Search
Archives
Categories

In this video, Laura Ingraham interviews Judge Ken Starr and former assistant US Attorney Andy McCarthy about Jeff Flake’s bill to ‘protect’ Special Counsel Robert Mueller:

I don’t know what they put in the water in Arizona but something’s making their politicians idiots. It’s also making them ignore the Constitution. Why would a US senator think that he can ‘protect’ an employee of the Executive Branch with a bill that’s only passed by one house of Congress? What Sen. Flake is attempting to do is hold up dozens of highly qualified judges until his bill is debated and voted on.

That’s the definition of negotiating from a position of weakness. Even if he temporarily stops this batch of judges, he can only do so until the new year. After that, he’s no longer a US senator. All President Trump has to do is resubmit these judicial nominees to a larger GOP majority and they’ll sail through. By then, too, the spending bills will have been passed.

Finally, let’s be honest about something important. The Russia collusion scandal will either be ancient history before the 2020 presidential election or the public will have turned against Adam Schiff by then. Every time Democrats, including Sen. Flake, have accused him of wanting to stop Mueller’s investigation, President Trump has said he’ll let the investigation run its course.

I haven’t kept track but I’m betting that this has pattern has repeated itself more than a dozen times. At what point will Democrats and Flake figure it out that they’re seen as blowhards? PS- I’m not even certain that they’ll drop this after Mueller’s report is in their hands.

I agree with Townhall.com’s Katie Pavlich that the Democrats’ smear factory, aka the Senate Judiciary Committee’s Democrats, owe Associate Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh an apology. Unfortunately, that won’t happen. It won’t happen because too many of that Committee’s Democrats have presidential ambitions.

Pavlich is right in quoting the Committee’s report when it said “After an extensive investigation that included the thorough review of all potentially credible evidence submitted and interviews of more than 40 individuals with information relating to the allegations, including classmates and friends of all those involved, Committee investigators found no witness who could provide any verifiable evidence to support any of the allegations brought against Justice Kavanaugh. In other words, following the separate and extensive investigations by both the Committee and the FBI, there was no evidence to substantiate any of the claims of sexual assault made against Justice Kavanaugh.”

It isn’t difficult to predict that House Democrats will open another investigation into the FBI’s investigation of these charges. Jerry Nadler and Elijah Cummings can’t wait to start that investigation. Further, it isn’t difficult to predict that their investigations will produce tons more allegations but no corroborated testimony that verifies the women’s accusations.

It’s difficult to picture the House getting much done during the next 2 years. It isn’t difficult to picture them opening dozens of investigations into the Trump administration. I wouldn’t be surprised, though, if Pelosi insists on passing a corporate tax increase. Here’s why:

Don’t be surprised if House Democrats cause a recession in the next 16-20 months. When Pelosi was speaker the last time, she helped create a financial crisis. We didn’t get out of it until unified Republican government and President Trump’s leadership produced the current surge in economic growth.

This article reminds me that hard-core leftists don’t hesitate in using intimidation and harassment to threaten conservatives.

During the campaign, leftist anarchists attacked 2 legislative candidates in Minnesota. I titled my post The party of hate. I’d hoped that this threatening behavior was confined to Minnesota, though I didn’t hold my breath on that considering how violent Antifa, Black Lives Matter and other Democrat-associated hate groups are.

This weekend, Fox News personality Kat Timpf was threatened by other Democrat-associated haters:

Fox News personality Kat Timpf revealed that she was felt so threatened by a woman angry at her for working at the cable news outlet that she left a restaurant to prevent an altercation from ensuing.

From there, things escalated:

But later, another women accosted Timpf when she found out she worked at Fox News. “This girl started going nuts on me, screaming at me to get out of the bar. I found her very threatening,” Timpf said.

She indicated that she tried to move to another part of the bar, but the woman followed her and continued screaming at her. Timpf said that the woman appeared intoxicated, and was surrounded by friends who laughed at her harassment. She said she was afraid the incident would escalate, so she left the bar. “It was super uncomfortable and I didn’t want things to get physical,” Timpf said.

The blame for this incident can be laid right at the feet of incoming Democrat Chairwoman Maxine Brown. Remember this?

It’s time to tell Democrats that Maxine Waters is unfit to be a member of Congress. People are getting intimidated by the Democrats’ anarchists. The Democrats’ anarchists need to be stopped ASAP before someone gets Scalised again.

According to this article, House Democrats unveiled their agenda for the first 100 days of the 116th Congress. According to the article, the “Democratic leader in the House, Nancy Pelosi, promises that the first bill voted on by the new Congress will focus on campaign finance and ethics reforms. According to news accounts, H.R. 1 would, among other things, establish automatic voter registration and “reinvigorate” the Voting Rights Act.”

Further, House Democrats want to overwhelm Republicans by pushing “public financing of congressional campaigns, with a 6-to-1 government match on small dollar donations.” Democrats will certainly define small dollar donations to their advantage.

The reason they’ll do that is because, according to Tucker Carlson’s op-ed, when “a Republican wins an election, it’s fine to question the legitimacy of the process. Democrats have been doing since the days Trump was elected two years ago. That’s patriotic. It’s your duty. But when the Democratic Party’s power is at stake, raising questions about the process is wrong. Indeed it’s nothing less than the road to dictatorship.”

It’s worse than that. Here’s Howard Dean talking about this topic:

In other words, in 2018, Dean vehemently insisted that the nation was in a fight of “good vs. evil” while being convinced that “we’re the good” and that Republicans were the evil. That’s literally what he said a couple weeks ago. That isn’t the first time he’s made that statement. When he was DNC Chair in 2005, he said this:

And concluding his backyard speech with a litany of Democratic values, he added: “This is a struggle of good and evil. And we’re the good.”

Think about that a second. In 2005, Howard Dean thought that George W. Bush was a hardcore conservative who was a religious extremist. Now, he’s insisting that President Trump is an extremist who thinks that the US-Mexican border should be protected.

What’s funny is that Democrats think that’s immoral. That puts the Democrats on the opposite side of the Founding Fathers. In Article I, Section 8, Clause 4 of the Constitution, Congress is authorized to “establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization.” It doesn’t say that Mexicans and Central Americans will “establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization” in consultation with Congress.

BTW, Democrats insist that the mobile mob making its way through Mexico isn’t an invasion. Here’s the official definition of invasion:

entrance as if to take possession or overrun:
infringement by intrusion.

CNN and Jim Acosta need better dictionaries. More importantly, Democrats need to start telling the whole truth more often:

Gun control was not a big issue in the midterm campaign, despite promises by gun control advocates to make it a centerpiece of the elections in the wake of the Parkland, Fla., school shooting. The issue “evaporated during the final weeks of the election in all but very safe liberal districts,” noted Paul Bedard of the Washington Examiner. “But now that the Democrats have won the House,” Bedard notes, “leaders feel emboldened to raise calls for expanded background checks and an assault weapon ban.”

Gun control advocates tout the fact that 15 House Republicans with “A” ratings from the NRA lost their elections. But gun control advocates lost seats in the Senate. That includes Joseph Donnelly, who lost his bid in Indiana. Pro-gun rights Josh Hawley unseated Claire McCaskill in Missouri. According to the NRA, candidates backed by gun rights group won 106 races, and lost 33 despite being outspent by gun control supporters. This was not the groundswell of support for gun control laws that advocates promised.

These items might gather majority support in polls but they don’t excite people. If Democrats pass tax increases in the House and the economy falters after that, they’ll rightly get blamed. If the Democrats focus on investigations, gun control and campaign finance reform instead of focusing on keeping the economy going strong, they’ll deserve the blame they’ll get.

Ed Morrissey’s post on the Florida recounts should become required reading. As Ed highlights in his posts, changing the outcome of statewide races is virtually impossible.

In his post, Ed highlights the fact that “According to an analysis by the nonpartisan group FairVote, which advocates for electoral reforms that make it easier to vote, out of 4,687 statewide elections between 2000 and 2016, just 26 went to a recount. Of those 26, just three recounts wound up changing the initial result of the race: The 2004 Washington governor’s race, the 2006 Vermont state auditor’s race and the 2008 Minnesota U.S. Senate race.”

While I don’t have statistics on recounts of legislative races, the odds aren’t high. I have experience with legislative recounts. It isn’t extensive but it’s something. In 2008, I was part of a team working on the recount of a state senate race. In that race, with over 35,000 votes cast, the margin of victory was reduced by 1 vote. In 2010, my state legislator won by 13 votes. That margin didn’t change.

The only way to change the victor is to illegitimately expand the universe of ballots to be counted. Once the Broward County judge ordered the reports published, the Senate recount essentially ended. Based on the reporting, it looked like Marc Elias, Sen. Bill Nelson’s recount attorney, tried doing exactly that. That’s why Rick Scott’s decision to file a pair of lawsuits last week was so important.

Gov. Scott didn’t hesitate like Norm Coleman did in 2008. The importance of those lawsuits, which required Broward County elections supervisor Brenda Snipes to hand over the vote totals reports to authorities, determined how many ballots had been cast. That eliminated the possibility of ‘finding’ additional ballots. Once those reports became public, Bill Nelson and, especially, Andrew Gillum, were sunk.

This video explains why Floridians will be significantly better off after Gov. Scott officially becomes Sen. Scott:

Sen. Nelson hasn’t done much legislatively to help Floridians in his time in the Senate. Good riddance. BTW, now that he’s lost the governor’s race, Andrew Gillum will have more time to meet with defense attorneys in his potential corruption trial.

It isn’t overstatement to call Joe Mauer a Twins legend. He’s the first Minnesotan taken with the first pick in the baseball draft. The only other Minnesotans picked in the upper part of the first round of the MLB draft are in Major League Baseball’s Hall of Fame; Paul Molitor was picked third overall by the Milwaukee Brewers while Dave Winfield was picked 4th overall by the San Diego Padres. It’s worth noting that Molitor and Winfield were drafted after playing for the Minnesota Golden Gophers while Joe Mauer was drafted first overall right after high school.

Joe Mauer is the only catcher in MLB history to lead the Major Leagues in hitting. He’s also the only catcher to win 3 batting titles in his career. Add to that Joe’s defensive skills and you’ve put together the ingredients for a once-in-a-generation type player and a future first ballot Hall of Famer. Here’s video of one of Mauer’s legendary defensive plays:

I remember that play. I remember thinking to myself “Are you kidding me? No other catcher in MLB history was capable of making that play.” I’m still convinced of that. This play was pretty good, too:

As good as those plays were, this is the best, in my humble opinion:

This article wouldn’t be complete without talking about Joe Mauer’s hitting ability. In his Twins career, Joe reached base more often than any other Twin. That’s quite a statement considering the fact that Rod Carew, Tony Oliva, Kirby Puckett and Harmon Killebrew each had lengthy careers with the Twins. Joe retires as the Twins’ leader in doubles, too.

Finally, the 2019 Twins will miss Joe’s leadership, talent and professionalism. Good luck, Joe.

Last Tuesday night, Keith Ellison was elected to replace Lori Swanson as Minnesota’s Attorney General. In this post, I wrote about Skip Humphrey and Walter Mondale’s op-ed endorsing Ellison for the AG position.

Prior to that op-ed, I’d thought of them as terrible on policy but somewhat of a family legacy. After that op-ed, I’m forced to admit that they’re just like most DFL politicians. They’re a pair of political hacks who put the DFL ahead of what’s best for Minnesotans. They’re a pair of losers, too.

Skip Humphrey’s biggest claim to fame isn’t that he’s Hubert Humphrey’s son. Skip Humphrey’s biggest claim to fame is that he’s the politician who finished last to this clown:

Jesse ‘The Body’ Ventura defeated Norm Coleman but he thrashed Skip Humphrey. After that thrashing, Skip had gone into hiding. He would’ve been better off if he’d stayed out of the limelight.

Walter Mondale’s biggest claim to fame is that he’s the only politician who’s lost elections in all 50 states. In 1984, he lost 49 states in President Reagan’s re-election victory. Mondale won Minnesota’s 10 electoral votes and DC’s 3 electoral votes that year. President Reagan won the nation’s other 525 electoral votes. After Paul Wellstone’s tragic death in a plane crash in northern Minnesota, the DFL recruited Mondale to run against Norm Coleman. That’s when Mondale lost in Minnesota. BTW, everyone my age and older remembers this moment:

Those moment have been eclipsed by Skip Humphrey’s and Walter Mondale’s endorsement of a man who has frequently supported cop-killers. Keith Ellison is a low-life who isn’t qualified to be Minnesota’s AG. It’s quite telling that the DFL hasn’t shown any remorse for endorsing a man credibly accused of beating his ex-girlfriend and who has begged the Castro government not to release Assata Shakur back into US custody.

It’s amazing that 2 men with legitimate legacies would throw them away for a politician like Keith Ellison. Still, that’s precisely what Skip Humphrey and Walter Mondale did in this counterpoint op-ed.

It proves beyond a doubt that there aren’t any moderates left in the DFL. Humphrey and Mondale open their counterpoint op-ed by saying “The Star Tribune Editorial Board erred in its decision not to endorse in the Minnesota attorney general’s race (“Two deeply flawed AG candidates,” Nov. 2). As two former Minnesota attorneys general, we can say with confidence that Keith Ellison is well-prepared to fulfill the important duties of this essential constitutional office and is the only reasonable choice for Minnesota voters in this election.”

Here’s a question for Mssrs. Humphrey and Mondale: What makes Ellison “well-prepared”? His frequent support for cop-killers?

Keith Ellison has always told Minnesotans exactly where he stands, and has acted on his word. He has been a strong advocate for equal opportunity and justice for all in Congress. He has the legal experience necessary to lead this public interest law firm. Over a 16-year career of civil rights and defense law, Ellison headed the state’s premier nonprofit public defense organization, the Legal Rights Center, for five years. He has real experience trying dozens of cases before the court and juries, experience that Mr. Wardlow lacks. Keith Ellison has the right priorities for the office, pledging to protect consumers and workers, and to enforce Minnesota’s strong civil rights laws to protect the rights of all.

Mssrs. Humphrey and Mondale, is it a Minnesota priority to file lawsuit after lawsuit against the federal government because you disagree with a president? Mssrs. Humphrey and Mondale, is it a Minnesota priority to support cop-killers like Assata Shakur and Sharif Willis? Mssrs. Humphrey and Mondale, is it a Minnesota priority to you to support a man credibly accused of assaulting his ex-girlfriend?

As far as I’m concerned, Mssrs. Humphrey and Mondale are just typical politicians who put the DFL first and Minnesota last. How disgraceful.

Friday night, Tim Walz tried being the ‘I’m all things to all people’ candidate during his debate with Jeff Johnson on Almanac. On one of the first questions, Walz talked about single-payer health care being where most people finally arrive at. Then Walz went into a long-winded spiel about how preventive care drives down health insurance premiums, which is why we need single-payer.

That’s BS. What drives up premiums is aging. As we get older, we reach our high-use years. Preventive care is a worthwhile thing to do because, theoretically, it keeps us healthier longer. Still, it doesn’t drive down health insurance premiums. Then Walz totally stepped in it, saying “everyone knows that there’s no plan to protect people with pre-existing conditions unless you have the ACA in place.”

Johnson jumped in at that point, saying “That’s utterly ridiculous. We did it for 30 years in Minnesota before the ACA and we did it better before the ACA. But let’s be honest about what single-payer is. Single-payer means that everybody loses their insurance. There is no private insurance and we’re all forced onto one government plan.”

That’s true. I wrote about the DFL’s single-payer bill in this post. That bill has 31 coverage requirements for each policy. Think of it this way. It’s the ACA except that it’s totally run by bureaucrats. After the rollout disaster of the ACA, that can’t sound appealing.

Next subject up was immigration. Mr. Walz went first, saying this:

I spent 24 years on national security and numerous trips to the border to actually witness how we do security in-depth and how we do it electronically and with surveillance. Every sovereign nation has the right and the need to control its borders but the issue is about stoking fear and telling us we’re not stronger because of immigration. It doesn’t matter what your plans are. The next governor of Minnesota must have the capacity to bring people together to solve problems. Immigration has always been an issue that has bound us together and what we see is this fear of telling people that they are in danger instead of coming up with real solid plans like comprehensive immigration reform that passed in the Senate but was never heard in the House.

Notice that Walz criticized President Trump, criticized House Republicans, tossed out the Democrats’ favorite go-to phrase on immigration but didn’t actually tell the moderators whether he’d advocate for turning Minnesota into a sanctuary state. Eventually, Walz admitted that he’s for turning Minnesota into a sanctuary state before lying about what a sanctuary state or city is.

Jeff Johnson immediately highlighted the fact that “there are only — what — 5-6 states in the nation that are sanctuary states in the country. We’d be the only one in the upper Midwest and what that means is that we would prohibit our law enforcement officers from cooperating with law enforcement from the federal government in any way.”

Walz denied that description, insisting that violent felons would go to prison. That isn’t at question. What’s at question is what state law enforcement officials would be allowed to do when these violent felons are released from prison.

After hearing Walz insist that Republicans have been stoking fear amongst citizens on immigration, I’d love hearing how Tim Walz would “bring people together to solve problems.”

At other points in the debate, Walz’s answers were more word salad than serious policy prescription. At one point, I hit pause on the DVR and told my roommate that “this guy is ‘The Babbler’.”

I highly recommend you watch the entire debate. Tim Walz was all over the place. Jeff Johnson’s answers were short, concise and actually fixed problems.

This article outlines President Trump’s positions on the major issues.

  1. People know the president said he would move the U.S. Embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem – and he did.
  2. President Trump said would replace the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) with a new trade deal with Canada and Mexico – and he did.
  3. Trump stands for lower taxes, stronger law enforcement, cutting government regulation and eliminating red tape.
  4. The president thinks the Federal Reserve shouldn’t raise interest rates as fast as it is or it will cause a recession.

If you think about it, you probably know President Trump’s positions on almost every major issue. And obviously, he has doubled down on immigration as the make-or-break issue for him and his party. Then we’re treated to some criticism of Democrats:

What exactly does Barack Obama stand for? Bernie Sanders at least has free college as an idea you can remember, albeit vague. What about House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., or Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.?

Other than investigations and impeachment, what are the Democrats running on? They have made an issue of health insurance coverage for pre-existing conditions. Trump has said he too would cover them. The Democratic idea is not a health-care plan, but an attack. Nor do Democrats have an economic plan many people can remember. Nor a plan on immigration. Nor a plan to deal with jobs migrating to China and Mexico.

Republicans in swing districts should spend the last few days constantly asking these questions. It isn’t because they’ll flip hard-core Democrats. The goal should be to excite and entice independent voters to vote.

If I asked who made these comments, who would you bet made them? Karl Rove? These criticisms weren’t made by Rove or any other Republican. They were made by Mark Penn, Clinton’s old pollster. Here’s how he finished out the article:

It looks like the Democrats will likely win majority control of the House in the midterm elections. So the battle of insults vs. issues may be moot in today’s rough-and-tumble politics. But if the Republicans win more seats in the Senate, that will be a victory compared to what happened in 1994 or 2010.

As surprising as it was in 2016, there’s only one candidate really running on detailed issue positions and he is not even on the ballot this year. Given how the presidential election turned out, it’s all the more surprising that the Democrats would again leave themselves open on the ideas front. Voters want progress, not just partisanship.

Frankly, I’m skeptical of the Democrats winning the House. Still, while I disagree with Penn on that prediction, I wholeheartedly agree with him when he says “voters want progress, not just partisanship.” I’d also add that nonpartisans see something in Trump that Democrats don’t see. It isn’t that nonpartisans think he’s a nice guy that they want their son to emulate. It’s that they appreciate the things he’s accomplished.