Trump Right NOT to Pre-Concede the Election

The hysteria over Trumps refusal to accept results that are not yet rendered is retarded - and if you're one of those who are hyper-ventilating over it - you too, are retarded.

This is not much different than the hysteria over Trumps refusal to commit to supporting the eventual GOP nominee. Trump answered that honestly. Many of the others didn't.

Now the fact that Trump hasn't committed to accept the results of a system that reveals deeper and more corrupt flaws every day, before the facts are even known - it's somehow controversial?


Hillary could answer that question easily - because she lied, everyone knows she lied, and no one will even think of bringing it up again. If Trump wins this - the Hillary and the Democrats will be filing lawsuits all over the country, demanding recounts, creating non-issues like confusing ballots, hanging chads, new found missing ballots in the backs of trunks - you name it - they'll do it. They'll demand the votes be counted over and over until they get the outcome they want.

And nobody even expects anything different.

But because Hillary is a Politician, her answer is discounted as political speak. Since Trump answered like a person - like any person would - the idiots on the left, coupled by retards on the right (yeah that's you Hugh Hewitt) have gone hysterical - over nothing.

Add a comment

They're Not Just Attacking Trump - They're Attacking Us

It's becoming increasingly clear that Donald Trump is under attack from not only Democrats and the media (excuse the redundancy); but also the Republican Party. In Arizona, there are two Republican Senators that are effectively campaigning for Hillary Clinton - and simultaneously decrying the fact that Trump might be losing in Arizona. In Ohio, there is a Republican Governor doing the same. There are numerous similar examples but that's not the point.

The point is...

The Republicans are really attacking the core of Republican voters that seek change. They are sending a clear message. Don't you dare do this again. If there ever again exists an "outsider" that threatens the power structure of the party, he'll be attacked by the left, then will be abandoned, opposed, and attacked by his own party - making his success impossible. Take heed those who dream of a Cruz or even Paul nomination. Your input is NOT to be considered. You are not to be involved in selecting a candidate. You are only to vote for the candidate chosen on your behalf.

Sure, you'll probably lose, but it will be respectably close, sort of, maybe.

You see, Trump isn't a problem for the GOP - the people who voted for him are. The DEMs took out their change guy the DEM way, and the GOP is trying to take out Trump the GOP way. So, if you're thinking "your guy" will be able overtake the GOP Establishment Candidate and roll to a General Election victory - think again.  You'll also be fighting both parties, and the media - and you'll probably be doing it without the Trump supporters you've rejected this year. 

Add a comment

Was Trumps Mic Really "Hot"

So, it strikes me that the video and audio quality of the #TrumpTapes is pretty good. But remember this was 05. No smart phone video, no go-pro. The state of the art compact video looked like this:

The point is, it seems unlikely that Trump was unaware of being filmed. In fact the camera follows him, like in a reality tv show, through 3 different scenes. 

So why was he so knowingly vulgar? 

My guess is that this was character prep for the walk-on cameo role he was playing on this soap opera set. 

So why not just explain it? 

Probably because it's better to apologize first, draw all the fire, then hit back - hard. 

We'll see 

Add a comment

No, JONATHAN V. LAST - The Election is NOT over

John Last picSo, another psuedo-intellectual self aggrandizing Weekly Standard writer with an illusion of omniscience; has gazed into the future and awarded us with the knowledge that "The Race is Over."

Its particularly irritating to simultaneously observe a coordinated Media/DEM/GOP attack on a candidate, and then read someone who knows nothing, don a sage persona and pretend to KNOW the outcome of an event yet to come.

This is no different than "expert sages" predicting:

-It was "Over" when OKC went up on GSW 3-1 in the NBA Western Conference Finals.

-It was "Over" when GSW went up 3-1 in the NBA Finals.

Obviously the Western Conference Champion GSW, and the NBA Champion Cleveland Cavaliers didn't pay any attention.

The point is, neither of these "experts" knows anything about what is going to happen, but are simply making a statement based on a logical probability with which the current odds are strongly in their favor.

Yes, it's likely that the combined efforts of the GOP elite, Democrat Party, and media, will be successful in derailing the Trump campaign. 

Yet, an honest assessment of the state of the campaign shows Trump within 6% points or less in both nationally and in every swing state needed to prevail. Based on Rasmussen poll this morning and two straight days of a tie in the LA Times tracking poll; it's reasonable to believe the polling impact of the TrumpTapes may have bottomed out. The polls are likely to tighten once again prior to election day, and we'll all be wondering what will happen until the polls close and the results are in.

With 26 days remaining, and a fickle public that has proven to change it's mind based on the craziest things, to write that one KNOWS the outcome of this election is an insult to anyone with enough intelligence to be able to read it.

Or, you could just ask the Golden State Warriors how they're enjoying their second consecutive NBA finals victory.

Add a comment

What does Assange have on Hillary?

Wiki-leaks founder Julianne Assange has hinted that he has damaging evidence against Hillary Clinton. I've a hunch that what it might be. I believe Assange has evidence that Hillary tampered and altered the "email" evidence that she turned into the State Department.

Yes. She edited her email files, turned them into .pdf files, printed the edited files, destroyed the digital back-up, then turned in the printed paper as "email" - and it's all a big fat lie.

-and Assange can prove it - beyond all reasonable doubt. 


Assange received copies of most of the Clinton emails from the State Department through a FOIA request. He then scanned them and placed them all in a publicly searchable database. Assange next published the hacked emails of the DNC in a seperate publicly searchable database.  In both of these searchable database examples, one can view both the "rendered email" (as it may appear in an email client); or the email source. In the case of the DNC hack, the email source is a text based .eml file - a typical email type of file. In the Hillary database, however, the source is only the scanned .pdf file - because there IS no original source.


It had been hacked prior to Hillary deleting it - and Assange has it.

If Assange has the original source email, and can show it's been altered from what Clinton submitted as "her email," it would be devastating.

Not sure this is what Assange has, but why would anyone go to the extent that Hillary did to destroy all digital verification of her alleged printed email - if she didn't alter them.

Guess we'll just have to wait and see.


Add a comment