Hunter Biden May Hold the Fate of the Democratic Party in His Hands

My boss would frown upon publishing any puns I have in mind about the title

by baldilocks

This about more than just a mere deadbeat sperm donor.

The Arkansas woman suing former vice president Joe Biden’s son Hunter Biden for child support on Monday accused him of needlessly delaying the trial, according to a new court filing.

Lawyers for Lunden Alexis Roberts are crying foul after Biden declared himself “unable to appear” for a scheduled Tuesday hearing that Biden himself set the date for. The filing asks the court to deny Biden’s motion to reschedule the hearing. (…)

Lawyers for Roberts allege that Biden is avoiding the hearing because he is unwilling to provide financial information for fear it will be made available to the public.

“[Biden] has used his carte blanche need for a protective order as a basis for refusing to disclose basic information about his income or assets,” the filing states. “The defendant has been clear that he will not provide his financial information or basic information about his income until his motion for a protective order is heard by the Court.”

Biden, a former government lobbyist, earned more than $50,000 a month to sit on the board of Ukrainian energy giant Burisma from April 2014 to April 2019. He was also recently revealed to have purchased a home worth $2.5 million in Hollywood Hills, Calif. The Monday filing contends that Biden may have assets in excess of $156 million.

Just what California needs, another rich liberal.

Prediction: Biden will evade this for as long as he can. He has to in order to keep the rickety House of Biden upright.

Prediction 2: if the location and amount of Biden’s money is exposed to the public, it will result in him ending up in jail – and, possibly, his father will have the same destination. And, most certainly, it will end the presidential campaign of Biden the elder.

Prediction 3: moreover, it will take the teeth out of at least one of the articles of impeachment against President Trump. Not that there is any “there” there anyway; let’s not forget about our Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty with Ukraine.

Think of it: the fortunes of the Democrat Party may hinge on one man’s years ago failure to use a condom in an indiscreet moment.

How appropriate.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng has been blogging since 2003 as baldilocks. Her older blog is here.  She published her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game in 2012.

Follow Juliette on FacebookTwitterMeWePatreon and Social Quodverum.

Hit Da Tech Guy Blog’s Tip Jar !

Or hit Juliette’s!

Inconvenient Guests, attacks, voters, numbers and signs under the fedora.

Saw a tweet by old friend Erick Erickson that jumped out at me

Nothing is more inconvenient for leftists on television that a person who critiques Donald Trump regularly but still intends to vote for him.


A close second are regular attacks on jews in NY by Blacks who do not support Donald Trump in any way shape or form

The fact that black people are responsible for this “dramatic increase” cannot be denied, but as Ace of Spades points out, the media keep trying to blame Trump for these crimes committed in Democrat-controlled cities by people who certainly don’t seem like MAGA-hat types.

Consider this “argument” by Jay Michaelson at The Daily Beast:

“New York is reeling from a wave of anti-Semitic attacks, and speaking as a Jewish parent who lives in Brooklyn, I can tell you that it’s terrifying.
It is also confusing. The vast majority of anti-Semitic attacks in this country are carried out by right-wing white supremacists. But most of the recent New York-area attacks have been carried out by people of color expressing very different grievances, or none at all. So is this the same phenomenon, or a different one? Hate, yes, but what kind of hate?
The answer is not simple. The recent street violence and acts of terror are based, in part, on anti-Semitic conspiracy theories similar to those on the Right. And yet, it is dangerous and misleading to see this as the same phenomenon, because the social contexts, the dynamics of race, and the relationships to power are all quite different. . . .

See? Michaelson is a liberal, and therefore “the dynamics of race” must be considered, as if a machete-wielding black psycho in New York deserves sympathy in a way that, say, Dylan Roof does not. In fact, he claims, “it is dangerous and misleading” not to employ a double standard:

Perhaps the left will shortly argue that these attackers while black opponents of Donald Trump define themselves as White Supremacists? That argument is a lot more convenient that dealing the with reality on the ground.


A while back I wrote about the anti-anti’s who tended to side against America’s enemies because they hated the anti-communists more than they hated communists. Victor Davis Hanson has found an inconvenient version of this meme just in time for election 2020:

Many who voted for Trump were quite aware that Trump’s rhetoric often bothered them. They now weigh that discomfort against his achievements and the shrill Democratic alternative — and find the latter far scarier. Few on the left ever contemplate the effect on the general public of the 24/7, 360-degree pure hatred of Trump on network and cable news, public TV and radio, and late-night TV talk shows, as well as print media. The silent disdain many people have for the progressive media nexus is especially potent when the haters so often fit a stereotypical profile in the public mind: counterfeit elite as defined by education, zip codes, careers, or supposed cultural influence; smug in their parrot-like group-speak and accustomed to deference.

This paradox was brought home to me not long ago when I asked an unlikely Trump minority supporter why in the world he would vote against his family’s and community’s political heritage. He answered at once, with simply, “I hate the people who hate him.”

Translated, I think that means we often are missing a cultural element to Trump Agonistes, exacerbated by the latest toxic impeachment episode.

That’s got to be very inconvenient for the left come November.


Speaking of inconvenient facts for the media there are few things more inconvenient to the media’s narrative than this one.

13 hours vs 13 minutes, talk about an inconvenient number.


Finally one of the problems with making predictions and decisions about the future based on iffy data is that when they don’t come true you might be left with some inconvenient signs:

The centerpiece of the visitor center at St. Mary near the east boundary is a large three-dimensional diorama showing lights going out as the glaciers disappear. Visitors press a button to see the diorama lit up like a Christmas tree in 1850, then showing fewer and fewer lights until the diorama goes completely dark. As recently as September 2018 the diorama displayed a sign saying GNP’s glaciers were expected to disappear completely by 2020.

But at some point during this past winter (as the visitor center was closed to the public), workers replaced the diorama’s ‘gone by 2020’ engraving with a new sign indicating the glaciers will disappear in “future generations.”

As Rush Limbaugh taught Al Gore with his Goremageddon clock you don’t make predictions about the future within a time span when they can be proven false because it might turn out to be a tad inconvenient.

2020: The Year We Find Out What America Shall be

Having been born in 1963 of Parents Born in 1921 & 1924 of Grandparents born from 1878-1896 me and mine have seen a lot of years of consequence.

For my grandparents 1914 would be the biggest year of consequence they were alive as it was the year where the entire history of the world pivoted on the decision of a single Serbian’s pistol shot.

For my parents it would be 1942 because in that year three allied battles Stalingrad (which started in 42 but ended in 43) El-Alamein (which started in 41 but ended in 42) and Midway all took place. The results of these battles meant that the 3rd Reich and their allies would not rule the world let alone survive World War 2 intact.

Until recently I thought the most significant year in my life would have been somewhere in the 1980’s where the combination of Reagan, Thatcher, St. Pope John Paul II & Lech Walesa lead to the fall of the Soviet Union and freedom for hundreds of millions around the world with perhaps 1986 being the key year, but 1984 (Reagan re-election) 89 (1st non communist government in Poland, 1983 (JP II 2nd visit to Poland) or even 1987 (“Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall”). But the more I think of it, for good or ill the year 2020 is likely going to be the most significant year of my lifetime in terms of history in general and American History in particular.

This is the year we find out if America survives as a single united free capitalist country.

This is the year that we find out if in fact if socialist and communist turn their cold war defeat into a belated victory.

This is the year we find out without question if America will stand up to it’s enemies or back down.

This is the year we find out if American blacks will believe the evidence of their own eyes and wallets or the propaganda that has enslaved them politically for 50 years.

This is the year we find out if America has boarders or it doesn’t.

This is the year where we find out if we are energy independent and thus able to resist OPEC & Russia or not.

This is the year we find out if our laws will be based on the Constitution as written or as imagined by the left.

This is the year we find out if we are to be bullied by those who claim that there are as many genders as there are grains of sands on the beach.

This is the year we discover if America is truly the leader of the free world or not

This is the year we discover if my children and grandchildren will be able to follow their Catholic Faith freely without fear or pay a heavy price for a profession of Christian faith.

And this is the year that we discover if the deep state with it’s propaganda machines in the press, and entertainment and the universities will rule this country or not.

As we are still, at this point free enough to make this choice as a nation, nothing is certain. All my instincts and all the data suggests that we will make the wise choice, there is still that fear within me that we will not, and that my sons and grandchildren will have to risk their lives to fight their way out of the socialism that their peers and mine vote themselves into.

Americans will as always get the government we deserve, but this is the year will discover if what we deserve is freedom we were bequeathed or not.

May God help us decide wisely.

“Beyond Normal” “Running on the Economy” “peace and security” “congressional approval” “we become morons” Under the Fedora

Because I have a busted shoulder and am currently on disability instead of doing my share to advance Christmas eCommerce, I am watching a Democrat debate.

It simply amazes me that people think these folks are serious and there was a lot of stupid on that stage but I want to point out just a few things that were said by various candidate in particular that were, well….interesting

Joe Biden: “We have to move beyond normal”

This was in response to how to win republicans back in a post Trump era. It has to be one of the silliest things I’ve ever heard. If I was Team Trump I would be making fun of that line for the rest of the campaign and in a debate with any democrat I’d ask how many genders they are.


Tom Steyer: “Trump is going to run on the Economy”

There was a question asked about how the Democrat field will deal with the economy. Every single democrat then went on and on about how bad the economy actually is for the majority of people. Yet Tom Steyer stated bluntly that Donald Trump is going to run on the economy.

If the economy is so bad, and the majority of voters know it, why on earth would Trump run on the economy?

To ask the question is to answer it.


Bernie Sanders: ” Israel has the right not only to exist, but to exist in peace and security”

Now in fairness of all of the statements that were said on the stage this is one of the sanest and most rational things said, but the revealing moment was the reaction to those words.

The night was full of loud applause to the words of candidate but of all the audience reactions of the night the most significant was the single solitary lonely clap that was heard in the audience when these words were said.

If you are a Jewish Democrat who supports Israel that should speak volumes


Joe Biden: “you had to have Congressional approval.”

Joe Biden was asked why Gitmo was not closed during the Obama years and he quickly pivoted toward Israel, but before he did he stated that to close gitmo “you had to have Congressional approval”

In 2008 a new congress was elected with Barack Obama and Joe Biden, that congress gave the Democrats majority in the house of 256-178. In the Senate they had the majority of 55-41 with two independents who caucused with the Democrats and that number at once point was 60-40.

That being the case how can Biden claim that congress was to blame for Gitmo not being closed?


Andrew Yang: “If you get too many men alone and leave us alone for a while, we kind of become morons”

It’s often commented that there is a gender gap between men and women in elections with men favoring the GOP and women favoring Democrats. If you want to know why just look at this response to the question concerning President Obama’s statement about how much better the world would be if women were running it.

The obvious statement that calling half the electoral population a bunch of morons is a bad idea when you want to win an election but it’s worth noting that Donald Trump did better than Hillary Clinton among Married couples.

Married couples would include a mother and a father and likely a son or two. I suspect that a lot of mothers don’t appreciate having some stranger tell her their fathers, or husbands or sons are a bunch of morons.

This type of thing might play with the Democrat Debate audience but it’s not going to play with the general public outside liberal universities.


In fairness only one of the Democrat nominees will be running for President ( I say it will be Biden on the 2nd ballot) and the great saving grace for the Democrats is that most of the voters they need to win in 2020 were not watching. But if I was the Trump Presidential campaign I would be tagging this entire field with all of these statements and dare them to run away from it.

Morning After Impeachment Thoughts Under the Fedora

Rhett Butler: With enough courage, you can do without a reputation.

Gone With the Wind 1939

Based on the reactions of some of the facebook friends of my son last night, a not inconsiderable number of people on the left and abroad are going to wake up this morning and be completely surprised that Donald Trump remains the current president of the United States of America with all the power and prerogatives of the office that he holds still intact.

While I deplore the commentary this is on our educational system a mere twenty years after Bill Clinton’s impeachment as a very vocal Trump supporter in an extremely blue state where even the establishment GOP is not on the side of the angels I confess that am going to enjoy quite a bit of schadenfreude when the reality of that fallacy hits these fools and frankly that feeling will be multiplied as the President not only ignores impeachment but weaponizes it against his foes to defeat them.

I must admit I did not anticipate how much fun this is going to be.


Vincent LaGuardia Gambini: Hey Stan, you’re in Ala-F***in-Bama. You come from New York. You killed a good old boy. There is no way this is not going to trial.

My Cousin Vinny 1992

There were quite a few people on the right who till the very end were convinced that this would not happen because Pelosi would not be this suicidal politically. Yesterday’s vote was a reminder of what I wrote a bit ago that this vote wasn’t about protecting newly elected Democrats in swing districts from primary challenges, it was about protecting longtime house members in “safe” districts from primary challenges. Pelosi wasn’t protecting her majority, she was projecting her leadership team from the violent left that is now their base.


Bill McKay: What do we do now?

The Candidate 1972

There is a real sense that the Democrats are pretty much making it up as they go along and nothing illustrates this better than the elevation of the “Impeach but don’t sent it to the Senate” plan what went from wild speculation a week ago to a threat by Pelsoi’s after impeachment last night.

As I’ve already written this gives the lie to the urgency of impeachment but stresses the point made above that the urgency was for the violent Democrat base to see Democrats had in fact vote for impeachment. I’m sure that focus groups are now being formed and such groups may find that now that they’ve had their vote those same angry activists might INSIST that Pelosi not send impeachment to the Senate to avoid on the record acquittal. All of this is uncharted territory for the left and it’s going to be a great source of income for political consultants for the next six months.


No plan of operations extends with certainty beyond the first encounter with the enemy’s main strength.

Helmuth von Moltke

Several other side effects of this decision to delay sending impeachment to the senate instantly come to mind:

  • If a vacancy appears in the SCOTUS and the Senate is about to vote on a Trump nominee don’t be surprised if Nancy & Company choose that moment to send impeachment over to the senate in order to delay consideration of any such nominee.
  • Any delay of more than a few days gives an awful lot of cover to the GOP in terms of voting for a motion to dismiss on the grounds that if the House impeachment was a serious exercise it would have delayed sending the case over.
  • Every day that the House delays sending Impeachment to the senate is a day that impeachment remains an issue in a house race and increases the likelihood that in a congressional debate incumbent democrats will be attacked or questioned over it.
  • It’s completely possible that the House might NEVER send impeachment to the senate and thus it will die at the end of the congress unless by some miracle Donald Trump loses re-election. At that point such a vote in the senate would be of interest only to see if there are 20 Senate Republicans who want a President Pence for two to three weeks.

Isoroku Yamamoto: I fear all we have done is awaken a sleeping Giant and fill him with a terrible resolve.

Tora Tora Tora 1970

At Legal Insurrection William Jacobson noted the contrast between the so called somber house vote and the Trump Rally in the swing state of Michigan:

Trump seems energized, and as do his supporters I encounter. I think Democrats will rue the day they forced this impeachment through the House.

I watched that rally, he in energized, the crowd is energized and the entire GOP base simply can’t wait to vote in November. This is Pearl Harbor for the Democrats without sinking a single battleship.


Batman: No Joker. You’re playing the wrong game. The old game. Tonight you’re taking no hostages. Tonight I’m taking no prisoners.

Batman the Dark Knight Returns #3 1986

Finally and ironically, the biggest losers of impeachment will be the House of Representatives and the media. Both have played this up as something serious and devastating and the end result seems to be as potent as a eunuch in a harem. While not the final nail in the coffin of the media this is going to weaken it to the point where ironically the only people it will be able to intimidate are those on their own side. Furthermore the threat of a political impeachment in the future is not going to be taken seriously by anyone with 40+ guaranteed votes in the Senate.

Nothing increases my respect for the founding fathers wisdom more then the fact that they anticipated all of this centuries before it happened and planned accordingly.

Some might say that the bad news here is that an actually corrupt President will recognize this and act accordingly but I submit and suggest that nightmare scenario already took place during the Clinton years.

Jeff Van Drew Solves the no win problem for Trump District Democrats on Impeachment

When I started writing this post is was going to be with the following premise: While it is a wise political move to put pressure on swing state Trump district Democrats to suggest that voting for impeachment will be against their political health, the entire premise of that argument is wrong because they were in a no-win situation.

If they vote for impeachment of course they anger voters in their Trump supporting districts who think it’s a sham or might be enjoying their best economic situation in a decade and thus risk their seat in a general election but if they oppose impeachment and embarrass the Democrat party, they are sure to draw a successful primary challenge not only because a 1st term member of congress is as a rule vulnerable but the ANTIFA loving Trump hating fanatics are frankly the most motivated of Democrat voters and such folks would likely draw huge war chest to destroy them.

Moreover that vote would not endear you to the GOP who will simply argue that being part of Pelosi’s majority enabled the whole crooked impeachment business anyway.

So in my mind while you might make some hay out of such pressure I thought it wasn’t likely to work because there was no upside for a Democrat in such a situation so such Democrats might as well stand pat.

Well apparently there is a third option that frankly I hadn’t thought of but Democrat congress Jeff Van Drew did:

Impeachment is already backfiring on the Democrats even before the full House votes on two articles of impeachment. A Democratic member of Congress is preparing to switch parties, joining Republicans amid the Democrat-led impeachment effort that has put dozens of moderate Democrats in a tough position with their Trump-supporting constituents. 

Representative Jeff Van Drew of New Jersey has been in talks with top advisors for President Trump, according to The New York Times. Mr. Van Drew is concerned about losing his seat in the Democratic primary or in the 2020 general election. Van Drew’s district is a traditionally Republican district that voted for Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election. 

While there is a value in having a sitting Democrat vote against impeachment, there is a greater value for the GOP for a congressman to switch parties over the vote. It’s true that the Democrats would go all in to defeat him but given that activists would primary him and punish him for it anyway it a wise political move.

Suddenly instead of the GOP trying to beat him no matter how he votes and ad after add linking him to the squad, he suddenly becomes a rock star of the party. Money will pour in. The party in general and the White House in particular will go all in to protect and support him. I’d be shocked if Trump didn’t turn up himself to campaign for him in his district. Furthermore as very few new GOP congressmen were elected in the house last time around, if he wins re-election he’ll have two years seniority over any GOP candidate who wins a seat on the President’s coattails in 2020.

I must confess I didn’t anticipate this move. It will be a shock to the Democrat political system , and if others Democrats on the fence realize that this is likely their best chance on re-election Van Drew might not be alone.

Then it would become an earthquake!

Exit question: How much do you think the British Election results had on his decision.

Impeachment is Happening Here’s how it will likely go

[Watching French Calvary deploy in front of them] Goodyear: What about it John Henry?

John Henry Thomas: Looks like we ourselves got mixed up in somebody’s else’s war.

Christian: Yeah Sure does.

Short Grub: What are we going to do now?

John Henry Thomas: Well that’s already been decided.

The Undefeated 1969

Because of the falling polls and the Wile-E-Coyote nature of impeachment there has been some speculation concerning if Democrats will in fact hold an impeachment vote and instead settle for censure.

Don’t count on it.

To be sure they will give it their best shot, in fact I suspect that the purpose of the scholarly witnesses that are going to be called before the judiciary committee’s primary job is not to justify impeachment but to provide the cover necessary for the Democrat votes against it.

Constitutionally Impeachment is a political process, not a judicial one and “high crimes and misdemeanors” are not defined so, it doesn’t matter if the best the Democrats can do is prove that Donald Trump had a nose bleed on the White House carpet, under the rules the Democrats have the right to impeach him for that if they they want.

Nancy Pelosi knows and understands this which is why she tried so hard to avoid open impeachment, particularly after the Mueller goose egg. But once the process had begun she understands that there is no turning back politically. The question is only the best way to do it.

If the Schiff hearings had moved public opinion it would be easy. She might have grabbed a republican vote or two and presented it , with the media’s help, this as a solemn decision to remove a corrupt leader.

But without limited public support, a booming economy, polls showing that minorities that are vital to the Democrat election plans moving toward Trump she is down to playing the best hand she has in the hopes that the GOP in general or the President in particular make a mistake.

Her best hand is to make the best possible case for “censure” and pol test it among Democrat activists. If somehow after the hearings this week poll results tell them they’ve convinced enough democrat fire-eaters that censure is a valid alternative to impeachment (very unlikely) she will go full bore on a cencure vote with every Democrat and perhaps even a stray republican will take place and the left will declare victory.

This would be the 2nd best case for the Democrats and the 2nd least likely which is to say it ain’t gonna happen because while it’s the party’s smartest move it requires woke activists in the party to see reason and reality.

Good luck there.

Of course there is always the remote possibility that the Democrats actually find something that IS impeachable enough to convince the public it’s worth doing or that the White House does something so egregious as to change the polling on impeachment. That’s the best case scenario for the left and the least likely for the reasons.

  1. If the Democrat/Left/Deep State HAD something of this nature, they would have produced it, or leaked it over the last three years
  2. All the evidence so far suggests that the only impeachable acts that have taken place were the previous administrations attempts to corrupt this election, too much deep state digging might uncover this fact.
  3. President Trump has demonstrated that however the left might paint him, he’s much too savvy to make that kind of mistake.

With God all things are of course possible and if this miracle falls into Nancy Pelosi’s lap she will happily accept it but she’s smart enough to not count on it.

Finally there is the chance that enough Democrats will rebel to force her to abandon impeachment although rather than risk a vote that fails. This isn’t going to happen either. It would be the most destructive result for the left and would practically invite primary opponents or at worst 3rd party challengers on an “Impeach Now!” platform. The Damage to the left from such a result would be worse than anything else.

So what WILL happen? Here is the sequence:

  1. Dems make their best case for censure backed up by their report and the scholars who give them cover for it.
  2. Swing state Dems argue strongly for censure saying that this is where the evidence has taken them.
  3. Pelosi after confirming that the fire-eaters will not settle for censure holds the impeachment vote and passes it with 219 Democrats, not a single one from a swing district. Said vote is delayed as long as feasible to discourage primaries from the left on Swing democrats voting “No”.
  4. Democrats do their best to beg borrow or steal enough votes to keep Election 2020 from becoming an electoral disaster and/or hope some event (say Ginsberg’s death) takes place that galvanizes Democrats to the point where they can pull it off.

This is how I see it happening, it’s basically their 2012 Obamacare strategy which was able to work because:

  1. Black votes couldn’t bear the thought of the 1st black president failing to be re-elected
  2. Race trumped faith among Black Christians
  3. The GOP managed to nominate the weakest candidate in their field one that not had pushed for a state version of Obamacare (that I’m still living under) but was unwilling or unable to fight back against anyone but his own base.

Alas for them this time they have a candidate that not only has a strong economy and has proactively reached out to minority Democrat voters but one that is willing to fight back relentlessly.

Bottom line, the Democrats have dealt themselves a bad hand but will play it out the best they can and hope they get lucky. That’s the smartest political move they have left and whatever else you might say about Nancy Pelosi, you can count on her to play the best hand she has, with the media’s help of course.

Update: After Wednesday’s clown car weaponizing the 1st Lady Pelosi has apparently decided to fast track this to minimize the chance of her team providing any more ad material for the GOP in the hearings.

She wants this over and done.

To ensure victory next year the Republicans desperately need to learn how to fight

The Republican party on a national level has one great failing; most of the members elected to office are spineless.  This failure has plagued the Republican party for decades.  In order to comfortably retake the House of Representatives and retain the Senate this must be fixed soon.

I’m by no means the first to bemoan the Repulican party members for being spineless.  It has been an all too frequent topic of discussion on conservative websites.  Check out this American Thinker article When will the timid GOP wussy boys step up to the plate?

As the Democrats plow ahead in their hollow quest to bring President Trump down, the absurdity of their pitiful scheme becomes ever more pathetic.  But we can say this for the Dems: they stick together, and they stick to their plan, no matter how futile it is.

The Republicans?  Not so much.  They do not stick together; they don’t stick to any plan.  They seem to barely agree on what conservatism is, let alone be true to it, to their party’s basic principles.  They cower.

The Democrats, on the other hand, will lie, cheat, and expose their monstrous hypocrisy for all to see while the Republicans quake in their boots and go wobbly for fear of being spoken of negatively by our moonbat lefty pseudo- journos in the media.  There are of course a few truly great, courageous Republicans in Congress: Devin Nunes, Jim Jordan, Matt Gaetz, Doug Collins, Mark Meadows, John Ratcliffe, and Ron Johnson come to mind.  Others who we thought would be great — Ted Cruz, Chuck Grassley, Mike Lee, and Tom Cotton — are sitting on their hands as though they are scared to death of bad press. 

I am not advocating that the Republicans embrace the Democrats tactics of cheating, lying, or using strong arm tactics.  I am suggesting very strenuously that they stand up and fight back, something they seem loath to do.  The period leading up to the public impeachment hearings is a perfect example of this.

The faint-of-heart Republicans have decided to be bystanders in the passing parade of democrat chicanery in service to their goal of exorcising Donald Trump.  All of this points to the essential difference between left and right. 

The Left has no scruples, no allegiance to its constituents.  Leftists seek power above all else, and Trump is an impediment to that power.  The Republicans want to be nice, always nice.  They loathe the confrontation the Left purposefully generates and try to avoid it.

Why did no Republican jump to his feet in a rage when Schiff read his false narrative of Trump’s conversation with Zelensky of Ukraine?  Because they are always polite.  No Republican would ever bring fried chicken to eat in a House committee hearing room. Not in a million years.

There is hope.  During the public impeachment farce last week several Republicans demonstrated real fighting spirit and it made quite a difference.  This was noted by the Washington Examiner in this article When Republicans fight back.

Republicans grew a backbone in the hearing and pushed back against House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff’s impeachment narrative. This is the sort of thing we’ve come to expect from Rep. Jim Jordan, but the fact that Reps. Elise Stefanik and John Ratcliffe also came out swinging speak volumes. These three are all quite different breeds of Republican, but for once, disparate House Republicans all brought the same level of intensity to a high stakes hearing.

Republicans challenged the Left’s narrative not only on the facts but the process as well. They’ve done good work to expose this investigation as the sham impeachment hearing it really is. We haven’t seen this sort of energy and poise from Republicans since the Kavanaugh saga, and we have rarely seen it at all throughout President Trump’s time in office.

For so long, the GOP has been afraid of its shadow. When things get tough, they turn tail and run. We’ve seen it on budget votes, shutdown standoffs, and stunningly, Obamacare — the single issue they railed against for years on the campaign trail but failed to repeal under unified government.

The Republicans really need to build on the uncharacteristic performance that they showed last week.  They need to stand up to the Democrats in congress and they absolutely need to stand up to the corrupt and biased liberal media.  The Republicans need to learn that any coverage of them will always be negative no matter what they say.  They should just say what they believe to be right and say it loudly.  It has worked exceptionally well for President Trump. 

Gang Warfare

by baldilocks

I estimate that everything we’ve seen since the assassination of President Kennedy has been Government-by-The-People Theater. No doubt, this charade goes much further back than that point in time, however, let’s call that event a conflagration – a reminder to all observers of who really runs things. Yes, I’m aware of the implication that I’m making: that the JFK assassination was a conspiracy by unseen actors, but don’t get it twisted; I’ve seen all the other conspiracy theories about it and I don’t subscribe to any of them. And it’s not my point anyway.

This is: I contend that every president from Lyndon B. Johnson to Barack H. Obama has walked in step with and/or been controlled by the bureaucracy, the secret cabals, the military-industrial complex (thank you, President Eisenhower), and the various other gangs that undergird this country. Yes, even Ronald Reagan.

And yet, somehow, we managed to elect one that refuses to walk in that path.

The gangs that began conspiring against him even before he won the nomination knew that he was the most dangerous choice for president — dangerous to them. He had made his money outside of government, had been in the public eye for decades and had a checkered private life that he didn’t try to hide. And, most frightening of all, he had claimed to be one of them: a Democrat. He entertained them, partied with them, listened to them.  He had probably seen and heard all manner of foul things that his “friends” prefer to remain private. And he had done so while drinking no alcohol and doing no drugs.

They had given him awards and begged him for jobs and for money.

Then, “out of the blue” he runs for president. In reality, he signaled what he was going to do back in the 1980s and did so again in 2012.

So, the gangs had to have something prepared just for him. However, it appears that he was ready for this, and for the next attack, and the next one and the one after that.

One of his missions is to expose the various means which the gangs have of enriching themselves on monies gotten from the pockets of the tax-payers. Ukraine seems to be both a means of thievery and a huge storage space for the loot.

This is why the government gangs will do anything to get him out of office. But before that happens, his reputation must be blasted to smithereens.

He knows this, which is why he will not be silent about it. As they use to say about a totally unrelated topic, silence equals death.

But he also keeps talking because it distracts the gangs from his more meaningful action against the gangs. While they continue to attempt to ruin his legacy before driving him out — or worse — he is on offense as well.

Everything will come to a head in one year or less.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng has been blogging since 2003 as baldilocks. Her older blog is here.  She published her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game in 2012.

Follow Juliette on FacebookTwitterMeWePatreon and Social Quodverum.

Hit Da Tech Guy Blog’s Tip Jar !

Or hit Juliette’s!

Another Method of Turning Your Money into Theirs

See the source imageby baldilocks

Last week we heard that Former NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Obama Administration’s first Attorney General Eric Holder were thinking about jumping into the 2020 presidential race on the Democratic Party side.

This week it’s Former Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick who’s thinking about giving it a shot. A member of the Boston Globe’s editorial staff seems less than enthusiastic about the prospect.

I’m old enough to remember when Patrick said he wasn’t running. It was way, way back in the sepia-toned days of November 2018. Let me tell you, youngsters, those were interesting times. Men were men and women were women and Hollywood was churning out classics like “Ralph Breaks the Internet,” which was tops at the box office. (…)

Ah, the good old days. So much has changed! The culture of cruelty that surrounded our elections, which Patrick decried when he decided not to run, is mercifully behind us now — ah, hang on, getting something in my earpiece again . . . uh oh. Oh no.

Of course, the writer can’t resist taking a shot at President Trump.

You want to know who has bad options? Republicans. They’re choosing among a semicoherent, obviously corrupt Twitter addict who will soon be impeached, a couple of vanity candidates, and Bill Weld.

At any rate, something that we all should keep in mind as we watch the presidential candidates from both parties come and go is that these candidacies, however long or short they may be, are, basically methods of getting money. They are like temporary side gigs for crooked politicians, if you’ll pardon the redundancy.

If they were bloggers, they’d be more honest and ask you to hit their tip-jar.

Remember Robert “Beto” O’Rourke? Of course, you do and he is a perfect example of this practice.

During the weeks before the end of his presidential candidacy, O’Rourke was running around the country iterating and reiterating via Social Media about his plans for mandatory “buy backs” of all the AR-15s from every owner in the country. And every time he talked about it, he became more and more incoherent and illogical, while causing gun owners seethe and stock up on more ammunition.

It seemed crazy, did it not? Well, it wasn’t at all.

Beto was polling at 0% or near that for most of his campaign and he knew that his quest would have to end. But before that end he needing to rake in as much money as possible. To that purpose, bullhorning his overt gun-grabbing plans was meant to entice as many dollars as possible from those who would kill to see the country entirely disarmed – pun intended. I bet it worked.

Most presidential candidacies are created simply to vacuum in the bucks for a set time and launder it. That’s why most of these new candidates are joining the 2020 circus.

Everyone needs a piggy bank, you know.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng has been blogging since 2003 as baldilocks. Her older blog is here.  She published her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game in 2012.

Follow Juliette on FacebookTwitterMeWePatreon and Social Quodverum.

Hit Da Tech Guy Blog’s Tip Jar !

Or hit Juliette’s!