Veep and beloved National Clown Joe Biden is outraged by Trump’s treatment of women and wishes they were in high school so that he could meet Trump out behind the gym. Why Joe? To exchange groping tips? Continue reading
George Will despises Donald Trump and left the Republican Party after his nomination. However, he believes that Trump has a point about rigged elections:
GEORGE WILL: When Mr. Trump talks about it being rigged, he sweeps all his grievances into one big puddle. He talked about the media. He talked about the primaries. He talked about the polls. Talked about the Republican National Committee. I think when most persons hear that an election is rigged, they think of government action to rig the election. And there Mr. Trump has a point if he would just make it more clearly.
It is hard to think of an innocent reason why Democrats spend so much time, energy and money, scarce resources all, resisting attempts to purge the voter rolls, that is to remove people who are dead or otherwise have left the jurisdiction. It’s hard to think of an innocent reason why they fight so tremendously against Voter I.D. laws. They say, well that burdens the exercise of a fundamental right. The Supreme Court has said that travel is a fundamental right and no one thinks that showing an I.D. at the airport burdens that fundamental right.
We know — we don’t surmise — we know that the 2010, ’12 and ’14 elections were rigged by the most intrusive and potentially punitive institution of the federal government, the IRS. You can read all about it in Kim Strassel’s book Intimidation Game. She’s familiar to all Wall Street Journal readers and FOX viewers. This is not a surmise. I have talked to lawyers in a position to know they say it’s still going on. The IRS is still intolerantly delaying the granting of tax exempt to conservative advocacy groups to skew the persuasion of this campaign. Continue reading
Almost all pundits now assume that Donald Trump is beaten and his corpse of a campaign is already being picked over by media vultures. His recent polls have been dismal, with Clinton in some having up to a 12 point lead. Trump has been besieged with women coming forward to attest to at best boorish behavior, at worst to behavior that could have him facing sexual assault charges in some States. He apparently had no plan about what to do in regard to this, although he should have assumed that something like this, real or fake, would be thrown against him towards the end of the election. (Curious how none of the women came forward during the primaries. All purely coincidental I am sure.) His campaign has been amateurish. His ground game is non-existent. Some polls show him on the verge of losing such die hard Republican states as Arizona and Texas. He seems headed to a defeat of epic proportions. That may well happen in three weeks less a day. However, I am not convinced that events will certainly play out that way.
1. Trump is a brawler. He is not in this race to claim the title of good loser which seemed to be the goal of John McCain, for example, in 2008. He will keep slugging until after the last vote is counted. As in the duel above from Rob Roy, a skilled opponent against a brawler sometimes gets overconfident, and the brawler can seize the initiative in an instant.
2. Trump is slime. Trump is a sleazy guy, to put it charitably, one of endless reasons why I opposed him in the primaries, and why I long refused to support him. The King and Queen of Sleaze in American politics are of course Bill and Hillary. However, Trump is giving them a run for their crowns. Go here to read the Hillary expose from the Trump-supporting National Enquirer. When it comes to throwing filth, Trump is only beginning to fight.
3. Disparate polls. A strange dichotomy has arisen between live phone polls, and internet polls and polls that rely upon robo calls. Trump tends to do much better in the latter polls than in the former. For example, in the Rasmussen poll from yesterday Clinton is up one point over Trump. Go here to look at it. Today Rasmussen has it dead even. Go here to look at it. People’s Pundit Tracking Poll had Trump ahead by one point. Go here to view it. A Cvoter international poll yesterday showed Clinton up two points, although I have not found a link to the it. The Los Angeles Times Daily Tracker Poll has a unique methodology in that it polls the same 3000 people each day. It was the most accurate poll in 2012. Today it shows Trump and Clinton tied. Go here to look at it. In every election cycle there are outlier polls, but it is odd to have such a long lasting split as seen in this election. Is it possible that these polls are catching a hidden Trump vote that will not reveal itself to live pollsters? We will find out in the second Tuesday in November. Although I hate to mention him in the same breath as Trump, I would note that Gallup had Reagan down by eight points at the end of October in 1980 just prior to his one and only debate with Carter. Reagan went on to win by ten points. Polls are amusing, sometimes useful, but rarely should they be accepted as Sacred Writ. Continue reading
(Language advisory as to the tape: lots of swearing Democrats.) James O’Keefe at Project Veritas gives us the second part of his look at the thug black bag boys of the Democrat Party. Go here to look at the first video. This installment focuses on the Democrat tactic of getting illegal voters to the polls. Scott Foval, the national field director for Americans United For Change, seen on the video has been fired by his organization, the Democrats seeking to use him as a scapegoat, along with Bob Creamer, the convicted felon husband of Democrat Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky, head of Democracy Partners, and a visitor to the Obama White House 342 times, who announced today that he was stepping down from working with the Clinton Campaign. This thing is starting to explode. O’Keefe is a master at this, and is worth a thousand of the usual worthless political consultants who drain funds in GOP races.
(Language advisory as to the tape: lots of swearing Democrats.) James O’Keefe at Project Veritas gives us further evidence that the Democrat Party is an organized criminal conspiracy:
The goal of “bird-dogging”: to create a sense of “anarchy” around Donald Trump that would undermine his political support. Often, the tactic uses the most vulnerable people — including the elderly and disabled — to maximize shock value.
O’Keefe’s extensive video investigation reveals that the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) are involved in “bird-dogging” and other provocative tactics through a web of consultants led by Robert Creamer, a veteran Chicago activist and convicted felon who is thought to have planned Democrats’ political strategy during the push for Obamacare in 2009 and 2010.
Creamer is also the co-founder of Democracy Partners, a consulting group that, according to Project Veritas videos, apparently contracts directly with the Hillary Clinton campaign and the DNC, and that works with an array of super PACs and consultants to organize, film and publicize their provocations.
Creamer affirms on one video that Clinton is aware of “all” of his work, and that Democracy Partners has a daily telephone call with the Clinton campaign to coordinate efforts.
O’Keefe and his team also obtained hidden camera videos showing one of Creamer’s consultants, Scott Foval, describing “bird-dogging,” among other tactics, and taking credit for having instigated violence at several Republican events during the 2016 election cycle.
Foval — who praises Creamer as “diabolical” — explains how “bird-dogging” works: how they plan confrontations in advance, choose particular individuals to provoke, and maximize media coverage.
FOVAL: So one of the things we do is we stage very authentic grassroots protests right in their faces at their own events. Like, we infiltrate. And then we get it on tape. And then, when our guys get beat up —
Project Veritas: You mean authentic-seeming grassroots?
FOVAL: No, authentic.
PV: You mean —
PV: So like — progressive, what we saw in Madison.
FOVAL: We train up our people, wherever they are, to — and I work with a network of groups, we train them up on how to get themselves into a situation on tape, on camera, that we can use later.
PV: So some of this, so I probably know your work.
FOVAL: I know you do. Everybody does. But —
PV: You mean like a situation where it’s sort of like a —
FOVAL: You remember the Iowa State Fair thing where Scott Walker grabbed the sign out of the dude’s hand and then the dude gets kind of roughed up right in front of the stage right there on camera?
FOVAL: That was all us. The guy that got roughed up is my counterpart, who works for Bob [Creamer].
PV: And that was like, storyboarded? Him getting roughed up like that?
FOVAL: We scenarioed it.
PV: And so you, like leant yourselves to that situation and it happened. A self-fulfilling prophecy.
FOVAL: We not only leant ourselves, we planted multiple people in that front area around him and in the back to make sure there wasn’t just a action that happened up front, there was also a reaction that happened out back. So the cameras, when they saw it, saw double angles of stuff like, they saw what happened up front, and they saw the reaction of people out back.
PV: That’s fucking brilliant. That’s brilliant.
FOVAL: And then the reporters had people to talk to.
Foval also tells Project Veritas’s undercover journalist that Republicans are less adept at such tactics because they obey rules: “They have fewer guys willing to step out on the line for what they believe in. … There is a level of adherence to rules on the other side that only when you’re at the very highest level, do you get over.”
In another video, Foval admits that his organization is responsible for an incident in Asheville, North Carolina in September, where an elderly woman was allegedly assaulted outside a Trump rally.
In that incident, the 69-year-old woman, wearing an oxygen tank, heckled a visually impaired 73-year-old Trump supporter, then pursued him. She claimed he then punched her in the jaw, though she had no visible injury; his attorney claims she touched him on the shoulder first, and then fell to the ground as he turned around. The national media covered her claims widely, while largely ignoring his. Foval explains that the woman had been “trained” as a part of his operation.
Foval also explains how the operation is set up to allow the DNC and the Clinton campaign “plausible deniability” in the event that the true nature of the deliberate violence is discovered: “The thing that we have to watch is making sure there’s a double-blind between the actual campaign and the actual DNC and what we’re doing. There’s a double-blind there, so that they can plausibly deny that they heard anything about it.”
He explains the flow of money in “rapid response” operations: “The campaign pays DNC, DNC pays Democracy Partners, Democracy Partners pays the Foval Group, the Foval Group goes and executes the shit on the ground.”
And Foval emphasizes that the goal of “bird-dogging” is to create a sense of “anarchy” around Trump: ”The bird-dogging. The aggressive bird-dogging. What I call it is ‘conflict engagement.’ … Conflict engagement in the lines at Trump rallies? We’re starting anarchy. And he needs to understand that we’re starting anarchy.” Continue reading
Now, listen to me, you hicks. Yeah, you’re hicks too, and they fooled you a thousand times, just like they fooled me. But this time, I’m gonna fool somebody. I’m gonna stay in this race. I’m on my own and I’m out for blood. Now listen to me, you hicks! Listen to me, and lift up your eyes and look at God’s blessed and unfly-blown truth. And this is the truth. You’re a hick, and nobody ever helped a hick but a hick himself!
Willie Stark, All the King’s Men, Robert Penn Warren
I was talking yesterday with a client about the election. We both agreed that it was a poor choice. I told him that I think it essentially came down to either a third term for Obama, since I doubt if Clinton would do much differently, or voting for someone who might be half crazy, but who would roll the dice and probably bring change. He told me that was the way he saw it and why he was voting for Trump.
Rumors are rife that a top aide to Speaker of the House Ryan, Dan Senor, leaked the audio tape of Trump’s conversation with Billy Bush. Go here to read all about it. If this is true, and if Ryan knew, two big ifs, then it illustrates the fact that plenty of elite Republicans in Washington and around the country would prefer Hillary Clinton to win rather than Donald Trump. This would also explain why Ryan decided to go to war with Trump after the second debate, a decision which otherwise strikes me as bizarre. Trump tends to be a fan of conspiracy theories, but this time I could not blame him for assuming that this is precisely what happened.
Trump is now in effect running as an independent against the corrupt powers that be in Washington. Trump of course is the ultimate insider. However, the old maxim that it takes a thief to catch a thief, or in this case thieves, comes to mind. I promised you a wild campaign. Buckle your seat belts. The conclusion of this campaign promises to be a roller coaster ride like nothing seen before in American political history.
Well, that is how the people at the top of the Clinton campaign view us. Matt Archbold at Creative Minority Report brings us the news:
So yeah, the Clinton campaign picked Tim Kaine as the vice presidential nominee but a recently leaked email displays the animus and disdain which the campaign views conservative Catholics.
WikiLeaks released an email chain that included Clinton campaign chair John Podesta, Clinton campaign communications director Jen Palmieri, and Center for American Progress fellow John Halpin.
Ken Auletta’s latest piece on Murdoch in the New Yorker starts off with the aside that both Murdoch and Robert Thompson, managing editor of the WSJ, are raising their kids Catholic. Friggin’ Murdoch baptized his kids in Jordan where John the Baptist baptized Jesus.
Many of the most powerful elements of the conservative movement are all Catholic (many converts) from the SC and think tanks to the media and social groups.
Halpin also says of conservatism among Catholics:
It’s an amazing bastardization of the faith. They must be attracted to the systematic thought and severely backwards gender relations and must be totally unaware of Christian democracy.
Palmieri reportedly said that Catholicism is “the most socially acceptable politically conservative religion” and adds “Their rich friends wouldn’t understand if they became evangelicals.”
Podesta then chimes in saying,
Excellent point. They can throw around “Thomistic” thought and “subsidiarity” and sound sophisticated because no one knows what the hell they’re talking about.
Yup. This is disgusting but it is how the Clinton campaign views Catholicism. And if you’re hoping the media will cover this in the way it deserves, think again. I’d bet it’ll hardly get a mention on MSM. Continue reading
The surreal campaign of 2016 continues with Al Gore joining Hillary on the campaign trail. This is an unusual development in light of the fact that Gore and Clinton have long cordially detested each other. However, when it comes to power Democrats are always able to swallow their bile and unite.
It does surprise me however due to Hillary’s shock and horror at what Donald Trump said back in 2005. I guess she is forgetting what Gore was accused of doing just a few years later:
Former Vice President Al Gore has been hit by new allegations of sexual assault. This time, it’s two more massage therapists bringing the charges.
The former VP is already in hot water, fighting abuse claims in Portland, where another masseuse said Gore groped her in ’06 and asked her to perform a “chakra release” (massage-speak for “hand job”.) He denies everything.
The new allegations are said to have taken place at two hotels – one in Beverly Hills in 2007, when Gore was in Hollywood for the Oscars, the other in Tokyo in 2008.
A source from the luxury hotel in Beverly Hills told The Enquirer: “The therapist claimed that when they were alone, Gore shrugged off a towel and stood naked in front of her.” He then propositioned her for a sexual act, according to The Enquirer.
Molly Hagerty, the Portland victim, has also recently piped up with some new evidence: a pair of stained black pants and the remains of some candy supposedly gobbled by Gore. Continue reading
My personal favorite in the debate last night. Clinton’s attempt to invoke Lincoln deserved Trump’s comeback. It reminds me of the politician who said that his opponent reminded him of Abraham Lincoln, if one could imagine a short, fat, corrupt and lying Abe.
Scott Adams, the creator of Dilbert, has had probably the most acute analysis on this strange campaign this year. Here is his take on the debate:
I just watched the debate on replay. Trump won bigly. This one wasn’t close. And keep in mind that I called Clinton the winner of the first debate, and I now endorse Gary Johnson, primarily to avoid being called an alleged enabler of alleged sex abusers and their alleged enablers. That basket of deplorables includes both Bill and Hillary Clinton (the alleged doer and the alleged cleaner-upper) plus Trump and his alleged misdeeds.
Some quick reactions…
1. When the Access Hollywood tape came up, Trump dismissed it as locker room banter that he regrets. You expected that part. The persuasion move was that he quickly contrasted that “small” issue with images of ISIS beheadings, and cage-drownings. It was a high ground maneuver, a powerful visual anchor (like the Rosie O’Donnell move from his first primary debate), and a contrast play. In this framing, Trump cares about saving your life while Clinton cares about your choice of words. I realize the issue is Trump’s alleged deeds, not his words. But in terms of debate persuasion, Trump nailed it hard.
2. Clinton’s body language was defensive. Trump is physically larger and prowled the stage. He won the optics. It only got worse when a fly landed on Clinton’s face mid-answer. Both candidates looked perfect in terms of wardrobe and hair, given what they have to work with.
3. Trump threw in enough random details about Syria to persuade viewers that he knows more than they thought he knew. And he did a great job selling the idea that he knows more than the generals (as ridiculous as that sounds), at least in terms of not announcing where we plan to attack. I agree with the moderator who said there might be good reasons for announcing attacks – such as giving time for civilians to leave – but it wasn’t quite a counter-argument. Trump succeeded in looking informed on Syria, and at the same time reinforced the “can’t keep a secret” theme for Clinton.
4. Trump’s pre-debate show with Bill’s alleged victims dismantled Clinton’s pro-woman high ground before the debate even started. I didn’t see the pre-debate show, but I assume it was impactful. It had to be. Clinton looked shaken from the start.
5. The best quotable moments from the debate are pro-Trump. His comment about putting Clinton in jail has that marvelous visual persuasion quality about it, and it was the laugh of the night, which means it will be repeated endlessly. He also looked like he meant it.
Clinton’s Abe Lincoln defense for two-faced politicking failed as hard as anything can fail. Mrs. Clinton, I knew Abe Lincoln, and you’re no Abe Lincoln. You know that was in your head. Or it will be.
6. Most of the rest was policy stuff that no one understands or cares about. We don’t know how to fix Obamacare or what to do with TPP. But by acting competent on these and other policy issues, Trump gains more than Clinton in persuasion.
7. Trump attacked Clinton on emails, and did a good job. His base needed that.
8. Clinton had to defend her “deplorables” comment. She said she regretted it. Regret isn’t what the public wanted to hear. That’s about her. They wanted to hear that she doesn’t think that way. She failed to address the emotional part of that topic, and that’s a persuasion fail. Continue reading
Bill Clinton’s deposition on Monica Lewinsky. A good thing to remember when Hillary rants tonight about how outraged she is about what Trump said. Ah for the halcyon days of that Clinton’s presidency when parents had to shoo kids out of the room when the news came on, and when oral sex and the oval office became synonymous. Trump is a pig, but having these characters act morally outraged over Trump is truly nauseating.
The second debate between Trump and Clinton starts at 8:00 PM Central Time tonight, and for lovers of political theater it promises to be exceptional. Any other politician would be dead meat now but Donald Trump is not “any other politician.” He isn’t a politician at all, as he has demonstrated time and time again in this campaign. What began, I suspect, as a vanity ride for him, has turned into a political movement that has been consistently underestimated by his foes, including me. Well, I am done underestimating Donald Trump. Tonight promises to be an epic disaster for him, but I would not be surprised to see him throw away the political rulebook yet again and snatch a victory from a debacle. We shall see. For a political junkie like me, it does not get any better than this.
Update: Trump has just held a news conference featuring Juanita Broaddrick, Paula Jones, Kathleen Willey and Kathy Shelton. It looks like he is taking the nuclear option unless this is a pre-debate headfake.
Update: Trump thus far, a half hour into the debate, is bringing his A game in the debate: Calm, articulate and on the attack. He has won most of the exchanges with Hillary.
Update: An hour in Trump is more than holding his own. Clinton came into this debate over confident and Trump came in knowing that he couldn’t afford another loss. Frank Luntz’ focus group is showing that 17 think Trump is winning, 4 think Hillary is winning and 9 think it is a tie.
Update: I called the first debate for Clinton and I think Trump is just as clearly the victor in the second debate. A bravura performance considering the pressure Trump is under.
Update: From the Luntz focus group:
Focus Group: Who are you willing to vote for?
BEFORE #DEBATE • Hillary: 8 • Trump: 9
AFTER DEBATE • Hillary: 4 • Trump: 18
The most hilarious feature in the above video is the idea that Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton are sleeping together. Lots of political news, all of it unedifying. We have Trump from 2005 talking to Billy Bush, yes a scion of that Bush family, braying about his attempt to physically seduce a married woman. Trump is a pig about women? Who knew? Then we have hacks of Hillary’s three speeches to Goldman Sachs, for which she was paid $675,000 for slightly more than three hours of speechmaking, hitherto kept secret, back in 2013 where we learn, to our stupified amazement, that she says one thing in public and one thing in private as a matter of policy, and that she believes in utopian schemes, such as having a common market for North and South America powered by green energy.
Too much going on in the law mines today for me to do more than note all this in passing. This open thread is your opportunity to comment on the political scene. As usual, be concise, be charitable and, above all, be amusing!
This weekend I got “shadowbanned” on Twitter. It lasted until my followers noticed and protested. Shadowbanning prevents my followers from seeing my tweets and replies, but in a way that is not obvious until you do some digging.
Why did I get shadowbanned?
But it was probably because I asked people to tweet me examples of Clinton supporters being violent against peaceful Trump supporters in public. I got a lot of them. It was chilling.
Late last week my Twitter feed was invaded by an army of Clinton trolls (it’s a real thing) leaving sarcastic insults and not much else on my feed. There was an obvious similarity to them, meaning it was organized.
At around the same time, a bottom-feeder at Slate wrote a hit piece on me that had nothing to do with anything. Except obviously it was politically motivated. It was so lame that I retweeted it myself. The timing of the hit piece might be a coincidence, but I stopped believing in coincidences this year.
All things considered, I had a great week. I didn’t realize I was having enough impact to get on the Clinton enemies list. I don’t think I’m supposed to be happy about any of this, but that’s not how I’m wired.
Mmm, critics. Delicious 🙂
P.S. The one and only speaking gig I had on my calendar for the coming year cancelled yesterday because they decided to “go in a different direction.” I estimate my opportunity cost from speaking events alone to be around $1 million. That’s based on how the rate of offers went from several per month (for decades) to zero this year. Blogging about Trump is expensive.
But it is also a system, not a goal. I wrote a book about that.
Update: Then they started leaving fake book reviews on Amazon to go after my book sales.
“I live in a rather special world. I only know one person who voted for Nixon. Where they are I don’t know. They’re outside my ken. But sometimes when I’m in a theater I can feel them.”
Pauline Kael, Film Critic for The New Yorker, December 28, 1972
When it comes to our politics the divisions in our country are often deplored. What really should be deplored is that one side of our politics, leftists, tend to lack the imagination to conceive how anyone could possibly in good will disagree with them.
Case in point Gail Collins’ op ed in the New York Times entitled “How Could Anyone Vote for Trump?”.
Why isn’t she leading 3 to 1? This is not a normal race between a Democrat and a Republican. One of the candidates has made it clear that he has no attention span or self-control. World security experts in both parties are terrified by the idea of a Trump presidency. He’s screwed small contractors in his business dealings and bought dumb presents for himself with money from his charitable foundation — a charitable foundation, by the way, that appears to have been managed by a team of gerbils. Also, he keeps changing his positions on critical issues and has paid settlements to people alleging he discriminated against them on the basis of race or not being attractive enough. Continue reading
Fifty-six years to the day from the first Presidential Debate: Trump v.
Nixon Clinton. Put your thoughts on the debate in the comboxes.
I thought it was a wretched debate with neither Hillary nor Trump doing especially well, although I gave it to Clinton on points. However, the online polls are showing a decisive Trump win. That is probably bad news for Hillary as those often in the wake of a Presidential debate are a good sign of political strength as hard core partisans tend to see their candidate winning no matter what. It looks like Trump did himself no harm tonight and Clinton did herself no good. She needed to change the momentum of the race away from Trump, and this is an early sign that she has failed to accomplish that.