Tag Archives: Biden

25th Amendment

Pelosi Is already working to install Kamala Harris as president. Conspiracy theory you may contend, I think not. This plan is much more logical, but then no one ever referred to this woman (loose term) as logical. I, personally,  consider her something unspeakable in the venue. But knowing what is going on with the puppet Joe, this has to be their plan. Folks voting the left ticket are not voting for Sleepy Joe as president, they are voting Harris as president, and ny of them smart enough have already figured that out..

I received this from a brother Marine. Thanks Smitty! 

You may have heard some hype about the 25th amendment recently. The rumor on the street is that Nancy Pelosi wants to use it to get rid of President Trump. That’s a misdirection. Removing Donald Trump is not the goal with this plan; Joe Biden and Kamala Harris are.

By all means, Nancy Pelosi would remove President Trump with the 25th amendment if she could. She already impeached him with no criminal accusations and a bastardized impeachment process. But, using the 25th against President Trump simply isn’t viable.  The reasons lie in how the 25th Amendment works.

There are a few ways the 25th can be invoked to remove a sitting president. The first involves death, in which case the Amendment merely declares that the vice president takes over. The second method is by the president’s own volition. A sitting president can formally declare himself unable to serve the office. At that point, the vice president assumes the role. Obviously, not neither of those scenarios work for Nancy Pelosi.

The third way (and the one that matters in this case) is if the president is declared unfit to serve. In order to do this, the vice president has to agree that the president is unfit. In addition to this, there needs to be a majority agreement in either the president’s cabinet or both houses of Congress. Since the Democrats don’t control the Senate, President Trump’s cabinet or the vice presidency, there is absolutely no way Pelosi can weaponize the 25th against President Trump.

Even if the Democrats took the House and the Senate this November, they would still need Pence’s help, and he clearly won’t sign on to such a plot. Neither would members of his cabinet. So while Speaker Pelosi wants you to think her newly formed committee to study the 25th amendment is about ousting President Trump, that is a misdirect. It can’t happen. The real target is Joe Biden, and Trump even pointed that out on Twitter on Sunday.

Assuming Biden and Harris win in November, the plan is to get rid of Biden and install Harris as president. Why would Pelosi want to do this? Trump pointed out that Biden isn’t extreme enough for the radical, left-wing portion of the Democrat’s base.  They’re just trying to use voters to get him in office so they can install someone they really want.

There are two ways this could play out. The first is that the Democrats plant a bunch of traitors in Joe’s cabinet and Harris is able to ouster him with only their support. She becomes president, and the American people have no say in the matter.

The second is if they retain the House and win the Senate. Then, the Democrats can ouster Biden regardless of who is in his cabinet. All they need is the support of Kamala Harris, and we all know the lengths she’ll go to in order to gain power.

Remember Senator Harris slept with a married man to get her first job in politics and has flipped flopped on issues she said were important to her like the Green New Deal and fracking so Biden would put her on his ticket. She personifies the Democratic willingness to do and say absolutely anything for power.

Why do the Democrats want Harris instead of Biden? There are two reasons. First, even they realize that he is a senile old man who can’t do the job. Second, Harris is willing to do anything for the office. She will bend and give people like Pelosi anything she wants in order to get that power. She’ll suspend freedoms and abuse the presidency in ways we’ve never seen before. Harris being a radical leftist is a bonus.

The Democrats always work like this. They don’t want you to select your leadership. They don’t want to hear your voice on how this country is run. As Harris put it herself, the American people can’t be trusted with their own decisions. That’s what the left has in store for our country.

 

Originally posted 2020-10-16 09:55:04.

A Man vs A Movement

This gentleman has a valuable message.  His analysis is concise and brilliantly on-point, in my opinion.  Few, if any, have stated our circumstance as clearly.

Tom Klingenstein is the Chairman of the Board, Claremont Institute (a conservative think tank). He explains why 2020 may be the most consequential election since 1860—and why President Trump is the man most uniquely suited to the moment.

Please watch and listen carefully, then share with everyone you possibly can. Might I encourage reading some of the comments viewers left after watching his talk. Provocative to say the least. 

PLEASE SHARE

Originally posted 2020-10-12 13:20:24.

Lady Justice is Blind – Really?

Once again my friend and Marine brother, Col Andy, nails it, and I mean really nails it!! Please copy and paste the link below. It’s not often Col Andy gets mad, but I suspect he is on this issue. You decide

AMERICA’S SCALES OF JUSTICE – IN FULL VIEW AND OUT OF BALANCE

By Colonel Andy of “A Colonel of Truth”

https://acoloneloftruth.blogspot.com/2020/10/americas-scales-of-justice-in-full-view.html

Is this the next statue that needs to come down?

Originally posted 2020-10-12 08:22:32.

Critical Race Theory

A very well written piece, albeit there are some words the left may need a dictionary to understand what he saying. LOL. A mostly retired trial lawyer who began as a Marine JAG Officer 1975-1982.

He poses a great question we all should be asking today, and does a great job answering it. Worth the read! Thank you Michael for sending it to me.

“What is wrong with critical race theory?”

Once the exclusive domain of deep thinking university professors, critical race theory became a part of our national conversation when the Trump administration ordered federal agencies to stop conducting workplace training based on critical race theory and opened an inquiry into the City of Seattle’s use of it.  The training is in fact political indoctrination and the public ought to know what it is and why it should be resisted.

Critical theory sprung largely from the Marxist scholars of the Frankfurt School in 1930’s Germany.  In 1848 Karl Marx had introduced the world to an analysis of social relations characterized by oppression when he argued in The Communist Manifesto and Capital that working class laborers were oppressed by those in power, the owners of capital. He argued for class consciousness, and in advocating radical change, he famously argued the workers had nothing to lose but their chains.  The dilemma facing the Frankfurt School scholars was why after the Russian Revolution and the wide dissemination of Marx’s invitation to a workers’ paradise was it not being realized?  Industrial organization and mass communications seemed to divert the oppressed workers from their liberation.  Max Horkheimer of the Frankfurt School is credited with arguing a theory is “critical” if it seeks “to liberate human beings from the circumstances that enslave them”, and critical theory was applied to interrogate how power was used to perpetuate oppression.

Critical race theory is a variant of what began in the 1970’s as critical legal studies.  Critical legal studies looked at our laws with the assumption that law oppresses people, especially minorities, and examined how power was used to create and enforce the law.  Restrictive racial covenants in property deeds was an example of the use of law to perpetuate racial oppression.  Denying women the right to vote and prosecuting women like Susan B. Anthony in 1872 when she defied the law and cast a vote was an example of the use of law to perpetuate gender oppression.

Women gained the right to vote in Washington in 1910, Wyoming before that, and the US Supreme Court declared restrictive racial covenants were illegal and unenforceable everywhere in 1948.  Nonetheless, and not withstanding adoption of the 14th, 15th and 19th Amendments and a web of state and federal legislation outlawing discrimination based solely on race or gender, critical legal theorists concluded that the power of the oppressors was  embedded in our political structures and infects our laws today to perpetuate bias and discrimination against minorities and other marginalized communities.  As Samuel Gregg puts it in “Liberalism’s Civilization Problem,” Law and Liberty, September 7, 2020, the left’s “insistence that most of the West’s achievements are primarily masks for endless oppression largely flows from the left’s generally negative view of Western civilization” (emphasis mine).  In this dystopia there is no arc of justice, instead, US history is irredeemably rotten to the core.

Critical race theory proceeds from the fallacy that a binary of white and black, or white and everybody else, is the only appropriate frame of reference for a discussion of race.  Applying Ockham’s Razor to inconvenient facts, this binary ignores the history of racial bias against the Irish, Italian, Jewish people and many others ordinarily thought of as white.  Starting with this assumed racial binary, the critical theorists contend racial bias is embedded not only in our laws, but also our language, media, political structures and culture, and they set out to look for it.  Ignoring all the steps we have taken to eliminate racial prejudice from our laws and institutions, practitioners of critical race theory rediscovered what Stokely Carmichael described as “institutional racism” in his 1967 book, Black Power: The Politics of Liberation.

It’s called systemic racism today, and its corollary theory holds that implicit bias exists even among those who deny any bias at all.  Indeed, denial of bias is strong proof one is in fact sick with bias.  This demand to override a person’s reluctance to accept the fact that she is in fact racially biased is one of the most pernicious and dangerous features of critical race theory.  These are not mere thought crimes, they are unthought crimes.  And the unrepentant ominously resemble dissidents in the former Soviet Union or the unruly psychiatric patients in the film One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest.

The Trump administration’s recent Executive Order and inquiry into Seattle’s work place training alleges that only White employees are required to admit to and denounce their racist impulses.  At first blush the required training appears to violate state and federal laws prohibiting discrimination based solely on race.

Aside from the totalitarian impulse to control what people think and the words people speak, two fundamental issues should make us wary of the growth of this ideology.  First, it is no accident these theorists too often are White academics and legislators.  Robin Diangelo is a White academic whose popular 2018 book, “White Fragility,” is a lecture to White people about how they got race all wrong and ignorantly so.

White men legislated poverty programs in the 1960’s that in the end further impoverished Black communities.  So much so that White men led by President Bill Clinton and then Senator Joe Biden legislated welfare and criminal justice reform that was directed against the Black community.  The reform ended “welfare as we know it” as Clinton put it and incarcerated large numbers of Black men, “super-predators” who needed to be brought to heel as Ms. Clinton put it to an all White audience in New Hampshire.  White folks telling Black folks what they need is a not so subtle form of oppression. White folks telling White folks what they shouldn’t think or say is almost as bad.  Isn’t it time for White folk to stop telling Black folk what they need?

Second, the critical race ideology claims all White people are infected with the racism disease and need help regardless of who they are or where they grew up.  In Diangelos’ world there are no individuals, no person is unique; instead, as a “race” we produce and reproduce racism in lockstep in every aspect of our daily lives whether we know it or not.  All notions of freedom are illusory.  The chains that bind us are no longer mere economic shackles, they define our very being which is, not coincidentally, not capable of redemption.

It is by definition a racist ideology, it divides our communities, and gives cover to those who want to destroy our history and institutions.  No leap of imagination is required to draw a direct line from the claim that systemic racism infects our institutions and must be pulled out by its roots to the destruction of civic monuments, attacks on the police, looting of stores and burning buildings in our cities today.

As Galatians 6:7 taught us, “whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.”

Michael J. Bond
Copyright 2020

Postscript: I’ll be off the net for a week, going fishing. Need a break. Meanwhile,let’s all pray for President Trump and his bride!!!

Originally posted 2020-10-03 15:51:40.

America’s Chris Wallace Problem

Is anything more dangerous to our country than media bias?
I doubt it. Chris Wallace is an arrogant, egotistical smartass who should never have been allowed to moderate a presidential debate. He is as sneaky as a lizard, and that’s what makes him so dangerous to the world of respected journalism. Mr. McCain spells out just one example of how he posed questions to Trump. Disgusting Wallace, you piece of garbage.
Robert Stacy McCain
Chris Wallace on Fox News yesterday (YouTube screenshot)
When will Chris Wallace apologize to Katie Pavlich? More than once, Wallace has insulted his Fox News colleague on the network, as in a January segment about the impeachment of President Trump, when Wallace barked at Pavlich, “Get your facts straight!” As it turned out in that case, Pavlich was right and Wallace was wrong — and not accidentally so. The question at issue was Democrats’ demand that the Senate trial over what was called “Ukrainegate” include testimony from additional witnesses. Pavlich said this was unprecedented, and contended it was not the Senate’s fault that “the House did not come with a complete case.” Wallace began barking about “facts” in an attempt to rescue Democrats from the consequences of their failure.

Why did Wallace use his position as moderator of a presidential debate to parrot Gov. Brown’s rhetoric by claiming that “white supremacists and militia groups” were somehow to blame for the Portland riots?

Wallace’s dismal performance as moderator in Tuesday’s presidential debate reminded many viewers of such previous instances in which the Fox News Sunday host has shown his prejudice against Trump. And this matters, not only because of how that ugly televised carnival might affect the election, but because of what it tells us about the sad state of journalism in America. If Wallace is, Dov Fischer says, “the fairest moderator we can hope for in today’s Left-dominated media,” there is no hope for fairness. But what about those “facts” that Wallace presumed to lecture Katie Pavlich about? Even if we must resign ourselves to partisan prejudice from the media, must we tolerate journalists trafficking in outright lies?

That’s what Wallace did in Tuesday’s debate. Consider this question he aimed at President Trump: “You have repeatedly criticized the vice president for not specifically calling out Antifa and other left-wing extremist groups, but are you willing tonight to condemn white supremacists and militia groups and to say that they need to stand down and not add to the violence in a number of these cities, as we saw in Kenosha and as we’ve seen in Portland?”

Where is the evidence that “white supremacists and militia groups” were to blame for violence in Kenosha or Portland, Oregon? Wallace’s question was not only tendentious, but counterfactual. As regards Portland, Wallace seemed to be echoing Oregon’s woefully misguided Democratic governor. After a man who described himself as “100% Antifa” murdered a Trump supporter on the streets of Portland Aug.29, Gov. Kate Brown issued this rather bizarre statement:

As elected officials and community leaders, we are coming together to condemn the acts of violence in Portland that have occurred as thousands of Oregonians have been peacefully protesting for racial justice and police accountability. The violence must stop. There is no place for white supremacy or vigilantism in Oregon. All who perpetrate violent crimes must be held equally accountable. Together, we are committing ourselves to do the hard work that will bring meaningful change for racial justice and police reform.

What did the murder of Trump supporter Aaron “Jay” Danielson have to do with “racial justice”? Danielson was white, but so was the Antifa radical who shot him to death, Michael Reinoehl. As for holding those “who perpetrate violent crimes … equally accountable,” why did Gov. Brown let Antifa wreak havoc in Portland for more than three months before deciding that violence is bad? Where is the evidence that “white supremacy” played any role in Portland’s anti-police riots?

More importantly, however, why did Chris Wallace use his position as moderator of a presidential debate to parrot Gov. Brown’s rhetoric by claiming that “white supremacists and militia groups” were somehow to blame for the Portland riots? Such a claim is not journalism but political propaganda, and that goes doubly so for what happened in Kenosha. In case you’ve been hiding in a cave for the past five weeks, riots erupted in this Wisconsin city on Aug. 23 after a police officer shot a black man, Jacob Blake, who had violated a restraining order and had a warrant against him on sexual assault charges. On the first night of what the national media insisted on calling “mostly peaceful protests” the BLM mob “hurled debris, smashed windows,” and set fire to the Kenosha County Courthouse and several vehicles.

The next morning, the Biden campaign issued a statement that declared, “We must dismantle systemic racism. It is the urgent task before us.” The BLM mob apparently took Biden’s words as a command to “dismantle” Kenosha. On the second night of riots in the city, the arsonists torched a car dealership, a furniture store, and a state Department of Corrections office, among other targets. Perhaps Chris Wallace can explain how “white supremacists and militia groups” were responsible for this violence, but probably what he had in mind were the events of the third night of the Kenosha riots. That was when a convicted child rapist named Joseph Don “JoJo” Rosenbaum attacked 17-year-old Kyle Rittenhouse.

By the way, has Chris Wallace ever mentioned Rosenbaum’s criminal record on Fox News? He considers himself authorized to lecture others about how important to “get your facts straight,” why wouldn’t he want to share with Fox News viewers the fact that Rosenbaum was convicted of raping five pre-teen boys in Tucson? The story of what happened in Kenosha on the night of Aug. 25 doesn’t make sense if you don’t know that the man who attacked Rittenhouse was a very dangerous criminal who had served more than a decade in Arizona prisons.

Rosenbaum was captured on video that night taunting a group of armed men who were guarding a Kenosha business against the angry mob: “Shoot me n****!” When Rosenbaum later set a fire, Rittenhouse ran with a fire extinguisher to put out the blaze. Video shows Rosenbaum chasing the teenager across a parking lot where he cornered him, and Rittenhouse fired in self-defense, fatally wounding his attacker. As I explained last month (“The Media Lynching of Kyle Rittenhouse,” Sept. 3), Rosenbaum’s attack set off the chain of events in which two other rioters were shot, after the angry mob chased Rittenhouse. An 11-minute video produced by attorneys for Rittenhouse clearly shows that the teenager acted in self-defense.

Contrary to what Chris Wallace asserted to a TV audience of millions of Americans during Tuesday’s debate, Kyle Rittenhouse is not a “white supremacist,” nor is he a member of any “militia group.” That was made clear in a report Thursday by two young Wisconsin contributors to the Federalist, Evita Duffy and Kylee Zempel, who were on the scene in Kenosha during the riots:

Robert Stacy McCain is the author of Sex Trouble: Essays on Radical Feminism and the War Against Human Nature. He blogs at TheOtherMcCain.com.

Originally posted 2020-10-02 12:23:35.