18 thoughts on “News/Politics 11-9-18

  1. Oh goody.

    More election mayhem in Florida.


    “Accusing Democrats of conducting a coordinated effort to “steal” elections in a campaign of possibly “rampant fraud,” Republican Senate candidate Rick Scott filed explosive lawsuits late Thursday against the top election officials in two heavily Democratic counties, as they continue to report new votes and three major races in the state appear headed for recounts.

    In their lawsuit against Broward County, Scott and the National Republican Senatorial Committeee (NRSC) allege that officials there are hiding critical information about the number of votes cast and counted. And in a parallel suit against Palm Beach County, Scott and the NRSC charge that the election supervisor there illegally used her own judgment to determine voter intent when reviewing damaged or incorrectly filled-out absentee ballots, while refusing to allow impartial witnesses to monitor the process.

    “I will not stand idly by while unethical liberals try to steal an election,” Scott, who is currently Florida’s governor, said at a press conference outside the Governor’s Mansion, as he slammed potential “rampant fraud” in the race.

    Scott is running against longtime incumbent Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson. On Thursday, a Nelson spokesperson tersely dismissed Scott’s effort: “The goal here is to see that all the votes in Florida are counted and counted accurately. Rick Scott’s action appears to be politically motivated and borne out of desperation.”

    The bombshell litigation comes hours after Florida GOP Sen. Marco Rubio, in an extraordinary series of tweets that alleged incompetence if not outright complicity by Florida officials, charged that Democratic lawyers were “descending on” the state in a calculated attempt to “change the results” and “try and steal” several statewide races.”


  2. Shenanigans?


    Chain of custody?

    Pffffttt…. not in this state.


  3. Marco is all over ’em.




  4. Stop me if you’ve heard this one before……



  5. I’m gonna miss this guy. Now who will explain things like this to clowns like Schumer?


    “The segment began with Baier airing a clip of Schumer expressing concern that Whitaker would limit the scope of the Mueller investigation.

    “Every prosecutor has jurisdictional boundaries. I don’t know a single prosecutor that does not. Mueller’s jurisdictional boundaries were set by Rod Rosenstein in the memo you have seen and they were altered, amended in the memo that we have not seen. But there has never been a prosecutor that just had unfettered power to go investigate whatever the heck he or she wanted to do,” Gowdy stated in response to Schumer.

    “If you’re a state prosecutor you can’t investigate federal crimes. If you’re in New York, you can’t investigate things in Idaho. So the notion that we are going to create a special counsel that has no boss, no jurisdictional strictures at all is just typical Chuck Schumer and I think it’s why so few people take them seriously,” he continued. “


  6. I am posting this for Debra and others who may be like-minded. Brooks is really sympathetic to you and discusses a new book. There appears to be a great deal of truth in what the book’s author says about education. In Europe roughly half of the students go on the college prep track at about age thirteen while the other half go on the trade school apprentice track. Most do well. In the US about half of the kids take advanced classes, go to college (and major in real subjects) and do fairly well. The other half take “regular” classes which are often just really dumbed-down versions of the advanced classes. These “regular” classes too often are a waste of time and a breeding ground for drug-use, illegitimacy and sloth.

    The comments about popular culture are also interesting. Since I stopped watching prime time TV in 1973, I have no idea if they are accurate.

    Liked by 2 people

  7. I didn’t hear what the question was, but I heard Trump tell someone, “What a stupid question!” I like that. I have often thought it.
    Again, I don’t know what it was. May have been good.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. Common sense and straight talk.


    “In a press release dated November 1, 56 major companies, including Amazon, IBM, Deutsche Bank, and Dow Chemical, issued a statement of solidarity “with the millions of people in America who identify as transgender, gender non-binary, or intersex,” opposing “any administrative and legislative efforts to erase transgender protections through reinterpretation of existing laws and regulations.” This corporate virtue-signaling is needed in reaction to a New York Times report that the Department of Health and Human Services is proposing to “establish a legal definition of sex under Title IX.” The proposed definition, “[s]ex means a person’s status as male or female based on immutable biological traits identifiable by or before birth,” has become necessary to undo the legal havoc caused by former president Obama’s decision to reinterpret “the legal concept of gender in federal programs … [to recognize] gender largely as an individual’s choice and not determined by the sex assigned at birth.”

    To no one’s surprise, any attempt at clarifying that Title IX’s exact language prohibiting discrimination “on the basis of sex” refers to “protections to women and girls” has been met with wails that transgenders and “non-binaries” are being “erased.” Catherine E. Lhamon, one of the people who helped Obama formulate his sex-as-choice expansion of Title IX, says “the proposed definition ‘quite simply negates the humanity of people.'”

    But that’s quite simply nonsense. It’s nonsense not least because Trump’s interpretation of Title IX can no more negate transgenders’ humanity than it was Barack Obama’s muddying up of Title IX that beneficently bestowed humanity on them.

    Their humanity is not in question. It never was.

    As David French wrote at NRO, rejecting the charge that the proposed interpretation “dehumanizes” transgenders:

    This makes no sense. Even if the Trump administration changes regulatory definitions to match the obvious statutory intent, it doesn’t deny any person’s humanity or existence. Every single American is still protected by every single provision of the Bill of Rights (and every other constitutional right). Every single American still enjoys the benefit of every other generally applicable statute.

    In reality, the claim that you “dehumanize” a person if you hold contrary beliefs about sex and gender is a common, inflammatory rhetorical tactic that creates a false choice. Either you recognize a transgender person on their own terms, or you “deny their humanity.” You “deny their existence.”

    “The left’s drive to normalize transgenderism, as aggressive as it is, hasn’t got nearly that much history. In 2016, Heather Mac Donald at the Manhattan Institute noted that the breakout of transgender activism began only in the summer of 2015, “when the New York Times ran a full-page editorial declaring that the oppression of the transgendered by the biologically obsessed heteronormative majority was our most pressing civil-rights struggle.” The Times immediately followed up with a series of articles focused on the tribulations of the persecuted “trans community.” “Now,” said Mac Donald, “less than a year later, any parent with qualms about having his twelve-year-old daughter share a locker room with a 14-year-old boy is branded as the equivalent of someone advocating a return to whites-only water fountains.” Remember that June 2015 was when Obergefell was handed down, and many of us foretold how marriage redefined would promptly become passé as we were pulled down the slope to the next thing.

    Maybe the clock can’t quite be turned back on boys in the girls’ locker room, either. But can that clock at least be stopped? There are some ideas so irredeemably false that persuasion and argument are a complete waste of time – they have to be flatly contradicted. The proposed HHS definition, that “[s]ex means a person’s status as male or female based on immutable biological traits identifiable by or before birth” could not state a more direct contradiction of the zeitgeist – the pervasive delusion that the LGBTQ community, the progressive media, Hollywood, a corrupted psychological industry, and 700 college gender studies programs have been demanding that we all embrace ever since liberals first fell in love with “camp.”

    Gender is “largely an individual’s choice and not determined by the sex assigned at birth,” decreed the Obama administration. “No, it’s not,” answers the Trump administration. “That’s bunk.”

    Start the revolution.”

    Liked by 3 people

  9. ” In the US about half of the kids take advanced classes, go to college (and major in real subjects) and do fairly well. The other half take “regular” classes which are often just really dumbed-down versions of the advanced classes. These “regular” classes too often are a waste of time and a breeding ground for drug-use, illegitimacy and sloth.”

    That’s the thing, the whole thing is a breeding ground, at the elementary, high school, and college levels. But they breeding exactly what they set out to breed. Leftist sheep. This isn’t an accident, it’s been their intent for decades.


    “In the left’s image, U.S. education has become a virtue-signal-generation machine. The bulk of our credentials have turned into shiny gold stars meant to signify not achievement but compliance with leftist ideology.”

    “It has become an undeniable fact of American life that our education system is heavily biased left. This is true about all levels, but it is currently most apparent — and most provoking to conservatives, to judge from the cottage industry of related books and articles — in higher education.

    Despite railing about this for 70 years, conservatives have done almost nothing effective to address it. Indeed, Republican politicians have typically worked hand in hand with Democrats to expand, centralize, subsidize, and entrench the very institutions that convert away their children and voters and send publicly subsidized kickbacks to their political opponents in the form of massive campaign donations and ground troops.

    This self-immolating, one-way bipartisanship has fattened the left. One more recent proof of that is in the latest midterm results.

    The smug leftist response, of course, that their team is just more intellectually superior to ours. It’s more evidence that we bigoted country rubes just need to submit to our betters — for our own good, of course.

    That’s preposterous. All the left’s current major policy proposals, such as they are, have been soundly debunked both by research and experience. That’s why they’ve switched to the culture war rather than debating serious issues that are the proper domain of government in a representative republic (taxes, national defense, immigration, trade, roads, patents). They have truly no governing platform to offer. That leaves only virtue signaling, which is another word for identity politics.”

    Read the rest, it’s a good article.

    Liked by 2 people

  10. If it weren’t for bad ethics he’d have no ethics at all.


    “Does Robert Mueller’s Lead Prosecutor Have A History Of Ethics Violations?

    These facts raise serious concerns about Andrew Weissmann’s continued service on the special counsel’s team and justify delving further into the career of the long-time federal prosecutor.”

    “Houston-based attorney Kevin Fulton, of the Fulton Law Group, filed a motion on my behalf Thursday morning to unseal and unredact court records that may expose past misconduct by Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s lead prosecutor, Andrew Weissmann.

    Since Weissmann took a leave of absence from his top Department of Justice job to join the special counsel’s team, critics have questioned his impartiality. Reports suggest the man branded Mueller’s pit bull by the New York Times violated internal protocol when he met with reporters from the Associated Press in April 2017. The following day, the AP published an exposé on Paul Manafort’s relationship with Ukraine officials.

    Then news broke that twice-demoted Department of Justice attorney Bruce Ohr kept Weissmann “in the loop” about the dossier penned by former MI6 British spy Christopher Steele and used to obtain a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant to surveil President Trump’s campaign.

    Ohr, who apparently had no official role in the Russia investigation, has come under fire for feeding the FBI intel from Steele following the latter’s termination as an informant. Ohr’s purported communications with Weissmann raise the question of whether the top DOJ lawyer likewise sidestepped FBI protocols concerning sources.

    These facts raise serious concerns about Weissmann’s continued service on the special counsel’s team and justify delving further into the career of the long-time federal prosecutor.

    Both The Federalist’s Mollie Hemingway and former federal prosecutor Sidney Powell have exposed Weissmann’s reckless win-until-reversed modus operandi that has destroyed countless lives. Weissmann’s tactics sent four Merrill Lynch executives to prison, until a federal appellate court overturned their convictions and freed the men—but not before upending their lives.

    Also, Weissmann’s prosecution of former accounting giant Arthur Andersen for its role in the Enron collapse shuttered the firm, leaving tens of thousands of people unemployed. Several years later the Supreme Court unanimously reversed the Arthur Andersen conviction, but it was too late by then to undo the harm Weissmann had caused.

    Further research into Weissmann’s role in the prosecution of Enron executives Jeffrey Skilling, Kenneth Lay, and Richard Causey (the “Enron case”) reveal a more startling and concerning possibility: that Weissmann improperly threatened witnesses. In that case, co-defendants Skilling, Lay, and Causey filed a joint motion to dismiss the criminal charges brought against them, arguing the Enron Task Force, which Weissmann joined in 2002 and headed from 2004 until his abrupt departure in July 2005, engaged in multiple incidents of prosecutorial misconduct.”

    Time to put them all out of work.


  11. A judge agrees with Scott.


    “A Broward judge has ruled in favor of Gov. Rick Scott and says Broward Supervisor of Elections Brenda Snipes must “allow immediate” viewing and copying of records that have been requested.

    The judge added that it must be completed by 7 p.m.

    The lawsuit in Broward filed against Snipes claimed that her office was withholding crucial voter information and has blocked access to the office. At the emergency hearing on Friday, Scott’s lawyers said this was a “simple” case about access to Broward ballots. It’s not about how votes are counted or inspecting ballots.

    “This information Supervisor of Elections should have already compiled and saved,” he added, “It should take 10 minutes to do.”

    The judge orders immediate inspections.



    “A judge ordered Broward County Supervisor of Elections Dr. Brenda Snipes to allow immediate inspection of voter records during an emergency hearing Friday.”

    “Judge Carol-Lisa Phillip said Snipes must allow inspections on or before 7 p.m. Friday evening. Phillips found that Snipes violated that law by failing to turn over the information to attorneys for Scott’s Senate campaign and the National Republican Senatorial Committee.

    Lawyers for Snipes argued that requiring such a swift response would interfere with ongoing efforts to finish counting Broward County ballots. But lawyers for Scott contended the information is already required to be collected under state law and should take minutes to provide.”

    Liked by 1 person

  12. @7:46 Wow. I think I finally hear a small cracking sound inside that cocoon. Could it possibly be that ‘smart people’ are going to finally figure out that the supreme value of a country is not to be found in its GDP? That’s encouraging. A country needs it’s smart people.

    A country needs all of its people. I was thinking the other day— in market vernacular, do you realize it takes 18 years for a country to produce each and every laborer, whether smart or mediocre, ambitious or lazy, law-abiding or criminal and all those multitudes who exist within those extremes as well. It takes even longer to produce a laborer with advanced knowledge and education. Of course, in my musings, I’m thinking of a doctor and lawyer as a laborer as well as the carpenter or electrician or plumber, which is not an insult to any, since I believe that labor or work or vocation was ordained by God from the beginning. But in the range of extremes, it takes far more resources and efforts of all kinds to *raise* good, virtuous men and women who labor, than to *produce* a country filled with irresponsible, self-centered consumers. And that priority makes all the difference in the world.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.