Monsters!
Austin and Bingley
Trump Isn’t Sounding Like a Russian Mole
I put no credence in the preposterous media/democrat talking point that somehow Trump is an operative stooge of Vladimir Putin, and I need no confirmation to be confident that I am correct. However, here is Walter Russell Mead on the nonsense that passes for rational analyses in media/democrat circles.
Walter Russell Mead:
“…With his latest effusive remarks to Reuters on the importance of expanding the U.S. nuclear arsenal, President Donald Trump has sent the press into a panic once again.
What the press has largely ignored about Trump’s latest pronouncement is an obvious truth that undermines its own narrative: someone who was safely in Vladimir Putin’s pocket wouldn’t run around saying things like this. While liberal America may have forgotten recent history, Russia certainly hasn’t: provoking a nuclear arms race with an outclassed, economically weak Soviet Union was Ronald Reagan’s winning strategy in the 1980s. Tech and wealth are two key American advantages over Russia now as they were over the Soviet Union then; Trump’s message here is that he intends to follow in Reagan’s footsteps to use these strengths to advance American power, with the inevitable result of marginalizing one of Russia’s primary sources of power and prestige. Putin’s ramshackle Russia is no more capable of matching an American nuclear buildup than Brezhnev’s sclerotic Soviet Union could keep up with the United States—and Putin knows it.
Whether it will work is an entirely different question, but there can be little doubt that Trump’s core global strategy will destroy any illusions in Moscow, or anywhere else, that Russia is a peer competitor of the United States. A Trump administration is going to be four years of hell for Russia: a massive American doubling down on shale production along with a major military buildup. Trump is, in other words, a nightmare for Putin and a much, much bigger threat to Putin’s goals than President Obama ever was or wanted to be…”
Achievements Versus Manners
I think the dichotomy between graders noting achievements versus behavior or manners perfectly sums up the split in the country over this president. I too find his behavior and manners off putting at times, but I have come to accept it and even look forward to the next round of insane media reaction to it. The achievements far outweigh the aesthetics.
“…This week’s White House Report Card finds President Trump spiriting through Europe, scoring points and settling grudges. The indictment of Russian military officials in the 2016 election hacking probe will interfere with Trump’s Monday meeting with Kremlin boss Vladimir Putin, meaning next week will be typically busy and huge too.
Our graders were split over the president’s week, with conservative Jed Babbin giving it an A for achievements, while pollster John Zogby graded it a D+ for bad manners and policy…”
Nevada Falls
Yosemite Falls
Rosenstein Announces Indictments of Russians Accussed of Hacking
I am glad that the Mueller Investigation was not a total waste. However, the timing of the Rosenstein press conference the day after the disastrous Strzok Hearing indicates to me the FDB/DOJ play the media and politics. I suppose it is good to take the public’s attention away from the corrupt Strzok and refocus it on the good work the FBI does. It is an obvious ploy, but okay.
Tweet of the Day
That pretty lady is Democratic Socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
Republicans Forced to Call U.S. Marshals to Serve Subpoena on Lisa Page
“…Republicans called in U.S. Marshals to serve former FBI lawyer Lisa Page on Wednesday after she refused to comply with the committee’s subpoena, according to Fox News.
Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee Rep. Bob Goodlatte accused Page of “apparently” having “something to hide.” Republicans want to question Page about her anti-Trump texts with disgraced FBI agent Peter Strzok, with whom she was having an extramarital affair.
Page’s lawyer claimed she “will cooperate with this investigation” even as Page defied the subpoena to appear on Wednesday before the House Judiciary and Oversight and Government Reform Committees.
Page’s attorney initially agreed to comply with the subpoena, Goodlatte told Fox News, but “then turned around and immediately tried to reject it.”
“So that’s why we sent the marshals to her house, to serve the subpoena,” he explained. “They had to go back three times before they were finally able to reach her.”…”
Losing the Supreme Court can teach Democrats same valuable lessons
Seth Lipsky:
“…This line of thinking was nicely articulated the other day by The New York Times’ David Leonhardt in a column urging liberals not to despair. Leonhardt didn’t go so far as to suggest that a right-wing court would be the “best” thing in years. He did, though, urge a course of realism and a new strategy for pursuing liberal policies.
Like, say, winning elections.
“Over the last half-century, conservatives have put more energy into building a movement,” Leonhardt wrote. Above all, he added, “winning local, state and congressional elections.”
Democrats, meanwhile, “have emphasized higher-profile politics, like the presidency and landmark court cases.” Leonhardt suggested Democrats “can’t afford to do so anymore.”
Those strike me as wise words as we stand at the brink of what might yet come to be called the Trump court. And they are words to mark for the conservative caucus, too.
After all, we were there once…”
Strzok Hearing – Nauseating Display of Moral Turpitude
Roger Simon:
“…So we’re all liars and maybe we are, but I’ll tell you what convinced me — besides an overwhelming amount of circumstantial evidence equivalent to the O.J. trial — that Strzok was not just your garden variety prevaricator but an out-and-out conniving, evil S. O. B.: his smirk.
The shrinks call that “inappropriate affect” and it sure was. What the hell was this guy smirking about? Even in the remote possibility (oh, how remote) that his bias had no direct political and investigatory consequence, he had shamed himself, his family, and the FBI and its personnel tremendously, damaging the organization materially for years to come. And yet he was smirking.
In fact, he wasn’t just smirking. He was fighting back as if he were the wounded party. One “useful idiot” on the Democratic side even said he deserved the Purple Heart.
It was a nauseating display of moral turpitude on the part of the Democrats and Strzok. Who paved the way for that? Well, I’ll tell you: Inspector General Michael Horowitz.
Listening to the hearings today convinced me more than ever that he, like Strzok, is a liar — only a far subtler and therefore ultimately more dangerous one. In fact, he’s so good he probably believes his own lies Unlike Strzok, he doesn’t smirk or get angry…”
Trump could end up replacing 3, even 4, Supreme Court justices in his first term.
“…President Donald Trump reportedly has suggested he hopes to remake nearly half of the US’s highest court in his image by making four separate appointments during his first term — and so far, that’d already be half right.
Upon taking office, Trump quickly filled the Supreme Court vacancy left by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia with Neil Gorsuch, a conservative who has already played a key role.
On Wednesday, Justice Anthony Kennedy announced that he would retire on July 31.
Trump now stands to secure two justices in the first half of his first term. Presidents Barack Obama and George W. Bush appointed two justices each during their eight years in office.
Supreme Court justices, who serve for life after a presidential appointment and Senate confirmation, represent one of the longer-lasting marks a president can leave on the country, as the justices often serve for decades.
But Trump reportedly thinks he can get an additional two justices in.
In October, the news website Axios cited an anonymous source detailing private predictions by Trump that Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor would retire during his term.
“What does she weigh? 60 pounds?” Trump asked of the now-85-year-old Ginsburg, a source told Axios. The same report indicated Trump said Sotomayor, over 20 years younger than Ginsburg, was also in trouble because of “her health.”
“No good. Diabetes,” Trump reportedly said.
Sotomayor had a health scare in January with paramedics treating her for low blood sugar, but she quickly returned to work. Sotomayor says she’s vigilant about her Type 1 diabetes, which she’s had since childhood.
During the 2016 campaign, Trump often said he or his Democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton, could end up appointing five justices.
So far, Trump has had the chance only to replace judges appointed by Republican presidents, and he is sure to nominate a conservative-leaning judge to replace Kennedy.
The nine-justice court already leans conservative, but Kennedy, chosen by President Ronald Reagan, has been viewed as a swing vote during his tenure, supporting same-sex marriage and upholding a woman’s right to abortion.
Ginsburg and Sotomayor are liberal justices, so replacing both Kennedy and either of them with conservatives could change the court’s makeup for decades, possibly reversing decisions like Roe v. Wade.
“The future of our democracy is at stake,” House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said of replacing Kennedy.
“We’re looking at a destruction of the Constitution of the United States,” if Trump gets to appoint another conservative to the Supreme Court, Sen. Kamala Harris, a Democrat from California, said on MSNBC.
Supreme Court nominees need at least 51 Senate votes to win confirmation, and Republicans hold a 51-49 majority. For Democrats, this makes their bid to take control of the Senate in November’s elections all the more vital….”
Another Shot of Group in Meadow
Austin at Bridalveil
Lesley at Bridalveil
Flare Shower Over Utah
Three Air Force F-15E Strike Eagles fire flares over the Utah Test and Training Range, July 3, 2018.
Tweet of the Day
One of my Favorite Movie Clips
MSM Journalist Nitwit Statement of the Day
Jonathan Chait: Unlikely But Possible That Trump Has Been Russian Asset Since 1987; “Probably Not True But It Might Be”
Probably not true but it might be…
Think about that coming from a “journalist”
Nitwit Statement of the Day
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) expressed Wednesday what troubles her about Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh. Shaheen said although she does not know Kavanaugh’s position on “women’s reproductive freedom,” she is “troubled” by what she expects it to be.