The fight for civil rights in Democrat controlled states

Dominick Mastrangelo:

“…Local leaders in a southwest Virginia county have approved a resolution placing emphasis on citizens’ rights to form a militia and disavowing gun control measures expected to pass through the state legislature next year.

The Board of Supervisors in Tazewell County approved on Dec. 3 two resolutions according to local television station WJHL.

The first resolution declared the county a “Second Amendment Sanctuary,” mirroring an effort displayed by several other local municipalities fearful of strict gun control measures that could be handed down from the Democratically-controlled state government in Richmond.

That amended says the county would not devote county funds to “any effort that would infringe upon its citizens’ Second Amendment rights.”

The second resolution emphasized “the right to a well-funded and regulated militia described in the U.S. Constitution and Commonwealth’s constitution,” the TV station reported.

Board supervisors said the resolution would allow the county to intervene in any measure from another form of government that would infringe on county residents’ Second Amendment rights, though it is unclear how such a protection would be granted.’…”

Original

Hate as political agenda

Victor Davis Hanson:

“…When a party, an ideological movement, and an entire political agenda is based on hatred, people and policies become warped. The left-wing loathing of Trump has now tainted almost every Democrat’s agenda and unhinged most of the party’s major players…

…Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s report proved a compendium of FBI lying, fraud, and vendetta. There is not a single prominent figure in Horowitz’s lengthy report who has not left a written or video trail of anti-Trump bias (James Comey, Peter Strozk, the Ohrs, Lisa Page, Kevin Clinesmith) or has had some sort of questionable financial relationship with the Clintons or their affiliates (Alexander Downer, Andrew McCabe).

Meanwhile, the progressive presidential field is in a sort of collective meltdown, as candidates begin recalibrating and trading accusations as they fear their own early anti-Trump agendas have little public support…

…the common denominator in all these catastrophes is an existential hatred of Donald Trump—his person, his family, his successes, his agenda, and his supporters. The two writs for impeachment are simply: 1) We loathe Trump 2) He will sabotage our agenda if we don’t impeach and remove him…

…Horowitz’s report on FISA abuse, neatly summarized in Appendix 1 with the FBI response in Appendix 2, is a litany of FBI deceit. The bureau’s lawyers and agents altered documents, withheld and misrepresented evidence before a FISA court, peddled an unverified opposition research dossier among government and the media, sought to deprive Carter Page of his constitutional rights, and engaged in character assassination of his person—and we have not yet heard from federal prosecutors investigating these and other misbehaviors.

The Horowitz report is simply the endnote to three years of rank criminality that have led to the firings, retirements, reassignments, and demotions of most of the FBI’s top Washington echelon: James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Lisa Page, Peter Strzok, William Priestap, James Rybicki, James Baker, along with Josh Campbell, James Turgal, Greg Bower, Michael Steinbach, John Giacalone, and Kevin Clinesmith. Comey, McCabe, and Clinesmith were criminally referred to the Justice Department by various inspector general reports, respectively for leaking, deceiving federal investigators, and altering a document presented to a FISA court.

Page and Strzok were both fired from the Mueller investigation. Their texts—including, one assumes, an entire corpus of exchanges that remains missing and was apparently destroyed by FBI employees—are a repository of conflicts of interest, unprofessionalism, and unadulterated hatred of Trump and his supporters. Clinesmith, who likely committed a felony by doctoring an email submitted to a FISA court, openly cheered on “le (sic) resistance.”…

…Comey likely would have been guilty of a felony for leaking such secret government documents had not a team of FBI cronies, including Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, retroactively classified his leaked presidential memos as “confidential” rather than feloniously “secret.”

The FBI deliberately leaked false information to Yahoo News apparently to rush the dossier’s lies into the public domain before the 2016 election. The FBI used at least four undercover sources who were recording conversations with unsuspecting targets. It edited or ignored exonerating written memos about FBI questioning of suspects like Michael Flynn. James Comey confessed that his certainty that Hillary Clinton would win the 2016 election had massaged the way he conducted his exoneration of the Clinton email scandal. Thanks to the FBI, the reputation of the FISA court has been stained to the point that some in Congress are calling for its suspension.

A suddenly amnesiac Comey on over 245 occasions under oath said he could not recall or did not know when asked direct questions by House members. He lied about not knowing that the dossier was unverified. He lied when he said there was other key evidence presented to a FISA court beside the dossier. He lied when he said the FBI had followed procedures in applying for FISA writs to surveil Carter Page…

…If Adam Schiff were a private citizen, he likely would have been indicted by now, too. He serially lied throughout the Mueller investigation by falsely announcing impending bombshells and indictments, based on his supposed exclusive knowledge of damning classified information.

Schiff hijacked the impeachment inquiry and rigged the rules of examination by holding hearings in secrecy in the House basement, characterized by threats to Republican colleagues not to leak incriminating cross-examinations of witnesses, even as initial exculpatory statements were leaked to the press.

Schiff lied when he read into the congressional record a “version” of the transcript of the Trump Ukrainian phone call that was full of errors and fantasies. When caught in his deceit, he pleaded it was a “parody.”

Schiff lied about the circumstances of the so-called whistleblower. Schiff never called him as a witness as promised. He lied about the whistleblower’s relationship with his own staff. He lied about the timeline, contacts, and trajectory of the whistleblower’s journey from his own office to the filing of a complaint with the inspector general. And he probably lied about his own supposed ignorance of the whistleblower’s identity—evident when he stopped congressional questioning of Lt. Colonel Alexander Vindman on grounds that it would expose the whistleblower’s identity.

Schiff’s minority House Intelligence Committee final report was full of untruths. The Horowitz report exposed them by demonstrating that Schiff lied when he wrote that the Steele dossier was not central to requests to a FISA court, that the dossier was verified, that the FBI did not omit key information to the court, and that Carter Page’s testimonies were not misrepresented by the FBI.

Schiff may be the first known congressional representative to use his office to subpoena the phone records of his own colleagues, of journalists, and of a president’s personal attorney, and then to selectively publicize names from his huge trove of metadata in an attempt to embarrass his political enemies…

…The Democratic field’s reason to be is now the hatred of Trump. The Democratic debates so far have been characterized by two themes: 1) no candidate shall appear to the left of any other candidate 2) no candidate shall be outdone by any other in expressing hatred of Trump.

Such antipathies have translated into the most far-left Democratic agendas in modern memory: Medicare for all, health care for illegal aliens, the Green New Deal, open borders, a wealth tax, a 70-90 percent top income tax rate, slavery reparations, free college tuition, and late-term abortions if not permissible infanticide. None of these issues warrants 51 percent public support; all are the wages of Trump hatred.

Nihilism is the theme: abolish ICE! Abolish student debt! Abolish the Electoral College! Abolish border security! Abolish the idea of Medicare for seniors! These are the highbrow versions of left-wing street nihilism from toppling statues to wiping out murals and the names of buildings and streets.

The antipathy to Trump has unhinged the candidates themselves to the point that so-called prior moderate candidates (such as Joe Biden, Pete Buttigieg, Corey Booker, Kamala Harris) either sought to shed their prior records and careers or went full socialist as in the case of Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren…”

Original

Tweet of the day

Hallmark Caves to Wokescolds Who Will Never Watch the Channel

STEPHEN KRUISER:

“…Happy, Romantic Couples at Christmas…THE HORROR

The cultural civil war against Wokescold Nation wages on, today forcing me to defend two things I generally loathe: happy people and romance movies.

Seriously, I got a headache just typing that.

Over the weekend, the Hallmark Channel came under fire for its lack of wokenicity. The company committed the unpardonable sin of acquiescing to its loyal fan base rather than appease the outrage mob who never watched the channel, but were demanding it change anyway. For a brief while, anyway…

…The frothing wokescolds have been coming after Hallmark since the holiday season — the channel’s biggest of the year — kicked off. Megan wrote about it last month:

I know I can turn it on and not be concerned that my children will be exposed to the clown world morality that is on every other channel. It’s safe.

Perhaps because of this pressure, Hallmark decided to get a little woke and air a commercial that featured a same-sex wedding and two brides kissing. That’s not terribly shocking in 21st Century America, but it also has nothing to do with Hallmark’s audience or programming. After a little pressure from people who actually do watch the Hallmark Channel, company execs decided to pull the ad…

…Other networks don’t focus on the entertainment value anymore. They seek to lecture and scold first, and maybe provide “entertainment” in the way of mocking Americans who don’t live in the coastal media bubbles. My leftist entertainment b.s. tolerance level is higher than most people’s, but I’ve recently had to stop watching three shows that I had been enjoying because the writers were overwhelmed by the urge to shoehorn liberal talking points into scripts.

I can choose to stop watching, and I’m sure it will happen with increasing frequency, especially after Trump wins re-election.

What I will never do — because I am not a constipated lunatic who’s laden with mommy and daddy issues — is seek out networks that aren’t catering to me anyway and complain about them.

Sadly, Hallmark decided to give the finger to the viewers who made the network a success and cave to people who are always going to hate them…

…There is no level of adaptation and capitulation that will please Wokescold Nation. We all know that one same-sex wedding ad isn’t going to get them off the network’s back. Hallmark could have a full slate of LGBTQ (heavy on the “T” even though there are only fourteen of them in America)-approved programming featuring shows full of toddlers representing seventy-two different genders and the wokescolds would respond with, “It took you too long.”…”

Original

These Obama/Trump voters are just Trump voters now

Alexi McCammond:

“…Why it matters: The two-plus hour conversation revealed major warning signs for the Democratic Party in a crucial swing county that will be a pivotal area to win in 2020.

    • This was the biggest takeaway from our Engagious/FPG focus group last week, which included 10 voters who flipped from Obama in 2012 to Trump in 2016.
    • While a focus group is not a statistically significant sample like a poll, these responses show how some voters are thinking and talking about the 2020 election in crucial counties.

Why Saginaw matters: Trump won Saginaw County by just over 1% in 2016, and Obama won by nearly 12% in 2012.

The big picture:

    • These voters hate the fact that House Democrats are moving toward impeaching the president. They call it a distraction from the issues that would actually improve their lives, like preserving Social Security, cracking down on illegal immigration, and keeping jobs in the U.S.
    • “I think she’s wasting a lot of [taxpayer] money on a ghost chase,” said Chad Y., a 43-year-old Obama/Trump voter, of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. “The money she’s spending on that could go to help the homeless or go towards health care.”
    • Another participant, 73-year-0ld Michael G., said Democrats’ focus is in the wrong direction. “Instead of working on policies and things that will help the people, they are just working to basically preserve their own position … [T]hey don’t really care about you and [me], I don’t think.”

Between the lines: These voters aren’t sick of Trump’s antics like other swing voters we’ve talked with, and they don’t feel a sense that things need to get back to “normal” — because Trump is their new normal.

That’s reinforced by the fact that:

    • They have virtually zero trust in the media’s coverage of him.
    • Their support for Trump will grow, they said, even if the country enters a recession or a full-blown trade war with China.
    • And they credit Trump with making health care more affordable, thanks to — they said — his GOP tax law, which some said has saved them more in taxes so they can now reallocate that money to pay for prescription drugs.

Their responses were strikingly at odds with several other groups of Obama/Trump voters we’ve spoken with this year.

    • In past focus groups this year around the upper Midwest, we’ve heard voters say they wish Michelle Obama would run for president; they’ve soured on Trump’s personality; and several of them have indicated they would vote for Obama over Trump in 2020 if he were allowed to run for a third term.
    • But swing voters in our focus groups from Ohio, Iowa and now Michigan have revealed a common disdain for impeachment.

What they’re saying: “He’s proven what he’s promised over and over to us,” said 38-year-old Mary D.

    • “Let him finish out the last four years. Why not? He’s done good this far,” said 55-year-old Karen M.
    • Others in group said they like Trump’s “I-don’t-give-a-s— attitude,” as one man put it.
    • Heidi L., a 66-year-old Obama/Trump voter, said she likes that “nobody bought him his presidency. He did it all himself with his own money and nobody’s trying to buy him to do this or that.”

While only two participants said they are definitely voting to re-elect Trump next year, the entire group said they’re not excited by any of the 2020 Democrats, and no one signaled an interest in supporting a Democratic candidate.

The bottom line: The only way these folks are “swing” voters anymore is in their willingness to either sit out the next election or vote for a third-party candidate…”

Original

US trade representative Robert Lighthizer says phase-one trade deal is ‘totally done’ and will double exports to China in two years

Emma Newburger:

    • U.S. and Chinese officials announced on Friday that the U.S. and China had finally agreed to the phase one agreement after a contentious 18-month trade war.
    • China agreed to billions of dollars in agricultural purchases from the U.S., while President Donald Trump vowed not to pursue a new round of tariffs set for Sunday.
    • The world’s two largest economies plan to sign the partial accord in the first week of January.

Original

Diversity for thee…

Kay S. Hymowitz:

“…The top Democratic candidates will soon take the stage at the next debate, and oh boy, are party leaders squirming. Up until late last week, when Andrew Yang made the cutoff by a hair, all six of those making their pitch were white—#debatesowhite, as the hashtag called it. Worse yet, half of those Caucasians are old enough to be carrying Medicare cards. As Frank Bruni wrote in last week’s Sunday column, “for a party that celebrates diversity, pitches itself to underdogs and prides itself on being future-minded and youth-oriented, that’s a freaky, baffling turn of events.”…”

Original

Impeachment = Reelection

Frank Miele:

“…Though the people of the great state of California may be happy to see President Trump impeached for coloring outside the lines, the people of the Midwest, South and Mountain West who voted for him to be the Great Disruptor no doubt see things very differently. After watching Congress do nothing for two years except try to unseat the people’s president on a host of trumped-up charges, it is very likely that there will be hell to pay in 2020. That means not just a Trump victory, but also a larger Republican majority in the Senate and very likely a House of Representatives that will flip from the Democrats to the Republicans.

The Democrats, however, did not have to impeach President Trump to seal their doom, at least in presidential politics. The cake was already baked, and the icing on it is Trump’s just-won’t-quit economy. In 1980, Ronald Reagan asked Americans to vote based on whether they were better off than they were four years ago. For the vast majority of folks today, the answer to that question is a resounding yes. Sure, lots of voters still don’t like Trump’s bluster and bravado, but God help the Democrat who comes between them and their 401(k).

Even if you take both the impeachment hoax and the economic renaissance off the table, Trump would still be the hands-down favorite for reelection. That’s because there has always been a clear path to victory for him in 2020, and it goes straight through the Supreme Court. There are several other issues that will boost Trump’s chances for reelection, but none quite as ripe as Ruth Bader Ginsburg. The octogenarian justice is locked in a life-or-death battle (literally) with President Trump to see who can outlast the other.

Trump’s ally, of course, is time. Ginsburg, 86, has beat the clock on numerous occasions, surviving multiple bouts with cancer and other ailments to which the flesh is heir, but actuarial statistics give voters a reasonable expectation that were Trump reelected, he would be appointing a successor to Ginsburg at some point. This also goes to a lesser extent for Stephen Breyer at age 81 and possibly Clarence Thomas at age 71 and Samuel Alito at 69.

Almost everyone agrees that Trump’s promise to appoint conservatives to the Supreme Court energized his base in 2016 and helped to cement his victory. Although liberals will also use this issue to their advantage, it is a safe bet that taking the court back from activist liberal judges will play well for the president in the battleground states…”

Original

Trump will prevail over ‘scalp-hunting’ journalists

Michael Goodwin:

“…Donald Trump just spoiled the fantasy.

If, as expected, the Democrats’ impeachment dies a quick death in the Senate, it’s not just Speaker Nancy Pelosi who will have been thwarted. Presidential scalp-hunting by a biased media will be another Washington game disrupted by Trump.

Backed by a press corps eager to get Trump, Pelosi felt confident to authorize the flimsy effort to remove the president from office. She assumed media bullhorns would push the public into her camp and that would win her Republican votes for a bipartisan takedown.

She certainly got the media support, but the public and the GOP aren’t following. Indeed, the harder that Reps. Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler push and the louder the ­anti-Trump media scream, the more the public resists impeachment over the Ukraine piffle.

That was true even before last week’s sensational revelations that the FBI was both corrupt and incompetent in the Russia collusion probe. The report and testimony by Michael Horowitz, the inspector general of the Justice Department, further undermined impeachment by revealing the rampant misconduct in the earlier case…”

Original

On the latest liberal outrage

Watch the MSM, deep state actors, and Democrats lie over and over again about the dossier

They lied over and over again and misrepresented information to the American people. The dossier was completely debunked by the Horowitz report.

New York Democrat Jeff Van Drew to Switch Parties and Become a Republican

“…Rep. Jeff Van Drew, a moderate Democrat who is strongly opposed to impeaching President Donald Trump, is expected to switch parties and become a Republican, according to multiple sources familiar with the situation.

Van Drew is one of two Democrats who voted against opening the impeachment inquiry into Trump and has remained against the effort, even as the House prepares to vote to impeach the president next week.

Van Drew’s congressional and campaign staff were informed he was planning to switch parties on Saturday, according to Democratic sources. The question was now when, not if, Van Drew was joining the Republican Party, according to several Democrats with knowledge of the ongoing conversations.

As of Saturday afternoon, it was still unclear if Van Drew would make the announcement before the House votes on impeachment, which is expected Wednesday.

“It was supposed to be bipartisan, it was supposed to be incontrovertible. It was supposed to be something that was always on the rarest of circumstances,” Van Drew told reporters about impeachment earlier this week. “Well it’s not bipartisan.”…”

Original

Minnesota Democrat Collin Peterson will vote against impeachment

Collin Peterson said he will vote against impeaching President Trump when the issue comes for a vote Wednesday. Peterson said he expects four or five other Democrats will do the same.

Peterson said Trump “has not committed a crime” and most people in the Seventh District don’t think the U.S. should provide foreign aid, so they are not troubled at all if Trump withheld funds to Ukraine. Peterson also said the case against Trump only includes “second-hand” information about Trump’s phone call with the president of Ukraine.

Peterson said the “biggest problem” he has with this impeachment process is that people decided in advance they were going to impeach Trump “and now they’ve spent a year trying to figure out how they can make a case for it. That’s backwards. I just don’t agree with this.”

Original

Doug Santo