Professor Peter Navarro Discusses Trump’s Economic Policies

Professor Peter Navarro (business professor at the University of California-Irvine – his books are here) is one of the specialists informing Donald Trump on his trade policies. This was a very informative interview and I plan on watching the documentary mentioned in this interview.

This conversation took a big step in elucidating me on the issue. I wish I could have heard a response to us (the U.S.) manipulating our currency and why this is an issue that I haven’t heard dealt with. In other words, if it is bad and really unlawful for China… why not us?

Dan Bongino Goes Renegade on Don Lemon

Dan Bongino, The Renegade Republican, was at a loss that the media at CNN were treating this as a DEFCON 1 issue.

WESTERN JOURNALISM makes notes of the exchange:

…The former Secret Service agent said no calls for violence against Clinton were implicit in Trump’s statement. He explained that the GOP nominee was directing his comments to “one-issue voters” who support the Second Amendment.

Bongino said, “It’s clear he’s trying to motivate people to go out and vote based on the potential for an open Supreme Court seat. How that’s clear to you that was some kind of call to an open revolution and to start firing your weapons at public officials, is utter absurdity.”

Lemon fired back asking, “As someone who’s running for leader of the free world, shouldn’t he be as clear in his words as possible?”

Bongino answered, “We can disagree about how imprudent he worded that, but to suggest that he was calling to violence means to me that you came into this with the idea that, ‘Donald Trump was calling to violence, let me make the case afterwards.’ You didn’t come into this with a clear and open mind.”

[….]

Lemon declared, “You’re lying to the American people and you know that you’re lying to the American people.”

“Right, I’m lying, Don,” Bongino answered sarcastically…

For more of Dan Bongino’s stuff, see here:

★ Conservative Review: https://www.conservativereview.com/authors/dan-bongino
★ His blog is here: http://blog.bongino.com/
★ Make sure to follow him on Twitter: https://twitter.com/dbongino

Media Hysteria Relegates Trump to Godfather Status

Dennis Prager touches on Donald Trumps poor use of the English vernacular to express his poor thinking. The bottom line is that Trump should stay on script and (b) we shouldn’t allow the media to form the narrative. One comment on another video on this topic reads:

“Hillary wants to abolish – essentially abolish – the Second Amendment. If she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is. I don’t know. That will be a horrible day.”

That last line is very ambiguous, you could interpret that as following on from the previous line i.e. It would be horrible if the second amendment people shot her. Or that it means it would be horrible if Clinton picked supreme court justices.

He shouldn’t have left it open to interpretation, it’s just giving the Clinton campaign and the biased media far too much ammunition.

I wish to reword this a bit myself:

➤ “Hillary wants to abolish – essentially abolish – the Second Amendment. If she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. Although the NRA and other pro-second amendment groups could continue the fight. But if Hillary gets to appoint judges for the Court, that would be a horrible day.”

Did Trump Call For An Assassination of His Rival?

HotAir comments on Dan Rather’s rather obnoxious indignation:

Disgraced news anchor Dan Rather wrote a post on Facebook yesterday attacking Trump’s comments about “Second Amendment people.” Here’s a sample:

No trying-to-be objective and fair journalist, no citizen who cares about the country and its future can ignore what Donald Trump said today. When he suggested that “The Second Amendment People” can stop Hillary Clinton he crossed a line with dangerous potential. By any objective analysis, this is a new low and unprecedented in the history of American presidential politics. This is no longer about policy, civility, decency or even temperament. This is a direct threat of violence against a political rival. It is not just against the norms of American politics, it raises a serious question of whether it is against the law. If any other citizen had said this about a Presidential candidate, would the Secret Service be investigating?…

To anyone who still pretends this is a normal election of Republican against Democrat, history is watching. And I suspect its verdict will be harsh. Many have tried to do a side-shuffle and issue statements saying they strongly disagree with his rhetoric but still support the candidate. That is becoming woefully insufficient. The rhetoric is the candidate.

There’s a lot more like this but it all has the same urgent tone of righteous indignation. This Facebook post shows everything that was wrong with Dan Rather as a journalist. There’s no effort to understand or explain the subject he’s discussing. Was Trump really making a threat here? Was he talking about the NRA? Was this a joke Trump should never have made? He doesn’t even bother to quote more than four words of what Trump said that prompted this response….

Before continuing, not how the story is presented, and then see Kayleigh McEnany rightly note the correct view of what Trump said:

Using the Left’s logic, however, we see that Hillary called for the assassination of Obama in 2008 (POWERLINE!):

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton defended staying in the Democratic nominating contest on Friday by pointing out that her husband had not wrapped up the nomination until June 1992, adding, “We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California.”…

Friday was not the first time Mrs. Clinton referred to the assassination of Robert F. Kennedy in such a context. In March, she told Time magazine: “Primary contests used to last a lot longer. We all remember the great tragedy of Bobby Kennedy being assassinated in June in L.A.

Let’s see whether the typical media double standard kicks in with Trump’s comments today.

Clinton Cash (Movie) and Campaign Donor List! [+ More]

Clinton Cash, is a feature documentary based on the Peter Schweizer book that the New York Times hailed as “The most anticipated and feared book of a presidential cycle.”

Clinton Cash investigates how Bill and Hillary Clinton went from being “dead broke” after leaving the White House to amassing a net worth of over $150 million, with over $2 billion in donations to their foundation. This wealth was accumulated during Mrs. Clinton’s tenure as US Secretary of State through lucrative speaking fees and contracts paid for by foreign companies and Clinton Foundation donors.

Buy the book that inspired the movie.

The following is with a h-t to YOUNG CONSERVATIVES, and comes by way of THE FEDERALIST PAPERS!Hedge Fund

….Topping Hillary’s list is the Saban Capital Group. The “private investment firm,” (read: hedge fund) has given the Clinton campaign more than $10 million this year alone. Founded by Hami Saban, an Jewish Egyptian national, he has said his greatest concern is to protect Israel. He is also part owner of Univision, Hillary Clinton’s greatest Spanish-language cheerleader. Here’s how the New Yorker described his relationship with the Clintons: 

By far his most important relationship is with Bill and Hillary Clinton. In 2002, Saban donated five million dollars to Bill Clinton’s Presidential library, and he has given more than five million dollars to the Clinton Foundation. In February, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton delivered a major policy address at the U.S.-Islamic World Forum in Doha, co-sponsored by the Saban Center. And last November Bill Clinton was a featured speaker at the Saban Forum, an annual conference attended by many high-level Israeli and U.S. government officials, which was held in Jerusalem. Ynon Kreiz, an Israeli who was the chairman and chief executive of a Saban company and Saban’s closest associate for many years, attended the conference, and when I commented that his former boss appeared to be positively smitten with Bill Clinton, Kreiz replied, grinning broadly, “No! No! I remember once Haim was talking to me on the phone, and he said in Hebrew, without changing his tone so Clinton would have no idea he was speaking about him, ‘The President of the United States, wearing his boxers, is coming down the stairs, and I am going to have to stop talking and go have breakfast with him.’”

A close second on the list is Renaissance Technologies, another hedge fund. They sunk $9.5 million into Hillary’s campaign this year. Founder James Simons has given more than $30 million to Democrats and their campaigns since 2006.

[….]

…It’s important to note that Trump’s top contributor has given a fraction of all the people on Hillary’s list.

The John Powers Middleton Companies gave $150,000 to Trump this year. Middleton is a TV producer who co-producedThe Lego Movie. 

Also on the list? A boring group of contributors, really.

There’s a financial group that gave $50,000, a realty company. The AON Corporation. All told, Trump has received zerodollars from Political Action Committees and has self-funded 56 percent of his campaign.

Love him or hate him, he answers to nobody but himself and the American people….

Take note that if you combine the above with this… you have in the Democratic Party EVERYTHING the Republicans are accused of.  An example:

From maligning and subverting others in the race (GOP or Democrat), from taking bribes, to making bribes… what has happened here in the primary is a giant leap ahead of what Democrats accuse George Bush of doing in Florida. Florida is chicken feed to what was revealed from these leaked DNC emails. On the DNC Convention floor, Bernie signs were confiscated, they censored the California delegation with “white noise speakers” and “reserving” the seats. It is worth noting that the woman behind this original censoring in the leaked DNC emails, stepped down because of this activity… to only be immediately hired by Hillary’s campaign. I would also posit that this almost Orwellian censoring at the Democrat Convention has Debbie Wasserman Schultz finger prints all over it.

Republicans are rightly called “the stupid party” (read here Donald Trump) and the Democrats are called “the evil party” (read here Hillary Clinton).

An old Washington joke is that the Republicans are called “the stupid party” and the Democrats are called “the evil party.” When the Republicans and Democrats get together on legislation, they do something both stupid and evil—and they call it “bipartisanship.”

John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) called conservatives “the stupidest party” in his Considerations on Representative Government (1861). The newspaper columnist Samuel T. Francis (1947-2005) was credited in 1993 with writing “There are two parties in Washington: the Stupid Party and the Evil Party.” It’s probable that Francis wrote the full joke at some time in the 1980s or early 1990s. The joke (cited in print since at least 1999) is also often credited to an unnamed Congressional staffer, who was explaining the U.S. government to someone from Russia (or another country in the former Soviet Union).

(Barry Popik)

I would rather be part of the Stupid Party.

Trump and Alzheimers?

Just a small political not. I did a search this morning on an idea I have had for about a week now. I have posited the idea that Donald Trump could be suffering from the early stages of Alzheimer’s. I found out his dad, Fred Trump, suffered from it late in life… and we know this disease can be passed on through a mutation in the genes:

Some diseases are caused by a genetic mutation, or permanent change in one or more specific genes. If a person inherits from a parent a genetic mutation that causes a certain disease, then he or she will usually get the disease. Sickle cell anemia, cystic fibrosis, and early-onset familial Alzheimer’s disease are examples of inherited genetic disorders.

(National Institute of Aging)

I watch speeches by Trump, and especially the most recent one I uploaded a critique of. When I did this search online, all I could find [for the most part] are left wing “Daily Kos”/”Slate” type sites saying this. Many included racism in their posts. I have already posted a refutation of the “most” racist thing people say Trump said. So, I wanted to get on record here (7-24-2016), noting that an early onset of dementia may explain Trump’s behavior.

I merely wanted to divorce the crazy leftist blather from the more reasonable assertion that this may be the case. I can see the headlines now… “the GOP nominated a man in the throes of dementia.” To which I would respond that that is still a better choice than Hillary. (Like the similar response regarding Rush Limbaugh: “even on drugs Rush is right.”)

“…So Here We Are” ~ Gay Patriot

H-T GAY PATRIOT, via 

So here we are.

This is the choice we’re given this year:

An egomaniacal New York Democrat who represents the terrible nexus between powerful moneyed interests and overbearing governmental influence in our lives.

A candidate whose entire family’s wealth in fact is a direct result of underhanded, criminal at times, manipulation of power that puts the ‘little guy’ under the thumb of those in undeserved positions of power and authority.

A candidate with actual legal travails in fact hanging like the Sword of Damocles as we move into the general election season.

A staunch supporter of Planned Parenthood, universal healthcare, and the expansion of governmental power, with a blindly protectionist view of free trade, who (although a supporter of it at the time) contends that George W Bush lied us into war in Iraq.

A candidate who cozies up to (and profits from relationships with) foreign strongmen.

A candidate who expresses an excitement and yearning desire to gut the First Amendment, primarily with the goal of targeting political enemies.

A candidate who colluded with party leaders to squelch any expression of inner-party dissent and explicitly and in the most personal and insulting ways conceivable to deny fellow-party adversaries any legitimacy even if it meant dragging them through the mud.

A candidate who chooses to offset such obvious personal (and universally accepted) flaws with a boring and milquetoast running mate with the hopes the general electorate will not take notice of such clear unfitness for the job.

A crooked, deceitful, duplicitous lout with an unquenchable desire for power and a seemingly physical inability to tell the truth.

The most unliked major-party nominee for president in the history of the United States.

So what, then? Are we supposed to vote for his opponent instead?

-Nick (ColoradoPatriot, from TML)