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

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

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

In Defense of Trumps 3 AM Tweets

Every pundit on the left and right have universally declared Trumps' 3 am Twitter attack on Alicia Machado to be stupid and harmful.

They're wrong. Here's why...

The Machado narrative was a coordinated attack. The Clinton campaign planted the stories of Trump's abuse with major media outlets, then Clinton delivered the obscure assertion of Trumps boorishness at the debate. This media offensive was intended to dominate the news cycle till the next debate. The idea that it would've "gone away" if he'd have ignored it is to be purposefully ignorant of a long history of media offensives against conservatives.

George Allen tried to downplay the ridiculous assertion that uttering  the non-word "macaca" was proof of his inherent racism - it dominated the news for weeks. It destroyed his campaign. In 2012 George Stephanopoulos planted the "contraceptive issue" in the first debate, then for weeks the media and democrats played out the coordinated "anti-woman" theme as the defining aspect of the Romney campaign. Romney never completely recovered. The list goes on. All "ignored" as trite and foolish - all pounded relentlessly by the media into the public conscience until it became the accepted "truth."

The Machado story was clearly set up to have legs and to dominate the news until the next debate. But Trump got down in the gutter, went toe to toe bringing up criminal charges, porn videos, and made it clear he was about to go nuclear on Clinton sex scandals. Trumps' tweets went directly to the TMZ and ETV crowd that has no idea that there is an AM band on the radio. Not surprisingly, the entertainment networks found the Machado story to messy for even them to cover. Make no mistake - if it weren't for Trumps' distasteful twitter attack - Machado would STILL be dominating the news cycle. But.. suddenly, Machado is gone.

Stolen tax returns are up.

Sorry, but this seems like the Democrats are off stride. The tax return story is so weak it's ridiculous. It's so weak that they have to make up half of it. They simply say he lost money, and that means he MIGHT have not paid much in taxes. I have to believe that this story was intended to be held till the week before the election - a la the GW Bush DUI incident.   

The election is five weeks out. The Democrats have already dropped two major oppo research October Surprises - and Trump is barely phased. Democrats have become accustomed to Republicans being stoic and silent in the face of gutter level false attacks, adhering to the flawed conventional wisdom that "it will pass," and that people will admire their restraint.

Not so with Trump. You go into the gutter to attack him. He'll go into the gutter and fight - and he may well hurt you. It remains to be seen if this strategy will ultimately prevail - but it if Democrats feared this level of counter attack from other Republicans, there might be a few less gutter level attacks in the future.  

Add a comment