INSIDER TRADING BY SENATORS DISCOVERED!

If it looks like insider trading, sounds like insider trading, and smells like insider trading…, then it’s probably insider trading.

These politicians definitely have their privileges!

ainsiders 9

And there are many more out there who benefited from their advance knowledge…, believe me…, but these were the only ones stupid enough to get caught.

According to Dom Calicchio of Fox News, “Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California and three of her Senate colleagues reported selling off stocks worth millions of dollars in the days before the coronavirus outbreak crashed the market, according to reports.”

Hmmm, what an absolute coincidence?

“The data is listed on a U.S. Senate website containing financial disclosures from Senate members.”

“Feinstein, who serves as ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and her husband sold between $1.5 million and $6 million in stock…between Jan. 31 and Feb. 18, The New York Times reported.”

ainsiders 1

“Feinstein defended herself in a series of tweets on Friday, saying she has ‘no control’ over her assets and the stocks in question were her husband’s transactions.”

Here we go again…, deny, deny, deny…, lie, lie, lie.

‘“During my Senate career I’ve held all assets in a blind trust of which I have no control. Reports that I sold any assets are incorrect, as are reports that I was at a January 24 briefing on coronavirus, which I was unable to attend,’ she tweeted.”

‘“Under Senate rules I report my husband’s financial transactions. I have no input into his decisions. My husband in January and February sold shares of a cancer therapy company. This company is unrelated to any work on the coronavirus and the sale was unrelated to the situation.’”

Her sales were “completely unrelated” to the coronavirus situation.

Oh I get it…, “someone” just decided to sell off between $1.5 million and $6 million of her and her husband’s stock, right in the midst of a record breaking stock market for no good reason.

Sounds legit to me.

And I’m not cutting any of our Republican friends any slack either.

ainsiders 6

“Reports identified the three other senators as Richard Burr of North Carolina, Kelly Loeffler of Georgia and James Inhofe of Oklahoma, all Republicans.”

“Burr, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, used more than 30 transactions to dump between $628,000 and $1.72 million on Feb. 13, according to ProPublica.”

Senate Lawmakers Hold Media Availability After Weekly Policy Luncheons

“The report said the transactions involved a significant percentage of the senator’s holdings and took place about a week before the impact of the virus outbreak sent stock prices plunging to the point where gains made during President Trump’s term in office were largely erased.”

‘“Senator Burr filed a financial disclosure form for personal transactions made several weeks before the U.S. and financial markets showed signs of volatility due to the growing coronavirus outbreak,’ a Burr spokesperson said. ‘As the situation continues to evolve daily, he has been deeply concerned by the steep and sudden toll this pandemic is taking on our economy.’”

“On Friday, the senator tweeted an updated statement saying he relied only on ‘public news reports’ to guide his decision on the sale. Still, he said he’s asked for a Senate Ethics Committee review of his actions.”

“Burr was an author of the Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Act, a law that helps determine the federal response to situations such as the coronavirus outbreak, ProPublica reported. Burr’s office would not comment on what kind of information Burr might have received about coronavirus prior to his stock sales, the outlet reported.”

“[Senator] Loeffler was appointed to the Senate in December by Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp after incumbent Sen. Johnny Isakson resigned because of health issues – despite allies of President Trump having urged Kemp to select Rep. Doug Collins instead.”

“Loeffler and her husband, Jeffrey Sprecher, chairman of the New York Stock Exchange, sold stock Jan. 24, the same day she sat in on a briefing from two members of Trump’s Coronavirus Task Force, The Daily Beast reported.”

“Between that day and Feb. 14, the couple sold stock worth a total between $1.2 million and $3.1 million, the report said. In addition to the sales, they also purchased stock in a maker of software that helps people work at home – just before millions of Americans were forced to leave their offices because of the outbreak, the report said.”

“Loeffler slammed the Daily Beast report as a ‘ridiculous and baseless attack’ in a pair of late-night tweets.”

‘“This is a ridiculous and baseless attack. I do not make investment decisions for my portfolio. Investment decisions are made by multiple third-party advisors without my or my husband’s knowledge or involvement,’ Loeffler wrote. ‘As confirmed in the periodic transaction report to Senate Ethics, I was informed of these purchases and sales on February 16, 2020 — three weeks after they were made.’”

ainsiders 2

“In an interview Friday with Fox News’ Ed Henry, Loeffler again said any claim of insider trading is ‘absolutely false.’”

“[Senator] Inhofe sold as much as $400,000 in stock all on Jan. 27, in companies such as PayPal, Apple and real estate company Brookfield Asset Management, The New York Times reported.”

“But in a written statement, Inhofe pushed back by saying he was not at a late January briefing and, further, does not have involvement in investment choices.”

ainsiders 4

“The statement said: ‘The New York Times allegations are completely baseless and 100 percent false. I was not at the briefing on January 24. I was meeting with pro-life kids from Oklahoma here for the March for Life and the new nominee to be U.S. Ambassador to Tanzania. I do not have any involvement in my investment decisions. In December 2018, shortly after becoming chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, I instructed my financial advisor to move me out of all stocks and into mutual funds to avoid any appearance of controversy. My advisor has been doing so faithfully since that time and I am not aware of or consulted about any transactions.’”

I really wish all four of these senators would give the rest of us a little credit for not being completely gullible and/or stupid.

ainsiders 7

This really is just another case of “the rich get richer.”

ainsiders 5

Isn’t it just so completely obvious that these individuals used knowledge, that wasn’t available to the rest of us, to advance themselves financially at the expense of everybody else?

Again…, if it looks like insider trading, sounds like insider trading, and smells like insider trading…, then it’s probably insider trading.

ainsiders 8

You can say you’re not responsible for your stocks or your money all day long, but in the end these are your stocks and it is your money, and YOU ARE responsible for it!

This whole thing stinks to high heaven, and these people need to held accountable.

But, the odds are we’ll just end up seeing another shining example of our wonderful two-tiered justice system.

We have to always remember…, that there’s this club, and we ain’t in it!

ainsiders 15

I value your feedback and I’d love to hear from you!

If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the white “FOLLOW” button at the bottom of that page, which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

Massive Republican voter turnout!

Yes, folks, the people are really turning out for President Trump in these 2020 primaries…, and he’s unopposed!

It’s crazy!

While all we hear is about is the democrat side of things, the real story of these 2020 primaries is the massive republican voter turnout for President Trump.

It seems people can’t wait to get out there and show their support for him!

That, of course, would never be acknowledged by the fake news media!

They wouldn’t want to even come close to promoting that idea, AT ALL…, that there is ANY type of positive news regarding President Trump, or that his support is setting records in all of these primaries.

Julia Musto of Fox News reports that, ‘“Tuesday’s massive voter turnout for my father is unprecedented,’ according to his son Eric.”

avoters 2

Alex Isenstadt, for Politico, agrees, and says, “Trump drives massive turnout in primaries.”

Julia Musto goes on to report that, “Even as an incumbent, President Trump’s nationwide support in primary states is unprecedented because American voters ‘finally feel like they have a voice,’ Executive Vice President of the Trump Organization Eric Trump said Wednesday.”

“In an interview on ‘Fox & Friends,’ [Eric] Trump explained that the president had more than 600,000 incumbent voters in the highly-contested and delegate-rich state of Michigan. By comparison, former President Barack Obama clinched just under 175,000 [in his re-election campaign].”

avoters 1

‘“So, he was three times Obama as an incumbent, right?’ he asked. ‘So, the last incumbent in 2012…My father has three times the amount of votes cast for him in Michigan than Obama did.’”

“Trump added that there was an ‘even more impressive’ statistic recorded in Washington State,” of all places.

‘“My father has 520,000 votes cast for him right now, alright? There’s only 67 percent in, so votes are still coming in Washington State. No other person in the history of the state has ever gotten to those vote numbers before,’ he said.”

‘“Guys, we’re seeing this across the country. The turnout — I mean he’s not running against anybody. The turnout for a guy who is the incumbent – we’ve never seen numbers like this,’ Trump stated.”

avoters 5

Aaaaaand the liberal, fake news media chooses to look the other way.

Propaganda by omission.

“Trump said that the results of Tuesday’s primaries were the continuation of a pattern of success the president’s campaign had seen during the Iowa caucuses and Nevada primaries.”

‘“I spoke at the Iowa caucuses and I had 600-700 people in a room in an uncontested convention and every single person was wearing a Trump shirt, was wearing a Trump hat,’ Trump continued further. ‘People are pissed off at [the] government. They don’t like the other candidates at all.’”

‘“My father is bringing back the pride of this nation. Everything he’s doing is American; it’s patriotic,’ he concluded. ‘People finally feel like they have a voice again and that’s why people are turning out in record numbers even when they don’t have to.’”

According to Alex Isenstadt, for Politico, “President Donald Trump doesn’t have much of a primary fight on his hands — but Republican voters are nevertheless turning out in droves for him, a warning sign for Democrats in November.”

“The massive turnout is a reflection of organic enthusiasm among conservatives.”

“The President doesn’t have much of a primary fight on his hands?”

How about The President doesn’t have anywhere near a primary fight on his hands, and voters are still turning out in droves for him?

I do agree, however, that this is “a warning sign for Democrats in November.”

The warning sign should read, “Get off of the tracks, because the Trump train is coming and we’re not stopping for anyone or anything!”

avoters 7

“Republicans [are] turning out in historic numbers.”

avoters 3

How many times have we heard the term “historic numbers” the last three years?

And the numbers referred to are all historically positive…, regarding the economy, employment, poverty rates, energy, trade, and on and on.

“Trump received more than 31,000 votes in the Iowa caucus, surpassing the 25,000 Democrats who turned out during Barack Obama’s successful 2012 reelection bid. Trump’s share was more than four times the number of Republicans who caucused during George W. Bush’s 2004 reelection campaign.”

“The vote totals in New Hampshire were even starker. The president received 129,696 votes, more than doubling Obama and Bush’s totals.”

avoters 6

“Republicans such as Ralph Reed, the founder and chairman of the Faith & Freedom Coalition, said Trump’s record on issues dear to conservatives drove turnout in the first two states. He and others said Democrats’ recent impeachment push also motivated his supporters.”

‘“Impeachment has lit a fire under the Trump base — and I anticipate it will burn until Election Day in November,’ said former Minnesota Sen. Norm Coleman, chairman of the pro-Trump Republican Jewish Coalition.”

Oh yeah, Norm!  The fire is definitely lit, and the democrats and their co-conspirators, the fake news, just keep throwing more logs on that fire.

The democrats have decided to throw patience, caution and subtlety to the wind, and they are going to pay dearly for that in November and on into the future.

The democrats’ lies and true anti-American desires have been exposed, and they’re not backing down…, but we aren’t either anymore!

WINNING!

avoters 10

avoters 9

I value your feedback and I’d love to hear from you!

If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the white “FOLLOW” button at the bottom of that page, which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

 

My reaction to some recent headlines about the Electoral College, AOC and the 22nd Amendment, DNC Chair calls Republican lawmakers “cowardly,” Joe Biden’s behavior with women, and did the NY Times and The Washington Post help elect President Trump!?

There are so many topics I’d like to offer my insight on, but so little time!

Welcome to my first crack at the “MrEricksonRules headline buffet line!”

Pick your favorite(s) or have some of each.  It’s totally up to you.

<<<<<<<*>>>>>>>

Senate democrats introduce measure to abolish Electoral College.

“Would election by popular vote be better than the Electoral College?”

“A group of Democratic senators on Tuesday introduced a measure to do away with the Electoral College, picking up on a talking point that has caught fire in the 2020 Democratic presidential field.”

“According to NBC News: ‘Leading Democratic senators are expected to introduce a constitutional amendment Tuesday to abolish the Electoral College, adding momentum to a long-shot idea that has been gaining steam among 2020 presidential candidates.’”

“…changing the Constitution is seen as virtually impossible today. A constitutional amendment may be proposed by a two-thirds supermajority in both the House (about 290 votes) and Senate (67 votes) and requires ratification by 38 states.”

As is usually the case with the democrat party, what we have here is either disingenuous political grandstanding, uninformed ignorance, or a combination of the two.  I’m going to give them some credit and say it’s disingenuous political grandstanding for the most part, since actually amending the Constitution would never happen, mostly due to the requirement of having 38 states go along with it.

So…, in the grand scheme of things, it’s kind of like “The Green New Deal,” a bunch of noise that ain’t never going to happen.

Andrew O’Reilly of Fox News contributed.

<<<<<<<*>>>>>>>

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Liz Cheney disagree over knowledge of 22nd Amendment, Constitution.

“[Liz] Cheney, R-WY, took issue with a comment [Alexandria] Ocasio-Cortez, D-NY, made during a recent MSNBC town hall event in which the freshman congresswoman talked about Democrats being in control of Congress in the 1930s and 1940s.”

‘“When our party was boldest, the time of the New Deal, the Great Society, the Civil Rights Act and so on, we had, and carried, supermajorities in the House, in the Senate. We carried the presidency,’ she told MSNBC’s Chris Hayes.”

‘“They had to amend the Constitution of the United States to make sure (President Franklin D.) Roosevelt did not get reelected,’ Ocasio-Cortez continued.”

“In response to Ocasio-Cortez’s remarks, Cheney tweeted: ‘We knew the Democrats let dead people vote. According to AOC, they can run for president too!’”

“The New Yorker then fired off her own response. ‘Hey Rep. Cheney, I see from your dead people comment that you get your news from Facebook memes, but the National Constitution Center + Newsweek are just two of many places where you can clarify your misunderstanding of the history of the 22nd Amendment,’ she wrote.”

“Roosevelt died while in office in 1945 and the 22nd Amendment was proposed by Congress in 1947.  The Amendment reads, “No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some of other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once.”

I think we can safely score this:

Representative Liz Cheney………..ONE

Representative Ocasio-Cortez…….ZERO

Kathleen Joyce of Fox News contributed.

<<<<<<<*>>>>>>>

DNC Chair Tom Perez calls Republican lawmakers “cowardly,” says they will be “judged harshly” by history

“Democratic National Committee Chair Tom Perez launched a stunning attack on Republican lawmakers, saying history will “judge” them for supporting President Trump.”

What’s so “stunning” about that?  I hear much worse on a daily basis directed at President Trump, republicans and various conservatives.

‘“The reason why we [Democrats] are winning, and we won at scale in 2018, is because our message is clear. Our message was: we are the ones who actually have your back on the issues that really matter. Healthcare, education. He said he had your back, but actually he had a knife in your back,’ Perez said.”

The truth is the democrats under performed in the 2018 midterms, and by any measure we can say the democrats do not “have our back.”  The democrats, most recently led by Barack Obama, sold America and Americans out.  They gave away our jobs, our wealth, our respect around the world, and our American soul.

“The DNC chair continued that President Trump found success in 2016 by putting ‘fear on the ballot,’ and that Republican lawmakers who have supported his policies over the last three years are ‘cowards’ who have allowed damage to be done to their part.”

That’s a good one Tom!  The democrats are historically the party of fear.  How many times have we heard “the republicans will gut social security,” due to the republicans, millions will die without healthcare, our children will starve and grandma will be left out on the street!?

We didn’t need President Trump to “put fear on the ballot” in 2016, we were all scared already that our country was going down the drain. And rightly so.

‘“I mean, history will not only judge Donald Trump harshly. It will judge Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan and all the other cowards who refused to stand up to this president and allowed the party of Lincoln to die. They will be judged harshly because whatever he says goes right now.’”

I feel more correctly, “history” will judge these times as the times of the great liberal lies.  The times of liberal propaganda and the times of the corrupt and biased media who backed them up rather than do their jobs as watchdogs for We the People.

Anna Hopkins of Fox News contributed.

<<<<<<<*>>>>>>>

Pelosi: Biden didn’t know “the world we’re in now.”

“House Speaker Rep. Nancy Pelosi is the most high-profile Democrat to come to the defense of former Vice President Joe Biden’s ‘affectionate demeanor,’ Peter Doocy reports from Washington.”

Ha! “Affectionate demeanor!?”  Is that what we’re calling “Uncle Joe’s” creepy behavior now?

And according to Politico (a news journalism company), “Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Tuesday that she does not think the allegations against Joe Biden of unwelcome contact are disqualifying for a 2020 run, but that the former vice president should be more aware of others’ personal space. ‘I don’t think it’s disqualifying,’ Pelosi said… ‘He has to understand in the world that we’re in now that people’s space is important to them, and what’s important is how they receive it and not necessarily how you intended it.’ … Pelosi pushed back against the tone of former vice president’s apologies. ‘It is how it’s received, so to say, ‘I’m sorry that you were offended’ is not an apology,’ the California Democrat said. ‘‘I’m sorry I invaded your space,’ but not, ‘I’m sorry you were offended.’ What’s that? That’s not accepting the fact that people think differently about communication.’”

I’m a little confused.  Is she coming to Joe’s defense or is she scolding him?

National Public Radio (NPR) noted, “On the most obvious level, complaints of this kind renew the criticism of Biden’s past performance on issues affecting women and people of color, the two constituencies likely to matter most in choosing the next Democratic nominee.”

As usual with the democrats, us poor white guys are treated like second class citizens.

“Perceptions of Biden as ‘old school’ or ‘old fashioned’ are not just liabilities to be shed. They are also the basis of his appeal to many older, white, working-class Democrats and independents.”

The democrat party can say what they want about the new breed of democrat-socialists out there; Joe Biden leads in the polls for president, and he hasn’t even officially declared yet!

“Biden’s advisers believe coverage of allegations of inappropriate behavior is being stoked by rival Democrats…”

No kidding.

That basically leaves one guy…, and I can hear ‘em now, Bernie, Bernie, Bernie.

<<<<<<<*>>>>>>>

New York Post: How the New York Times, Washington Post helped get Trump elected.

“If either paper had done the sort of digging on Hillary Clinton that they did on Trump, then Clinton would never have been the presidential nominee for the Democratic Party.”

headlines 2

True.  And actually, “If either paper had done the sort of digging on Hillary Clinton that they did on Trump,” she would be in jail, along with a lot of her friends.

“So, in a different scenario, if the Times and the Washington Post probe Clinton, alert the public to all of her ‘problems’ then the Democrats are forced to pick someone else as their candidate.  In that case, Trump might not have won.”

In reality, Mr. Crudele, anything “might” have happened.  It really annoys me these days when reporters say, “this might happen,” or that “could happen,” or this “may” happen.

Here’s some news for all of you journalism majors: ANYTHING “MIGHT,”  “COULD,” OR “MAY” HAPPEN!  THAT’S NOT NEWS!

John Crudele of The New York Post contribued.

headlines 1

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

 

Go for it Mr. President!

With all due respect Mr. President, please all allow me to offer you my advice related to the current partial government shutdown.

If ending the government shutdown truly depends on either side compromising on building the wall, this shutdown could last for a very long time, which really isn’t a good thing in the end.

After discussing my intentions privately with the republican Senate and House leadership, I would tell Nancy Peloser and Upchuck Schumer that I was ready to reopen and fund the government, without any money for the wall at this point, and that if they sent legislation up to my office, I would sign it.

After my signing it, I’m sure Peloser and Upchuck would quickly proceed to hold a victory press conference to rub your nose in it.

But wait…, I’m coming to the good part!

The moment they began their victory speech, I would declare a state of emergency on our southern border and immediately begin construction of the wall.  Thus upstaging their announcement, while robbing them of gloating over their victory, and ending the shutdown at the same time.

You might as well get it over with and declare the emergency, because the democrats are going to challenge you in court no matter what you do, so you might as well get the ball rolling.  The sooner we get the process moving, the sooner it can get to The Supreme Court, at which time they will deem you are within your rights as The President to do what you have done, and we can get on with securing our border.

Every few weeks now we see another “caravan” has formed, with thousands of people, and is preparing to march through Mexico and challenge our southern border.

If having to deal with these invaders on a weekly basis isn’t a national emergency, what is?

And this is on top of the “normal” amount of drug smuggling and human trafficking.

I would not be overly concerned about setting precedent here.  Was Nancy concerned about setting one with the State of the Union address?

And like it has been pointed out before, if these illegal immigrants were turning around and voting for republicans, the wall would be so big you’d be able to see it from space.

The democrats are going to do what they need to do going forward and so should we, and so should you.

Don’t do what a politician would do.  Do what a patriot and a leader would do.

Go for it Mr. President!

BUILD THAT WALL!  BUILD THAT WALL!  BUILD THAT WALL!

Like you said, “One way or another.”

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please scroll down to the bottom of this site and click the “Follow” button.  That’ll keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

trump-build-that-wall-701x393 (1)

 

Listen to Cher sing her #1 hit, “Do You Believe in Life After Liberalism!?”  

Why anyone cares what Cher has to say is beyond me, but in the liberals’ world it seems she is considered a wise old sage, ala Barbra Streisand, Bette Midler, and Whoopi Goldberg.

In this instance, Cher has demanded that Nancy Pelosi end this partial government shutdown and fund the border wall, tweeting to Nancy, “DON’T DIE ON THIS HILL.”

Maybe I need to reconsider my thoughts on Cher!

Cher has also admitted that she felt she went “too far” with her latest criticisms of President Trump (Whaaat?!), although she’s not exactly sorry for calling him a “cancer ravaging our nation (That sounds more like the Cher I know and love!).”

“I Say What I feel, But There’s a Responsibility That Goes With That,” the 71-year-old singer and actress tweeted. “I Walk Knifes Edge, But Sometimes It’s Too far. This Is Not An Apology….Its a Reprimand.”

She continued, “Just Because I CAN SAY ANYTHING…Doesn’t Mean I SHOULD. Sometimes I Learn The Hard Way, Over & Over. Humans are Fallible.”

Cher’s semi-apology came shortly after she described Trump as a “malignant tumor eating its way through our constitution” in a since-deleted tweet, according to Breitbart News Network.  The news site also reported that Cher called President Trump a “criminal,” a “sociopath” and a “despot.”

According to Fox News, “This is hardly the first time Cher has lashed out against Trump and members of his administration.”

“At an August 2016 Hillary Clinton fundraiser, the singer compared Trump to Hitler and told reporters that Trump was ‘a racist, he’s a misogynist, he’s a horrible person.’”

“She took to Twitter in January to express her sentiments about White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders’ style and shamed her for her everyday wear.”

Cher’s tweet read, “Would someone please tell Sarah Huckabee Sanders to stop dressing like a sister wife?”

“The singer illustrated her tweet with an image of two women in stereotypical clothing.  In the photo the women also sport braids, plain lace-up shoes and high-neck dresses with long sleeves and puffy shoulders.”

After President Trump delivered a prime-time address from the Oval Office making the case for funding the border wall, which was followed by a response from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., who argued that the president must reopen the government in order to continue conversations about border security, Cher took to Twitter to blast the president for promising that Mexico would pay for the wall and demanded him to end the government shutdown.

The next day, however, she called out Pelosi: “NANCY YOU ARE A HERO. LET (Trump) HAVE HIS FKNG MONEY. PPL WILL STARVE LOSE THEIR HOMES, B UNABLE 2 C DRS.”

Cher then demanded Democrats to “stop” the shutdown before Trump does: “HELL B HERO… HE’LL EAT UR LUNCH & STEAL UR LUNCH YOU’LL B FKD 6 WAYS 2 SUNDAY.DONT DIE ON THIS HILL. HE STOPS AT NOTHING.”

I’m sorry Nancy, but I feel that I have to go along with Cher on this one.  You need to let President Trump have the money for the wall.

“If I could turn back time…,” I’d vote for Donald Trump all over again!

Winning!

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please scroll down to the bottom of this site and click the “Follow” button.  That’ll keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

cher turn back time

What is a “Republican,” and what is a “Conservative,” and is President Trump either one?  

I would suggest that the terms “republican” and “conservative” are moving targets.

When President Trump was running for president, it was pretty apparent that “the establishment republicans” didn’t consider him “a republican,” and the “establishment conservatives” didn’t consider him a “conservative.”

President Trump ran under the mantle of “a republican” within the Republican Party, but definitely was not a member of “the club.”

And people supported Donald Trump for the 2016 election for just that reason.  Many Americans wanted someone who wasn’t a member of the establishment politician’s “club.”  I believe people voted for Donald Trump because of his ideas and his intentions, without much regard for which party he ran under or how he was labeled.

Socially speaking, Donald Trump’s “anti-political correctness” stance naturally aligned him more with the Republican Party and the conservatives, however.

The terms “republican” and “conservative,” of course, mean different things to different people.

Judge Andrew Napolitano, a Fox News contributor, also asked the question, “Is Trump a Republican?” and pointed out that President Trump, “chose to characterize himself as a conservative Republican; and nearly two years into his presidency, he continues to call himself that.”

Judge Napolitano goes on to say that, “A fair analysis of his presidency at its current mid-point gives rise in my mind, and I suggest it should in yours, to serious questions about his fidelity to any conservative principles. Trump is the president who attacks the FBI almost every day, borrows a trillion dollars a year to run the government, has tried to re-write immigration laws on his own, has imposed tariffs on household goods for which Americans must pay up to 25 percent more than they previously were paying, suggested he could shut down the New York Times and CNN, insults foreign leaders whose alliances with the US are long and deep, bombed Syria without congressional authorization, sent troops to Syria then summarily ordered them home, threatened to reveal intelligence sources publicly, and continues to use drones to kill folks internationally.”

Wow!  Where did that come from and how do you really feel, Judge?

First of all, when someone leads off by saying this is going to be “a fair analysis,” it usually isn’t, and this is no exception.

Let’s analyze the Judge’s attacks, one mindless point at a time.

The Judge says, “Trump is the president who attacks the FBI almost every day…”

Have you been paying attention to the news at all Judge?  Do the names James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok, and Lisa Page conjure up any reason to attack the FBI?  Does the fraudulent Steele dossier, the FISA warrants that were obtained under false pretenses, and the “spying on” of the Trump campaign and the early Trump presidency possibly give The President any reason to be critical of the FBI?

The Judge complains that President Trump, “…, borrows a trillion dollars a year to run the government…”

And this is any different from Barrack Obama or George Bush how?  No one else seems to be concerned about the deficit.  Why should he?  The “establishment conservatives” talk a good deficit concern game, but that’s as far as it goes…, talk.

Judge Napolitano claims that President Trump, “…, has tried to re-write immigration laws on his own…”

For a judge, you don’t seem to be very observant, Judge Napolitano.  Quite the contrary from your claim, President Trump is actually trying to follow the immigration laws on the books and work within his Constitutional rights as a president and commander in chief.  Perhaps you had him confused with former President Obama.

The Judge says that President Trump, “…, has imposed tariffs on household goods for which Americans must pay up to 25 percent more than they previously were paying…”

This is such a shallow-minded, short-sided and disingenuous remark to be coming from you, Judge.  You must be aware that The United States has been getting ripped-off by all of our trading partners for many years, and that from time to time we have to pay a little bit more as negotiations are taking place, before better trade deals are implemented (as with Canada and Mexico for example).  In the long run we will be much better off as a country.  Wait and see what the China talks bring.

Judge Napolitano asserts that President Trump, “…, suggested he could shut down the New York Times and CNN…”

This statement by the Judge is just a plain lie. President Trump has never said he could “shut down the New York Times and CNN.”  He has called these two news outlets “fake news,” which they are, but never claimed he could, or would, “shut them down.”

The Judge says President Trump, “…, insults foreign leaders whose alliances with the US are long and deep…”

President Trump does not “insult foreign leaders.”  He merely has let them know “there is a new sheriff in town,” and that we value being their ally, but not at the expense of the US at every turn.

“…, bombed Syria without congressional authorization…”

One, he doesn’t need congressional authorization to bomb anyone, and two he demonstrated he means what he says, unlike our prior, weak, president.

“…, sent troops to Syria then summarily ordered them home…”

What’s your point Judge?  Is this not within the prerogative of the Commander in Chief?  And are we just going to keep our soldiers planted out in the desert over there forever?

“…, threatened to reveal intelligence sources publicly…”

This is not really the case here, Judge.  Considering everything the FBI chose to redact in those “secret” documents, what he really threatened to do was reveal the FBI’s CYA operation, not any intelligence sources.

“… and continues to use drones to kill folks internationally.”

Really?  You want to go there?  I can’t recall hearing anything about any drones killing anyone since President Trump was elected, as opposed to Obama’s administration’s almost weekly bragging about the fact.

So there you have the complete deconstruction and refutation of Judge Andrew Napolitano’s “fair analysis” of President Trump’s action in office so far.

I must admit that Judge Napolitano has had me fooled for quite a while.  I apparently had mistaken him as a good natured, former judge, who lent his experience, knowledge and perspective to topics of the day, when in fact he turns out to be a “fake news,” “never Trumper!”

Shame on me, but thank you to the Judge for finally revealing himself.

So the real question here isn’t “Is Trump a Republican?”  It’s “Why isn’t Judge Napolitano working over at CNN?”

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please scroll down to the bottom of the page and click the “Follow” button.  That’ll keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

judge napolitano

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑