Connect with us

Everything

John Kelly recognized what Trump, Scaramucci apologists missed

Published

on

I was about to his “publish” on this post when Anthony Scaramucci was unceremoniously discharged from service at the White House by Gen. John “Brick” Kelly (I just gave him that nickname for his unflinching devotion to doing the hard things). What great news. Kelly’s action, to me, validates the problem I discuss below, and gives me a glimmer of hope that things could improve.

Liars can and do reform.

President Trump tells it like it is. He’s honest about what he believes. He “means what he says.” These are the arguments presented as to why traditional communications professionals can’t (won’t) work the Trump, and why people like Anthony Scaramucci are a better fit–and good for the country.

David Marcus over at The Federalist, and Dr. Michael Brown, writing in The Stream used these arguments to justify supporting the president’s choice, and explaining his “style.”

Marcus:

In the long run, that decision will be good for Trump and for the American people. The reason everyone from Pennsylvania Avenue to Main Street should celebrate this move is that it finally puts the cards on the table.

Brown:

So, just as a soldier risking his life on the front lines would rather have a brilliant general who was profane and slept around than a polite, faithfully-married, but ineffective general, so many voters chose Trump as the most effective person for the job.

I respect both men, especially Dr. Brown, who was present at my own baptism 18 years ago. But I think, one from a purely political angle and the other from a more religious one, that they are both missing the point. They are both ignoring one major problem with Trump and his White House.

They lie.

They lie about everything. Little things like the inauguration crowd size (“alternative facts”), and big things like Russia. Trump has made his career based on telling lies. He’s very effective at it, almost as good as Bill Clinton. (And for the Liars Club, Clinton is legendary, even possibly the GOAT in American politics.)

Marcus said it’s good that this move “finally puts the cards on the table.” Except the cards aren’t honest. It’s more like Three-card Monte than an open hand. There’s a reason why Sean Spicer looked so uncomfortable–besides the ill-fitting suit jacket–on his first day on the job. He had to stand up in front of the press and lie his head off and make it seem natural.

Most communications shops are really good at “spin.” With the proper talking points, a grain of truth, and a bathtub of lies and axle grease, they can make Benghazi about a Youtube video. They can protect the political principal and make everything plausibly deniable. But they can’t handle Trump, who himself leads with gargantuan lies rapid-fired to confuse and distract the press.

The only way to deal with Trump is to have a perfect straight man to go along with everything he says, even if it contradicts what he just said (it frequently does). Kellyanne Conway is fairly good at this, but she’s a known quantity in the press, and an actual nice person.

It takes the equivalent of a mob enforcer, fiercely loyal to the capo de tutti capi, to handle a hostile press. Scaramucci is correct in his obscene reference to Stephen Bannon, in that Bannon has his own agenda, and Trump is an instrument/partner. Scaramucci is 100 percent a posterior-kissing, genuflecting worshipper of Trump, with no other agenda (right now).

To be honest, I get a really bad vibe from the guy, like a Beria to Stalin, or a Himmler to you-know-who vibe. A guard dog who can lie, cheat, and do whatever is necessary in service of his boss. G. Gordon Liddy before he reformed, perhaps. But Liddy was behind the scenes, while Scaramucci is right out in the klieg lights.

Marcus wrote “President Donald Trump is who he is. He’s a tough as nails New Yorker who enjoys competition.” That’s one interpretation. One could just as easily argue that he’s a soft-as-Jell-o rich boy who enjoys torturing others like pulling wings off butterflies.

“At the same time, he is a 70-year-old, rough and tumble, New York businessman,” Brown wrote of Trump, “more cutthroat than compassionate when it comes to getting things done.” He went on to write that from this perspective, “he’s not really much of an enigma after all.”

I don’t think Trump is an enigma. I honestly believes he loves America–or at least his vision of what he thinks America is and should be. Some of it’s like Barack Obama said, he believes his own bulls**t. But there’s far more BS that Trump doesn’t believe at all, that’s simply tossed out there to make himself look good, or to further endear those who are under his thrall to himself.

He lies. Scaramucci lies. They believe lying is part and parcel of governing; that in fact everyone does it. So when Attorney General Jeff Sessions tells the truth, or when Reince Priebus won’t lie (not spin, but outright lie) or when Sean Spicer is not the best liar, they get upset. Grifters never like it when they have to rely on honest people.

I don’t know how things will work out with Gen. John Kelly as chief of staff. He’s probably an honest guy who knows the value of a ruse. Maybe Trump/Scaramucci can persuade him to go along to get along–that this is to advance “Trump’s agenda.” Or maybe they’ll set him up like they’ve done to so many others.

This, however, I do believe. Getting rid of “nice guys” by discrediting them and replacing them with liars, cheats and confidence men is not the way to govern, nor is it something to be explained away so easily.

Culture and Religion

Snatching Defeat from the jaws of Victory: ‘Writing out’ Most Guns with the Bump-Stock ban.

Published

on

By

Bump Stock

The latest Liberty grabber wave has crested, but Trump is about to give them a tremendous victory over the 2nd amendment.

Now that the Sturm und Drang of the March for gun confiscation has ‘died down’ it has become evident that, much like previous movements of the past, it came to nought aside from some localised suppressions of Liberty. The problem is there a vestige of this assault of freedom that is still rearing it’s ugly head, that of the infamous ban on so-called “Bump-Stocks”.

Those who are rightly concerned about this assault on Liberty can still inscribe their opposition with the Moonshine, Cigarettes and Fire-sticks bureaucracy [Better known as the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms – BATF]  pushing through a new ‘law’ that all by himself, Trump has taken to “Writing Out”.  The deadline is June 27, 2018 11:59 PM ET for everyone to post their opposition to this ‘Law’.

First they came for the Bump-Stocks.

For those who may not care about someone else’s concerns over freedom, just be mindful of a reprise of Martin Niemöller Poem starting with the line: “First they came for the Bump-Stocks, and I didn’t object – For I didn’t care about Bump-Stocks…. Soon enough, they get around to coming after the firearms everyone else cares about, and eventually that will be hunting rifles or shotguns. If you chose to remain silent those guns will be “written out” as well.

But don’t just take our word for it, listen to what the Liberty grabbers have stated in bragging about the subject:

Delaney Tarr [March for Our Lives]

When they give us that inch, that bump stock ban, we will take a mile.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.):

Upon being asked if the bill was a slippery slope toward further gun restrictions, she said, “So what? … I certainly hope so.”

Apparently we’re not supposed to notice when the Liberty grabber Left broadcasts their intentions to the world. We’re supposed to let them get a foot in the door of a pretext for further bans before objecting.

Giving up the question.

David Deming over on the American thinker, Made the very important point that sacrificing one more time to the Liberty grabbers of what seems to be nothing is in essence:

If we agree to ban bump stocks because they facilitate rapid firing, we have given up the question. We have agreed in principle that any dangerous gun can be banned and confiscated by an arbitrary executive order. All guns are capable of rapid fire, and all guns are inherently dangerous. Pump-action shotguns can be rapidly fired and reloaded. Jerry Miculek can fire five shots from a double-action revolver in 0.57 seconds. High-capacity magazines most certainly facilitate rapid fire, so they also will have to go. A writer who wants to ban all “private individual ownership of firearms” recently argued that “even bolt-action rifles can still fire surprisingly fast in skilled hands.” He’s right. All magazine-fed guns will be outlawed.

Automatic redefinition.

In point of fact, the ATF previously ruled that Bump-Stocks [and presumably other ways of ‘bump-firing a gun – Fast fingers, Rubber bands and Belt-loops] don’t actually convert ordinary semi-automatic firearms to a “Machine gun” because the trigger has to be pulled for every shot. Now with the President’s authorising this linguistic legerdemain, this definition codified in the law has been blurred to the point that any gun that can be ‘Bump-fired’ could also be banned. However, they can’t very well ban fingers, belt-loops or rubber bands, so they will just ban each and every gun that can fire too fast.

Just ‘Write-out’ this legal requirement and Voila! Any gun that can be fired too fast for the sensibilities of the Liberty grabbers can be thought of as a “Machine Gun” and banned instantly – converting most of the 120 Million gun owners into instant felons. With a bit of training,  most guns can be fired faster, so in essence, letting them change this legal definition could have them ban just about every gun in existence.

The Takeaway.

One might not care about the fate of thousands of inert pieces of plastic or what happens to those who have them. One might not care if someone won’t be able to bump-fire a weapon in this particular way. But we on the Pro-Liberty Right will rue the day that we let this go through in exchange for nothing.

If we let the powers that be arbitrarily proclaim that some guns with these pieces of inert plastic are “Machine Guns’, the day will soon dawn when ALL guns are dishonestly ‘written out’ as the same. It will then just be a slippery slope to everyone having to undergo a background check, registration and of course – TAXES – on guns that we already own. Followed by the inevitable confiscation of those guns.

Those who remain silent now will only have themselves to blame when this happens – so now is the time to stop this dead in it’s tracks. The comment window is only open for a few more days [Jun 27, 2018 11:59 PM ET], make the best of it.

 

Continue Reading

Foreign Affairs

Trump’s trade war faces resistance from GOP, but it probably won’t matter

Published

on

While the government-contrived immigration “crisis” at the border involving forced family separations has captured the headlines—effectively giving Trump and the GOP the cover they need to save DACA and create a pathway to citizenship for millions of illegal aliens—Trump’s trade war was the topic of the day during hearings with the Senate Finance Committee yesterday.

Following recent announcements of retaliatory tariffs being leveled against the US by Canada, China, Mexico, and the EU, Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross appeared before the committee to defend what the committee referred to as Trump’s “knee-jerk impulses” with his trade policies.

Senators from both parties blasted Ross over Trump’s steel and aluminum tariffs—which Ross once defended as “no big deal” because any impact they might have on consumer prices would be “trivial”—following recent economic data indicating that tariffs were indeed having a negative impact on the US economy.

After pointing out that tariffs were responsible for raising prices by 20 percent or more for certain US manufacturers, Finance Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch questioned the administration’s claim that Trump’s trade war was a matter of national security.

“These tariffs do not support US national security; instead, they harm American manufacturers, damage our economy, hurt American consumers, and disrupt our relationship with our long-term allies, while giving China a free pass.”

As regular readers of the Strident Conservative already know, Trump has been particularly soft on China after receiving favorable treatment for his and Ivanka’s business interests in China from the Chinese government.

Sen. Pat Toomey (R-PA), who attempted to get a law passed that would return the power to levy tariffs back to Congress as the Constitution requires—it was shot down by Mitch McConnell—also pointed out that Trump’s trade war has nothing to do with national security.

“I wish we would stop invoking national security because that’s not what this is about. This is about economic nationalism.”

“We’re picking winners and losers.”

Hmm… picking winners and losers. Isn’t that something Obama did?

Despite Trump’s misguided optimism, it’s important to remember that there are always casualties in war—even in a trade war—and he is personally responsible for them because he will have caused them.

While news that there are Republicans willing to take a stand against Trump’s disastrous trade policies should be something to cheer, the GOP has become the party of Trump where loyalty and undying devotion to the NY liberal has replaced conservative values. It was just yesterday that I wrote about Sen. Dean Heller’s conversion to Trump conservatism and how as a Trump loyalist, he would be giving Trump “a wide berth” concerning tariffs.

With the GOP adopting a Trump loyalty test when it comes to enacting policy and running elections, it’s likely that we’ll see more Republicans giving Trump a wide berth on tariffs and pretty much everything else Trump wants.

Originally posted on The Strident Conservative.

 


David Leach is the owner of The Strident Conservative. His daily radio commentary is distributed by the Salem Radio Network and is heard on stations across America.

Follow the Strident Conservative on Twitter and FacebookSubscribe to receive podcasts of radio commentaries: iTunes | Stitcher | Tune In | RSS

Continue Reading

Opinions

Conservative Picks for the Colorado Primary

Published

on

There isn’t too much action in the Colorado Primary, but the race to watch seems to be out of District 5. Colorado is a state that can embrace the grassroots. Doug Lamborn seems to have lost touch with the grassroots due to his struggle at getting on the ballot. As a result of temporarily not being on the ballot, he finds himself in a contested field and is a more vulnerable incumbent. If Lamborn’s reputation can’t recover, Darryl Glenn is poised to capitalize.

Best Pick: Darryl Glenn
Worst Pick: Doug Lamborn
Best Race: District 4
Worst Race: District 3, District 6

District 1

Casper Stockham is the only Republican in this race.

District 2

Peter Yu is the only Republican in this race.

District 3

Scott Tipton is an incumbent RINO. He is unchallenged.

District 4

Ken Buck is Colorado’s most Conservative Congressman. He is unchallenged.

District 5

The first impression from this race is that incumbent Doug Lamborn badmouthed Trump. But rather, Lamborn is in a fight because he had some ballot issues because he was using nonresident signatures or something like that. He survived that court battle but that is only the first battle for in this swamp creature’s quest to stay on top. Looking at his record, he was more Conservative under Obama.

His most serious challenger is Darryl Glenn. Glenn is a candidate with a strong grasp on federalism and separation of powers. He is also running as a fiscal hawk who seems as though he would align with the Freedom Caucus on spending issues. It’ll be interesting to see if Glenn’s Youtube campaign is matched by his ground game. If so, he just might have this.

Conservative Pick: Darryl Glenn

District 6

Mike Coffman is an unchallenged RINO.

District 7

Mark Barrington is the only Republican in this race.

Continue Reading

NOQ Report Daily

Advertisement

Facebook

Twitter

Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2017 NOQ Report.