Does your U.S. representative represent you?

In a democratic republic, which is the type of government the U.S. has, our elected state senators and district representatives are supposed to represent the citizens in their state and districts.

Rather than the entire country voting on every issue and law, we elect these representatives to do so on our behalf.

The only problem is, we have many elected officials in government who commonly disregard the people they represent, the people they work for, and vote for things because they feel they know better, they want to draw, what they deem to be, favorable political attention to themselves, or because of “pressure” from their respective political parties.  

I’ve selected four representatives to use as examples.

Donald Trump got 68.62% of the vote in West Virginia, yet, their senator, Joe Manchin votes with the democrats on every issue, including impeachment.  

Donald Trump got 58.13% of the vote in Utah, yet, their senator, Mitt Romney, voted to impeach President Trump, and sides with the democrats quite often.  

Donald Trump got 56.92% of the vote in Montana, yet, their senator, Jon Tester votes with the democrats on every issue, including impeachment. 

Donald Trump got 69.94% of the vote in Wyoming, yet, one of their representatives, Liz Cheney, voted to impeach President Trump, and was very outspoken on the issue.  

Again, these are just the four examples I’ve chosen to use here, but there are more.

Then we have senate “majority” leader, Chuck Schumer, who really doesn’t represent a majority at all, and Speaker Nancy Pelosi, whose democrat party holds the slimmest of majorities in the Congress, pushing radical, totalitarian, legislation, while supposedly representing most Americans, which they don’t.

And we can throw Illegitimate Joe Biden in there, as well, with his signing of radical executive orders, while purporting to desire unity among the American people.

He may want unity, but only on his terms, and only unity with people who will blindly follow his anti-American agenda.

Better said, the anti-American agenda that Illegitimate Joe has been told to follow.

Remember, Joe…, Kamala is waiting in the wings to become the Signer in Chief, should you falter or grow a conscience.  

It is now very apparent that Joe Biden and his administration was only a “trojan horse” for ultra-left-wing policies and ideology.

Hopefully America can survive until the 2022 elections, and then until the elections of 2024.

If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please choose to “follow” me, which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts, and/or leave me a comment.  I value your feedback and I’d love to hear from you!

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

Excuse me, but WHAT’S “unfair” about the election?!

And WHO’S being “unfair” about the election?!

According to Joshua Q. Nelson of Fox News, “Jonathan Turley says Trump’s attacks on judges over election rulings are ‘unfair.’”

‘“There is a disconnect between the evidence and the relief being sought,’ Turley says”

Turley also adds that, “The odds are against Trump in flipping states.”

No kidding?

Well thank you very much, Captain Obvious!

Yes…, the odds are against The President…, especially when the fake news, liberal propaganda, mainstream media refuses to address any type election malfeasance, and the DOJ and the FBI are completely out to lunch as well.  

Please tell us, Mr. Turley, exactly when it was that the odds weren’t against President Trump regarding anything?! 

“George Washington University Law Professor Jonathan Turley said on Monday that President Trump’s’ ‘attacks’ on judges over their decisions on the 2020 election dispute are ‘unfair.’”

Please, Mr. Turley, let’s not deflect the issue from a presidential election being stolen to your perceived unfairness of judicial treatment.

After all, haven’t we become a country that favors “victims?”

And aren’t President Trump and all of the legal voters in this last election the “victims” here?

‘“There is a disconnect between the evidence and the relief being sought,’ Turley told ‘Fox & Friends.’”

The only “disconnect” here is the “disconnect” between you and your democrat friends and the hard working, law abiding, American people.

“Turley said that although the Trump legal team provided evidence of ‘irregularities, unlawful orders, and thousands of votes that were not counted,’ none of it has ‘amounted to the type of numbers that would change the outcome of a given state.’”

Again, well, thank you very much, Professor Turley, for your astute determination of the cases here.

And, please, let’s not pretend that Professor Turley is some kind of unbiased purveyor of legal wisdom.

The only fair and balanced George Washington University Law Professor is an ex-George Washington University Law Professor.

Believe that.

What President Trump’s legal team has provided is a reason for some of these states in question to hit the pause button and at least have some of their voting systems and voting processes looked at.

I mean, it’s pretty hard for President’s Trump’s legal team to gather any hard evidence, besides the hundreds of affidavits documenting vote processing shenanigans, of course, if they are not allowed access to the voting machines, the actual ballots, and election workers.

‘“More importantly, these judges have balked at the idea of essentially negating millions of votes as a form of relief. And, in Pennsylvania, the courts said, look, these voters do appear to have been denied their right to vote; I’d rather count their votes than not count millions of others, and, that is the disconnect he’s facing,’ Turley said”

All I have to say to these judges is, either the votes were cast legally or they weren’t.

“Negating” fraudulent votes isn’t a bad thing, no matter how many of them there are.    

And who exactly was denied their “right to vote?”

Perhaps people who died prior to the Civil War. 

I mean, even the democrats had to draw the line somewhere!  

And you’d rather count these potentially illegal votes, which, in effect, cancels out my vote and thousands of others’ legal votes?

What about our rights, Mr. Turley?  

“President Trump blasted judges’ rejections of his legal challenges to 2020 election results and said he couldn’t be certain any of his cases would make it to the Supreme Court in his first interview since Election Day on Sunday.”

‘“We’re not allowed to put in our proof. They say you don’t have standing,’ Trump told ‘Sunday Morning Futures.’ ‘I would like to file one nice big beautiful lawsuit, talking about this and many other things, with tremendous proof. We have affidavits, we have hundreds and hundreds of affidavits.’”

You see, Mr. President, conservatives are held to a completely different standard, compared to the political establishment and the neo-fascist “deep state.”   

Perhaps if you could present a single anonymous whistleblower, you may have a better chance!

‘“You mean as president of the United States, I don’t have standing? What kind of a court system is this?’ Trump continued.”

A kangaroo Court, Mr. President!

A Kangaroo Court.

“Most recently, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court dismissed a case Saturday night brought by Rep. Mike Kelly, R-Pa., and a handful of other Republican voters who sought to overturn last year’s law creating no-excuse mail-in voting as well as halt further action in certifying Pennsylvania’s votes.”

“Judge Ken Starr said The President’s path to victory is fading despite ‘numerous’ examples of anecdotal evidence.”

“Turley again stated that Trump’s ‘attacks against the judges’ are “unfair.”

‘“They’re being attacked–the judiciary is being attacked by both Democratic and Republican leaders these days, but, they’re doing their job. They’re trying to rule according to the evidence.’”

Have you heard of any “Democratic leaders” attacking any judges, anywhere?

I sure haven’t.   

These judges should be trying to rule according to the actual election laws that are in place, not according to election “rules” adopted by partisan election officials and other activist judges.   

If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please choose to “follow” me, which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts, and/or leave me a comment.   I value your feedback and I’d love to hear from you!

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

Dumb, dumber, dumbest!

I’m sorry, Leslie Marshall, for Fox News, but I’m referring to an opinion piece you recently wrote, titled, “Leslie Marshall: Hillary Clinton endorsement of Biden is bad news for Trump – Democrats uniting to defeat him.”

First, a little bit about Ms. Marshall.  Per Fox News, “Leslie Marshall joined Fox News Channel as a contributor in 2009; providing analysis on both political and social issues from a liberal point of view. A nationally syndicated talk host, whose program, ‘The Leslie Marshall Show’ can be heard on radio, stream, ‘Tune In,’ ‘The Progressive Voices Radio Network,’ and ‘The Armed Forces Radio Network.’”

abidenhill 4

The Armed Forces Radio Network? Talk about liberal propaganda fed to a captive audience.  I guess someone should be looking into the selected programming for our Armed Forces, and at least ensure that conservative voices get equal time.

“The swamp” [the deep state] never sleeps.

Anyway…, back to our confused and/or propagandistic Ms. Marshall.

abidenhill 2

(Marshall shown here with Sean Hannity to her left and Michelle Malkin to her right.)

According to Leslie Marshall, “Hillary Clinton’s endorsement Tuesday of former Vice President Joe Biden in the November presidential election is just the latest sign of Democratic unity that will be needed to send President Trump into political retirement.”

abidenhill 5

Wow!

Hillary Clinton endorsing Creepy Joe Biden is an absolute journalistic bombshell, Ms. Marshall!

NO KIDDING!

abidenhill 8

WHO ELSE WAS HILLARY GOING TO ENDORSE…, OPRAH?  MICKEY MOUSE?  PRINCE HARRY?  ALEC BALDWIN?  WHOOPI GOLDBERG?

I mean, c’mon…, this isn’t news at all.

DUMB.

Marshall continues by saying, “Biden has also picked up the endorsements of many other prominent Democrats, including candidates who ran against him for the presidential nomination this year, former President Barack Obama, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California, and even Rep Alexandria Ocasio- Cortez of New York – one of the most progressive members of Congress.”

OH REEEEALLY?!

abidenhill 10

You actually mean to tell me that, “Biden has also picked up the endorsements of many other prominent Democrats?”

AMAZING!

AGAIN, WHO WOULD HAVE THUNK IT?!

abidenhill 3

She continues, “The endorsement of Biden by Clinton – a former first lady, senator and secretary of state – may not get Biden many additional votes, but it’s likely to help him raise the millions of dollars he needs to defeat Trump.”

Actually, Ms. Marshall, the endorsement of Creepy Joe by Hillary will probably end up costing him votes, and rich democrats were going to pour money into Biden’s campaign regardless of Hillary’s endorsement.

Stating the obvious and now stating inaccuracies are not good traits for a journalist to project.

“Trump’s continuing insulting attacks against Clinton – including regularly referring to her as “Crooked Hillary” and falsely accusing her of wrongdoing – are strong motivators to her to work for the defeat of a president she clearly views as unfit for the nation’s highest office.”

“FALSELY ACCUSING HER OF WRONGDOING?!”

Excuse me…, please give me a minute while I catch my breath.

DUMBER.

LOCK HER UP!

LOCK HER UP!

LOCK HER UP!

abidenhill 6

“Additionally, Clinton and Biden worked well together in President Obama’s administration and hold similar policy positions that differ dramatically from Trump’s. The sober and fact-based leadership styles of the two Democrats are far more similar to each other than to the erratic and unpredictable shoot-from-the-hip style favored by Trump.”

abidenhill 17

Yes…, Biden’s and Clinton’s anti-America, pro new world order, Pro-Russia and Pro-China positions differ dramatically from President Trump’s positions.

“It’s a safe bet that with or without the Clinton endorsement, Biden could count on strong support from Democratic voters in November.”

Are you kidding right now with this comment, Ms. Marshall?

“Biden could count on strong support from Democratic voters in November?”

abidenhill 9

YA THINK?!!!

DUMBEST.

“Many independents and even some Republicans want to see Trump defeated. For example, former Republican Sen. Jeff Flake of Arizona told The Washington Post he will not be voting for Trump and hinted at supporting Biden.”

abidenhill 11

All I have to say to this comment is, these “independents” need to climb down off of their fence and pick a side.  Either you’re pro-America (Republican/conservative) or anti-America (Democrat/liberal).  It’s a pretty straight forward choice.

And yes…, RINOs (Republicans In Name Only) like Jeff Flake and Mitt Romney will probably not be voting for President Trump.

Again…, is there any news here?

Marshall continues by informing us that, “Biden needs money for ads on TV, the web, radio, print publications and direct mail. TV ads are expensive and particularly crucial now that many people are homebound and watching more TV than usual due to shelter-in-place orders imposed to combat the coronavirus pandemic.”

So, you’re saying that Creepy Joe needs money to run ads on TV and radio?

And that these ads are expensive?

abidenhill 12

Who exactly subscribes to your opinion newsletter, Ms. Marshall…, people that have recently come out of decades-long comas?  People who have been living off the grid since World War II?  Mindless democrats?

I guess I’m going to have to go with mindless democrats.

She concludes her remarks by saying, “A lot of surprises can happen between now and November.”

abidenhill 7

Thank you for that bit of wisdom, Ms. Marshall.

And, “I don’t know if Joe Biden will be our next president, but if I were a Trump supporter I’d be very nervous about the prospect.”

To this I would say, right back at ya Ms. Marshall…, right back at ya.

abidenhill 14

abidenhill 13

I don’t normally berate articles that I refer to in my blogs, but this piece truly stands out.

I would venture to say that the article by Leslie Marshall, here, could have been written by any naïve and/or confused high school newspaper reporter…, with all due respect to naïve and/or confused high school newspaper reporters.

Do they have newspapers in middle school?

WINNING!

abidenhill 16

abidenhill 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 if 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.

 

 

 

I’m offended by you always being offended!

Extra!  Extra!  Read all about it!  America is still a “free” country!

We have freedom of speech here.

We have freedom of expression here.

I am free to be whatever I want or say whatever I want or think whatever I want and you have the right not to like it and vice versa.

lgbtq x

You can choose to be offended all you want, and I have the right not to care and vice versa.

In the case I’m looking at here, a Kentucky BBQ restaurant is being attacked for “LGBTQ” shirts they are selling that have been deemed “offensive” by some.

In many places around the country, LGBTQ stands for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer.”  On the other hand, many people don’t know what LGBTQ means, and they don’t really care.

lgbtq 2

According to Anna Hopkins for Fox News, “A Kentucky barbecue joint is facing serious blowback after some of their merchandise has been deemed inappropriate and offensive to the LGBTQ community.”

“Belle’s Smoking BBQ, which operates out of a food truck based in Williamstown, Ky., promoted their new t-shirts on social media this week, which are emblazoned with the slogan, ‘I support LGBTQ – Liberty, Guns, Bible, Trump, BBQ.’”

lgbtq 5

“Many were quick to respond …, calling the misappropriation of the ‘lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer’ slogan bigoted and harmful.”

Unless I’m mistaken, and from what I was able to learn, I’m not, the LGBTQ acronym is not legally trademarked.  This means anybody is free to use that acronym any way they want…, have it mean anything they want…, and have it stand for anything they want.

As much as the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer community wants to believe they own that acronym…, they don’t.

‘“I posted the shirt for new swag and it just went out of hand and it got blowed up,’ Belle’s Smoking BBQ owner Jamie Smith told Fox 19.  He added that even before advertising the shirts on Facebook, he had sold about 100 of the shirts.”

“After the post went viral and was inundated with negative comments, Belle’s Smoking BBQ removed it from Facebook and issued a statement apologizing, but also arguing that some individuals were behaving hypocritically by calling their shirts hateful while also making threats to the owners.”

‘“Belle’s Smoking BBQ apologizes if we have offended any groups, organizations or individuals with our shirts,’ the statement began.”

‘“We respect all beliefs and lifestyles and want no ill will towards anyone. We know each person has their own thoughts and beliefs but we are hurt that the people who are saying, “stop the hate” are the ones coming at us with the harassing messages and threatening phone calls. Again we apologize for any hurt feelings and thank our supporters who truly know us.’”

The only people who have to worry about public opinion are politicians and businesses.  Hence the apology.

But the bottom line with all of this “being offended” stuff is we can never make everyone happy.  Someone is always going to find a reason to be offended…, about something…, even if it’s just one out of a million.

Case in point from a recent headline:

“LGBTQ GROUPS CONDEMN TRUMP ADMINISTRATION’S CAMPAIGN TO END CRIMINALIZATION OF HOMOSEXUALITY WORLDWIDE AS STUNT”

What!?

Yes…, “LGBTQ GROUPS CONDEMN TRUMP ADMINISTRATION’S CAMPAIGN TO END CRIMINALIZATION OF HOMOSEXUALITY WORLDWIDE AS STUNT”

According to Hollie McKay for Fox News, “The Trump administration, spearheaded by the openly gay U.S Ambassador to Germany, Richard Grenell, announced a new initiative aimed at bringing an end to the criminalization of homosexuality worldwide.”

“Wow,” you might say…, that’s a pretty noble initiative by President Trump and his administration.

“On January 10 in the southwestern Iranian city of Kazeroon, a 31-year-old man was publicly hanged, according to state-run media, after being found in guilty of the ultimate crime: homosexuality.”

“The man, whose identity was not released, was just one of more than 6,000 alleged to have been executed under the Islamic republic’s Sharia penal system. What’s more, Iran is just one of 73 countries where homosexuality is criminalized, and one of eight nations, alongside Afghanistan, Brunei, Mauritania, Sudan, Nigeria, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Somalia, where it is classified as an offense punishable by death.”

‘“The United States continues to work to protect and defend human rights for all. Governments have an obligation to ensure that all people can freely enjoy the universal human rights and fundamental freedoms to which they are entitled,’ a State Department spokesperson told Fox News this week. ‘Working to advance longstanding U.S. policy around human rights is the kind of work our Ambassadors do all around the world every day.’”

So what kind of problem could the LGBTQ community in The United States have with this type of initiative you might ask?  What would cause them to label the initiative as a “stunt?”

“The initiative has in large part not been praised my many gay, lesbian and transgender rights groups and activists in the United States, and has actually been met with considerable backlash and skepticism.”

“Jeremy Kadden, Senior International Policy Advocate for the Human Rights Campaign, the largest national lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer civil rights organization in the country, told Fox News: ‘If this commitment is real, we have a lot of questions about their intentions and commitments, and are eager to see what proof and action will follow.’”

lgbtq 1

“James Esseks, Director of the ACLU’s LGBT and HIV Project also censured the initiative. ‘Any talk from the Trump administration about improving life for LGBTQ people in other countries will ring hollow for the millions of LGBTQ people in America who have been under attack by this administration from day one,’ he stressed. ‘If the Trump administration wants to reduce the very real violence and discrimination faced by LGBTQ people, it should start at home by ensuring LGBTQ people are protected by our nation’s civil rights laws.’”

And Tarah Demant, Director of the Gender, Sexuality and Identity Program at Amnesty International pointed out that ‘Amnesty stands with activists calling for the decriminalization of homosexuality,’ but said they were concerned that key LGBT groups in the United States were not invited to the Grenell-led summit to kick of the campaign in Berlin this month.”

Oh, I get it now.  The anointed LGBTQ keepers of the discrimination “holy grail” were not paid proper homage to.

As usual with liberals…, it’s more about what is said than what is actually done.  The fact that this may actually help LGBTQ people around the world doesn’t really matter.  What only matters to these people is that they keep their cottage industry of being offended alive in order to justify their own existence.

Some members of the media and policy experts “view the vilifying of the campaign with collective frustration.”

‘“The left, and many on the right, have expressed concern about the harsh penalties for homosexuality in other nations for an extremely long time,’ noted Adam Weiss, CEO of AMW, a public relations firm. ‘President Trump is constantly hit with a barrage of baseless claims that he is harmful to the LGBT community, but this effort could potentially save many lives around the globe. Even when he is helping, they insist that he is hurting. It’s madness.’”

“According to Dan Gainor, VP of Business and Culture at the Media Research Center, ‘it’s a case of being damned if you do and damned if you do not.’”

“You can please some of the people some of the time, all of the people some of the time, some of the people all of the time, but you can never please all of the people all of the time.” – Abraham Lincoln

On a side note…, a new “app” has been developed that identifies restaurants and businesses that are safe for conservatives to visit.

Think about that for a minute.

Have they needed an app that identifies restaurants and businesses that are safe for LGBTQ individuals to visit?

Just sayin’.

 

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.

How portions of the liberals’ playbook has evolved AND the recently released Mueller Report!

I would contend that prior to the 1980’s the political playbook for liberals and conservatives was pretty similar.

During the 90’s, Bill and Hillary Clinton changed the “deflect accusations” portion of the liberal playbook to “deny, deny, deny” and “lie, lie, lie.”  They just would not admit to anything…, even if they were caught red-handed.

blaming others 1

Then in the 2000’s, in addition to “deny, deny, deny” and “lie, lie, lie,” the liberals went one step further.  Before they could even be accused of doing something, they would take the initiative and blame the conservatives of doing exactly what they were already doing; thus not only getting themselves off the hook, but giving the complicit “biased, liberal propaganda, fake news media” an excuse to harass and investigate conservatives.

I would say it’s a pretty ingenious strategy, however, this strategy only works when you have a cooperative media.  Having the cooperative media changes the strategy from ingenious to diabolical…, and even treasonous in some cases.

blaming others 2

We have now seen this new strategy employed over and over again.

Most recently we have the cases of the democrats charging President Trump and the republicans of tampering with the election of 2016, Russian collusion, and obstruction of justice…, all of which the democrats were doing, but the complicit media, of course, looked the other way.

The recent completion and subsequent release of Robert Mueller’s report has cleared The President and his people of any election tampering, as well as any type of Russian collusion.

Mueller and his team, in fact, were unable to come up with ANYTHING they could charge The President with.

blaming others 5

If they could’ve you know they would’ve!

So what are we left with?

We’re left with the democrats crying about redactions in the report and more unfounded claims of obstruction of justice.

President Trump wasn’t charged with anything…, so what exactly do they feel he was obstructing…, the proving of his innocence in all of these manufactured matters?

The whole thing would be funny if it wasn’t so sad and pathetic.

blaming others 6

So now we have come full circle, for the first time I believe, regarding a topic(s) put forward by this “preemptive accusal strategy.”

The question remains then…, if your opposition is cleared of those things you accused them of, which you did or are still doing, how do we proceed and what can we expect?

If matters are handled correctly, this could be an epic beat down for the democrats.

Not only would they be held accountable for the wild goose chase of an investigation, but they would then begin to face the music for their own sins in these matter(s).

This has the potential to be an extremely beautiful thing…, especially if President Trump rolls in the 2020 election and regains control of The House of representatives on his coat tails.

The democrats’ sole mission now is to keep the American peoples’ eyes off of the ensuing investigations into democrats and to cover their a$$es by any means possible.

The “biased, liberal propaganda, fake news media” will of course be doing its best to assist in these matters, but I still have faith that some semblance of justice will be done, and karma will collect its toll.

blaming others 9

WINNING!

blaming others 3

 

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.

 

Investigations here…, investigations there…, investigations everywhere!

The now democrat controlled House Judiciary Committee opened a whole new investigation this week into President Donald Trump and his “associates.”  The committee is requesting documents from 81 “agencies, entities, and individuals” connected to the administration and President Trump’s private businesses.

As reported by William Cummings of USA TODAY, ‘“Over the last several years, President Trump has evaded accountability for his near-daily attacks on our basic legal, ethical, and constitutional rules and norms,’ House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., said in a statement announcing the investigation ‘into the alleged obstruction of justice, public corruption, and other abuses of power by President Trump, his associates, and members of his Administration.’”

“Those issued document requests included names connected to the Trump Organization, the Trump campaign and the White House.”

Wait…, what happened to the Mueller report?

What happened to the anticipation and expectation of Robert Mueller crucifying President Trump and his entire family?

What happened to the liberals’ vision of President Trump being “perp walked” into jail?

What?

Apparently these democrats know something (something we’ve known from the beginning).

Apparently they know that Mueller’s report is going to confirm the “witch hunt” that has been going on for two years.

Apparently they know that Mueller’s report is going to be a whole lot of nothing.

And now they want to try and continue to drive the false narrative of some kind of, any kind of, wrong doing by President Trump and anyone he’s ever come in contact with.

I would like to add that these democrats should be careful because they are setting a dangerous precedent regarding their version of “investigations gone wild!”

“Among the names were both of Trump’s adult sons, Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump; Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner; the Trump trust; Allen Weisselberg, the Trump Organization’s chief financial officer; former national security adviser Michael Flynn; longtime Trump associate Roger Stone; former White House adviser Steve Bannon; WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange; former White House press secretary Sean Spicer; former White House communications director Hope Hicks; the National Rifle Association and former Attorney General Jeff Sessions.”

I didn’t notice Ivanka’s name?  Some “swamp dweller” is going to be in trouble for leaving her off of the list!

“The House Intelligence Committee has already announced a separate probe into Russian interference in the 2016 election and Trump’s foreign financial interests.”

Again…, what happened to the Mueller report?

What happened to all of that talk about Mueller “bringing the evil Donald Trump to justice?”

What happened to all of this “overwhelming evidence of Russian collusion” talk?

On Sunday, that committee’s chairman, the ever reprehensible, Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., told ABC’s “This Week” that he plans to investigate “allegations that the Russians have been laundering money through the Trump Organization.”

Again…, what happened to the Mueller report?

The Special Counsel has a more wide ranging authority in these types of investigations than Congress has.  What makes Schiff think he’ll be able to uncover things that Mueller hasn’t?

The answer is Schiff doesn’t think that.

The answer is Schiff knows he is just continuing the harassment of The President and his family without any real justification.

And the “biased, liberal, fake news, propaganda media” are more than happy to cooperate with Mr. Schiff and Mr. Nadler.

Regarding all of this, President Trump tweeted, “After more than two years of Presidential Harassment, the only things that have been proven is that Democrats and others broke the law.”

“I am an innocent man being persecuted by some very bad, conflicted & corrupt people in a Witch Hunt that is illegal & should never have been allowed to start – And only because I won the Election! Despite this, great success!” The President said.

“Presidential Harassment by “crazed” Democrats at the highest level in the history of our Country. Likewise, the most vicious and corrupt Mainstream Media that any president has ever had to endure – Yet the most successful first two years for any President.”

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 4, 2019

Cummings added, “He [President Trump] also criticized ‘ridiculous partisan investigations’ during his recent State of the Union address.”

“Schiff and Nadler have both publicly expressed their belief that Trump is guilty of several crimes, but both have also said they are waiting to see the conclusions from special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation before calling for the president’s impeachment.”

‘“It’s very clear that the president obstructed justice,” Nadler said Sunday on ‘This Week.’ But he cautioned that ‘impeachment is a long way down the road.’”

Ya, it’s as clear as mud.

Both Schiff and Nadler claim obstruction of justice “is clear,” that Russian collusion “is clear,” and that they even have evidence, but this evidence never materializes and their claims seem to evaporate like a puddle on the sidewalk on a warm summer day.

“We don’t have the facts yet, but we’re going to initiate proper investigations,” he said. “Before you impeach somebody, you have to persuade the American public that it ought to happen.”

Wow!  Something truthful can come out of their mouths!  They don’t have any facts yet, and the truth is they have no justification for even initiating an investigation.

“We have sent these document requests in order to begin building the public record,” Nadler said, adding that Mueller and federal prosecutors for the Southern District of New York “are aware that we are taking these steps.”

“House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., said that Nadler is starting fresh investigations because he does not believe Mueller will conclude there was collusion between Russians and the Trump campaign.”

‘“Congressman Nadler decided to impeach the president the day the president won the election,’ McCarthy said on ‘This Week.’”

Maybe The President and all of his friends should respond to Congress the way Hillary and all of her friends have:  by ignoring congressional document requests and pleading “the fifth.”

According to Ben Shapiro of Breitbart News, “Hillary Clinton has a long history of hiding documents.”

“… the media have ignored Hillary Clinton’s obstructions and dissemblance for decades.  Hillary Clinton has a long and inglorious history of alleged document tampering and questionable legal maneuverings.”

Here are some of her greatest hits of “thwarted record requests,” besides her most recent escapades of deleting over 33,000 subpoenaed emails, having the hard drive on her private server bleached, and smashing all of her and her staff’s devices with hammers:

“Clinton used her private email address to avoid turning over documents to Congressional committees investigating the Benghazi, Libya terror attack of September 11, 2012. According to the Times, ‘It was one of several instances in which records requests sent to the State Department, which had no access to Mrs. Clinton’s emails, came up empty.’ The State Department did the same routine with regard to a Freedom of Information Act request asking for correspondence between Hillary and former political hit man Sidney Blumenthal; in 2010, the AP said its FOIA requests had gone unanswered by the State Department on the same grounds; the same holds true with regard to FOIA requests from conservative group Citizens United.”

“Hillary’s First ‘Emailgate.’ According to Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch, Hillary’s top woman, Cheryl Mills – you may remember her from Benghazi – “helped orchestrate the cover-up of a major scandal, often referred to as ‘Email-gate.’” Over the course of years, the Clinton Administration allegedly withheld some 1.8 million email communications from Judicial Watch’s attorneys, as well as federal investigators and Congress. Judicial Watch says that when a White House computer contractor attempted to reveal the emails, White House officials “instructed her to keep her mouth shut about the hidden e-mail or face dismissal and jail time.”

“Hillary’s Missing Whitewater Documents. In 1996, a special Senate Whitewater committee released a report from the FBI demonstrating that documents sought in the Whitewater investigation had been found in the personal Clinton quarters of the White House. The First Lady’s fingerprints were on them. The documents had gone mysteriously missing for two years. Mark Fabiani, special White House counsel, immediately stated that there was no problem, according to the Times: ‘He added that she had testified under oath that she had nothing to do with the documents during the two years they were missing and did not know how they ended up in the family quarters.’ Hillary remains the only First Lady in American history to be fingerprinted by the FBI. Those weren’t the only missing Whitewater documents later found in the Clinton White House. Rose Law billing records were found years after being sought ‘in the storage area in the third-floor private residence at the White House where unsolicited gifts to the President and First Lady are stored before being sorted and catalogued.’”

“Hillary’s Missing Travelgate Documents. In 1996, just before the Whitewater documents emerged – literally the day before – a two-year-old memo emerged, according to The New York Times, showing that Hillary ‘had played a far greater role in the dismissal of employees of the White House travel office than the Administration has acknowledged.’ Oops.”

“Hillary has a long history of this behavior. The media are less interested in governmental transparency than in picking the next president – and making sure the next president represents the hard, corrupt left.”

Just another example, in a long line of examples, of the double standards and the hypocrisy of the democrats and their partners in crime, the “biased, liberal propaganda, fake news media.”

 

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

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

schiff-nadler

President Trump asks The Congress to choose greatness.  My State of the Union address analysis: Part 1.

There were quite a few memorable moments from President Trump’s State of the Union address last night.  But it was at the end of his speech, when he was appealing directly to The Congress, that The President’s message especially resonated.

As the cameras panned the audience of elected Congress people and Senators, you could see that they were actually paying attention, intently listening to The President, as he pulled them in and attempted to enlist them all in his cause:

“Here tonight, we have legislators from across this magnificent republic. You have come from the rocky shores of Maine and the volcanic peaks of Hawaii; from the snowy woods of Wisconsin and the red deserts of Arizona; from the green farms of Kentucky and the golden beaches of California. Together, we represent the most extraordinary Nation in all of history.”

“What will we do with this moment?  How will we be remembered?”

“I ask the men and women of this Congress: Look at the opportunities before us! Our most thrilling achievements are still ahead. Our most exciting journeys still await. Our biggest victories are still to come. We have not yet begun to dream.”

“We must choose whether we are defined by our differences, or whether we dare to transcend them.”

“We must choose whether we will squander our inheritance, or whether we will proudly declare that we are Americans.  We do the incredible. We defy the impossible.  We conquer the unknown.”

“This is the time to re-ignite the American imagination.  This is the time to search for the tallest summit, and set our sights on the brightest star. This is the time to rekindle the bonds of love and loyalty and memory that link us together as citizens, as neighbors, as patriots.”

“This is our future, our fate, and our choice to make.  I am asking you to choose greatness.”

“No matter the trials we face, no matter the challenges to come, we must go forward together.”

“We must keep America first in our hearts.  We must keep freedom alive in our souls.  And we must always keep faith in America’s destiny, that one Nation, under God, must be the hope and the promise and the light and the glory among all the nations of the world!”

“Thank you. God Bless You, God Bless America, and good night!”

By the time he hit “thank you,’ it seemed like he had the audience mesmerized.

It seemed like for those last two minutes they all had dropped their partisan political guards just a bit, and we were all able to glimpse some of the potential that exists when our representatives choose to do their jobs like they were intended to do in the spirit of constructive compromise, with the best interests of our country and its people in mind.

Stay tuned for my more detailed analysis of The State of the Union address: Part 2 tomorrow.

 

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 at state of the union 2019

 

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)

 

“The state of our Union is…?”

The state of our Union is…, at a crossroads.

Not only is the state of our Union at a crossroads, The State of the Union address itself is at a crossroads.

Speaker of the House, California democrat, Nancy Pelosi, has chosen to throw all congressional tradition and decency to the wayside and disinvite President Trump to give his State of the Union address in the House of Representatives.

She weakly, and unsupported by the truth, suggested that, “it may be difficult to provide security for the event because of the partial government shutdown.”

“Sadly, given the security concerns and unless the government re-opens this week, I suggest that we work together to determine another suitable date after government has re-opened for this address or for you to consider delivering your State of the Union address in writing to Congress on January 29,” Pelosi wrote.

A senior Homeland Security official later told Fox News, however, that they have been preparing for months for the State of the Union event [and that they had no security concerns as referred to by Mrs. Pelosi].

“We are ready,” the official said. “Despite the fact members of the Secret Service are not being paid, the protective mission has not changed.”

According to Alex Pappas and John Roberts of Fox News, “White House Deputy Press Secretary Hogan Gidley accused Pelosi of ‘trying to play politics with that venue.’ He also dinged the speaker for suggesting it may be difficult to provide security for the event because of the partial government shutdown.”

‘“If the Secret Service can protect the president of the United States on a trip to Iraq, chances are they can protect the American president in the halls of Congress,’ Gidley said.”

“A spokesman for Pelosi did not return a request for comment.  Neither did the House Sergeant at Arms office.”

According to History.House.gov:

“Including President Donald J. Trump’s 2018 address, there have been a total of 95 in-person Annual Messages/State of the Union Addresses.

“Since President Woodrow Wilson’s 1913 address, there have been a total of 83 in-person addresses.”

“The formal basis for the State of the Union Address is from the U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 3, Clause 1, ‘The President shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient.’”

sotu supremes w zzzzzs 2

Never one to let the Constitution get in her way, Speaker Nancy Pelosi has strongly urged the president to delay the speech or submit it in writing amid the government shutdown fight.

Be careful Nancy, you may get what you’re wishing for!

In my opinion, it seems like you are actually doing President Trump a big favor, Nancy.  Not only are you making yourself and your party look petty and foolish, you are providing President Trump with an excuse to give his State of the Union address somewhere other than the stodgy, old, predictable halls of Congress.

Wouldn’t it be awesome to see The President give his address to a crowd of 20-30 thousand supporters in a rally type of atmosphere in say Columbus, Ohio, or in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, or perhaps in Jacksonville, Florida?

Is that what you want Nancy?

Somehow I don’t think so.

But I sure would!

I can hear the standing room only crowd now, screaming, “BUILD THAT WALL! BUILD THAT WALL! BUILD THAT WALL!” “USA, USA, USA” “FOUR MORE YEARS!” “LOCK HER UP! and that “oldie but a goodie,”  “CNN SUCKS!”  Maybe we’ll even hear President Trump’s newest slogan, “BUILD A WALL & CRIME WILL FALL!”

It’s a beautiful thing.

Have you heard the old saying, “Keep your friends close and your enemies even closer,” Nancy?

Letting President Trump out of Washington D.C. would be doing him and all of his supporters a big favor.

It would nice a nice change of pace to watch The State of the Union address without having to see all of those grouchy democrats sitting on their hands, falling asleep, and just generally being disrespectful.

“At the moment, however, President Trump intends to be at the Capitol next Tuesday to deliver his speech as scheduled, sources said.  White House officials told Fox News they essentially are preparing for two tracks for next week’s speech. The preferred track is an address, as per custom, at the Capitol.  The second track is a backup plan for a speech outside of Washington, D.C.”

In the end, whether or not the speech is welcomed on the House floor is up to comrade Pelosi.

The way it stands now, welcome or not, President Trump has a “get out of jail free” card and he should take his “show” on the road!

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.

trump state of the union

 

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

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑