Tag Archives: political parties

Accusations

Posted on by
Reply

On Chris Wallace’s Fox News Sunday last weekend, Mo Elleithee, 20 years a communications strategist for the Progressive-Democratic Party, said he had a daughter and a son. Then he said that if her daughter were assaulted and named her assailant, even if she couldn’t corroborate, if her claim were merely plausible (for instance, firm evidence that she had been assaulted), she should be believed and her assailant jailed.

His statement was just that broad.  He left no room for the possibility that his daughter might have named the wrong guy. His statement completely rejected any possibility of beseech[ing], in the bowels of Christ, think it possible that she may be mistaken.  It’s perfectly appropriate to put the wrong man in jail while the perpetrator continues to run free, free to assault others’ daughters.

This of course, also means that if some other woman is assaulted and then wrongly accuses his son, he must support putting his son, innocent of the charge, son in jail because a woman’s uncorroborated accusation must be believed.

There is no room for Elleithee misunderstanding here. Words are Elleithee’s stock in trade. He knew how all-inclusive his statement was. He knew when he composed his statement before he uttered it that he was subjecting his own son to his preferred outcome even if wrongly accused.

This is a key part of the Left’s ideology: accuse, hang, go to trial. And that first step can be waived if it proves inconvenient.  Even when it’s their own sons.

Keep this in mind next month.

An Investigation

Posted on by
Reply

No, not that one.

Senator Lyndsey Graham (R, SC) said on Sunday Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo that he’s going to investigate [the whole program is interesting, but skip ahead to 15:28 for the Graham interview, which lasts for a bit in its own right] who “destroyed Dr Ford’s trust” by outing her after she had requested anonymity when communicating her charge to her Congresswoman, Anna Eshoo (D, CA), and her Senator, Dianne Feinstein (D, CA).  Graham pointed out, too, that there were only three groups of people who knew about Dr Ford’s letter: Feinstein and her staff, Eshoo and her staff, and Dr Ford’s lawyers.  Someone or some ones from those groups are the only ones who could have leaked Dr Ford’s letter and outed her.  Yes, I’m omitting the obvious fourth—that Dr Ford outed herself.

What’s instructive here is that it’s a Republican who wants to get to the bottom of that despicable betrayal.  The Progressive-Democrats are shockingly silent on the matter.

A Deported High School Student

Posted on by
Reply

Recall the first debate between Senator Ted Cruz (R, TX) and Beto O’Rourke, Progressive-Democratic Party candidate for Texas Senator.  Ol’ Beto told the tale of a mistreated Dreamer [emphasis added]:

the salutatorian at tiny Booker High School in the Texas Panhandle, recently deported to his country of origin, not even speaking the language.

Oops.

It didn’t happen [emphasis added].

The honor student in question was actually the valedictorian.
She spoke the language.
It happened a decade ago, not recently.
And most importantly, said Yamile Guerrero Rosales, “I wasn’t deported….”

Oh, the lady was, at the time, here from Mexico, and she had to deal with six months of paperwork concerning her then baby, still stuck in Juarez.  But she’s now a naturalized citizen (tough to achieve after having been deported) and an accountant for a Booker area company.

Aides insist that O’Rourke was operating on second-hand information.  But come on, even the Dallas Morning News checks this kind of information, why didn’t O’Rourke?  Even if this was nothing more than an honest mistake—I’ll spot him that, tentatively—he’d repeated that tale on the campaign trail several times before he got to the debate and got fact checked.

Nor is this the first serious…error…O’Rourke has made (he now claims that an unidentified passenger in his own vehicle corroborates his claim).  It likely won’t be his last.  Is this the level of “carelessness” we want representing us in Texas?

Remember this, this fall.

An FBI Investigation

Posted on by
1

Senator Jeff Flake (R, AZ) sold his Supreme Court Justice nominee Brett Kavanaugh confirmation floor vote for a week-long FBI investigation into Dr Christine Blasey Ford’s accusation against Kavanaugh.  Ostensibly this was a deal he made with his BFF, Senator Chris Coons (D, DE), in return for the Senate’s Progressive-Democrats dropping their complaints that six prior FBI background checks of Kavanaugh didn’t turn up enough dirt to suit them.

Immediately after the Senate Judicial Committee hearing to vote on passing Kavanaugh’s nomination out of committee with a favorable vote (it was) Coons said that if any other allegations of sexual misconduct against Kavanaugh surfaced during the week, he believed those would have to be investigated, too.  The deal, plainly, was just one more stall by the Progressive-Democrats so they could manufacture more smear.  It’s hard for me to believe that Flake was unwittingly played by his friend.

Minimizing delay and calling the Progressive-Democrats’ bluff, President Donald Trump ordered the FBI to conduct its investigation, starting last Friday (Trump ordered it to begin “immediately”), limited in scope to Dr Ford’s accusation, and to complete their investigation within a week.  Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R, KY) began, Friday evening, the process for the originally scheduled Tuesday floor vote for confirmation.  The combination, if the FBI’s investigation truly is done as ordered, means the floor vote can occur over the weekend—a small delay.

We’ll see what else the Party of Character Assassination will come up with in this week.

Sadly, what’s lost in all of this is how disgustingly the Progressive-Democrats have treated Dr Ford.  They chose to use her accusation—and it’s clear to me that she was abused by someone those decades ago—to manufacture a smear against Kavanaugh.  Further, by holding Dr Ford’s accusation until the last moment—she had written to Senator Dianne Feinstein (D, CA) ‘way back in July, requesting anonymity at that time—these persons prevented the Committee and the FBI from investigating her claim weeks ago without exposing her.  Feinstein’s—their (does anyone really believe Feinstein didn’t share this opportunity with her colleagues?  Does anyone really believe that during those weeks Feinstein, et al., kept Dr Ford’s letter hidden from the FBI and from the Republican Committee members, they didn’t conduct their own investigation, that they really sprang this affair without knowing what they had in their hands?)—decision to expose Dr Ford to the press at the last moment was done solely for her/their personal political gain.

These Progressive-Democrats have abused Dr Ford almost as badly as did her unknown assailant.

Budgets and Austerity

Posted on by
1

The Italian coalition government (interesting in its own right, consisting as it does as a teaming up of the far left 5 Star Movement and the far right Liga) has decided to increase government spending and decrease taxes.  This has been projected to produce a 2.4% budget deficit.  For a government already badly in debt, this deficit isn’t good.

Cutting taxes has been decried by others as being the cause of such deficits and debts.  Spending cuts cannot be allowed, say the same folks, because that would be an austere measure.

They’re wrong.

Cutting taxes leaves more money in the hands of the citizenry, the folks best positioned and best suited to make decisions concerning how their money should be used.

Cutting spending—a necessary measure to stay within the taxes collected—far from being an austerity measure, would enable Italy’s economy to burgeon. Getting the government out of competition with the citizens and businesses of the Italian economy for that economy’s resources will reduce price pressure, and it will leave those resources more available to the private actors, who will use those resources more efficiently than any government can achieve.

Italy’s move to cut taxes and increase spending is a half measure.  Spending needs to be cut to fit within the revenue the taxes will produce. Make no mistake on a related matter, too: the burgeoning economy will produce a net increase in revenue to the Italian government.