Tag: trump

2ND ASSASSINATION ATTEMPT ON TRUMP

This is unbelievable, unacceptable and unprecedented. Just nine weeks after Trump was nearly assassinated while speaking at a rally in Butler, PA there was a second attempt. As you all know by now, on Sunday Trump was playing golf at the Trump International Golf Course in West Palm Beach, FL. A gunman, armed with an SKS rifle was able to create a sniper’s nest in some bushes bordering the sixth and seventh holes of the course and lie in wait for some 12 hours for Trump to pass by. Only by a stroke of luck was the Secret Service able to thwart him.

An alert SS agent was walking the course one hole head of Trump when he spotted a rifle peeking through some bushes bordering a chain link fence between the sixth and seventh holes. In a matter of minutes Trump would be passing by at which time the would-be assassin would have had a clear shot from some 300 yards away. A shot like that is so easy that the chances of the gunman failing to kill Trump would have been minimal. The agent fired at the man who then fled. An alert private citizen was able to note the license plate on his car, and the police were able to apprehend him in short order.

America is no stranger to assassinations and assassination attempts of presidents and presidential candidates. According to Wikipedia there have been numerous attempted assassinations of both presidents and presidential candidates, too many to list them all here. The first was Andrew Jackson in 1835 while he was president.

According to my research there have been three attempted assassinations of presidential candidates prior to Trump. Teddy Roosevelt and George Wallace were wounded, and RFK was killed. Four sitting presidents have been assassinated. How many can you name? You get bonus points if you can also name the year. See the answers below.

Decent people can take a deep breath that the attempt failed, but there are a multitude of questions that need to be addressed prospectively. For example, according to multiple media outlets:

  1. The area in which the assassin was nesting was well known not only to the SS but also to others as well. Apparently, it has been a favorite hiding place for paparazzi seeking to take surreptitious photographs of celebrities. So why was it left unattended?
  2. Obviously, Trump’s SS protection has been inadequate. Why wasn’t it enhanced after the first attempt on his life?
  3. Is it a problem with manpower, training, funding, planning, leadership, a combination of the foregoing, or something else more sinister? Could certain people who view Trump as a threat to democracy, or worse, be embroiled in a conspiracy to intentionally leave Trump vulnerable? Food for thought.
  4. Routh was able to construct a sniper’s nest and hang out for some 12 hours without being noticed. Why? How?
  5. Security at the Trump National Doral, where Trump also plays frequently, is similarly lacking.
  6. Only the golf course in Bedminster, NJ seems to provide appropriate and adequate security for Trump when he plays there. For one thing, the police restrict public access by closing down nearby roads.
  7. The SS admitted that it failed to “sweep” the golf course beforehand, but it failed to provide a reasonable excuse. In addition, it stated that it didn’t have the resources to protect Trump on a golf course. That is absurd on its face. Many presidents have played golf from Eisenhower to Obama, and the SS managed to protect them just fine.
  8. Why didn’t the SS have a drone on site. It doesn’t take a lot of manpower to operate a drone, and they provide an extra layer of security.
  9. The Palm Beach County sheriff, Ric Bradshaw, disclosed that Trump’s SS detail was “lighter” because he is not the president, only a candidate. This strikes me as illogical, inane, ill-advised, and incredulous, and if true, needs to be rectified immediately. Common sense, which as we all know is not common, holds that Trump is not your typical candidate. He is a controversial figure whose enemies both political and non-political, have vilified him ceaselessly. Therefore, he is much more likely to be attacked. He has been twice already, and the likelihood is there will be more attempts. He definitely needs a higher level of protection.
  10. The federal government claims the SS is short of manpower and money. Biden and Schumer have claimed that Congress needs to pass an appropriations bill to resolve the matter. In the words of Joe Biden, that is pure “malarky.” According to published reports the SS budget is $3.8 billion. Furthermore, if more funds are needed the feds have the power to reallocate funds from other agencies, such as Homeland or the FBI, especially for an “emergency,” which this clearly is. Also, the SS could “borrow” law enforcement personnel from the state or local police. Of course, this would require a certain degree of coordination and cooperation, which, as we saw in Butler, seems to be another deficiency. In my opinion, by the time Congress passed such a bill it would be weeks if not months. The election would be over, and Trump could very well be dead. Besides, House Speaker Mike Johnson, and others have opined that the problem is a “manpower allocation [issue], not a funding issue.” I would agree.
  11. Routh is clearly unbalanced. For instance, he had published a book in which he openly called for Trump’s assassination. Moreover, in April he tweeted that “democracy is on the ballot, and we can’t lose. … You can’t lose if your opponent [Trump] is dead.” Those actions should have landed him on the FBI’s radar. Somehow, it didn’t.
  12. Incredibly, much of the mainstream media has been praising Roof as a “super-citizen” and a “crusader for causes.” Huh?
  13. Where has Mayorkas been? As head of Homeland Security he should have been all over this. He has been MIA, just like he has been regarding the border and everything else for which he is responsible.
  14. The best news I have heard is that Governor Ron DeSantis has directed Florida law enforcement to conduct a thorough investigation. He is one person who will get answers, which have been sorely lacking.

I maintain that the continued vilification of Trump by his political opponents and the mainstream media is the chief cause of the two assassination attempts. It is one thing to disagree with him politically. That’s protected by the First Amendment of the Constitution, but in my opinion characterizing him as “evil,” a “Nazi,” “Hitler,” or an “existential threat to democracy” as they have done and continue to do crosses the line. Rather than try to calm emotions the Dems and their allies in the media have doubled down on the vitriol. For example, just today, Hillary Clinton referred to Trump as “a danger to our country.” Even worse, various bloviators on CNN and MSNBC blamed Trump and the GOP for the attempted assassination and accused them of trying to “rile up” their political base. Truly, they are suffering from a terminal case of TDS.

In our political system we are free to disagree with political opponents. That does not make them “evil.” These above characterizations merely incite unbalanced persons to violence, which is exactly what we are seeing now. Biden, Harris and their allies in the Dem Party, the media, and elsewhere need to tone it down. It is irresponsible, and furthermore it is not true. Have they forgotten what Hitler did? Maybe so, which is a whole other problem.

CONCLUSION

Trump’s haters and opponents have been trying everything to defeat him for nine years for example, falsely accusing him of treason, insurrection and being a threat to democracy, impeachment, rigged Stalin-style “show trials,” imprisonment, disqualifying him from the ballot in certain states, and now assassination. He has prevailed every time, so far. As I said above, there have been two assassination near-misses in just nine weeks. It is clear that the policies and procedures of his SS protection detail are insufficient and need to be addressed. Is anyone doing that? I hope so, but I don’t know.

The impressionable crazies out there will keep trying. We have been lucky so far. The law of averages dictates that we can’t be lucky every time. The assassin only has to be lucky once. I fear that sooner later one of them will succeed in assassinating Trump, and no sane person wants that. Note, I said sane.

One could characterize some of Trump’s critics as deranged, but that is a subject for another blog at another time. By the way, has anyone thought through the constitutional crisis that would result if Trump were, in fact assassinated while still a candidate or if he were the president-elect?

Quiz answer: Abraham Lincoln – 1865; James Garfield – 1881; William McKinley – 1901; and JFK – 1963.

by Tags: , , , Leave a comment

HARRIS-TRUMP 2024 PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE

The much-anticipated, long-awaited Harris-Trump presidential debate is history. The questions are (1) who won, (2) will the results affect the polls, and (3) will there be a second debate? Read on for the answers.

The post-debate polls I have seen are all over the place, and as is always the case each side’s spin doctors claimed victory. But, to be fair, the consensus seems to be that Harris “won” the debate. According to CNN North Carolina Governor Roy Cooper opined that Harris’ performance will “move the needle” in his state. But before Harris begins to pick out curtains for the White House, I have a word of caution. Firstly, history has shown that “winning” a debate does not always translate to a bump in the polls, and when it does the advantage is often fleeting. The reasons have varied, but that has generally been the case. For example:

  1. Post-debate, the same polls indicate that the crucial swing states are all still within the margin of error.
  2. In 2012 a CNN poll reported that Mitt Romney won the first debate over Barack Obama. He received a post-debate bump in the polls. But, as we know, Obama won the election.
  3. In 2016 the consensus was that Hillary Clinton had “won” all three debates over Donald Trump. She, too, received a bump in the polls. However, again, Trump won the election.

So, today, Dems can rejoice over Harris’ “victory,” but history has proven it does not mean she will win the election. A lot can happen between now and ED and usually does.

This was an extremely difficult debate to analyze. I have tried to be objective, however, I suspect that some of you will conclude that my comments are biased in favor of Trump. That said, below please find my thoughts, comments and analyses:

  1. This was not a “debate” in the strict sense of the word, nor was it intended to be. As you saw, the moderators asked each candidate questions in turn to which they responded. Then the other candidate had the opportunity to respond. In the interest of fairness, the moderators were supposed to refrain from commenting or exhibiting any bias at all. That was not always the case as you shall see below.
  2. My most significant takeaway from the debate was that the moderators exhibited considerable and frequent bias against Trump. Thus, they failed in their primary duty. They fact-checked Trump frequently (not always correctly as I will denote below), yet I cannot recall any instance of them doing so to Harris. At times, it appeared to be three against one. Many GOPers were incensed. According to CNN Trump asserted to it that ABC News’ bias was so extreme that the network “should have its broadcast license revoked.”
  3. In my view, each side had its own objectives with respect to the debate. Harris’ was to (a) appear presidential, (b) speak in generalities to avoid being pinned down on the specifics of her radical policies, (c) avoid her traditional “word salads” and cackling, (d) “spin” the Biden-Harris Administration’s accomplishments or lack thereof, (e) try to goad Trump into one of his traditional bullying, name-calling episodes, and (f) most importantly, blame Trump for everything – every failed policy from the economy to the border to abortion, even if it meant exaggerating, obfuscating, misrepresenting, or lying. She knew she could succeed in these endeavors because the moderators would assist her and would not fact-check her. For the most part, she accomplished her objectives.
  4. Trump’s objectives were to (a) expose her far-left policies to voters who for whatever reasons, have little or no familiarity of her and policies, (b) expose the duplicity, misrepresentations, mischaracterizations, and outright lying with respect to her claimed policy changes, (c) tie her to Biden, (d) refrain from any bullying or name calling, and (e) explain how his policies would be better for the American people.
  5. In my opinion, she succeeded for the most part, whereas Trump, for the most part, did not. Why? Well, for one thing, Trump seemed desultory, and he gave an uncharacteristically lackluster performance. The more significant factor, however, was the moderators. The moderators in a debate have one simple job – to be fair and impartial. Their job is NOT to fact-check, dispute or assist one of the debaters. The ABC News moderators failed miserably (or, perhaps, in view of the network’s history of bias against Trump, 95% unfavorable compared to 100% favorable for Harris, succeeded brilliantly). They fact-checked Trump frequently, sometimes incorrectly. On a couple of occasions, they even disputed his statements. On the other hand, they allowed Harris to bob and weave, obfuscate, deceive and even lie. No fact-checking there.
  6. Apparently, the night before the debate Harris finally posted some policies on her website. But they were vague and short on specifics. Trump derided them as being “plagiarized” from Biden’s policies.
  7. Harris tended to avoid specifics. For the most part, she spoke in generalities, platitudes and slogans.
  8. Harris continually reiterated how “everyone” hated Trump. Yes, he is hated by a portion of the electorate, but not “everyone.” In fact, roughly half the voters love him.
  9. While Trump was speaking and the camera was on her Harris often made weird faces, which was meant to convey her disagreement or displeasure. I found that to be distracting, unprofessional, and disrespectful. Also, on various occasions it appeared she was trying to interrupt Trump while he was speaking. Of course, she couldn’t because her microphone was turned off. The NY Post referred to them derisively as her “Marcel Marceau shtick.” In the opinion of Miranda Devine, political reporter for the NY Post these “reinforced the fatal inauthenticity of the rest of her debate performance, which was a string of memorized set pieces with little reference to the question being asked and delivered in an odd staccato.”
  10. One of the major reasons for the debate was for the electorate to ascertain Harris’ policies. Heretofore, because she had largely refrained from giving news conferences or speaking without the aid of a teleprompter, according to polls as many as 70% were not clear on them. In her entire career up until few months ago she has espoused far left policies. In this electronic age there are a copious number of quotes of them if one cares to look. Now, with the election looming suddenly she has been disavowing most of them in favor of more moderate ones. Voters wanted to know if these substantial modifications were genuine or were they flip-flops to win the election. I would like to denote that in a rare moment of candor erstwhile Harris supporter Bernie Sanders disclosed they were just temporary to win the election. Everyone knows that she cannot possibly win if the voters were to ascertain her real policies.
  11. As of today, voters still don’t know, because she frequently responded to questions with lies, half-truths, nonresponsive generalities, non-sequiturs or avoided answering them entirely. The moderators should have pressed her with follow-up questions or fact-checked her answers. I don’t recall even one instance where they did.
  12. On the other hand, they frequently fact-checked or even disputed Trump’s answers, sometimes incorrectly. That was not their job. That exposed their deep bias against Trump.
  13. The most egregious instance was regarding abortion, although there were several others. They claimed that his point that the state of Virginia under a previous governor had allowed post-birth abortions was incorrect. On the contrary, it was true. Also, they allowed Harris to assert inaccurately that Trump supported an abortion ban. As most people know, Trump has advocated that the voters in each state should decide that state’s abortion policy. In the wake of SCOTUS’ recent decision abortion is basically a non-issue, but the Dems are trying to make it one as they don’t have any others.
  14. As I said, most observers opined that Trump “lost” the debate, but he did utter a few memorable zingers.
    • He said Harris now agreed with his policies to such an extent that he thought about sending her a MAGA hat.
    • He said many of the policy changes Harris is claiming she’ll effect on Day 1, such as the immigration problems and resuming drilling and fracking, can be implemented right now by Executive Orders. We don’t need Congress to pass any laws. He challenged Harris to go to DC right now, wake up Biden, and get him to sign the requisite Executive Orders.
  15. The following issues were either ignored, mischaracterized or glossed over:
    • Are Americans better off today than they were four years ago. Why/why not.
    • Income tax hike of up to 80% for high earners.
    • Tax on unrealized income.
    • Rising prices for groceries and other products and services.
    • Single payer healthcare plan to be administered by the federal government.
    • Illegal migrants being treated better than citizens.
    • Various freebies for illegal migrants, such as healthcare, social security, housing, education, and sex change operations even for those in prison (all to be funded by US taxpayers).
    • Late term abortions when the fetus is viable even after birth, which is allowed now in Minnesota, where Walz is governor, and a few other states.
    • Mandatory gun buyback program, which is tantamount to gun confiscation.
    • Green New Deal, which she co-sponsored and which would cost over $93 trillion.
    • Bans on various popular products such as red meat and plastic straws.
    • Electric vehicle mandate.
    • Bans on offshore drilling and fracking.
    • Border security.
    • Allowing illegal immigrants to vote.
    • The ill-conceived, ill-advised, misnamed Inflation Reduction Act, for which she was “proud” to cast the tiebreaking vote. Contrary to its name this act will cost trillions of dollars, was chock full of “pork” for party donors and friends and actually increased inflation and interest rates.
    • Defunding the police
    • Abolish or sharply curtail the powers of ICE.
    • No-cash bail laws.
    • Establishing a fund to post bail for criminals.
    • Lawlessness in many cities defended and unpunished.
    • Billions of dollars provided to Iran.
    • Dem Party coup to oust Biden, which disenfranchised, some 12 million Dem primary voters, and nominate Harris who has never, ever won even one delegate vote.
    • Student loan forgiveness.
    • Botched withdrawal from Afghanistan.
    • Reparations.

I found some post-debate polls interesting, for example:

  1. A NY Times survey disclosed that although a majority of the pundits thought Harris had won the debate many undecided voters surveyed were not so sure.
  2. A group of independent voters tracking the debate in real time on the economy were as positive toward Trump as his supporters.
  3. Reuters polled ten undecided voters after the debate. Six said they would vote for Trump, three for Harris, and one remained undecided.
  4. Another independent voter put it succinctly: “I guess I’m leaning more on his facts than her vision.”
  5. Commonwealth Attorney pollster Matt Lowery opined the debate “was not Trump’s best day, but it [didn’t seem] to hurt him. Undecideds are “not sold” on Harris. Trump has now pulled even in MI. Trump’s super-packs must help him to disseminate Harris’ true policies to the electorate (via ads). He cannot do it alone.
  6. Pollster Mark Penn, CEO of Stagwell, a marketing group, opined that voters care the most about the economy (no revelation since that is always the case). Furthermore, Harris’ real positions seem to be slowly seeping out to voters, but Trump has to work harder to disseminate them more fully.
  7. Charles Payne, a Fox News financial journalist, denoted that Biden-Harris’ actions have enriched their donors at the expense of the middle class. He added that the deficits they have created are “unsustainable.” Also, the runaway spending has raised interest rates and is “imploding” the jobs market. The Fed cannot cut interest rates because “inflation is at a 40-year high.”

CONCLUSION

As I said, as is normally the case, both sides are claiming victory. It’s probably too early to know the post-debate impact on the election for sure. The answer will probably be determined once we see the post-debate polls. Although I don’t know who won, I can definitely tell you who lost – the American people. The people did not learn much, if anything, about Harris’ core beliefs, which, in a free society, is unacceptable. A goodly percentage of them did not know before the debate, and they still don’t know now.

Both sides have expressed interest in a second debate. Supposedly, they are negotiating the details. I’m skeptical, but we’ll see.

by Tags: , , , , , Leave a comment

TRUMP VERDICT – WHAT DOES IT MEAN FOR AMERICA?

So, the Trump “show” trial is over, and predictably, Trump was found guilty on all 34 counts. I’m not going to discuss the nuts and bolts of the trial itself. Anyone who has been following it is fully cognizant of how it was rigged and why. The real issues are what it does it portend for America’s justice system? Will it remain fair and unbiased, or will politics and influence play a decisive role? What does it portend for America? Will there be equal opportunity under the law? Will the Bill of Rights and the Constitution apply equally to everyone or just a chosen few?

These are not hyperbolic questions. These are very real and serious issues. Read on for my opinion of these matters.

Today, the far-left progressives and the Trump-haters are rejoicing. I don’t know how many of them really think Trump was guilty of anything or whether or not he got a fair trial, but to them it doesn’t matter. To them the end justifies the means. Now they can paint Trump as a convicted felon. Many of them probably think he should be sentenced to prison for 100+ years or worse. These people are being short-sighted and are missing the main point.

In my view, there are two transcendent issues here:

  1. If the powers-that-be can do this to Trump they can do it to any of us. If one were to say or do the “wrong” thing prospectively he could suffer the same fate. Any trial lawyer will tell you that even if you are innocent defending yourself can easily bankrupt you and, ruin your life and your family’s. Few of us have the financial resources, influence and mental and emotional toughness that Trump has. If they were to target the average citizen, they can easily break him.
  2. The real goal was and is to taint the 2024 presidential election. Make no mistake about that. The Dems are hoping that branding Trump as a convicted felon or even incarcerating him will cause some voters to vote for someone else. They don’t care about the obvious sham of a trial. They don’t care if it is reversed on appeal, which according to most legal experts, is likely. Their plan is that such reversal will occur after the election, after their man has won. The only saving grace is that this is so obvious to most of us it will likely backfire. Indeed, according to Fox News and various other media outlets since the verdict Trump’s campaign has already received $40 million in donations, and these were small donations, which indicate widespread support. Today, in his speech Trump stated that a new poll showed a 6% jump in support, but we’ll see what additional polls tell us over the next few days.

CONCLUSION

I am not a lawyer. I am not an expert on the appellate process. But, like most of you I do have common sense and a sense of right and wrong. If I were a member of Trump’s legal team I would not sit back and wait for the slow-grinding NY appeals process to play out. As I said, that would not remedy the matter until after the election. I would figure out a way to get this matter into the federal courts, ideally the Supreme Court, before the election. I recall that in the 2000 election the SC reviewed the Florida “hanging Chad” issue on an expedited basis, so there is precedent. As I said above, this decision transcends NYC; it impacts the entire country. His team is highly competent and highly paid. Figure it out. I would presume they are planning to do just that.

This is the first of many blogs I will publish on this matter over the next few months as developments unfold. Stay tuned.

by Tags: , , , 3 Comments

IRAN’S BLATANT ATTACK ON ISRAEL

Once again, the powder keg that we call the Middle East is in danger of exploding. Unfortunately, this seems to recur every few years. Israel has been in a virtually constant state of war ever since its founding in 1948. Many observers are fearful that this situation could easily morph into a wider war, or even WWWIII. Before you scoff at that remember your history. WWI commenced following the assassination of one man, Austrian Archduke Franz Ferdinand by a deranged Slav activist named Gavrilo Princip. That set off a chain of events that culminated in WWI. It doesn’t take much to light a powder keg. To illustrate the gravity of the situation President Biden took the unusual step of interrupting his vacation on the beach to return to DC to deal with it.

The following comments are based on multiple news reports unless stated otherwise. The situation is very fluid, and by the time you read this it may very well have changed.

Normally, Iran has attacked Israel indirectly through various proxies such as Lebanon, Syria, Hamas and Hezbollah that it supports through financing, training or other means. This time Iran launched a massive direct attack of some 300 drones and rockets. Incredibly, Israel with some help from the US, UK and Jordan managed to thwart the attack destroying 99% of them. Israel employed its Iron Dome defense system and also a new defense system it called “David’s Sling.” As I write this the only reported casualty was a seven-year-old girl.

Many Israelis and Jews the world over are very concerned by the possible ramifications of Iran’s blatant attack. Why did Iran do it? Why did it attack Israel directly instead of employing proxies as it has normally done? The ruling mullahs had to know Israel would likely retaliate against them. They had to know that their attack could very easily set off a chain of events that would culminate in a much broader war involving multiple nations.

In the wake of the attack many analysts have posited the opinion that Iran sensed weakness in the Biden Administration and the US’s resolve to support Israel and it determined to seize on the opportunity to attack. One strong possibility was that Iran was emboldened by Biden’s recent well-publicized criticisms of Israel and Prime Minister Netanyahu. Indeed, he has been pressuring Israel to show “restraint” in retaliating against Hamas in Gaza; he has called for Netanyahu to resign; he has threatened to withhold aid; and he has threatened to reassess the US’s staunch support for Israel. Moreover, Biden has continually shown weakness in foreign policy, in general, since he has been in office. From Iran’s point of view, it would be reasonable that there would be no significant consequences for the attack. Indeed, speaking on ABC’s Good Morning America National Security Council spokesman John Kirby cautioned that a response “could result in the conflict spreading,” the implication being that Israel should just let it go. Biden was less discrete saying that Israel should just be satisfied that 99% of the drones and rockets were shot down and “take the win.” I guess the Iranian rulers were not deterred by Biden’s simplistic, vague and inane warning of “don’t.” Finally, you know that our other enemies, Russia, China and North Korea, are paying close attention to developments and re-assessing their own foreign policies.

As reported by Mark Dubowitz and Behnam Ben Teleblu in the NY Post Iran is claiming that the attack was in retaliation for Israel’s recent bombing attack, which killed several senior Hamas officials including General Mohammad Reza Zahedi who reputedly played a significant role in the planning and execution of the October 7 terror attacks. Of course, that is a specious argument as that bombing was, itself, in retaliation for those attacks. Afterwards, Iran warned Israel against any “reckless behavior” in retaliation vowing it would engender a much more robust response. Regardless, Iran has left itself open to a significant retaliatory attack. Israel would have a plethora of rich targets to choose from including Iran’s oil refineries and nuclear bomb facilities.

Following the attack Israel’s war cabinet met immediately to discuss how to respond. Ominously, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu assured that Israel had been prepared for such an attack and vowed it would “respond accordingly.” War Cabinet Minister Benny Gantz asserted that Israel “would take the actions [against Iran] that it deems appropriate [and] exact the price from Iran in the fashion and timing that is right for us.” It’s safe to assume that Israel will brook no interference from the US, the UN, or anyone else.

Israel has few friends in the world, and it will need the unwavering support of the US to survive this war. In view of the current lukewarm relationship between Israel and the US it is appropriate to wonder how strongly the US will support Israel. In my opinion, such concern is warranted. True, President Biden has assured that the US’s support for Israel is “ironclad.” But wait, isn’t that the same Joe Biden who abandoned hundreds of Americans and Afghanis who had supported us for years at great personal risk to an uncertain fate due to his ill-advised and ill-timed withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan? Isn’t that the same Joe Biden who has been assuring us for three plus years that the southern border is secure when anyone with two eyes can see evidence daily that it is not? Isn’t that the same Joe Biden that has been assuring us that inflation is under control when a quick trip to the grocery store or the gas station tells you it is not? Isn’t that the same Joe Biden who brags about his modest working-class roots in Scranton but yet has managed to accumulate a published net worth in excess of $10 million, excluding any surreptitious payments from foreign governments for access and favors, even though he has never held a job outside of government service? Of course it is. Biden is well known for saying one thing and doing another. Furthermore, Biden’s recent lukewarm, wishy-washy, often contentious attitude toward Israel would suggest his support for Israel will be far from “ironclad.”

Meanwhile, in other developments:

  1. In various US cities “activists” cheered and celebrated after learning that Iran had launched the attack on Israel.
  2. Despite Iran’s claim that the attack was a “retaliation” the IDF views it as a desire to “escalate” the ongoing conflict.
  3. Various media outlets in the US and elsewhere published scathing criticisms of Biden’s “timid” policy toward Iran and mocked his ineffectual “don’t” admonitions to Iran.
  4. Campaigning in PA former President Trump attributed Iran’s attack to the US having shown “great weakness,” and it “should not have happened” and “wouldn’t have [if he were president]”. Many would agree.
  5. In the US and elsewhere groups of “activists “have been taking to the streets disrupting traffic brandishing flags of Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah while burning the American flag and chanting death to America, death to Israel, and death to Jews. More on this later.
  6. Some commentators predicted that oil prices would “surge,” the extent of which would depend on how long and how extensive the fighting turns out to be.
  7. Appearing on Sunday Morning Futures John Ratcliffe, former Director of National Intelligence, delineated an extensive list of Biden’s “blunders” with respect to relations with Iran and opined that the US’s “fractured” relationship with Israel emboldened Iran to launch its attack. Many other commentators have expressed similar thoughts.
  8. Israel has augmented its forces in southern Gaza, which many believe is an indication it will attack Rafah. Located on the border with Egypt Rafah is Hamas’ last refuge in Gaza. In addition, it houses an estimated one million displaced Palestinian non-combatants. Biden has advised Israel “don’t,” but Israel is not inclined to heed his advice. According to today’s NY Post an attack is “imminent.” As always, Israel will do its utmost to minimize civilian casualties, and as always it will be severely criticized if there is but one.
  9. Appearing on CNN PA Senator John Fetterman, a Democrat, strongly disagreed with Biden’s statement that the US would not participate in any offensive operations against Iran. He added that he would never “capitulate to the fringe” of the Dem party, as Biden has.
  10. Appearing on Fox News Sunday John Kirby called on China to help “de-escalate” tensions in the ME. Good luck with that.

So, what can the US do? Biden convened a meeting of the G7 to examine diplomatic solutions. Fine as far as it goes, but I don’t have much faith that diplomacy, by itself, will resolve this situation. Additionally, the Wall Street Journal reported that he moved two destroyers to the region as a deterrent.

Short of war, which no one wants, the best course of action would be to reinstitute sanctions. Put together a consortium of nations. Strangle Iran financially. Freeze the $10 billion of its money that Biden has unfrozen. Convince other countries to cease importing Iran’s oil. We could even resume domestic drilling (not likely). Fighting wars takes money, lots of it. If Iran doesn’t have money, it can’t finance war or even terror activities. Passing an aid package would be a good idea, but so far Congress has been unable to do so. Typically, each party is blaming the other for that.

Conclusion

In his foreign policy regarding Israel Biden has continually tried to walk a tightrope worthy of the Flying Wallendas’ circus act. He is trying to please both Jewish voters and the far-left radicals in his party. So far, he has pleased neither. With typical lack of clarity and decisiveness, which has characterized his entire foreign policy, Biden recently made two contradictory statements regarding support for Israel. On the one hand, he reaffirmed the US’s “ironclad commitment” to Israel, but then as reported by CNN he also informed Israel that the US would not participate in any “offensive” actions against Iran. Huh?

As the expression goes, “actions speak louder than words.” As I said above, Biden consistently says one thing then does another. His mendacity knows no bounds. He is willing to sell out Israel, a staunch and reliable ally and the only one in the ME, in order to win an election. According to the polls his support among Blacks and Hispanics has been sharply declining, and in my view, he is kowtowing to the far left because he is terrified he will lose their support as well and hence the election.

These people he is courting are despicable. They are antisemitic and anti-American. Many of them are not even citizens. They are here on work visas or college visas or perhaps illegally. They are guests in the US and have no right to chant “death to America.” In my opinion they should all be deported. If Biden really truly intends to support Israel, he needs to communicate that to Iran clearly, decisively and definitively and above all act like it. I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for that.

by Tags: , , , , , , , Leave a comment

I’M NOT VOTING FOR TRUMP

Thanks to loyal reader, David, for providing the idea and much of the information for the following blog.

I am not voting for Donald Trump, the man, in the 2024 presidential election. I don’t hate the man as many others do. I don’t know him. I have never met him, but based on what I have seen and observed over the years it is likely that if I did get to know him, I wouldn’t like him personally. He would not be my choice for a dinner companion or any other type of social encounter. He can be abrasive, rude, abrupt, and arrogant. Over the years he has had a plethora of clashes with many people including, subordinates, business associates, and the media, among others. These types of qualities do not exactly endear him to many people on a personal level. No, I would not vote for Trump, the man.

However, I AM going to vote for the following policies and, by extension, the man who I deem best able to enact them.

  1. Support and defend the Constitution, especially the first and second amendments.
  2. Secure and defend our borders against illegals who we have no idea who they are, where they came from, and their intent. Contrary to what the Dems and the media tell you most of them are NOT asylum-seekers. Many of them are from countries that are our enemies and/or sponsor terrorism and comprise the dregs of society from those countries – criminals, terrorists and other undesirables.
  3. Finish the border wall, reinstitute the “remain in Mexico” policy and deport illegal aliens that break our laws. Until and unless they become citizens they are guests in our country, and they should act as such.
  4. Crack down on the importing of illegal, deadly drugs, such as fentanyl, which are killing tens of thousands of us.
  5. Crack down on the Mexican cartels who essentially control the Mexican government and act with impunity on both sides of the southern border.
  6. Terminate human trafficking and other human rights violations.
  7. Crack down on sanctuary states and cities.
  8. Be the president of all the people, not just some of the people.
  9. Do away with the runaway wokeism and other inane and misguided far-left policies that have been plaguing our country and tearing apart our social fabric.
  10. Stop treating illegal aliens better than our own citizens.
  11. End censorship of differences of opinion, especially on social media.
  12. Restore the traditional justice system. Make the Justice Department treat everyone equally under the law regardless of social status, economic wealth, color, religion, or political persuasion.
  13. Make us feel safe again by refunding the police, ending “no-bail” laws, and demanding that local DAs actually prosecute crimes and judges sentence the guilty to prison.
  14. Appoint judges and SC justices that will follow the constitution.
  15. Resume drilling for oil and gas in order to restore our energy independence and eliminate our dependence on our enemies.
  16. Replace the current administration’s “America last” policy with an “America first” policy.
  17. Stand up to the leaders of foreign countries who are threatening us (e.g. Russia, China, and Iran), disrespecting us and taking advantage of us (e.g. NATO allies and Mexico).
  18. Reinstitute unwavering support for Israel, our sole reliable ally in the critical, dangerous and mercurial Middle East.
  19. Protect our critical industries by equalizing tariffs and preventing the export of jobs and manufacturing.
  20. Support our military and our veterans.
  21. Crack down on the anti-Semites and antisemitism that is running rampant in our schools and in our society, in general.
  22. Reverse the US’s current downward spiral and make us proud to be an American again.
  23. Secure the future of America for our children and grandchildren.

CONCLUSION

These are tall orders. They will not be easy to accomplish, particularly since the entrenched powers in Congress and government will resist by any means possible to safeguard their turf.

Of all the candidates which one is most capable of accomplishing the foregoing? We know the answer, because he did it already in his first term. The policies he has been espousing are precisely the ones we need and want now. Biden and his administration have had their chance, and they have f**ked it up royally.

In a recent poll people were asked to name the most significant accomplishment of the Biden administration. What was the winner? Was it the economy? No. Was it the border? No. Was it crime? No. The winner was “nothing.” That’s right, “nothing.” So, if you voted for him in 2020 are you happy with the result, or do you have buyer’s remorse?

My advice is to ignore the bloviators and spin doctors in the media and elsewhere. Your decision in 2024 should come down to the answer to one simple question. There is no deep analysis needed. “Are you better off today than you were in 2020?”

So, don’t vote for Trump, the man. Hold your nose, swallow your pride, ignore your personal feelings, and vote for Trump’s policies. Ignore what he says. Ignore his character flaws. Focus on his policies. He succeeded before. He can do so again.

Your children and grandchildren will thank you.

–

by Tags: , , , , Leave a comment

2024 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION – TRUMP VS BIDEN

Trump and Biden are now the presumptive nominees of their respective political parties. Although anything can happen in politics in all likelihood they will become the official nominees at their respective party’s conventions this summer.

In my view, the 2024 presidential election will be extremely contentious. The campaign will include a surfeit of obfuscations, exaggerations and lies, even more so than usual. It is virtually axiomatic that all politicians are guilty of the above to some degree. We all know this. We don’t like it, but we accept it. A politician who tells the absolute truth all the time, like Jim Carrey’s character in the movie Liar, Liar, would never get elected.

That said, I maintain that voters should ignore all the bloviations, exaggerations and promises by the candidates and reported by the media. After a while, it all becomes so much “white noise” anyway. Promises are meaningless. Most of them never come to pass anyway. Rather than listening to what they say or promise focus on what they’ve done or haven’t done. You will find that that will clarify matters.

We can do this because in 2024 we have a very rare situation. Both candidates have actually served a term as president. Therefore, we don’t have to guess. We don’t have to predict. We can see what they’ve each done or not done as president. According to Wikipedia, Trump is only the 7th former president to run again after having left office, the first to do so since Herbert Hoover in 1940. (Only one of the previous six won – Grover Cleveland.)

The best way to analyze this election is to ask yourself that age-old question – are you are better off today under Biden’s presidency than you were four years ago under Trump’s. For example, is your quality of life better or not? Do you have more money or not? Are you able to provide for your family better or not? Regardless of what the government says, in your personal experience are prices of the necessities you buy, chiefly food, gas and shelter, higher or not? Has inflation impacted you or not? Do you feel crime is on the rise or not? Do you personally feel safer or not? Do you think the world is safer or not? Are you more or less satisfied with the US’s relationship with our friends, notably Israel, and our enemies? Do you feel the justice system is more equitable or not? Are your children’s and grandchildren’s schools educating them better or not? If you are Jewish do you feel the level of antisemitism is greater, lesser, or the same? If you are Black do you feel opportunities are better, lesser or the same? If you are a legal immigrant are you happy with special treatment of the flood of illegal immigrants that have entered the country or not? These are just some of the questions you should ponder. Your answers will make it obvious for whom to vote.

Don’t pay any attention to real or perceived personality flaws. They are largely subjective anyway. Like I said, follow your objective analysis. If you feel you and the country are better off under Biden than you were under Trump vote for Biden regardless of his cognitive status and legal issues. On the other hand, if you feel you and the country were better off under Trump then vote for him regardless of his abrasive personality and legal issues.

CONCLUSION

In my opinion, the answer to all of those comparisons strongly favor Trump. Do I like him on a personal level? I don’t know him. Never met him. But if I were to know him personally, I probably wouldn’t like him. But I say so what? Who cares? We’re not voting for senior class president. It’s not a popularity contest. We’re not going to “hang out” together. We don’t have to like him. We just have to think that he will improve things. Moreover, if you know your history you know that many of our best and most popular presidents had serious physical and/or personality flaws that were hidden from the public. Today, due to the internet and social media virtually nothing is hidden.

Furthermore, let’s not ignore the empirical evidence. We saw what Trump did as president pre-Covid. The economy was booming. Unemployment was at record lows for all ethnic and gender groups. We were energy independent for the first time in over 70 years. There were no wars. Our enemies feared and respected us. Our border was secure. Yes, some people were put off by his mean tweets and abrasive personality. Well, strap on your “big boy pants,” hold your nose and deal with it!

On the other hand, Biden’s record speaks for itself. His supporters perceive him as a nice old man. Many of them choose to ignore his cognitive decline and his nefarious, if not treasonous, activities. They voted for him in 2020 and will likely do so again. My question to them is how is that decision working out for you? I repeat, focus on what the candidates do or don’t do, not what they say or promise.

by Tags: , , , , 1 Comment

FECKLESS JOE AND THE STATE OF THE UNION

Tonight, President Biden will deliver the annual State of the Union address before a joint session of Congress, members of the Cabinet (except for one “designated survivor), and the justices of the Supreme Court. The SOTU is required by the US Constitution, Article 2, Section 3, Clause 1, which states that the president shall periodically “give to the Congress information of the SOTU and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient.”

George Washington delivered the initial SOTU to a joint session of Congress on January 8, 1790. For most of the next 100 or so years presidents fulfilled the constitutional requirement merely by submitting a written report to Congress. Then, in 1913 Woodrow Wilson commenced the current practice of delivering the SOTU in person. Later, with the advent of television and streaming the address has been delivered live throughout the entire country and much of the world.

Traditionally, the president uses this opportunity to review his administration’s accomplishments, outline what he hopes to achieve prospectively, and foster unity among the voters. In this case, however, I wouldn’t count on it. As I have written many times I cannot think of any positive accomplishments by the Biden administration. Moreover, I doubt that he will be able to achieve any in the remainder of his (hopefully only) term. Finally, the notion that he will unify the country, or even try to, is a joke. On the contrary, thus far his administration has done everything to demonize and criticize Republicans and, in particular, Trump and his supporters.

Those of you who have been paying attention over the last three years are cognizant of the following Biden lowlights, and I apologize for wasting your time by repeating them here, but for those of you who have been drinking the Dem Kool-Aid below please find a brief summary:

  1. Opened the border to virtually anyone who wants to enter the US. Millions have entered in the last three years. We don’t even know the identity of these people, how many there are, where they’re from or their intentions. What we do know is they done significant damage to our country economically, politically, criminally, and socially. And that doesn’t even address the real threat of terrorism they present. The negative ramifications of this action are incalculable and will be long-lasting.
  2. Suspended the production of oil and gas. Succinctly put, this took us from energy independence to energy dependence and in the process damaged our economy. Additionally, it has propped up the economies of many of our enemies, such as Russia and Iran. As a result, Russia has used its oil revenue to prosecute the war against Ukraine, and Iran has been able to finance terrorist activities in the Middle East and elsewhere.
  3. Created massive inflation through profligate spending. Don’t believe the government’s publicized inflation numbers. Anyone who has bought groceries, filled up their car’s gas tank, or tried to buy or rent a home knows they don’t reflect reality. We’re being gaslit.
  4. The evidence of his and his family’s corruption continues to grow. It’s getting to the point where only his most ardent supporters can deny their guilt of corruption and maybe even treason. In my view, he has been the classic “Manchurian candidate.”
  5. There are wars and conflicts all over the world. His weakness has encouraged Russia to invade Ukraine, Arab terrorists to attack Israel in the most heinous fashion, and China’s saber-rattling vis a vis Taiwan. The botched exit from Afghanistan was a disastrous embarrassment and caused the loss of hundreds of American lives. Furthermore, his tepid support of Israel should make every Jew very uncomfortable.
  6. The rise of crime due to the proliferation of “no bail” laws and woke DA’s reluctance to prosecute crimes has made all of us unsafe.
  7. He has done nothing to curb the very disturbing rise of anti-Semitism in the country and indeed the entire world. He has not taken any action, not condemned it, not even spoken out. I am not saying Biden is an anti-Semite, but his lack of support for Israel and Jews makes one wonder. Based on the foregoing, it is beyond me how any self-respecting Jew could vote for him.

It has taken over three years, but voters are finally catching on. All the polls speak loudly and clearly. Voters are beginning to realize that “the emperor [really] has no clothes.”

  1. According to the latest NY Times-Sienna poll Two-thirds of voters say the country is “heading in the wrong direction.”
  2. The latest CBS News/You-Gov poll has revealed that only one-third of voters think Biden’s presidency has been “excellent” or “good.” Some 61% of voters say he is “too old to be an effective leader.” It’s not just his chronological age. Many people have been lucid and effective well into their 80s. Contrary to what his supporters say, anyone who has seen Biden speak or even move around can readily see he is declining cognitively. It brings to mind the old Groucho Marx joke: “Are you going to believe what I tell you or what you see with your own eyes?”
  3. Despite the Dems’ and their supporters attempts to discredit Trump with bogus claims, even to get him disqualified from the ballot in some states voters are not being fooled. In fact, these false claims have served to boost Trump’s popularity. People are coming to realize that what’s being done to him could easily be done to them. Presently, the latest polls indicate that he leads Biden in every battleground state. This has led to widespread panic among the Dems. Some believe Biden may be replaced on the ticket, possibly at the convention.

CONCLUSION

I believe that tonight’s SOTU speech will be very interesting. I am anxious to see how Biden conducts himself. I’m not interested in what he says so much as how he says it. The pressure is on him to be articulate, cogent, coherent, and lucid. How will he justify his record? Will he attack Trump and his supporters? How many “Pinocchio’s” will he get. Who will deliver the opposition rebuttal, and what will he or she say?

by Tags: , , , , Leave a comment