Britain’s Remoaner Establishment Is Fomenting Civil War

Britain’s Remoaner Establishment Is Fomenting Civil War, by James Delingpole.

“The last time we were in territory like this it was decided by civil war.”

One thing I love about British constitutional historian and national treasure David Starkey is that he’s never knowingly understated.

Another thing I love about Starkey is that he’s always right about everything.

So I think we should take very seriously his damning verdict on the disgraceful decision by Britain’s Supreme Court that it had the right to meddle in affairs which, for centuries, have been left to parliament. …

The battle of Marston Moor, the English civil war, 1644

This also is the story of Brexit itself, and of the fault-lines it has exposed in an increasingly divided Britain.

On the one hand, are those of us — the Brexiteers — who are rather proud of our country and its traditions and its history.

On the other are the Remainers who — while of course playing lip service to all the above: heaven forfend that anyone should accuse them of being unpatriotic or disloyal or treacherous — find Britain’s past all a bit embarrassing and in urgent need of modernisation. …

As Peter Hitchens often says … Tony Blair was much, much more radically left-wing than he pretended to be.

It was Blair, of course, who created the Supreme Court — which was only established as recently as 2009.

I don’t know much about the current 11 justices who reached yesterday’s Supreme Court decision. (Nor, for that matter, does anyone else — which is part of the problem. Who the **** are these people?).

One thing we can fairly safely bet on though, is that not one of them is a Brexiteer. These are Blair’s people. “Human rights” people. People who it’s not unlikely — not naming any names, Lady Hale — were promoted not so much because of their intelligence, wisdom, impartiality, or raw legal talent but because they pushed the right, identity-politics-compliant “gender” buttons.

One part of the country — embodied by Peston’s idiot tweet — lives, breathes, eats this fashionable, politically correct drivel. These people are what David Goodhart calls the “Anywheres” — shiftless, rootless metropolitans with so little love for the nation-state that they would far rather that decision-making was surrendered to supranational powers such as the European Union or the United Nations.

The other part — the majority; the “Somewheres” as Goodhart calls them — loathes and despises the woke modernising agenda that the likes of Tony Blair, John Bercow, David Cameron, Theresa May, Mark Carney’s even more annoying wife, and so on, are trying to inflict on us.

There can be no meeting of minds between these groups because they are wired so differently: one side is proud to be British; the other, for all that they may protest otherwise, is embarrassed to be British.

This fault line has always been with us to a degree.

As Orwell once famously wrote:

“It is a strange fact, but it is unquestionably true, that almost any English intellectual would feel more ashamed of standing to attention during “God Save the King” than stealing from a poor box”

But not since the English Civil War of the 1640s, arguably, has the fissure that divides Britain ever been quite so wide and deep.

The more the minority Remainer Establishment carries on with its trickery, its cheating, its lies, its double-dealing, its canting, its hypocrisy, and its shenanigans, the more the majority of us will loathe it with every fibre of our beings.

We’re all too angry and determined now to accept anything but total victory.

Oh dear. This has dragged on too long, and there has been too much bad behavior (by the globalist elitists, of course).

Are the Dems overplaying their hand?

Are the Dems overplaying their hand? By Jim Dueholm.

The whistleblower’s complaint and the transcript of the July 25 call between President Trump and President Zalensky have been released to the public. Neither supports the pre-release claim that President Trump threatened to withhold aid to Ukraine unless Ukraine investigated presidential candidate Joe Biden and his son.

The July 25 call was a friendly, feel-good call with no pressure and no threat, explicit or implicit, that tied aid to a Biden investigation.

President Trump dwelled on an investigation into the 2016 presidential campaign, which is appropriate and has nothing to do with the 2020 presidential election. The president didn’t ask President Zalensky to investigate Joe and Hunter Biden, but he did urge him in an aside to cooperate in an investigation of that matter by Attorney General Bill Barr. Cooperation and investigation are much different things.

The complaint adds little to the transcript. It dwells at great length on investigation of the 2016 election. Like the transcript, it makes brief mention of a Biden investigation but provides no evidence that President Trump tied aid to a Biden investigation. The aid has been provided and Attorney General Barr is apparently not investigating the Bidens.

Nothing in the complaint or transcript is likely to generate Republican or public support for impeachment.

Paul Mirengoff:

I think Pelosi and other Democrats, in their eagerness to find a smoking gun or a magic bullet, view the transcript as far more scandalous than most Americans will perceive it to be. President Trump, whose political instincts are usually sound, doesn’t view the transcript as scandalous.

Well, today seems to wrap up the impeachment news. It’s another hoax, at most a very thin straw. Even less than the Trump-as-Russian-agent story. Unless there’s some other evidence to emerge, this is going to be a noisy divisive battle over nothing. But it will tie up the lead country of the free world for months.

The Significance of Adam Schiff’s “Parody”

The Significance of Adam Schiff’s “Parody”, by John Hinderaker.

During a hearing before the House Intelligence Committee earlier today, committee chairman Adam Schiff purported to quote from the transcript of President Trump’s phone call with Ukraine’s President Zelensky. …

Schiff simply lied. Not a word of his tirade came from the transcript of the president’s conversation with Zelensky. Schiff made it all up, and it didn’t resemble the actual transcript in any respect.

Apart from the fact that it shows once again what a disgusting liar Adam Schiff is, why is his “parody” important? Because it shows the baselessness of the Democrats’ case against Trump.

The heart of the matter:

If Trump had actually said anything objectionable — let alone impeachable! — in his conversation with Zelensky, Schiff would have quoted it.

But because the conversation was entirely innocent, Schiff couldn’t quote a line of it. He had to make schiff up, and that’s what he did.

Adam Schiff’s absurd tirade of lies demonstrates, as well as anything, that the Democrats’ Ukraine hysteria is just another hoax.

It seems the Democrats truly have very little to work with. This is almost embarrassing. This impeachment case does not stand up on its own merit.  It’s almost as if there is another agenda at work here.

Trump Team Bets Impeachment Will Backfire on Democrats

Trump Team Bets Impeachment Will Backfire on Democrats, by Michael Bender.

Faced with the prospect of impeachment, President Trump and his re-election campaign expressed confidence the effort to boot him from office would give an unlikely boost to his bid for a second term. …

When Pelosi first announced an impeachment inquiry:

A video mocking what the campaign views as Democrats’ obsession with impeachment was released within 30 minutes. “We’ve had that ready for weeks in case the Democrats were that dumb,” one campaign aide said. …

Strategy of releasing the phone call transcript immediately:

Mr. Trump pushed for the release, arguing it would prove he did nothing wrong and halt coverage on cable news that he found increasingly troubling, White House aides said. Mr. Trump had even encouraged reporters to continue looking into the Ukraine issue.

“Keep asking questions and build it up as big as possible, so you can have a bigger downfall,” he told White House reporters last week in the Oval Office.

Angela Merkel’s Toll on Germany

Angela Merkel’s Toll on Germany, by David Archibald.

Two hundred years ago France was the country most feared in Europe. Then Germany won three wars in 1864, 1866 and 1870-71. The rest of Europe started to ally against Germany. These fears were well founded because Germany started a couple of civilisation-destroying wars in 1914 and 1939. After the first of these some of the victors thought that Germany should be de-industrialised so that it would no longer be a military threat. After the second, Drexler-White, a high ranking agent of influence in the Roosevelt administration, proposed the Morgenthau plan to that end. … In the end the Truman administration chose the Marshall plan to rebuild Germany. …

Germany spends 1.2% of its GDP on defence, well under the NATO minimum of 2%. What is spent is largely wasted. It is certainly not spent on equipment. A German Defense Ministry report of June 2018 listed the major weapons systems ready for action as:

Typhoon jets: 39 of 128
Tornado jets: 26 of 93
CH-53 transport helicopters: 16 of 72
NH-90 transport helicopters: 13 of 58
Tiger attack helicopters: 12 of 62
A400M transport aircraft: 3 of 15
Leopard 2 tanks: 105 of 224
Frigates: 5 of 13
Submarines: 0 out of 6

The German Navy had one operating submarine in October 2017 but that vessel damaged its rudder on a rock off Norway. German operational readiness is stuck around 30%. Thus morale in the Bundeswehr is at rock bottom.

Apart from a bloated procurement bureaucracy of 11,000 souls and general ineptitude, the German military has also been afflicted by sheer looniness. This article reports that the delivery of 350 Puma armored personnel carriers was delayed because they had to be suitable for heavily pregnant female soldiers (the use of the word female to describe someone pregnant is no longer a tautology in this day and age). To expect heavily pregnant soldiers to make a positive contribution in battle is delusional. Sadly that is also something that needs to be said. …

As this article says, “the Bundeswehr is now a successful disarmament project.”

Conqueror of the modern Wehrmacht

The German defense minister who achieved this state of affairs over the last five years, Ursula von der Leyden [pictured], is now President of the European Commission.

The Disturbing Reason Why the Dems Really Want to Impeach Trump

The Disturbing Reason Why the Dems Really Want to Impeach Trump, by Daniel Greenfield.

The Russia election hacking accusation and the current Ukraine smear have the common purpose of delegitimizing an election. The Russia lie was about delegitimizing 2016. The Ukraine lie is a preemptive effort at delegitimizing the 2020 election in case Biden is the nominee and Trump is the winner.

Impeachment plugs into the same narrative which is not just about winning, but delegitimizing.

The big picture is much more disturbing:

Democrats want to win elections. Radicals want to delegitimize the entire idea of elections. Pelosi wants to win an election. The radicals don’t want to win elections. They want to destroy them. Their real goal is to use blind hatred of Republicans to convince Democrats that elections are inherently illegitimate. All their arguments, whether about Russian Facebook bots or the Electoral College circle back to that.

The choosing of governments, it follows, is too important an issue to be left to mere voters whose voting machines and brains are all too easily hacked by disinformation campaigns and FOX News. And the removal of President Trump from office is also too important to be left to those same voters.

Lefties have made it very clear that they would rather, practically or symbolically, reverse the results of the 2016 election than focus on winning in 2020 because of the larger principle at stake. The second part of the principle appears in every media piece pushing impeachment. It hinges on President Trump’s alleged unfitness for office. The first part of the principle is the unfitness of the voters to choose leaders.

Elections are a humiliating process that force lefties to lie to voters, hide their agendas, and appeal to the people they despise to be allowed to rule them. Even when they win, a sour taste lingers afterward.

The Left desperately wants impeachment proceedings because it wants to exercise direct power.

People wonder what the Left really wants? Post-gender bathrooms, banning cows, and paying reparations to drug dealers are just random policies. They’re not the endgame. …

The premise of impeachment has always been an inherent unfitness. The actual basis for impeachment has always been a corollary to that claim of an inherent unfitness that preceded even the election.

Inherent unfitness expresses the idea that the voters never had any right to elect President Trump.

Impeachment is not just meant to be a trial of President Trump, but of the voters who chose him. Its outcome, whatever the composition of the Senate, is meant to be an argument for remaking the system of elections, whether by abolishing the Electoral College or tampering with the judiciary, that would take the power further out of the hands of the voters and concentrate them with the right sorts of people.

The right sorts of people usually being wealthy and influential lefties in California and New York. …

“Power is not a means, it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship,” O’Brien tells the hapless Winston Smith in the novel 1984. “The object of power is power.”

Outside the media and social media, where the purges of cancel culture are a daily event, the Left lacks the power to regularly drag its political enemies before its bar, to put them on trial and break them. And yet it craves that terrible power above all else. All its obsessions, political correctness, cancel culture, political protests, demonization and impeachment bend toward that consuming evil obsession. …

Terror is in the political DNA of every radical movement. And the arc of the Left is always radical.

“Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face–for ever,” 1984’s O’Brien rhapsodizes.

Too Corrupt To Fail

Too Corrupt To Fail, by the Z-Man.

The best example of this is the Catholic Church scandal. By the time the story of the homosexual priests was public, the Church was infested with them. The lavender mafia had taken over whole orders. The number of pederasts had reached a point where moving them around the system was just a part of the administration. As people started asking questions and making claims, the system rallied to defend itself, without much thought about what it was defending. The corruption was systemic. …

Those who cannot tolerate the corruption, but lack the courage to do anything about it, are boiled off. They move on, leaving behind a mix of cowards and corrupt. Of course, the corrupt flock to corruption, so the institution becomes a magnate for the type who like rule breaking. Before long, you go from a system where rule breaking is not tolerated and the rule breakers fear exposure, to a system where rule breaking is normalized and rule enforcers fear exposure. …

Then Trump rode into town. Beyond monetary corruption, “Drain the swamp!” he bellowed.

This dynamic of corruption is something to consider when trying to sort out the many scandals engulfing Washington. For eight years, the media was celebrating the fact that there were no major scandals under Obama. They never said it, but there were no big scandals under Bush. …

Yet, Trump hits town and the city is hit with a tsunami of front page scandals. The fact that most are hoaxes and the rest are scandals those hoaxes are intend to obscure, suggests something about the system. It sees Trump as not only a foreign body, but a threat by reason of being a foreign body. He’s the new precinct captain taking over a rotten precinct or the new bishop with a reputation for piety. The defense mechanism of the corrupt organization just assumes virtue is a vice that must be expelled.

This would explain why the whole system seems to have reorganized itself to defend even the pipsqueaks in the system. Andrew McCabe should be a perfect fall guy, as he is high profile enough to be a nice trophy, but not so high up as to be important to anyone in politics. Yet, he has been funneled millions of dollars by the system, through jobs and speaking fees. His legal defense fund quickly filled up with millions of dollars from Washington lobbyists. The system wants him safe.

Something similar is happening with the fake whistle blower story. The system saw that Trump people were looking into the Biden stuff. Instinctively the system responds with the fake whistle blower, so the democrats can bellow about impeachment, rather than defend Joe Biden. Why not just let this very corrupt old man go down in flames so Warren can be the nominee? The thoroughly corrupt organization lacks the ability to sacrifice any part of itself, so it instinctively defends the whole.

This video of Rudy Giuliani talking about the Biden corruption is interesting for a number of reasons. One is the level of corruption. It does appear China bought Joe Biden, while he was Vice President. Putting that aside, Giuliani seems to be realizing, as he is talking, that Washington is just like the organized crime he prosecuted back when he was making a name for himself in New York. It is an organism whose purpose, in addition to the corruption, is to defend itself against exposure.

An open letter to the Democratic party

An open letter to the Democratic party, by Bridget Phetsay.

Having been born and raised a liberal Democrat, I had only a vague sense of the truth behind America’s political divisions. This was because of the left’s firm domination of media, entertainment and education. I subscribed to what I now call ‘The Approved Message’, a sort of ‘right-think’ that meant you were one of the good guys: a Democrat. It made for a simpler life. …

It quickly became clear that anyone who supported Trump (to be clear, I am not a fan) should be shamed and ostracized. If they were a family member, disowned. In fact, coming out as anything other than anti-Trump could end your career, get you kicked out of your mommy group or land you on the wrong side of a virtual mob.

Like most Americans, I was suddenly playing catch-up. Speech is violence, capitalism and democracy are oppressive, critical thinking is ‘fence-sitting’.

If you try nuance or engage in ‘wrong-think’ on sacred issues, you won’t just get into a tiff with the neighbors; now there’s every chance you will have your personal life dragged into the public square in order to shame you into obscurity. The days of buffet-style politics are no longer allowed. You either check all the boxes of the ‘good’ party, or you belong to the ‘bad’ one. When I dared to push back by writing articles, I was struck by how quickly the left rejected me. Millions noticed this too: they watched in stunned silence as leftists demanded books be censored, scrutinized language and called anyone who disagreed a Nazi.

Flash forward three years into a Trump administration and instead of learning from mistakes, the loudest members of the party are heading for the same brick wall. At this point the 2020 Democratic platform feels like a barely veiled threat: ‘Vote for us or you’re racist.’

The progressive push to fully embody the promise made in the Declaration of Independence that ‘all men are created equal’ used to feel aspirational and attainable. Now, the open-mindedness and tolerance that attracted me to the Democratic party seems like a thing of the past. Gone is the party that stood in direct opposition to the rigid moralizing of conservatism.

In its place is a movement that feels less about liberation and more about obedience. Progressivism is no longer interested in ideological diversity and instead demands rigid adherence to dogma. Dare to defy and risk being, as we say on Twitter, ‘canceled’.

It’s dawning on them.

Ukraine transcript is like a lousy sequel to Russia ‘collusion’ controversy

Ukraine transcript is like a lousy sequel to Russia ‘collusion’ controversy, by Sohrab Ahmari.

Well, the transcript is out, and it is already clear that Biden-Ukraine is the even-lousier sequel to the already-lousy Russian “collusion” flick. ..

The Washington Post, the chief organ of the #Resistance, described the call between President Trump and “a foreign leader” as “so troubling that it prompted an official in the US intelligence community to file a formal whistleblower complaint.”

Why? Because the interaction with the foreign leader “included a ‘promise’” — gasp! What had Trump promised: America’s nuclear codes in exchange for the foreign leader spending a week at one of his golf resorts? Had he revealed “how the United States obtained sensitive information,” as the paper speculated?

Later it was revealed that the interaction involved less strategic matters. Trump, we were told, had pushed the Kiev government to look into Hunter Biden’s role in a Ukrainian energy firm, work for which the vice presidential princeling was paid $50,000 a month (nice work if you can get it). Had there been a tight quid pro quo: US aid to Kiev in return for embarrassing Trump’s leading rival via his son? ..

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi suggested a “formal” impeachment inquiry (whatever that is).

Then came the transcript of the call between Trump and Ukraine’s President Zelensky. …

The transcript isn’t actually very long, and the bottom line is that there is no “promise,” contrary to the whistleblower’s widely reported complaint: At no point does Trump explicitly condition any action or assistance on the Ukrainians doing anything specific.

Early on, Trump does note that he has done much more to help the Russian-threatened Ukrainians than the Europeans have, which is true and admirable. Zelensky agrees and mentions purchasing more Javelin antitank missiles from the United States. “I would like you to do us a favor though,” Trump replies, and it is this single clause that the impeachment-now crowd has seized upon to suggest a quid pro quo. But the favor Trump asks for has nothing to do with the illustrious, handsomely compensated Hunter Biden.

Instead, Trump asks Zelensky to probe Ukraine’s role in foreign interference in the 2016 election — a perfectly legitimate request in an area of bipartisan concern.

Later, when it comes to the Hunter question, Trump seems legitimately concerned about corruption: “There’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son,” Trump grumbles, “that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that, so whatever you can do with the Attorney General [William Barr] would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it. . . . It sounds horrible to me.”

And that’s all true. As vice president, Biden did encourage Ukraine to fire a prosecutor who happened to be investigating the company on whose board his son happened to sit. Widespread graft being Ukraine’s biggest enemy after Russia — the country is one of the world’s most corrupt, according to Transparency International — how is it not legitimate for the US chief executive to probe these matters with his Ukrainian counterpart?

That’s it. That’s really all the “there” in the call that set off this brouhaha. And it falls far short of a legitimate basis for removing a duly elected president from office.

The US Constitution gives the president vast discretion in the conduct of foreign affairs. Ours being a fallen world, that conduct has ever been grubby, though Trump has undoubtedly made it grubbier with his vulgar ways. But if this call is enough to justify impeachment, it will become impossible for any president to act on the world stage. Democrats might want to ponder that before setting out to make Mike Pence president.

Donald Trump Lawmakers react to text of Trump’s Ukraine call: ‘A classic mob shakedown’

Lawmakers react to text of Trump’s Ukraine call: ‘A classic mob shakedown’, by Dareh Gregorian.

The newly released summary of President Donald Trump’s July call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy swept through Washington and the 2020 trail Wednesday, bolstering Democrats’ calls for impeachment and eliciting defensive outrage from some Republicans.

Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., tweeted: “The transcript of the call reads like a classic mob shakedown: — We do a lot for Ukraine — There’s not much reciprocity — I have a favor to ask — Investigate my opponent — My people will be in touch — Nice country you got there. It would be a shame if something happened to her.” …

Pelosi on Wednesday said that “the release of the notes of the call by the White House confirms that the President engaged in behavior that undermines the integrity of our elections, the dignity of the office he holds and our national security. The President has tried to make lawlessness a virtue in America and now is exporting it abroad.”

Biden released a statement later Wednesday, saying: “It is a tragedy for this country that our president put personal politics above his sacred oath. He has put his own political interests over our national security interest, which is bolstering Ukraine against Russian pressure. It is an affront to every single American and the founding values of our country.”

Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, a leading Democratic presidential candidate, told NBC News the document was “a smoking gun.”

“It’s solicitation of help from a foreign government for his own political purposes. That is the smoking gun. It’s right there in his own words. He’s admitted it,” Warren said.

Pelosi Reassures Nation Impeachment is Ultimate Aphrodisiac

Pelosi Reassures Nation Impeachment is Ultimate Aphrodisiac, by The Derringer, a satrical site.

“You will love it,” reassured House Speaker Nancy Pelosi as she opened an impeachment inquiry into President Trump, “Impeachment is the ultimate aphrodisiac.”

“We’ve done this before,” she said, “And it is a rip-rolling good time. A lot of people will be getting off on this. I know I’m excited.”

As the news broke, major news networks were struggling to keep their shows together as massive orgies broke out backstage, pulling tens and then hundreds of employees into writhing, fleshy heaps.

“It is going to be intense. I can tell you that,” said President Trump when asked about the inquiry, “But I am looking forward to it. I have a lot of stamina and can keep going a lot longer than they can, a lot, lot longer.”

Pelosi’s impeachment flip-flop changes everything

Pelosi’s impeachment flip-flop changes everything, by Michael Godwin.

[Pelosi has] effectively committed House Dems to impeaching President Trump.

Because of what she said and did, if the House doesn’t go all the way, it will be a political disaster. Either failing to take a vote on articles of impeachment, or failing to get enough votes among her majority to pass any articles, would be seen as a political exoneration for Trump, likely leading to his re-election.

If all that weren’t risky enough, consider another scenario. If House Dems do impeach Trump on grounds that much of the public sees as flimsy and concocted, they could win the battle and lose the war. Indeed, no matter what the House does, there is a next-to-zero chance the GOP controlled Senate would convict the president absent clear and convincing “high crimes and misdemeanors.” …

The consequences:

Pelosi may think she went only halfway Tuesday and could eventually back down on impeachment if the Ukraine issue fizzles, but that’s wishful thinking. Anything less than a public flogging of Trump will not satisfy the far left of her own party, including the 150 or so House members who already demanded impeachment before the Ukraine issue appeared.

Meanwhile, Pelosi’s endorsement also pushes the presidential candidates toward the impeachment path, whether they like it or not. None of them can possibly be against it, nor can they be wishy-washy about it.

Bet that within days, there will be virtually unanimous support among the White House wannabes. Anything less will be disqualifying among the loud left.

In short, Pelosi just changed everything. The next election is now about impeachment.

If you think America is polarized today, you ain’t seen nothing yet. …

A side-effect: the impeachment will knock Biden out of the presidential race.

Ironically, a full examination of the facts could make Biden the first casualty of the impeachment jihad. He is already a weak front-runner and even if he did nothing legally wrong in dealing with Ukraine, the fact that his son was enriching himself by free-riding on the coattails of his father’s job won’t sit well with progressive voters, many of whom already dislike and distrust Biden.

Put it this way: Would Hunter Biden have gotten that job if his father were not vice president? Ditto for a sweetheart investment deal Hunter Biden got from the Chinese government. On at least one occasion, he reportedly flew with his father on Air Force Two to China to seal a lucrative agreement there.

The Democrats are Walking into a Trap

The Democrats are Walking into a Trap, by the Z-Man.

It’s important to remember that this is not about Trump or Biden. What this is about is the corruption that went on during the Obama years. We know, for example, that several Senators were colluding with the FBI plotters. While no smoking gun has been unearthed, it seems likely that Obama’s inner circle knew about the plot. Then there is the Clinton factor. No one really knows what she was auctioning off out of the State Department and no one wants the public to know about it either.

This is probably why Trump is grinning like a chimp over this Ukraine stuff. It’s another chance to bring that story into the sunlight. Trump has been trying to get the classified documents surrounding the FBI case released for a year now. His AG, Bill Barr, is sitting on them as the political establishment works to prevent the disclosure. The more the media and the Democrats demand documents and testimony from the Trump administration, the greater the odds of an Alexander Butterfield moment.

Alexander Butterfield was a White House staffer in the Nixon years. He revealed the existence of the White House taping system, during the Watergate investigation. It was his testimony that changed the nature of the scandal. Investigators suspected there was a recording system, but they had no way of knowing. In questioning Butterfield about another matter, he revealed that there was a taping system in the Oval Office and most important, everything was being taped. It was the turning point of the scandal. …

Theatrics aside, the lesson of the Butterfield story is that you never can know what will slither into the daylight once you start turning over rocks. The Trump administration is in possession of a lot of classified material related to the political corruption of the last administration. They can’t just dump it into the public domain. A big ugly political fight with the Democrats, heading into an election, is perfect cover for putting someone in front of Congress to accidentally on purpose say something important.

This is why Pelosi has no intention of holding formal impeachment proceedings. It’s far too risky to her party. …

The trouble for Pelosi and the Democrats is their media and back bench is staffed with the sorts of lunatics they have been courting for decades. The Washington press corps is full of hysterical females, convinced Trump will stuff their uterus with Bibles and sew their legs shut. The Democrat back benchers are cranks and dingbats like Ocasio-Cortez and Corey Booker. Keeping these loons from rushing into the minefield may prove impossible. Trump seems to think so, at least.

The Post-Reagan Era Of Conservatism Has Collapsed

The Post-Reagan Era Of Conservatism Has Collapsed, by Andrew Klavan.

Conservatism, as we knew it in the post-Reagan era, has collapsed. It collapsed for good reasons: …

  • It failed to stem the slow growth of the undemocratic administrative state …
  • It supported the overly ambitious Bush freedom agenda, which led us into unwinnable wars in Afghanistan and the Middle East …
  • It answered the anguish of unemployment and despair in the heartland with pompous bromides about the wonders of the global free markets that had destroyed their communities and lives.

Donald Trump is an effect of that collapse. [He’s] not its cause. He’s a huge American original with huge American flaws.

He’s accomplished a great deal for our country. Taken the brakes off our economy, restored integrity to our judiciary, begun a necessary reordering of international relations in a post-Cold War world, and taken on a corrupt anti-American culture led by a corrupt anti-American news media. …

The new left sucks badly:

I believe the Democrat team has become socialistic and anti-American. They say that out loud themselves, they tout socialism, they say America was never great, they oppose the First Amendment when they seek to ban, intimidate, and deep platform speech they disagree with. They also oppose the Second Amendment, which is the only real guarantee of the First. They are, as I’ve said before, enemies of our Founding.

The establishment right has lost sight of the goals:

The other party, the Republicans, led by Trump, seemed to me a bunch of fractious clowns straggling in the generally right direction. In other words, they seem like a typical American political party.

I don’t question the integrity of Never Trumpers and Trump skeptics — I really don’t — but I do think they’re making a moral miscalculation, a mistake, not a sin. I think their mistake is that they’ve lifted their own discomfort and uncertainty amidst the collapse of the conservative movement, above the true purposes of our politics, which are the preservation of American freedoms and the happiness of the American people. To allow the occasional unforced errors of our blowhard president to endanger those purposes is, in my humble opinion, to be played for a fool by our opponents.

After two and a half years of false accusations against this president, after what looks very much to me like a failed coup attempt by the Obama intelligence community, after a cover-up committed by the very news media whose job it is to expose cover-ups, I think that now every single charge against Trump and each consecutive impeachment hysteria should be laughed out of court until: (A) It’s proven real, and (B) it’s shown to be worth handing our country over to the internal enemies of its first principles.

Trump says says that the Democratic Party has been taken over by the radical left

Trump says says that the Democratic Party has been taken over by the radical left, by John Hinderaker. From a press conference today:

His point was that Pelosi is no longer at the wheel, as the Squad and other far leftists are now driving the Democratic Party. That would have been obvious to anyone who listened to the exchange. But Democratic Party reporters played dumb, pretending to think that Trump had literally said that Pelosi had somehow lost her position as Speaker.

We have seen this over and over again: Trump will say something perfectly sensible that would be understood by any person of normal intelligence, but Democratic Party reporters and spokesmen willfully pretend to misunderstand him, and then attack the faux interpretation that was theirs alone.

That is a depressing phenomenon, but the bright spot is that if this is the best the Democrats can do after Trump spent more than an hour with the press, while Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden both refused to take any questions, the Democrats are in trouble.