Connect with us

Politics

Trump picked Kavanaugh for solely self-interested reasons

Published

on

When Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy announced his retirement, faux-conservative hearts were all-a-flutter over the prospect of replacing the part-time judicial activist with a strict constructionist who would help return the federal judiciary to its constitutional roots. Sadly, that didn’t happen with the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh.

As a candidate, Donald Trump promised to nominate strict constructionists to the high court, going so far as to say it was necessary in order to see disastrous rulings like Roe v. Wade reversed. It was this promise above all others that motivated evangelicals to support him. Well, that and the fact that he was #notHillary.

While the jury is still out on Trump’s first Supreme Court pick, Neil Gorsuch, Kavanaugh has all the markings of someone who will fail to measure up when it comes to limiting judicial interpretation and restricting the powers of government. And even though Trump likes to spin his promise to “drain the swamp,” Kavanaugh is considered by some to be “the heart and soul of the DC establishment.”

So, why did Trump pass up the opportunity to truly reshape the court?

It’s been reported that Trump has had his eye on Kavanaugh all along as part of a negotiation between Kennedy and Trump where Kennedy would agree to retire on the condition that Trump nominate Kennedy’s former law clerk to replace him. There’s ample evidence to consider this a real possibility.

To begin with, it was during the Gorsuch confirmation that we learned how Trump had a back channel connection to Kennedy through their children, specifically Justin Kennedy who worked for Deutsche Bank when the institution loaned $1 billion to Trump for his real estate investments. At the time, Trump had been denied loans from other banks due to his poor credit history.

It was also during the Gorsuch confirmation that private meetings with Kennedy to discuss his retirement and replacement first began and Kavanaugh’s name was first introduced.

One of the non-Kennedy reasons Trump was interested in Kavanaugh had to do with the Mueller investigation. Jim Acosta at CNN reported that Trump spent a great deal of time looking into Kavanaugh’s opinions on whether a sitting president can be indicted while in office.

Kavanaugh has written that a sitting president is essentially above the law:

“I believe it vital that the President be able to focus on his never-ending tasks with as few distractions as possible. The country wants the President to be ‘one of us’ who bears the same responsibilities of citizenship that all share.

“But I believe that the President should be excused from some of the burdens of ordinary citizenship while serving in office.”

Kavanaugh then asserted that “the indictment and trial of a sitting President, moreover, would cripple the federal government, rendering it unable to function with credibility in either the international or domestic arenas. Such an outcome would ill serve the public interest, especially in times of financial or national security crisis.”

You might wonder why, with all of this information out there, would Trump nominate Kavanaugh. The answer to that is simple: Trump knew that #Cult45, evangelicals, and other so-called conservative groups would provide him with all the cover he would need. For example, after calling Kavanaugh “unreliable” before his nomination, Sen. Ted Cruz praised him and committed to vote for his confirmation.

Trump made this decision solely for selfish interests. As a result, America has lost another rare opportunity to begin repairing our broken judiciary.

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

Advertisement

0

Culture and Religion

Hashtag Authoritarianism: How the Left uses subtle methods to manipulate the electorate

Published

on

By

Hashtag Authoritarianism How the Left uses subtle methods to manipulate the electorate

The danger of the Authoritarian Socialist Left using social media trends and tricks to alter opinions.

The dominant social media publishers are exerting their influence subliminally and the situation is only getting worse. It’s to the point that a small and exceedingly undemocratic elite could decide to swing future elections to the Left from now on.

This was extensively discussed in a recent congressional hearing where experts and victims of social media free speech suppression presented the problem in stark terms on the future of our representative republic

#Istandwith [insert name of SJW ‘victim’]

The danger in all of this was perfectly exemplified by the initial report of an alleged ‘verbal assault’ of Georgia Democrat Erica Thomas by a “white man” because she had too many items in the express lane. Suddenly the erstwhile hashtag #IstandwithErica trended and we were off to the races.

At first, she doubled down on her lies. Then she backpedalled, but not before showing the gullibility of several candidates for president.

What is rather interesting is that the hashtag in question started trending in the early afternoon Saturday, staying in the list for what was trending in the colonies for a few hours and then suddenly dropping off the list as though it has never been there. Then early Sunday another hashtag #HateHoax emerged.

These hashtags can easily drive a particular narrative, emphasising certain themes over others. These ‘trends’ are then picked up by a lazy national socialist media to drive the news cycle. All based on a hidden realm that decides what is ‘trending’ now.

Who determines what is trending?

According to Twitter, Trends are determined by an algorithm [In other words, we don’t want to tell you] depending on a number of factors. However, it is quite telling that certain trends can be ‘promoted’ or placed at the top of the list for money. What’s to stop some enterprising employee from adjusting the ‘algorithm’ to have a certain topic or issue trend?

There is a touch of mob rule in those who post in the trending twitter hashtag lists. People who want to be part of the crowd in adding their voice to the issue or cause. This is made easier with the ‘#Istandwith[insert name of someone of instant fame]’ format. Then it’s easier to go along with the SJW crowd – saying something without actually saying something.

If hashtags can be ‘promoted’ what is to stop the dominant social media publishers from ‘demoting a trending tag?

AutoComplete autocracy.

All hashtags are equal, but some hashtags are more equal than others to paraphrase George Orwell. This was seen in the little graphic added to the ‘#Marchforourlives’ or #Pride tags. Apparently, this is a perk of being of a certain political bent. Then there is the very useful feature of auto completing certain tags. Meanwhile, other tags don’t seem to engender this benefit because they don’t fit into the politics of the ‘algorithms’.

The hashtag #LibertyControl is a prime example, since it contravenes the #GunControl hashtag, framing this issue as being one of Liberty instead of inanimate objects of metal and wood, it does accrue the ‘perks’ of a more politically palatable tag.

Desire for control determines one’s place on the political spectrum.

Governmental power or desire for control is the only practical metric for arranging the political spectrum. It is to the advantage of some groups to obfuscate or confuse the issue, leaving it undefined, but with the implication that Left means good and Right means bad or some other nonsense.

These vague metrics are confusing at best and dreadfully false at worst. The metric of governmental power or desire for control is the underlying theme to almost all dictionary definitions of political ideologies, thus, this makes the most sense. Never mind that it eviscerates certain political lies or long-held but farcical beliefs.

For all of their false protestations over a desire for democracy, the far-Left radical socialists only want one thing: Power. For all their words about equality, they desire the exact opposite just as happens with their use of the term Liberal in connection with the cause of Liberty.

These examples show that the Left is using the dominant social media publishers to manipulate and control the electorate. Control epitomises the Left and the Left epitomises control, even if it’s by covert methods and hashtags.

The Takeaway.

While these issues may seem rather inconsequential, consider that we as a nation are on the razor’s edge in what happens in the next few years. Its not being overly hyperbolic to assert that if the national socialist Left attains control of the government in 2020 that will be the end of the country. Were they to win, they will no doubt open the borders and offer anyone and every free goodies all paid for by the taxpayers – until the run out of other people’s money.

Authoritarianism via hashtags is but one method the Left wants to use to accomplish that goal. Create a crisis or cause and have it trend and have enough people vote for their own enslavement almost subconsciously.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Democrats

Exposing the truth about Republicans

Published

on

By

Exposing the truth about Republicans

Which party founded the KKK, supported slavery, and opposed civil rights and giving blacks the vote?

A recent video from Will Witt from PragerU exposes that people do not really know that much about the Republican and Democratic parties. The revelation of the facts of the matter shocked most of the people, showing that the government indoctrination system is woefully inadequate to educating the country. No matter how much money they waste.

Now that the Left is doing all they can to render the words racist and sexist meaningless, while numbing everyone to real crimes against certain minorities. It’s vitally important to correct the record on which political party began with the purpose of the abolition of slavery. The party that started the – and revived – the KKK and which party opposed civil rights and giving blacks the vote.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Democrats

The three candidates who fell for Erica Thomas’s hate hoax are too gullible to be president

Published

on

The three candidates who fell for Erica Thomass hate hoax are too gullible to be president

The President of the United States needs to be able to call out lies, especially when they’re told by people who may share ideological alignment. Republicans should be the first to call out Republicans when one of them is wrong, and Democrats should expect the same from their own ranks.

There’s another characteristic important for a president. They can’t be gullible, again with an emphasis on being gullible to stories coming from within one’s own tribe. There are too many false narratives in the world of American politics, so being able to see a blatant lie for what it is makes for an important presidential trait.

Georgia state representative Erica Thomas lied. She played the race card, turned it into an anti-Trump dog whistle, and then doubled down when confronted by her fellow Democrat she was trying to slander. But three Democratic candidates quickly backed her on her tall tale. None of them have retracted now that the truth is known. And no Democratic candidate has called her out for perpetrating another hate hoax.

There is real racism in America and it should be confronted. But the breathless rants of people desperately trying to emerge in the crowded Democratic field are often too quick to pass the wrong judgment when it suits their narrative. Such is the case for three reactionary and gullible candidates:

Bill de Blasio, Beto O’Rourke, and Julian Castro failed the jump-to-conclusions test, the see-through-the-lies test, and the make-everything-about-race test. It’s no surprise that their candidacies for president are failing or that they’re desperately attempting to pander to the African-American community by backing a false narrative. There was no racism involved in this incident, and most Americans had the sense to question the validity of Thomas’s outrageous claim. But in the world of Democrats who are stricken with Trump Derangement Syndrome, the only surprise is that fewer didn’t fall for it. Perhaps it was fortunate for them it happened over the weekend.

Hate hoaxers like Erica Thomas should be condemned, not embraced for their hatred. The three who were too gullible to see through her fabrications are not presidential nomination material.

The first Democratic candidate to call out Erica Thomas’s lies gets my endorsement for the party’s nomination. I still won’t vote for them next November, but at least they’ll stand out as the one honest person among two dozen race hoax enablers.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending