Connect with us

Democrats

Mueller’s testimony will only splinter the Democratic Party even further

Published

on

Muellers testimony will only splinter the Democratic Party even further

Call me a cynic, but I’ve been turning the prospects of Robert Mueller’s testimony before Congress over and over in my head to seek a reason why Democrats would have pursued it. The one benefit to them is that it’s a brief distraction – one to three news cycles – to take attention away from the border crisis. But here’s the funny part about that: When they scheduled it, they were losing the border narrative, but over the last couple of days leading up to Mueller’s testimony, they’ve had a few stories that actually benefited them on the issue. So much for prior proper planning.

Nevertheless, tomorrow’s circus is coming to town and many eyes will be on Mueller and Congress as they exchange points and press for some sort of resolution to the two-year waste of time and dollars that has been aptly called Russiagate. What do Democrats hope to gain? What could they possibly achieve with it? If they think he’s going to sing about how bad President Trump is or how he obstructed the investigation, then this is an exercise in having someone read what they already made public. Any awareness to specific details could have been brought about through their press surrogates. There was no need to initiate the circus.

If, on the other hand, they’re going to have him elaborate on why he didn’t pursue the case, then they’re opening up a fresh can of worms when there are plenty of impeachment worms already crawling around in the Democratic Caucus. Are they going to try avoid having him essentially prompt them to pursue impeachment, or is their goal to use him as justification for going after the President?

This is the rock and the hard place many on the left have discussed, especially among Establishment Democrats in DC. They don’t want to pursue impeachment yet. It wouldn’t be popular and it would play that particular card too early in the election cycle. The best time for impeachment to be an issue, if they’re being strategic about it, is later when they’ve accumulated more information and performed more investigations. By no means am I recommending this as any further attention to the Russia hoax by the press, the people, or our representatives in DC is one of the most wasteful things they could do until the election, and that’s saying a lot considering it’s Congress we’re talking about here.

The choice they’re forcing following the Mueller testimony is whether or not to impeach the President. Unless Mueller drops a bombshell (he won’t) or opens doors to investigations that lead to bombshells (there won’t be), then this is going to exacerbate the internal debate they’re already having in the Democratic Party. It’s one of several, but second only to the overarching Pelosi-vs-Squad battle, the impeachment debate is the most contentious.

If they impeach at the request of the radicals in their party (who happened to be joined by a few dozen more moderate representatives) following Mueller’s testimony, then they risk alienating the party to many voters and playing right into the President’s hands. He’ll be able to play the victim card because they’ll make him a victim.

If Mueller testifies and they still don’t impeach, the divide between the two warring factions will only grow wider.

Mueller’s testimony will reveal some things of interest that could harm the President, but these will have short-term effects. The lasting effect will echo the sentiment that Democrats focused on a single mission – removing President Trump – when they should be trying to solve problems of the issues they’ve created for the American people, including the border crisis.

The kabuki dance of the Mueller testimony could affect the President temporarily, but the lasting effects on the unhinged Democrats in the House could be used against them in 2020.

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

Advertisement

0

Democrats

Dianne Feinstein’s comment on Dayton shooter skipped one important point

Published

on

Dianne Feinsteins comment on Dayton shooter skipped one important point

Gun control is the talk of the town as the week comes to a close. Well, that and Greenland. And Jeffrey Epstein. But the mass shootings two weeks ago has DC buzzing, media furiously reporting, and activists on both sides of the debate furiously Tweeting at each other. Senator Dianne Feinstein weighed in on the discussion by pointing out some important facts about the alleged Dayton shooter, Connor Betts.

Her facts are correct. Her analysis is off because it missed one important point. We’ll get to that in a minute, but let’s declare once and for all (though I’m sure I’ll have to repeat myself later) that the 2nd Amendment IS NOT ABOUT HUNTING OR HOME PROTECTION. Our right to keep and bear firearms was put into the Constitution by our founders because they recognized what could happen if the people had no recourse against an oppressive government. Just as Venezuelans didn’t realize they danger they were putting themselves into when they allowed their guns to be taken away, so too do many Americans put way too much trust in government.

The authoritarian left wants guns because they know they’ll never achieve their endgame as long as the people can defend themselves from tyranny.

Feinstein is correct that the Dayton shooter was able to cause an extreme amount of death and injury in a short period of time. Police were quick to respond, otherwise it could have been much worse. But as our EIC pointed out in a Tweet, Feinstein’s narrative is worthless when you look at it from the opposite perspective.

Gun control is not the solution to our mass shooting problem. If anything, gun control has enabled shooters to enact their crimes without fear of many “good guys with a gun” to stop them. We must never give up our 2nd Amendment rights.

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

President says AOC ‘fuming’ that Tlaib, Omar are becoming the faces of the party

Published

on

President says AOC fuming that Tlaib Omar are becoming the faces of the party

President Trump took to Twitter to make fun of the opposition party as two of its most outspoken members, Representatives Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar, continue making headlines and stirring up controversy. He even threw in an accusation against Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez for good measure.

There are no indications that this is accurate, but that’s not the point. This isn’t hard policy or thoughtful analysis. It’s a petty jab, and while many Americans, including some of his fans, are against him taking shots at the opposition in such a manner, this is the society we live in and it includes a President who takes jabs on Twitter. You can stress over it or sit back and enjoy it. I choose the latter.

For AOC’s part, she took the jab with a chuckle.

Beyond the diversion this offers ahead of a weekend, reality is probably more closely reflected by the President’s Tweet than Democrats are comfortable admitting, at least the part about them being the face of the party. “The Squad” makes more headlines among the four of them than the rest of the Democrats combined, and this includes the powerful heads of committees who are actively investigating President Trump ahead of a possible impeachment.

Both Democrats and Republicans have different degrees of infatuation with “The Squad.” Are they a real threat to our republic, as many on both sides claim, or are they merely a diversion from real decisions being made in DC?

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

Kirsten Gillibrand wants to confiscate guns

Published

on

Kirsten Gillibrand wants to confiscate guns

Senator and failing Democratic candidate for president Kirsten Gillibrand wants to confiscate your guns. The former “conservative” when it was politically expedient to be one in upstate New York has now gone the way of most her new party. She’s a radical progressive who wants your guns.

For someone who used to have an “A” rating with the NRA, she’s come a long way to hit rock bottom by calling for “assault weapons” bans and mandatory buybacks, AKA confiscations. Oh, but she won’t actually SAY they’re mandatory buybacks. She danced around that question like a pop star.

Gun activist Colion Noir broke down a recent interview she did with CNN. It was clear, as Noir pointed out, that CNN has already weighed Gillibrand in the balance and found her wanting. They went after her to corner her on her old gun rights support and tried to get her to admit what she wants to do as president with gun confiscations.

It’s funny watching Democrats flail around trying to get attention for themselves. There are only a handful of candidates leaving a mark, and Kirsten Gillibrand isn’t one of them. But she’s still trying to do damage to the 2nd Amendment on her way out.

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