quote from Donny Deutsch

Panelist Donny Deutsch guessed that Trump would have no problem counter-punching with the Epstein connection whenever he was hit for his own behavior with women, as he was last weekend in a piece in the New York Times.

“Here’s the tennis game,” Deutsch said. “Donald Trump kissed a woman in a bathing suit. Trump hits back: Tell me about the president’s relationship with a guy named Jeffrey Epstein. That’s your tennis match.”

In my original piece I had video from the Washington Free Beacon story containing that entire exchange. You might wonder why I didn’t include said video of Deutsch mentioning Jeffery Epstein and see the reaction of the people at the table.

Here is why

nbc copywright

If you look at the view count you will see that seven minute clip had over 100,000 views before NBC decided to play copyright police game.

Maybe it’s just me but given how often we see stuff at mediaite et al it seems rather unusual for a news network to make a copyright claim over a clip from a news story that used as “fair use” by another news organization. Could this suggest that NBC wants to keep this clip out of the public view because it might hurt Hillary?

I can see the NBC reaction now: Nonsense, we’re not censoring the clip at all. The seven minute clip IS available IF you

Go to the Morning Joe site

Hit search taking you to the MSNBC search engine

Search for Donald Trump

Narrow the field to Morning Joe

Narrow the field to May 16th 2016

and sit through all the videos till you find the right one.

And skip ahead to the 12 minute mark on that video.

If you do so you CAN find the clip and watch the Morning Joe panel’s reaction to what Donny Deutsch says

So,  You’ll have absolutely no problem sharing this clip with people far and wide and giving them a hint about the relationship between Jeffery Epstein and Bill Clinton and how the media views it…provided you are someone like me who

already saw the clip

remembered what show it was on

knew what day it was broadcast

And knew what time segment to look for 

As for everyone else NBC says to you: Beware of the Leopard!

If you like what you see here please consider hitting DaTipjar

Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. Right now our subscribers consist of 1/50 of 1% of our total unique visitors based on last years numbers.

If we can get another 150 subscribers at $10 a month (another 1/10 of 1% of those who have visited this year) We can meet our annual goals with no trouble, with the same number of subscribers at $20 a month I could afford to cover the presidential campaign outside of New England firsthand.

And of course at that price you get the Da Magnificent Seven plus those we hope to add on and all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.

Choose a Subscription level

and if you want to fight the MSM company store join the Have Fedora Will Travel pledge drive to send me to cover Donald Trump on the road

Reg:  All right, but apart from the sanitation, medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh water system and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?

Monty Python  Life of Brian 1979

Helen Ramirez: You want to know why I’m leaving?  Then listen.   Kane will be dead in half an hour.   And nobody’s going to do anything about it. And when he dies, this town dies too.   I can feel it.

High Noon 1952

Wednesday I wrote about how the situation in Louisiana doesn’t help the MSM’s cause and how it’s affects their coverage but there is another aspect that I’ve talked about before in these web pages that Rod Dreher mentioned in the piece I quoted that, that is worthy of its own post:

you would be hard-pressed to find a single church or Christian organization (like the school community of which I’m a part) that isn’t in some way helping flood victims. I’m not talking about simply giving money. I’m talking about doing sacrificial work to help those who are helpless.

This of course is no surprise to any Christian of any denomination as it echoes the words of St. James in his letter:

If a brother or sister has nothing to wear and has no food for the day, and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, keep warm, and eat well,” but you do not give them the necessities of the body, what good is it?

James 2:15-16

Christians are not just called to be believers, we are called to be doers.  If you look at the Ten Commandments they are divided between the things we do based on our duty to God as his children and our duties to each other as brothers and sisters or as Christ put it.  

One of the scribes, when he came forward and heard them disputing and saw how well he had answered them, asked him, “Which is the first of all the commandments?”

Jesus replied, “The first is this: ‘Hear, O Israel! The Lord our God is Lord alone!  You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength.’  The second is this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.”

Mark 12:28-31

This is the reason why as Matthew Kelly said:

Every single day the Catholic Church feeds more people, houses more people , clothes more people, visits more imprisoned people and educates more people than any other institution on the planet earth can ever hope to.

Worcester Mass. March 20th 2010

And you will find that if you go to your local church of any denomination, Catholic or Protestant you will find people either quietly or loudly doing all the good works that a lot of you.

The media has not talked about this, any more than they bothered to talk about Miravia or the Kolping Society or visitation house or the open arms society.

Why do I bring all this up, because Rod mentions something of interest concerning the upcoming election and the election of Hillary:

Some people say that loss of tax-exempt status, which is what many progressives would like to see happen to dissident churches, will be no big deal. Why should their tax dollars go to subsidize bigotry? they reason.

It will be a very big deal. All contributions to churches and Christian organizations doing relief work are tax-deductible at the present time. This will likely go away, dramatically hampering the resources available to conservative churches like Istrouma to help the suffering in instances like this. Far as I know, nobody has seen crews from the Human Rights Campaign mucking out houses or feeding refugees.

Of course if they lose their tax exemption, churches will still do these things. But they will have many fewer resources with which to do so. Progressives either have not thought about this, or, as I suspect, they just don’t care.

I guarantee you won’t see Jim Carville saying “this is saving people lives” in arguing against this.  Our liberal “friends” have embraced a different faith and that faith’s primary enemy is Christianity.

One of the worst things about all this, is many Christians don’t see it coming

I find that even at this late date, it is difficult to get ordinary Christians, including pastors, to understand the reality of what’s coming. You should believe David Gushee. He has done us all a favor here. He and his allies — that is, the entire American establishment — are going to do everything they possibly can to eliminate any place of retreat. When people say that if the Left has its way, there will be no Benedict Option places left to retreat to, I agree. That does not mean they will succeed, at least not at first, but it’s just a matter of time. This means that we will need the Benedict Option more than ever. The Ben Op is not about escapism; it’s about building the institutions and adopting the practices required for the church to be resilient, and even to thrive, under harsh conditions. The church will be under unprecedented pressure, legally and socially, to capitulate. But it will be possible to resist, though not without paying a high cost.

But the people who won’t see it coming are the poor, the indigent the destitute and those caught in disaster who will discover very quickly the difference between the church coming to help without question or condition in your time of trouble and relying on the state.

That’s how a culture dies and when it does it will be through our own actions and inactions.

If you like what you see here please consider hitting DaTipJar

Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. If less than 1/3 of 1% of our readers subscribed at $10 a month we’d have the 114.5 subscribers needed to our annual goal all year without solicitation.

Plus of course all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.

Choose a Subscription level

One of the great problems with the #nevertrump movement among conservatives is a basic fact of life noted in his post The 2016 conundrum for the Right: Truth-telling or cheerleading? by Ed Morrissey:

In the interests of telling the truth, I’ll disclose now that I plan to vote for Donald Trump. Perhaps I’ll write a separate post explaining how I made that decision, but the short version is that Hillary Clinton must be stopped and he’s the only way to make that happen.

That’s a much shorter version of my Donald Trump or Civil War I Choose Trump post detailing why Hillary Clinton must be stopped.

However thanks to various missteps, a united front by not only the MSM but the primary social media outlets such as Facebook and twitter who have, as expected in an election year dropped any pretense of being unbiased, and the efforts of the #NeverTrump Crowd the odds of us living under a Hillary Clinton presidency are increasing by the day.

And while the MSM and liberal owners of social media giants will rejoice I’ve been flummoxed by the lack of worry by #nevertrump over the consequences of a Hillary presidency, particularly since I see no reason why they should assume that they would be immune to any of the consequences that a newly empowered Hillary Clinton and “justice” department will vent on conservatives in general and Christians in particular.

At least I was until I saw yesterday’s headlines concerning the Clinton Foundation and Hillary’s time at State:

More than half the people outside the government who met with Hillary Clinton while she was secretary of state gave money — either personally or through companies or groups — to the Clinton Foundation. It’s an extraordinary proportion indicating her possible ethics challenges if elected president.

At least 85 of 154 people from private interests who met or had phone conversations scheduled with Clinton while she led the State Department donated to her family charity or pledged commitments to its international programs, according to a review of State Department calendars released so far to The Associated Press. Combined, the 85 donors contributed as much as $156 million. At least 40 donated more than $100,000 each, and 20 gave more than $1 million.

This being the case, the plan for conservatives in a Hillary administration is obvious.

Rather than spending money on think tanks, electing officials, grass roots organizing or educating the American people on the reasons why fiscal and social conservatism produces positive results for both society as a whole and for individuals in particular, conservatives can instead choose to take advantage of a fact noted by Reince Priebus on CNN:

Since it’s clear that Hillary Clinton can be bought all conservatives have to do is make sure we aren’t outbid.

Worried about taxes? $10 Million in the right hands will keep them low. Upset about gay marriage or the transgender stuff from the feds. Satisfaction is just $25 million away. Concerned about the Supreme Court? $100 million is the difference between Hillary appointing justice Warren or Justice Sessions. Want immigration laws enforced? $250 million will get it done and if you double it you might even get a wall.

And with the drop in oil prices making things difficult for the gulf states it might even be possible to outbid the Muslim Brotherhood’s supporters to make sure help actually gets sent in the next Benghazi situation, bid high enough and she might even denounce islamic terror.

I must commend the #nevertrump crowd for figuring this out before I did.

And to the Bernie Sanders supporters who sent those $10-$50 contributions have decided to Support Hillary Clinton over either Jill Stein, Gary Johnson or even Donald Trump.

You asked for it.

The Clock is ticking for Da Magnificent Prospects You can check out their work Monday evening, Tuesday at Noon, All Day Thursday and Saturday at noon. If you like what you see from them consider hitting DaTipjar in support of them (and please mention their name when you do) as both internet hits and tipjar hits will be part of scoring who stays & who goes.

(If you can’t see DaTipJar button below on their posts use the one on the 2nd column on the right)

Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. If less than 1/3 of 1% of our readers subscribed at $10 a month we’d have the 114.5 subscribers needed to our annual goal all year without solicitation.

Plus of course all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.

Choose a Subscription level