Archive for the ‘Democratic Culture of Corruption’ Category

Predictably, Democrat activists have threatened violence if President Trump nominates someone to replace the late Associate Justice Ruth Bader-Ginsburg. One Democrat activist, Andrew Desiderio, posted a tweet on the subject. Reza Azlan then replied to Desiderio’s tweet. Here’s that tweet:


Here’s Desiderio’s original tweet:

Author Aaron Gouveia similarly blasted McConnell’s statement, saying: “F–k no. Burn it all down.” A Canadian political science professor called for arson, prompting accusations he made a terroristic threat. “Burn Congress down before letting Trump try to appoint anyone to SCOTUS,” Waterloo professor Emmett MacFarlane tweeted.

Senate Republicans better wake up. Whether they like it or not, this isn’t going away. If Senate Republicans haven’t realized that Democrats have declared war on Republican judicial nominees, then they’re stupid and need to be replaced ASAP. The truth is that Democrats are coming after every GOP senator, whether they vote before or after the election.

Susan Collins, Thom Tillis, Cory Gardner, Joni Ernst and Lindsey Graham will get targeted by Democrats whether they vote to confirm President Trump’s nominee or not so they might as well confirm President Trump’s nominee. Democrat politicians and Democrat activists are in win-at-all-cost-mode. If that means demolishing people or institutions, these Democrats won’t hesitate in using whatever tactics are required to stop the confirmation of President Trump’s SCOTUS nominee. If yoou think I’m bluffing, check this out:

A member of Wisconsin’s ethics commission, Scott Ross, ordered Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., to “burn it all down” if he couldn’t stop McConnell. “F—–g A, Ed. If you can’t shut it down, burn it down,” he said. Other tweets didn’t contain violent threats but indicated opponents wouldn’t take Ginsburg’s replacement lying down. If McConnell jams someone through, which he will, there will be riots,” warned GQ writer Laura Bassett.

It isn’t like these should be treated like idle threats. These are the people who’ve contributed to bail funds like Minnesota Freedom Fund. I wrote about the exploits of MFF in this post:

Timothy Wayne Columbus, a 36-year-old-man, is charged with first-degree criminal sexual conduct for allegedly penetrating a girl in 2015 when she was about 8 years old. A warrant was issued for his arrest on June 25. But he was later bailed out of jail and according to a court document, filed to have his bail money returned to Minnesota Freedom Fund (MFF), the organization Harris and many Biden staffers asked their followers to donate to during the rioting in Minneapolis earlier this year.

According to MFF’s website, “At Minnesota Freedom Fund, we believe that wealth should never determine who is kept in jail. That’s what the money bail system does. It puts a price on freedom that only a few can afford and many cannot. This system is unjust. That’s why we’re working to create a society that values the freedom of all people, regardless of class or identity, ends mass incarceration, and invests in restorative and transformative justice.”

Restorative justice is the system that let the Parkland shooter roam free without getting flagged by law enforcement agencies. MFF says that this system “is unjust.” Tell that to Andrew Pollack, whose daughter Meadow was assassinated at Stoneman Douglas HS. But I digress. More on this system of organizations in future articles.

If Kim Gardner wanted to pick a fight, she’s picked the wrong fight. She isn’t just fighting the McCloskeys, who are both attorneys. She’s also picked a fight with Antonin Scali, who wrote the majority opinion in the landmark case of District of Columbia v. Heller. That’s a fight that she’s already lost. Further, she’s picked a fight against Eric Schmitt, the Missouri Attorney General and Josh Hawley, Schmitt’s predecessor. These are fights she’s destined to lose.

This Redstate.com article highlights the extent that AG Schmitt is prepared. This won’t be a pretty ending for Ms. Gardner. AG Schmitt’s tweet storm is both blistering and extensive. I won’t post all of AG Schmitt’s tweets. I’ll just post 3 tweets to illustrate the foolishness of Ms. Gardner’s case.


If Ms. Gardner wants to fight that fight, that’s her option. It’s a foolish option, though, because her prosecution might prevent the McCloskeys from assisting their clients. If the McCloskeys prove that they’ve been harmed financially because of Ms. Gardner’s prosecution, that might expose her office to a lawsuit.

If that happened, Eric Schmitt would make a powerful opening witness. Video of the broken down gate to the community would strengthen such a lawsuit. Testimony by the McCloskeys themselves would seal the deal. They’ve told law enforcement that the troublemakers pointed to specific rooms, then told the McCloskeys how they planned on using each room after they’d conquered the property.

Discretion is the better part of valor. If Gardner was smart, she’d drop this before this gets to trial. Otherwise, the outcome might be quite painful.

While testifying to the House Committee on Administration, Newt Gingrich showed that he’s still part history teacher, part patriot and part constitutionalist. It isn’t surprising to me that his list of accomplishments as Speaker is lengthy and impressive. Speaker Gingrich is still one of the most impressive intellects of our time.

During Speaker Gingrich’s testimony, Speaker Gingrich started with a lesson on the Constitution, then transitioned to a civics teacher before finishing as a school principal admonishing disobedient students. Specifically, I want to focus on Speaker Gingrich’s role of admonishing Congress.

Specifically, Speaker Gingrich called out Congress essentially for being elitists and wimps:

Our national anthem says we are “the land of the free and the home of the brave.” Our Founding Fathers risked their lives, fortunes and sacred honor to defend freedom. The Civil War generation lost 630,000 Americans fighting for the Union and to end slavery. The Greatest Generation went across the planet risking its lives to defeat Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. By the way, through all these events, Congress met in person.

Now, we are told that our members of the House are too precious to risk their lives by coming to Washington.

To these members I would say: If freedom isn’t worth the risk, quit the Congress. Someone with more courage will replace you in a special election. The emotion driving the proposal for remote voting is an expression of a kind of cowardice I would never have expected to see in America.

Ms. Pelosi, like Democrat governors Whitmer, Walz, Pritzker and Inslee, likes being in total control. The thought that Democrats voted to vote from their districts isn’t surprising, though it is wimpy. Across the way on Capitol Hill, the Senate is meeting regularly and getting lots of things done. They’re confirming judges and holding Intelligence Committee and Judiciary Committee hearings. The Democrat House has gotten things done but only after getting dragged kicking and screaming to do their job.

We are asking children and teachers to go back to school, but House members can’t come to Washington. We are asking truckers to crisscross the country bringing us food and supplies, but their representatives have to hide in fear and vote electronically to avoid risk.

We have young men and women risking their lives all across the planet to protect freedom, but their elected leaders can’t risk being in a room with immediate access to doctors and remarkably little risk of anything bad happening.

I am embarrassed for this House that such a proposal could even get to a hearing.

Let’s be clear about something. If average citizens can function safely in a Walmart, Congresscritters should be able to figure out a way to function on Capitol Hill. The routine is simple. Wash hands frequently, stay socially distanced, cough into your shirt rather than across a room and finally, don’t touch your eyes, nose or mouth with your hands. If the House can’t figure that out, then we need a different Speaker and a different (GOP) majority.

Here is Speaker Gingrich’s opening statement:

Lindsey Graham spoke out yesterday, saying that Robert Mueller should testify in front of his Committee if he’s going to write Washington Post op-eds. The article states “Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.) said Sunday that he will grant Democrats’ request to have former special counsel Robert Mueller testify about his investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election before the committee.”

I can imagine Mueller not wanting to testify. The reasons’ names are Graham, Grassley, Lee, Cruz, Hawley and Kennedy. Mueller wouldn’t b worried about answering questions about his op-ed. He’d be plenty worried about answering questions about the Special Counsel investigation he conducted into Gen. Flynn. He’d be on the hot seat answering why the Special Counsel investigation was needed. He’d feel the heat answering why the FBI’s DC Field Office recommended shutting the Flynn investigation down when they didn’t find any “derogatory information” against Flynn. Imagine how Mueller would squirm when presented with Jim Comey’s note that said that the Flynn-Kislyak calls were “totally legit.”

Mueller certainly would’ve gotten that information at the start of the Special Counsel’s investigation. Despite the fact that the investigation lacked proper predication, Mueller bankrupted Flynn based on charges that weren’t sustainable. Besides partisanship, why would Mueller continue investigating when he knew that a) the Steele Dossier was unsubstantiated, b) the FBI’s DC Field Office recommended dismissing the investigation into Gen. Flynn and c) Jim Comey had said that the Flynn-Kislyak phone calls were legitimate?

If Mueller thinks they’ll just talk about Roger Stone, he’s kidding himself. In the op-ed, he wrote this:

“We made every decision in Stone’s case, as in all our cases, based solely on the facts and the law and in accordance with the rule of law. The women and men who conducted these investigations and prosecutions acted with the highest integrity. Claims to the contrary are false.”

Let’s see whether he’d repeat that testimony. Did Mueller’s investigators act “with the highest integrity” when they prosecuted Gen. Flynn after the FBI’s DC field office recommended Operation Crossfire Razor be terminated? Did Mueller’s investigators act “with the highest integrity” when they tipped off CNN before they executed a pre-dawn raid of Roger Stone?

Let’s hear Mueller’s testimony to those questions. If he thinks that’s acting “with the highest integrity”, then people will think, rightly, that Mueller’s part of the swamp just like Jim Comey is.

Democrats hating various statues, monuments, military bases and cities aren’t looking at things from a biblical perspective. It’s understandable that Democrats would want the confederate flag removed. It’s a reminder of the Democrats’ racist history. The MSM won’t admit this but the Democrat Party is the party of Bull Conner, Jim Crow, George Wallace, the KKK (including Robert C. Byrd) and the Party of segregation.

Now that that isn’t hidden anymore, let’s look at these sins from a biblical perspective. King David is described as a “man after God’s own heart.” Despite that, David murdered Uriah after David slept with Uriah’s wife, Bathsheba, and gotten her pregnant. Despite that, God forgave David.

Saying that David was a complex person is understatement. God saw what was important and forgave David. After that, David became one of Israel’s greatest kings. That’s just the first example from the Bible.

Most people know the story of Moses killing an Egyptian who was beating an Israelite while Israel was held hostage in Egypt for 400 years. After that, Moses hid in the desert until God called him to lead Israel out of Egypt. Despite the fact that Moses had murdered another person, God chose Moses to lead Israel out of captivity. After the Passover, when the Lord spared Israelis whose doors were marked, Pharaoh called for Moses, then let Israel go. The only other thing that Moses is famous for is parting the Red Sea and giving Israel the Ten Commandments. Imagine that. God utilized a complex individual to fulfill one of His biggest promises.

That isn’t factoring in the contributions of Saul of Tarsus. Saul of Tarsus was a Roman hired by Romans to kill Christians. Saul was extremely gifted at killing Christians. His most famous slaying was of Stephen, who was stoned to death. While he was being murdered, Stephen “saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God, and said, ‘Look! I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God!'” That’s the only time in the Bible when Jesus wasn’t seated at the right hand of the Father.

Shortly thereafter, Saul had his “Damascus experience.” After that, Saul of Tarsus became the Apostle Paul, the father of the church and the greatest evangelist in the history of Europe and Asia. During his life, Paul made 3 major missionary trips, establishing churches throughout Europe, Greece and as far away as India and Africa. Paul wasn’t too proud to admit that he was “chief among sinners.”

The point I’m making is that the things that the Cancel Culture wants to abolish were no worse than the things that David, Moses and Paul did. God forgave David, Moses and Paul before using them to fulfill major prophecies. Today, the Cancel Culture wants the statues of Abraham Lincoln, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and Ulysses S. Grant torn down, just to name a few. Is the Cancel Culture so hard-hearted that they can’t forgive complex people who did things that they regretted doing before doing things that make them heroes worthy of celebration and distinction?

If the U.S. becomes unwilling to forgive our fellow citizens, then this society won’t be sustained for any length of time. Everyone has committed incredible sin. People belong to the least exclusive club in the history of mankind. According to Paul’s letter to the church in Rome, “All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” That means that everyone, including the members of the Cancel Culture, have committed heinous wrongdoings. Should we eliminate everyone except Christ, the only man who never sinned?

Too late. Cancel Culture wants His statues torn down, too.

It’s long past time to tell Democrat media hacks like Jessica Tarlov, Marie Harf and Donna Brazile to shut up about what the ‘Defund the Police’ movement is or isn’t about. Tarlov, Harf and Brazile are Democrat establishment hacks waging a public fight against the Bernie Bros/BLM/Antifa/AOC activist wing of the Democratic Party. The truth is that Democrats are split on this from a PR standpoint. Democrats aren’t split on this from a policy standpoint.

Bill de Blasio is the worst big city mayor in America. He wants to cut $1,000,000,000 from NYPD’s $6,000,000,000 police budget while “gun violence has surged across the Big Apple.” De Blasio insists that “We can do this, we can strike the balance, we can keep this city safe.”

Of course, that doesn’t match with reality, which is normal with de Blasio:

The violence continued across the city over the weekend as eleven people were shot in less than 12 hours Saturday night into Sunday night, including in Brooklyn, The Bronx, Queens and Manhattan.

The key to preventing crime is … reducing the numbers of officers on the street? If de Blasio had been alive when they made the Wizard of Oz, he might’ve gotten cast as the Scarecrow even without an audition:

“We have caved to the mob in a moment we know will come back to haunt us,” Councilman Joe Borelli (R-Staten Island) told The Post. “The mayor is smart enough to know that these actions will create a more violent environment in New York. “This is what you get when you have government-by-hashtag,” he added.

Borelli’s counterpart from Queens, Councilman Robert Holden, echoed the complaints. “I’m against wholesale cuts based on protest signs,” the Middle Village Democrat said. “One billion dollars is an arbitrary number that the mayor and some of my colleagues are trying to reach to appease the masses without considering public safety.”

De Blasio insists that this is part of his reform package. That’s BS. There aren’t any reforms in this proposal. The only thing that’s happening is de Blasio caving to BLM, Antifa and AOC.

Defunding the police is happening in too many places for Democrats to ignore. LA, NYC, Seattle, Portland and Chicago are cutting their budgets. Minneapolis wants to eliminate their police department entirely. Since PD budgets are set locally, Democrat hacks like Tarlov, Harf, Brazile and Biden can say whatever they want. Their voices are irrelevant.

The voices that matter are the activists’ voices (#BlackLivesMatter, Antifa) and the de facto leaders of the Democrats (AOC, Ilhan Omar, Lisa Bender and Jeremiah Ellison).

When Nancy Pelosi, the Democrats’ Speaker of the House of Representatives, said that Republicans were “trying to get away with murder, actually, the murder of George Floyd”, Democrats sat silent. Not a single House Democrat expressed outrage over Pelosi’s statement. Some might’ve said something in official statements but nobody got on the morning shows and lit her up like a Christmas tree. The lack of outrage is disgusting.

Saying that Mrs. Pelosi is heartless isn’t news. That’s something we’ve known since 2006. I’ll say this without any political correctness. Mrs. Pelosi is the biggest bitch in the Democrat Party, including Hillary Clinton, Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren. Clinton, Harris and Warren are back-benchers compared with Pelosi. She is to bitchiness what Adam Schiff is to leaking and outright corruption. But I digress.

When Tim Scott, the point person for Republicans on police reform, went on Guy Benson’s show, he didn’t hold anything back:

“I thought to myself that how in the world does this woman sitting, standing in front of a twenty four thousand dollar refrigerator have the sense to jump into the bottomless pit of race politics? Why in the world would she want to do that? There’s only one answer, by the way. One answer. It’s because she’s lived so long in a state of privilege that she has forgotten. That is the Republican Party that voted more for the civil rights era legislation than the Democrats. It’s because she’s forgotten that it was President Trump and the criminal justice reform done in 2018 that made it for the Democrats 1994 crime bill. She’s forgotten. That is the school choice movement that frees more kids in poverty from the poor education system brought to us by the Democrats and the teachers unions than they’ve ever seen. She has forgotten so much about reality that she spends too much time in an alternate universe. But the facts are simple. Why in the world would she stoop so low? And is simply this they believe. I truly believe this. They believe that campaigning on police brutality is more important than solving police reform.”

When I said that not “a single House Democrat expressed outrage over Pelosi’s statement”, I said it because it’s important to this discussion. If people aren’t willing to set aside partisanship on this issue and do what’s best, they aren’t morally fit for office. Period. Full stop. Nancy Pelosi isn’t morally fit for this debate.

That’s before talking about the 45 Senate Democrats that voted against starting the debate on Sen. Scott’s JUSTICE Act. Rather than debating and amending Sen. Scott’s JUSTICE Act, Senate Democrats joined with Mrs. Pelosi. With their votes, they said that partisanship was infinitely more important than fixing a racial crisis. Think about that a bit. Democrats rely heavily on African-American votes but they won’t vote for a bill that will improve African-Americans’ lives.

That’s the definition of moral depravity. That’s what not having a soul looks like. This is what not having a heart looks like:

This interview is what it looks like when 2 thoughtful people of different political persuasions talk about fixing a crisis:

We need more people who want to fix this nation, fewer people who want to play politics during a crisis. In that America, Tim Scott towers over Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats.

Gen. Flynn won a major victory in court today. On the other hand, this was a difficult day for Joe Biden. Peter Strzok’s note is particularly troublesome:

Attending the meeting were Susan Rice, the National Security Adviser, Jim Comey, the FBI Director, President Obama, Vice President Biden and Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates. TRANSLATION: Susan Rice = NSA; Obama = P; Biden = VP; Comey = D & Yates = DAG

Remember that Biden was asked about what he knew about Gen. Flynn by George Stephanopoulos in this interview:

Stephanopoulos: I do want to ask you about Michael Flynn, the former national security adviser to President Trump and the move by the Justice Department to dismiss the case against him for lying to the FBI. The President said yesterday that the move was justified because President Obama targeted Flynn. He called it, quote, the biggest political crime in US history. Your former Senate colleague Charles Grassley has added that Flynn was entrapped and asked on the Senate floor “What did Obama and Biden know? When did they know it?” So what did you know about those moves to investigate Michael Flynn and was there anything improper done?
BIDEN: I know nothing about those moves to investigate Michael Flynn, number one, and number two, this is all about diversion. This is the game this guy plays all the time. The country is in a crisis. We’re in an economic crisis, a health crisis.

That’s about 2 minutes into the interview. After Biden’s full-throated denial, Stephanopoulos returned to the subject:

I want to press that. You say you didn’t know anything about but you were reported to be at a January 5, 2017 meeting where you and the President were briefed on the FBI’s plan to question Michael Flynn over those conversations he had with the Russian Ambassador Kislyak.
Biden: No, I thought you asked me about whether I had anything to do with him being prosecuted. I’m sorry. I was aware that they asked for an investigation but that’s all I know about it and nothing else.

I’ll bet most people didn’t notice the fatal flaw in Biden’s reply. Biden said “I thought you asked me whether I had anything to do with him getting prosecuted.” The FBI interview with Gen. Flynn didn’t happen until January 24, 2017, 4 full days after Biden became formerVice President Biden. As a private citizen, he wouldn’t have had any influence to get Flynn prosecuted. Further, Biden’s denial, which was categorical, was a lie. He knew much more about the investigation. According to Strzok’s note, he’s the person who brought up the Logan Act at the January 5, 2017 meeting as a way of investigating Gen. Flynn. Don’t forget that FBI field officers with the DC Bureau had interviewed Gen. Flynn and wanted to drop Operation Crossfire Razor, the FBI code name for the Flynn investigation:

On Jan. 4, 2017, two weeks before the Trump inauguration, FBI agents at a lower level, where the real work is done, prudently tried to close the Flynn investigation, citing the absence of any derogatory information or other facts that would enable the bureau to keep the case open.

Before the now-infamous January 5 meeting, FBI field agents tried closing the Flynn investigation. That investigation was kept open by “the 7th floor”, which is where then-FBI Director Jim Comey’s office was.

Thanks to the investigation into the investigators, Jim Comey refused to renew his security clearance. He allegedly did that to avoid getting asked questions about classified information.

Vice President Biden’s problem isn’t that a hard-nosed reporter will ask him about his dishonesty. It’s difficult to picture Biden’s campaign staff letting him get within a mile of a hard-nosed reporter. That’s if such a reporter exists outside of a handful of national security correspondents. Biden’s problem is that he’ll get pelted with this information by the Trump campaign in ads, by Trump-supporting PACs and by Trump himself during the presidential debates.

Biden can hide in his basement a little while longer but he’ll have to do real campaigning sooner rather than later. Last weekend, the MSM criticized the Trump campaign for only having 6,000 people in the arena. The story that they didn’t tell is that 7,700,000 people watched the rally on Fox and another 5,000,000 watched on C-SPAN. That’s before factoring in the people who watched the livestreaming via YouTube. Trump’s message is getting out and, as Charlie Hurt said this weekend, there’s nobody better at putting people on the defensive than President Trump.

Journalist Andy Ngo is reporting that the Occupied Territory within Seattle “could be described as a ‘sort of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde.'” In greater detail, Ngo reports that “during the day it could be considered peaceful if one ignored boarded-up businesses or graffiti calling for the murder of police. But when the sun goes down, the “criminal elements come out,” Ngo noted. ‘Unfortunately, last night that was made very clear, when one person on a microphone and a loudspeaker was able to sic a mob of probably more than 100 people to chase down this business that was several blocks away. They just all descended on it. It was pure anarchy.'”

Jenny Durkan, the idiot mayor of Seattle, once told CNN’s Chris Cuomo that “We could have a summer of love.” That’s Durkan’s legacy. She’ll never be able to live that down for the rest of her life. That statement is as tied to her as “If you like your plan, you can keep your plan” is tied to President Obama.

Right now, it appears as though there’s a 3-way competition for the ‘Worst Mayor in America.’ At this point, the tri-finalists are Durkan, Jacob Frey and Bill de Blasio. It’s a difficult race to handicap. Durkan allowed a foreign nation to sprout up in the middle of her city. Frey let rioters and looters demolish his city. In a city of 8,000,000 people, De Blasio has figured out a way to piss off every influential group in the city. But I digress.

Seattle Police Chief Carmen Best told everyone that it was Durkan’s decision to abandon the police:

Seattle is transforming itself into a hell-hole:

“For example, there’s a Trader Joe’s nearby who announced just a few days ago that they’re closing indefinitely because of security and safety issues,” he remarked. “So, when you take that and you also see all [of] the businesses that are boarded up, that no cars can drive into this area — I don’t see how the few anecdotes of positive experiences of some owners could be the representative voice. Particularly when there are now some dissident voices coming out to speak and they’re having to do it anonymously because of threats of retaliation,” Ngo noted.

Another contributing factor to what Ngo described as a chaotic atmosphere is that many people have been seen openly carrying weapons like handguns, rifles, batons or knives. In addition, Ngo highlighted other concerns like rampant drug use, homelessness and lack of medical care.

Other than those dangers, Seattle is a virtual paradise. Then again, what would you expect if you removed law enforcement officers? I’d expect a chaotic situation, which is what’s happened.

Whenever a Democrat spins the Flynn plea bargain story, that Democrat omits an important (some might say essential) sentence. In this article, the Democrat wrote “In 2017, special counsel Robert Mueller charged Flynn with making false statements to the FBI regarding his conversations with the Russian ambassador about U.S. sanctions, among other things. Flynn promptly entered a guilty plea, and agreed to cooperate with Mueller’s team in its investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election.”

Actually, they’re missing multiple sentences. First, the Democrats omit the part that the DC Field Office wanted to shut down the Flynn investigation because they didn’t find any derogatory information on Gen. Flynn. See Jonathan Turley’s post on the subject. Turley wrote “It now appears that, on January 4, 2017, the FBI’s Washington Field Office issued a “Closing Communication” indicating that the bureau was terminating “CROSSFIRE RAZOR”, the newly disclosed codename for the investigation of Flynn. That is when Strzok intervened.”

This part is important to understanding the Democrats’ Flynn spin campaign:

The FBI investigated Flynn and various databases and determined that “no derogatory information was identified in FBI holdings.” Due to this conclusion, the Washington Field Office concluded that Flynn “was no longer a viable candidate as part of the larger CROSSFIRE HURRICANE umbrella case.”

The Flynn case should’ve been dropped right there. Because of when this happened, that also means that there never should’ve been a special counsel investigation. Mueller’s special counsel investigation happened because a corrupt FBI agent named Peter Strzok intervened. While what he did isn’t illegal, it’s definitely swampy.

The other thing that Democrats omit is the part about how Mueller used that Strzok decision to push Gen. Flynn to the brink of bankruptcy before threatening to prosecute Gen. Flynn’s son and Gen. Flynn. I’d love hearing the ACLU explain how those Gestapo tactics are accepted by the Bill of Rights. I guess they’re accepted under the part that says that the ends justify the means.

Democrats have constantly omitted these details from their story. It’s disgraceful that they aren’t confident enough to win an argument on the merits. If Democrats have that weak of arguments, shouldn’t they find better arguments? That’s what smart people would do.