Sunday, February 18, 2018

How the Russians should have stolen the election



Sunday, February 18, 2018

Will Rogers once said: “Russia is a country that no matter what you say about it it's true. Even if it's a lie it's true.”
The Mueller indictment this week isn't so much a testimony to Russia's ability to mount a conspiracy but Russia’s utter ignorance about how the American elections work.
Despite all the rhetoric from the sour grape Democrats, and claims by Mueller, it is clear the Russians were not trying to influence the election.
The Russians mistakenly believed our claims that elections a really are about popular opinion and they were trying to sway voters, influencing public opinion through misinformation
But the Russians are rank amateurs when compared to the American media and the two-party system that bats around control of the country like a badminton birdie.
Everything in the indictment shows just how out of touch the Russians were with how the political system works and would have been far better off imitating what Democrats and Republicans had done for more than a century in manipulating voters.
The Russians were apparently not paying attention to all of the classic techniques the two American Parties have perfected, either by stealing votes or by discouraging opponent supporters from going to the polls at all.
The Russians clearly believed more in the American system that any right-minded politician here does. This is why their efforts seem so pathetic, despite all the hype Mueller and Media give it to suggest that this was some great effort to interfere with the election.
The Russians completely misunderstood what it means to rig an election, and that despite all we see on TV with people marching in the streets, Democrats and Republicans long ago learned that to rig an election you have to do it behind the scenes.
The Russians should not have bothered with any convert. They should have started a think tank the way the Democrats and Republicans have, little incubators out of which the best lies and distortions are always hatched.
It’s not that the Russians conspiracy was completely off base. Most of what they did was routine for Clinton during the election, stealing questions, buying out the Democratic Party so that she was the inevitable candidate, and Soros, who funded and manipulated thousands of people to hit the streets after the election.
The problem is the Russians simply mistook these Democrats stunts as all that was needed, when any Democrat could have warned them it was hardly enough.
The Russians – who live with a controlled media – should have known from the start that in order to win an election in America, you first have to take control of the press the way the Democrats did.
This is never a sure thing as the Democrats found out when Clinton lost, but a campaign has to have a candidate that isn’t a dirt bag.
The biggest crime the Russians did in coming to United States to work the election is underestimating just how manipulative the system is.
The made the mistake of presuming that if you hold a protest, if you chant the right things and get the press to pay attention to you, voters will be swayed to vote the way you want them to.
This is a vast overestimation of the intelligence of the average American voter, regardless of how educated or well-informed.
The Russians were hopeless outclassed in trying to manipulate public opinion when it came to the con job American political parties play.
While the Russians were trying to “influence” voters, politically deluded Democratic college students were out looking under every rock for Democratic votes if it moved they registered it.
While Democrats screamed and yelled about the Russians hacking into voting machines, they were far behind the curve when it came to how well American politicians engaged in the most classic of voting manipulation: the mail-in ballot.
Perhaps if the Russians had read more books on how to make friends and influence people they might have better understood the most basic concept of American politics: awarding of patronage to supporters.
If you don't have a contract to give somebody or a political appointment or a job you don't win votes.
The Russians also clearly failed to understand how many votes there are to be gained in graveyards.
This whole indictment of Russians over attempted manipulation of the American election just shows how inept they are in compared to how we do it here in America and how good at it we have become.
If there is a lesson to be had and if the Russians intend to influence the 2018 midterms they have a lot of catching up to do and may have to hire Hillary Clinton as a consultant.


Saturday, February 17, 2018

Russian conspiracy unmasked: send in the clowns



Saturday, February 17, 2018

If I had known the Russians were going to pay people to say bad things about Hillary Clinton, I would have waited for my check to come in the mail.
This is essentially the essence of the charges that Mueller filed this week in exposing a Russian conspiracy that largely resembles a Three Stooges routine.
You have to think with all the high-profile Russians named in the indictment (one of whom I even know in passing), the Russians could have done a better job in “influencing” the outcome of the 2016 presidential election.
To say I’m disappointment is a gross understatement.
Being a huge fan of the early cold war James Bonds movies, I expected some high-tech espionage, killer satellites, men in black, neat little pocket devices that can open doors and transmit government secrets to the internet.
We didn’t even get the hacking of voting machines that Jill Stein promised us or the great conspiracy with Donald Trump Democrats claim allowed him to win over Clinton in the election. We didn’t’ get Mata hari or even Natasha and Boris – all we got was a pack of people saying bad things at staged protests and posting terrible (but sometimes even accurate things) about Clinton on social media.
In fact, the antics so resemble those employed by the Clinton Campaign prior to election day and the Soros-funded antics post-election, you would think the Russians advised both.
Mueller’s pathetic indictment essentially says the Russians snuck in, set up cells and paid Americans to say bad things about Clinton (and yes, I’m still waiting for my check in the mail.)
The fact that no Americans were indicted is significant since the actual activities fall under the category of Freedom of Speech – even if they strongly resemble the dirty tricks Nixon and Clinton employed.
What apparently is illegal is the fact that the Russians failed to report themselves as a campaign funding raising organization. It may even be illegal for a foreign country to be involved in funding campaigns at all. This is a gray area these indictments fully exploit to build a conspiracy out of an Abbott and Costello skit.
Indictments suggest that somehow by paying for a bunch of Americans to say bad things at protest and post bad things on the internet, the election swung from the Democratic candidate to the GOP.
This is beyond silliness, but Mueller needed to come up with some conspiracy or another to justify the expenditures of such large amount of tax payers’ money on what most people consider a witch hunt in order to support sour grape Democratic theories that the Russians somehow helped Trump steal the election.
The indictments so much resemble the New York investigations of the 1940s into communist infiltration of the SUNY colleges and the more famous 1950s Joe McCarty House of Un-American Activities hearings that you have to wonder if Mueller had the script written for him by a Democratic think tank. McCarty was trying to prove that Soviets were funding unions and other left-wing protest groups. Now Mueller is trying to prove the Russians are supporting right wing groups. But this oppressive act is exactly the same.
While Democrats and media will play this up as fruition of the Russian conspiracy they claim was taking the place, in truth what has been uncovered so far is so much a far cry from the claim that Trump colluded with the Russians to win the election and that the Russians somehow actually influenced the outcome on his behalf.
The indictments largely come across as more Democratic propaganda paid for by the taxpayers in order to keep alive a long-discredited concept that can be played up by Democrats going into the 2018 mid-term elections. In fact, we’re already getting media spin on how to prevent the Russians from doing so.
What is truly dangerous about the indictments is the potential for abuse beyond the partisan Mueller findings, but the ability for this legal concept to be expanded to include any group that protests or posts provocative things on social media.  This is particularly dangerous to immigrant-rights groups which might get off-shore undeclared funding and could provide an excuse for law enforcement such as ICE to shut them down.
The Russian conspiracy that Mueller supposedly uncovered is as ludicrous as the 1960s attempts by the CIA to give Castro exploding cigars.  And Mueller, in promoting it, should put on a big red nose and big flappy shoes and change his name to Bozzo.
Mueller clearly shows his desperation in providing Democrats the Russian conspiracy they desperately need in order to take back the House and Senate later this year.
This is a bogus indictment politically motivated and with political results the crimes committed here are so petty it's beneath anybody's to even consider them as a real crime and hardly live up to the hype that Democrats had been spreading.
But these indictments open the door to a potential to charge anybody from exercising their free speech rights, especially in someone can make up or prove some off-shore funding source paid for the protest signs or office space.
Mueller is traveling down the very dangerous path the FBI went in the early 1970s when law enforcement secretly sought to shut down alternative press.
This is the new Red Scare only instead of coming after the left, Mueller is the new Joe McCarthy coming after people who lean to the right.
He is sending a very loud message that there is a potential for arrest if you happen to support the wrong people.
And a political tool used by the Democrats to undermine Trump can equally be used against Democrats, especially in a time when immigrants are being deported in droves.
Will ICE now begin to search out funding sources for groups that support immigrant rights and use them to shut them down?
Democrats really need to be careful about the can of worms they are opening here, and we all need to fear what might crawl out.






Friday, February 16, 2018

Releasing the mindless beast (democracy as myth)





Friday, February 16, 2018

One thing I learned in college years ago is just how out of date our belief systems are.
Most of what we believe these days was already out of date by the time of Voltaire.
Most Americans cling to beliefs associated with The Enlightenment -- this idea that human kind can be made perfect through the accumulation of knowledge. In other words, the more we know the better we become.
World War I largely discredited this idea although many people did not yet know it at the time, sending off our best and brightest in the belief that they were engaged in a “war to end all wars,” – a foolish idea to believe evil can cure evil.
This folly became most evident in the run-up to World War II when accumulated knowledge was use to perfect the means of mass slaughter – the best and brightest in science and technology developing the best and most efficient means of eradicating human life.
While most serious scholars have since concluded education alone does not make for a better person, the masses continue up the same old road like sheep led to slaughter.
This ignorance is not an exclusive attribute to the uneducated.
In fact, the better educated in our society -- trained in the illusion of the Enlightenment – arrogantly assume they are somehow superior to the less educated, having gone through all the hoops degree programs can provide, when in actuality they are no closer to possessing “truth” or “moral” high ground than the masses they think of as uncouth.
A number of post-Nazi thinkers believe mankind cannot be perfected, and that we live with fundamental flaws that education cannot cure.
This may explain to some degree the reversion to primal violence we see among out best educated when they profess to be standing up for all they believe as right and good.
Most people regardless of their intentions revert to animal instincts under the right conditions.
As with the theory of enlightenment political theory shows that democracy is also an illusion, an out of date concept as as unattainable as perfection through the accumulation of knowledge.
Democracy is the religion of our time, with many people believing in it the way ancients did their Gods.
The theory of democracy is that people will gather, study the issues, and then decide the direction they want their nation to take through an elective process that installs leaders with the same or similar beliefs.
First of all, this assumes that all the participants are well-versed in all of the issues and then come to a decision about which is best.
To begin with, the majority is not versed in all aspects of issues, and this is particularly true of the better educated among us.
Contemporary political theorists believe that those with the most knowledge tend to be at the extremes of the political spectrum, those most motivated in the political process seeking to push the largely politically ignorant masses to the direction of their choice.
Most of those in the middle are generally ignorant not merely about critical issues that affect their lives, but also about what they actually see as their own core values.
Some studies show that people interviewed said one thing about their beliefs, only to vote for candidates that largely did not reflect those beliefs.
These people often accepted thumb nail slogans as beliefs, such as pro-life or pro-choice, and often accept promoters of these beliefs as the sole source of their information and arbitrators of truth.
Most people are rarely exposed to more than one side of an issue and studies show this is as true in the era of the internet as it was pre TV.
And ignorance isn’t exclusive to the unwashed mass as the so-called enlightened would like us to think.
Educated people are often as ignorant politically because they are generally exposed to limited sides of issues, often imposed by if not a liberal educational system, then one so entrenched in the outdated concepts of the Enlightenment as to be utterly out of touch with reality. This is not a new issue. The ivory tower concept has plagued the educational system since the monks.
Right wing proponents try to portray this as liberal propaganda, but this misses the point as well.
As long as educational system sees itself as possessing the only avenue to truth and encapsulates education into simplified talking points that students take in and regurgitate like cows, those students will always be as ignorant politically as those who learn their truths on the street.
One very significant example is the how cursory social study education about the Civil War generally claims it was only about freeing the slaves, when the war was about much more than that. Some history majors get it, but most of the general population graduates with a very limited reality.
Specialization is also a problem because it further reduces what a student is exposed to, forcing perfunctory thumb nail lessons on general knowledge before plunging him or her into a world even more abreacted.
This kind of education does not expand a world view.
More troubling for the concept of democracy is human nature itself.
A number of studies show that most voters are not merely uninformed, but choose to be that way.
They do not seek out alternative views to their own.
People believe what they want to believe regardless of conflicting evidence and then to block out anything that disagrees with their own preconceived notions
In this regard, politics has become very much like sports and which people support a particular team regardless of who the members of that team are or what they stand for – once a New York Giants fan, always a fan, regardless of who the quarter back is.
Even the so called unaffiliated voter is a fantasy. They are simply people who do not know what they believe in.
One theory from the 1960s sees true believers on either end of the political spectrum desperate to motivate the ignorant masses to their side.
So we see a proliferation of scare tactics and smear campaigns as spin doctors in some think tank like witch doctors of old calculate what formula they might use to magically shift the balance of public perception.
The so-called fake news of today is largely an attempt to use these political touch s tones in order stir up support for one side’s cause with media and others desperate to find the right combination that will somehow connect with the special logic old time political observers claim influenced voting habits.
It is a precarious science at best – because manipulation can backfire, media seeming to be a dishonest broker in a game in which people believe it serves as umpire.
Worse still, it stirs up some primitive beast inside the masses that once unleashed with no longer be predictable or controllable, nor will it likely move in the intended direction, lashing out at all, good or bad, right or wrong, left for right.
For all the Russian conspiracies, the claims of sexism, or all the other media spin being spun, those who love Trump will continue to live him, those who hate him will continue to at him, and the rest of the masses will largely be confused by the constant agitation doing little to enlighten anybody except to create more and more hate.
All we are doing is taunting the mob to action without any idea of what the mob will do once it acts.










Tuesday, February 13, 2018

Death of Journalism in the era of a new King Lear




Tuesday, February 13, 2018

The New York Times today predicted today the death of print journalism.
This comes as no surprise since journalism itself is dead -- at least objective journalism.
While not everybody in journalism is as biased and unfair as is Maggie Haberman of the Times or countless other reporters from The Washington Post, most are.
It is the nature of the beast these days, an indication of contemporary journalism that in the glorious times of the past, would have been called “yellow” though these days wears the distinction of being called “fake.”
These reporters are people who have ceased creating a wall between their personal opinions and beliefs and fact we are powerful maybe power-hungry individuals with a diluted sense of purpose.
This is not fake news, but it is dishonest, corrupted news, part of a new breed of journalism that no longer requires ethical behavior by its journalists.
Unlike in the past when journalism has its ups and downs, this change is so fundamental that the industry is not likely to recover.
I guess them it is appropriate that The Times declares its death since it once claimed god as dead and plays as significant role in killing both.
Dysfunction in The White House has allowed these wolves through the gates as we watch a reenactment of a Shakespearean tragedy -- not the Macbeth we would have gotten had Clinton won, but a sad and pathetic King Lear with Trump playing both the king and the fool.
Media -- upset with its inability to steer the presidency to Clinton -- now seeks to flex its muscles to bring down Trump.
And it has had plenty of help from inside the White House:  a palace guard still loyal to the old king and three factions like three children to whom Trump has abdicated power -- all of whom work against each other to gain the ear of a king who listens to nobody but himself.
For a time, this kind listened to a worm named Bannon, who would bring down the king rather than concede power to either of the other two.
Although Bannon pictures himself as Darth Vader of Star Wars movies, he is really more like Gollum of The Lord of Rings: sneaky, slimy and vicious, powerless except for the trouble he can cause and clever enough to make use of an equally vicious and unethical media who would sell its soul to prove it still has power.
While media portrays Bannon as the anti-christ he clearly sensed a kindred spirit in them when served as unnamed source for stories he needed to undermine his enemies with in the White House.
And media without scruples was more than willing to comply since these leaks furthered its own agenda.
But media has no friends only temporary alliances and as Bannon has since found out turns on those alliances at even the slightest whiff of blood.
The big question remains how much damage has Bannon done?
Do the wolves roam free behind the castle walls to ravage the mad king at will?
Does Bannon’s banishment allow one of the other princes to step up in time to save the king?







Sunday, February 11, 2018

Welcome to the new morality



Sunday, February 11, 2018

In some ways, what we are witnessing in Washington DC these days is a personal war between two rich white men, the richest man on earth (owner of The Washington Post) and The President of the United States.
It is a tug of war that has the whole country torn apart because two men who hate each other and one which has vowed to bring the other one down.
The Washington Post is fighting to maintain credibility at a time when media objectively has hit new lows and has vowed to prove itself against a president who is not only not afraid of the Post’s historic power but has routinely defied it.
There are no rules in this war.
The Post has become the mouth piece of the opposition party and will make use anything and everything to discredit the president.
The Post and the Democratic Party’s latest gambit is the MeToo movement – which appears to be gaining traction in the New Morality crusade sweeping the country.
Yesterday, Screen Actors Guild – represents those in Hollywood who actually get paid -- came out with new rules regarding what is sexual abuse this after more than a century of misbehavior by actors and producers and others.
This is the latest chapter in a shameful tale of abuse Hollywood and the Democrats hope to sweep under the rug, in much the way some in the country want to erase history, such as the real events leading to and the aftermath of the American Civil War.
This is part of a new women’s vigilante movement that appears to have started when women successfully brought down Bill Cosby, and you have to wonder if and when it will discover rock and roll, and male performers and their relationship with groupies.
This new morality does not rely on God or Bible but some misguided crusade by self-righteous people who need to exert their vision of the world on others, often at the expense of due process.
This new morality insists on telling us how we should live our lives and what we should believe.
Sexual harassment, of course, has always been wrong, but has long been overlooked especially in the entertainment industry where budding actors and actresses put career advancement ahead of their moral principles.
The movement, however, has become a political tool, used by Democrats, as well as media, in a frenzy as vile as that of the Salem Witch Trials, but instead of targeting independent women, the way the witch trials did, it is now women targeting men who they believe have violated them in some way, in which any man can be accused of anything and have his reputation totally screwed because someone somewhere said something about him without due process of law.
This new morality is very selective.
Gillibrand recently made headlines with her call to interview women who have accused Trump of sexual misconduct.
This comes at a time when the Democrats have used one of the Kennedys at its spokesperson and the rich sexual and criminal history that has long plagued that family.
The argument there is that we cannot just the past by president moral standards – when hypocritically, that’s exactly what MeToo, media and the Democrats are doing. We cannot raise questions about Teddy Kennedy, or even JFK, but will reach back for decades to contemn people we disagree with politically. God help us all if anyone dares mention Bill Clinton.
I had an argument last week on Facebook with a man who hated Socrates because he claimed Socrates was a fascist, and a model that Hitler used to build his empire. Not only was this person ignorant of history (since it was the Roman Empire Hitler claimed to represent), but also he imposed today’s morality on the past, judging people by a standard he no doubt learned from some obnoxious professor somewhere, who would also pass judgment on Robert E. Lee while being equally ignorant of who Lee was and what he really stood for. It’s easy to tear town statutes when you don’t know what they really mean and impose your own values on them.
This new morality has a more contemporary target in Gen. Kelly, who apparently knew about domestic abuse claims against one of his aides, but did nothing to investigate.
I did not know what the job description for the President’s Chief of Staff included investigating domestic abuse or devolving into the personal lives of employees when such misbehavior has nothing to do with their job.
But apparently, the new Morality Crusade thinks so and is calling for Kelly’s head on a platter because he failed to respond to the complaints in a timely matter. Conveniently, the call for his resignation would benefit most those who are most outspoken against him, namely the Democrats.
I suppose Kelly could have called the local police the way an ordinary citizen might have.
But Democrats and the media (in particularly the Washington Post) are suggesting the Kelly’s lack of action resulted in some kind of cover up and that an employee of the White House might not be prosecuted because of his position of power.
These New Morality Crusaders appear not to know or care about the distinction between a person’s professional role and his or her personal life and would stomp on the constitution by having the White House investigate an alleged crime more suited for the local police.
The crimes in question was no  workplace harassment but something in a person's private life that the new morality insist is now in the realm of public officials rather than police in the courts.
These moral crusaders want to make a case against Kelly as if this was a coverup.
Of course, this is very convenient for the Democrats who have been riding a women issue card since the campaign and feel now that they have some horse to ride on.
Gillibrand, a potential presidential candidate in 2020, apparently wants to pick up where Hillary Clinton left off as the standard bearer for this new and questionably unethical feminist movement. It would be quite a feather in Gillibrand’s hat if she could bring down Kelly and by default, The President.
Like all things Democrats do these days, this is an exploitation of victims for a political gain. While Gillibrand and others claim they are doing this on behalf of the victims of abuse, it is a self-serving exercise and dishonest. It also violates the basic premises of American freedom  for accused have their day in court and to be innocent until proven guilty.
But with the power of media such as The Washington Post (with its owner’s personal grudge against Trump) justice ceases to exist, and we basically have lynching in headlines.
This is a war between two super rich people, the owner of the Post (who is the richest man in the world) with a vendetta against the man in the White House who refuses to take seriously the power of the press. So for media, this Me-Too vehicle is a way of striking blow against a political enemy, regardless of how many other people’s reputations it has to destroy to accomplish this.
We are watching a major chapter of history unfolding where there is a new moral standard being imposed by people who profess sainthood but do not believe in God who believe in freedom only not your freedom to face your day in court who profess to be inclusive yet are exclusive anybody who disagrees with them. While behind the scenes, power brokers manipulate movements for their own purposes.



Saturday, February 10, 2018

Big Brother in High Heals



Saturday, February 10, 2018

Next time your ex-wife accuses you of beating her up regardless of whether it happens, somebody should tell your boss. It is clearly your boss's business what happens in your private life.
This of course is the new Democratic morality media is shoving down the public's throat, as the latest victims of a MeToo witch hunt targets the White House.
And worse if your boss does nothing to punish you for a crime you claim you're innocent of he should be fired.
This comes at a time when White House staffer Rob Porter has been accused by two of his ex-wives of domestic violence.
If guilty, of course, he should be punished, and fired, though his resignation comes at a time when he denies the allegation, despite provocative pictures media has displayed of his alleged victims.
While no charges were originally filed against Porter, the White House apparently was aware of the allegations, and did nothing.
Media and others are now blasting the White House, picking up on this mob morality that people are guilty until proven innocent and that the White House or any other employer should inject itself into a domestic violence situation rather than let the normal system of justice deal with it.
Democrats and their media accomplices are, of course, foisting their own system of justice in an attempt to discredit the White House and bring down the Trump Administration because those at the top refuse to play the part of Big Brother.
This intrusion into private lives is part of an orchestrated campaign by media and Democrats desperate to find a way to undermine close associates of Trump, and raises the fundamental question of what is your boss's business when it comes to what you do in your personal life.
More importantly this is a move to try to destroy Kelly who is one of the key people in the administration and discredit him so that Democrats can finally achieve what they have been doing all along.
The real target is not Porter or even David Sorensen, who resigned this week facing similar allegations.
The Democrats are engaged in the “table theory of politics,” in which they hope to cut off the legs of the table that supports Trump, since all of their previous attempts to undercut him have failed.
Porter and Sorensen are merely vehicles by which the Democrats can bring down Kelly, perhaps one of the single most important figures in the Trump Administration.
Media, Democrats and others appear to believe that Kelly should have taken actions against Porter for what is clearly actions unrelated to his job, interjecting into what would be a routine legal matter if and when the women pressed charges.
Somehow, Kelly becomes responsible for what Porter does outside the work place.
This isn’t just mob morality based on guilt by accusation, but it is also guilt by association,
Kelly in their eyes should have become cop, judge and jury in a case that is not in his job description.
This is typical of the new left which no longer believes in the legal process in which people are innocent until proven guilty. It is crucifixion at the hands of people who accuse them very much the kind of Justice Christ had when people called for him to be executed. Kelly becomes a kind of Pilate forced by media to wash his hands and give into the mob.
But if you take this as an example then every boss in every job suddenly becomes Morality police to this new regime of accusation.
So that if a man is accused of beating his wife at home then the boss is responsible for firing him.
But as I said this is really a calculated attempt by unscrupulous Democrats to use Porter and his wives as a political tool to bring down Trump by bringing down Kelly.
Having failed to convince people about the Russian conspiracy the strategy now is to dismantle the Trump Administration from within.
Admittedly, many unscrupulous employees of the White House have resigned before this, most of them cheap thugs who rode Trump’s coattails to power. Many of these were fringe characters driven out by their own ineptitude. The current attack is aimed at the most upstanding members of the Trump administration, using what would otherwise be a private issue to undermine them.
Attacks on the innocent is nothing new with the Democrats, as was the case in regard to Jared Kushner, another member of the Trump brain trust who helped save the campaign and eventually allowed Trump to become president.
The fact that Kushner did nothing illegal is beside the point when it comes to Democratic attacks on him. This is all about undermining Trump by removing those who actually make Trump's government work.
The strategy did not work on Kushner and hopefully it will not work for Kelly.
But if Democrats cannot get Kelly fired or force him to resign, expect them to engage in even more extreme and radical strategies for overthrowing a government they disapprove of.
In the end this is not about Justice for the women that supposedly were beaten by their husbands. This is about power and how Democrats will resort to anything to regain what they lost in the election.
And it is certainly not about Justice because Democrats clearly are willing to violate the legal process which protects innocent and prosecutes guilty in order to prosecute by mob rule and innuendo.
In this regard, MeToo is nothing but a group of people with pitchforks and Lynch ropes showing up at their enemies’ doors ready to do violence in the name of their own skewed morality.


resume

Friday, February 9, 2018

Why Democrats now hate “Fire and Fury”




Friday, February 09, 2018

As of late Democrats -- especially in the media—have started to put down Michael Wolff whose book “Fire and Fury” they previously hailed as scathing proof of how evil the Trump Administration is.
It took Democrats weeks to realize how Wolff’s book actually testifies to how utterly wrong Democrats are about the 2016 election and completely dismisses the Russian conspiracy when it comes to having the president collude with the Russians to beat Clinton.
This is why Democrats are picking the book apart in order to choose what sections they want to believe and which parts to dismiss.
Democrats claim trump and his staff conspired with the Russians to rig the election against Clinton.
Wolff not only claims no one in the Trump camp -- except Bannon -- thought Trump could win, most of the insiders including Trump didn’t want to win and in fact sought to use the election as spring board to personal careers that had nothing to do with government.
Trump, for instance, made plans to start his own media network using public exposure from the campaign. He was so convinced he could not beat Clinton that he refused to invest his own money in a cause he saw as already lost.
Nearly all of his top staff had similar big plans right up to when the polls closed. None had confidence in Trump as a leader. Some even believed he should be the last person on earth to serve as president.
All were as stunned as the Democrats when the polls closed showing Trump as victor.
Some even cried and as Wolff noted not for joy.
If Trump wanted to lose then he had no reason to collude with the Russians to help them rig the election on his behalf.
Indeed, if Trump people went to the Russians to get dirt on Clinton it was because they hated her enough to want to smear her not to win an election none believed or even wanted to win.
For all including Trump, the campaign was one big circus and Trump was the starring clown.
The most humiliating aspect of this is the fact that many voters preferred and trusted a clown more than they did Clinton or the Democrats.
Wolff’s book reads like a story from the National Enquirer, a cheap and sometimes sleazy tabloid report Democrats might at other times found entertaining but which does horrible damage to the Russian conspiracy scam they are selling to the general public.
So naturally Democrats have to discredit the book and its author.
The problem for everybody is the fact that the GOP trusts Trump as little as the Democrats do.
He is unpredictable and does not follow anyone’s agenda only his own.
One person I know who knows Trump says the president is likely taunting Democrats for his own amusement the way a cat might a trapped mouse, letting them rant and rave while he enjoys the sport.
And predictably Democrats fume at each tweet and rest desperate hopes on a Russian conspiracy that never existed except in their delusions.
The Democrats need to discredit Wolff’s book so that nobody takes its take on the election seriously.
As flawed as it is the book is a delightful read. It shows Trump not so much asleep at the steering wheel of government but rather somewhat distracted.
For him being president is just another reality TV show, a three ring circus with all the protesters, all of the deluded Democratic speeches, part of the entertainment.
Trump is a master clown and ring master, ushering in each and every new act with every tweet.
He does take Democrats seriously. He doesn’t care if he's reelected.  He's just along for the ride.