Tag Archives: political parties

Pompeo’s Correct Path

Posted on by
Reply

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo had this to say in a Sunday interview about team play at State and in the other Cabinets of the Federal government.  Fox News Sunday host Chris Wallace asked Pompeo about The New York Times‘ manufactured story about Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein wearing a wire and moving to invoke the 25th Amendment:

I’m not going to comment on that in any way, other than to say this: I’ve been pretty clear since my beginning of service here in this administration, if you can’t be on the team, if you’re not supporting this mission, then maybe you ought to find something else to do.
I’ve told that to my senior colleagues, I’ve told it to junior folks at the CIA, and the State Department; we need everyone who’s engaged in helping achieve President Trump’s mission. And I hope that everyone in every agency: DOJ, FBI, State Department is on that mission.

It’s not the subordinate’s role to do as he wishes, or to countermand the boss’ instructions, or to run a shadow government, or to follow his bliss in his civil service—or Senate-confirmed—position.  The subordinate’s role is to give his best advice, and after the boss has made his decision, to carry it out to the best of his ability.  If the subordinate thinks—or feelz—he cannot, his only option is to resign.

Yewbetcha.

Another Witness Demurs

Posted on by
Reply

In an email to the Senate Judiciary Committee on Saturday, Leland Ingham Keyser, a former classmate of Ford’s at the Holton-Arms all-girls school in Maryland, said she doesn’t know Kavanaugh or remember being at the party with him.
“Simply put, Ms Keyser does not know Mr [sic] Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr Ford,” lawyer Howard J Walsh III of Bethesda, MD, conveyed in an email to the committee that was obtained by Fox News [and by Politico].

Another witness identified by Dr Christine Blasey Ford, Patrick J Smyth, also has denied being at the alleged party, saying

…earlier this week that he has “no knowledge” of the party. He told the committee that he understands that “I have been identified by Dr Christine Blasey Ford as the person she remembers as “PJ” who supposedly was present at the party she described in her statements to the Washington Post.

White House spokeswoman Kerri Kupec summed things up as they currently stand, as reported in a pool report:

One week ago, Dr Christine Ford claimed she was assaulted at a house party attended by four others. Since then, all four of these individuals have provided statements to the Senate Judiciary Committee denying any knowledge of the incident or even having attended such a party.

It’s clear to me that something traumatic happened to Ford all those decades ago, but it’s clear that Kavanaugh had nothing to do with it, whatever it was.

No wonder Ford’s lawyers are continuing to stall regarding her appearance before the Committee—even those lawyers’ “agreement” that Ford would appear this week is a sham; they’re still manufacturing disagreement over “details” of the appearance’s terms and conditions.

A Hearing

Posted on by
1

Christine Blasey Ford, who has accused Supreme Court Justice nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault ‘way back in their high school days, now doesn’t want to testify about her accusation—to back up her claim—in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee.  She wants an FBI investigation of the alleged crime—never mind that she knows, because her lawyers know, and they’ve surely briefed her, that such a thing is not a Federal crime, and so the FBI has no standing to investigate.

Her lawyers also are claiming that Ford is afraid to come to DC because of the alleged backlash she’s faced since Senator Dianne Feinstein (D, CA) outed her.

[Her lawyers] also said their client had received death threats and had her email hacked, and criticized the timing of the hearing.

The police reports she filed regarding those death threats and that hack job are public records.  Let’s see those records.  If she didn’t file any complaints with the police, she plainly doesn’t take the alleged threats and hack seriously, and so there’s no reason for the Committee members, or any of us, to do so.

The hearing was scheduled too soon? This is nonsense, also.  She’s been rehashing these…memories…for at least 6 years whether by design or by their trauma. She’s ready to testify now—and she doesn’t even have to publicly; she’s been offered a closed-door hearing, and she’s been offered the opportunity to be deposed away from the madding crowds of DC, in a location of her choice.

Monday is the hearing, and she’s been invited to testify.  If Ford is a no-show, and if I were the Committee’s chairman (Senator Chuck Grassley (R, IA) is a much better man than I), I’d have an empty chair at her place at the table, and questions for Ford would be directed to the empty chair.

Jobs

Posted on by
Reply

French President Emmanuel Macron had the effrontery to say to a heretofore unsuccessful job seeker that, were the latter not absolutely set on a job in his chosen career field, the man easily could find work in France.  And the man wouldn’t even have to relocate very far.  The Left is in an uproar over Macron’s arrogance in saying an obvious truth.

The jobseeker, an aspiring gardener, said to Macron at an Elysee Palace open house,

I’m 25 years old, I send resumes and cover letters, they don’t lead to anything[.]

Macron’s terrible advice?

The president responded: “If you’re willing and motivated, in hotels, cafes and restaurants, construction, there’s not a single place I go where they don’t say they’re looking for people. Not one — it’s true!”

Macron went on to suggest that young gardener go to Paris’ Montparnasse district, an area brimming with cafés and restaurants, assuring him he would easily find work. “If I crossed the street I’d find you one,” Macron said.

How terribly thoughtless.  Society—or Government—owes the man a job because he wants to follow his bliss.  The fact that his bliss is very limited in value is of no import.  None at all.

Foolish

Posted on by
Reply

Senator Bernie Sanders (I, VT) has offered legislation, in coordination with Congressman Ro Khanna (D, CA), that is his latest bit of socialism.  His legislation would hit large businesses with a tax equal to 100% of the welfare payments any of their employees might receive while working.

Sanders and Khanna say—and they’re actually serious—that this would pay for the welfare programs involved.

Andy Puzder has a different view of such legislation.

[T]he first step on the path to financial self-sufficiency is finding a job. A tax on employing welfare recipients would discourage employers from hiring them. It would increase the cost of employing such people without an offsetting increase in productivity or employee satisfaction, since the extra payment would go to the government rather than the employee. Companies could avoid the tax simply by hiring people not on welfare, reducing job opportunities for the people most in need of jobs and opportunity.

This is the anti-business—worse, the anti-poor, the anti-single mom, and the anti-just-starting-out youth—position of the Progressive-Democrat Party and their Socialist confreres.

But, hey—votes.  Our youth, our single mothers, our poor, they aren’t human beings needing a start a or hand up in the eyes of the Party.  They’re just votes to be kept trapped in the Progressive-Democrats’ welfare cage.