We don’t know a lot. Yet. What we do know is that a US drone strike hit Baghdad airport killing Qasem Soleimani (and one of his deputies), a top general and very powerful man in Iran. Additionally, the U.S. will be sending thousands more troops to the Middle East in case of retaliation. The State Department claims that the drone strike happened to prevent an “imminent attack” in the region that would put American lives at risk.
CNN is quoting Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R, Kentucky) as saying:
"Soleimani made it his life's work to take the Iranian revolutionary call for death to America and death to Israel and turned them into action. But this terrorist mastermind was not just a threat to the United States and Israel. For more than a decade, he masterminded Iran's malevolent and destabilizing work throughout the entire Middle East,"
And the Democrats seem to agree with Schumer saying that no one will shed a tear over Soleimani’s death. Although top Democrats, especially those on the Intel Commities were not briefed beforehand about the strike which is potentially problematic.
Okay. So those seem to be the general facts as everyone is reporting. Since both sides agree this guy was a terrorist mastermind I will take it on faith that his death will save innocent lives. But … now what? Well, the cynical side of me agrees with many folks who have pointed out that President Trump predicted this very event - for Obama. In 2011 and 2012 Trump tweeted that Obama would start a war with Iran in order to win an election. Here they are:
In order to get elected, @BarackObama will start a war with Iran.
Now that Obama’s poll numbers are in tailspin – watch for him to launch a strike in Libya or Iran. He is desperate.
Don't let Obama play the Iran card in order to start a war in order to get elected--be careful Republicans!
Trump on Nov. 16, 2011:
“Our president will start a war with Iran because he has absolutely no ability to negotiate. He's weak and ineffective. So the only way he figures that he's going to get reelected — and as sure as you're sitting there — is to start a war with Iran.”
So, is this just a Wag the Dog tactic? Is Trump doing what he “predicted” Obama would do? Even though … Obama never did that thing, but whatever. Let’s just ignore that for now.
War Presidents are popular. It’s true; however, I suspect the truth is … all of the above. This Soleimani guy was clearly a terrorist scumbag and I don’t care that he’s dead. The drone strike also helps Donald Trump in the popularity polls because war sells. So, I think we have a little of column A and a little of column B.
To be honest, I don’t think this will lead to a full scale war. The U.S. launches drone strikes a lot. Probably more than you realize. Remember that Obama was and still is criticized for the large amount of drone strikes he sent out. Well, it was widely reported that in 2009-2010, President Obama launched 186 drone strikes on Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen. In 2017 and 2018, President Trump launched 238 drone strikes in those regions. Again, Obama was openly criticized for launching too many drone strikes. And Trump has launched much more. So, this is nothing new, especially to the people living in said regions.
I’m not going to weigh in too heavily with the “but drone strikes create terrorists” argument, even though it's true. But I will say that if Iran was going to start a war with the U.S. because of drone strikes - they probably would have already done it. On the other hand, this was a very popular person in Iran who is publicaly claiming that they will retaliate the U.S.
Let's hope cooler heads prevail. An all out war with Iran would be ... ugly.
I got a lot of phone calls last week from the many people who have one of my numbers, not about the content but about the word I used to describe the House Democrats. Retards.
Frankly, it was the only printable term I could think of at the time.
I certainly mean no disrespect to those who have, what we call today, learning disabilities. Even the thought of comparing any of those folks to the vast majority of House Democrats—who are just plain stupid and unpatriotic—places an innocent person with a low intelligence quotient in a bad light and I certainly don’t wish for that. You see, a person with learning disabilities, a low IQ and other issues can usually go on to live a good life and become a productive member of society. They just have to work at it. And many—if not most—of them do.
Not so much for the House Democrats who participated in the impeachment scam.
They and their faux leader are just plain stupid. As we say in rural America, dumb as a box of rocks. Also, mean.
Want to know how stupid?
Let’s take Tom Steyer from the billionaire left wing.
Here’s a guy who is real proud of his business experience as long as he doesn’t specifically tell the lefties whose vote he is courting exactly what that experience is. The truth is he got rich the same way a lot of people do—private equity and hedge fund management. You know those private prisons which ICE uses. His funds invested early.
Yet he calls President Trump, who got rich building things, a “criminal in the White House”.
Also, he says that climate change is the biggest problem we’re facing.
As Kellyanne Conway would say, that’s a load of crap. To put it in the words of the late George Carlin, “The planet has been through a lot worse than us. Been through earthquakes, volcanoes, plate tectonics, continental drift, solar flares, sun spots, magnetic storms, the magnetic reversal of the poles … hundreds of thousands of years of bombardment by comets and asteroids and meteors, worldwide floods, tidal waves, worldwide fires, erosion, cosmic rays, recurring ice ages … And we think some plastic bags and some aluminum cans are going to make a difference? The planet isn’t going anywhere. WE are!”
But people will get rich on the hysteria. And guys like Steyer think that’s enough to get them elected President.
Then, take Joe Biden.
When he was Vice President to Barack Obama, his portfolio included the Ukraine. Yet he doesn’t understand why his neer’do well son, Hunter, suddenly popping up with a huge paying job with a suspicious Ukrainian gas company raises any red flags at all.
What a schumck.
Where do these people come from?
Well, trust me, it’s NOT like they are inspired by the concept of public service. Many if not most of them simply look down on their fellow Americans. They are under the misapprehension that we are too stupid to live our lives without their divine intercession. They also like the money and the notoriety.
That’s where the Adam Schiffs, the Eric Swalwells and, God help us, the Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’ come from and they will decide they have what it take to be the top dog soon. (Swalwell already has.)
What can America do?
To quote Nancy Reagan, “just say no” . These folks may be worse than street drugs. And the media will drop them like a hot rock if they lose a few elections. The media may have its favorites, but at the end of the day, it’s a business. No ratings, no money goodbye AOC and friends.
As you no doubt have heard by now, President Donald Trump has been impeached by Congress. This is only the third time in the history of the country where a sitting President has been impeached. The first was way back in 1868 when President Andrew Johnson was impeached after the Civil War as the nation struggled with reunification. The second time was President Bill Clinton, who was impeached for lying to Congress about a sexual relationship he had with White House intern Monica Lewinsky. Both Presidents were acquitted as neither received the two-thirds Senate vote to remove them from office. President Nixon resigned before the impeachment moved forward and was fully pardoned by President Ford.
And now President Trump has joined the Impeached Club for:
The vote in Congress went as much as you would expect, along party lines. The abuse of power article passed 230-197, the Obstruction of Congress article passed 229-198. Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D) voted “Present” in each case, which is neither a “yes” or “no.”
So … now what happens?
Not much for the time being. President Trump is still the sitting President. Speaker Pelosi will, eventually send the two articles of impeachment to the Senate who will then hear a trial (or maybe they won’t) and vote to remove the President from office.
But, Pelosi hasn’t quite sent the articles to the Senate floor yet. She’s holding out, some believe, in order to get Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to agree to hold a Senate trial as opposed to simply vote against the articles of impeachment without further investigation or trial, which Republicans have already threatened to do.
The problem is that key witnesses refused subpoenas to testify before Congress. This … is a bit awkward. By comparison, when the Republican Congress sent out subpoenas to former Clinton advisor Susan McDougal to testify at the Whitewater hearing, she refused. And so Republicans threw her in jail for a year and a half. Today, several White House aides, lawyers, and even the acting chief of staff have ignored their subpoenas to testify before Congress in the Trump impeachment hearing. None of them went to jail. But maybe they should have. In fact, President Trump ordered some of them to ignore the subpoena, which is why Congress also added the Obstruction of Congress impeachment article. I mean, if Congress orders you to testify and you just, you know - refuse to show up, that’s pretty much the exact definition of “Obstruction of Congress.” Hard to argue with.
Eventually, the articles of impeachment will get to the Senate and President Trump could be, but will probably not be removed from office. Democrats claim he is corrupt and was trying to get a foreign power to interfere in the 2020 election. Republicans say he’s a man of God and was only trying to fight corruption by speaking with Ukraine about the Biden scandal.
If Trump were indeed a “man of God,” who wants to fight corruption at every turn then … um, well, he probably wouldn't be stealing money from charity and using it to pay for things like, a $12,000 autographed football helmet (which he kept), a $20,000 portrait of himself, paying off his legal debt. Trump actually spent more than $250,000 of money he raised for charity - to settle lawsuits involving his for profit business. That doesn’t even count his 2016 veterans fundraiser where he raised millions for vets and just .. you know, kept most of it to spend on his Presidential campaign. Which is what led to the actual New York State lawsuit against him and the $2 million fine he has been ordered to be distributed amongst eight charities Trump’s foundation swindled money from.
Not only that, the Judge found the foundation to be so corrupt, he ordered the entire Trump Charity Foundation to liquidate, worth about $1.7 million, and also give that money - to the charities Trump swindled money out of. In conclusion, Donald Trump's charity, which raises money for charity, takes the vast majority of that money for personal use and business gain. This is grossly illegal. After the liquidation the Trump Foundation was ordered to pay out (and it quietly did so) approx $400,000 to each of the following charities, listed alphabetically:
The Army Emergency Relief, the Children’s Aid Society, Citymeals on Wheels, Give an Hour, Martha’s Table, the United Negro College Fund, the United Way of the National Capital Area, and the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum.
Before I get into how I think We the People of America should view the perverted version of the Ed Sullivan (or the Jerry Springer, your choice) show in the House of Representatives, I want to give you an update from my subject of last week, the Kabbage company.
After my column appeared, I got a phone call from an executive there and they very graciously acknowledged my point, that as a lender to small business, America’s largest employer, when they make an adverse decision, human beings should be involved. Ultimately, they were operating on bad artificial intelligence and they fixed it.
That is the hallmark of how good business people operate. Consider that as you see what the Democrat majority in the House is trying to do to our first businessman President.
And, on that note, let’s talk about Jerry Nadler’s inquisition against the President.
Now, keep in mind, that Nadler’s House Judiciary Committee should have been the committee to pursue the “impeachment” investigation as opposed to Adam Schiff’s House “Intelligence” Committee.
Basically, the Democrats have been thwarted at every turn in their jihad against the President—whose only impeachable offense was to actually win the 2016 election and threaten the status quo of the permanent establishment—and this is just a continuation of their effort to get rid of a threat which has put the establishment of both parties on Defcon Two.
They think that this…businessman…may be the President but he’s certainly not really the …President…and he can’t really make his own foreign policy.
Folks, what it gets down to is that people like Schiff, Nadler and the diplocrats I mentioned above think we’re stupid. Just like Hillary Clinton did.
They think—and sometimes actually come out and say—that we simply cannot be entrusted with the election of a President. That’s why they want to get rid of the Electoral College—so our votes would mean nothing.
Fortunately, the Republicans control the Senate. And when this show gets to the Senate, it will be like a little league baseball team taking on the Yankees.
Since Watergate, we have always known that the impeachment process is completely political. But, even in the Clinton mess, at least there was a violation of the law, even though it was a mistake on the part of the Republicans to use it as a political cudgel. Lying about your sex life is no more an impeachable offense than having no respect for Nadler. Or Schiff.
If, as the President has said, impeachment is simply going to become a part of the tool box for the most vicious of the elements of both parties, then we need to give them the political scare of their lives—kind of like Boris Johnson just gave the Labour party in Britain.
There is a classic example of what happens when you use political tricks to ignore the will of the people. Three years ago, the people in Great Britain voted to get out of the European Union. The Parliament screwed around for three years. Finally, the people had enough and in the recent election gave Prime Minister Boris Johnson a massive majority with instructions to get-r-done as Larry the Cable Guy would say it.
If the morons I wrote of above keep it up here, what do you think might happen in November of 2020?
Whenever I hear some left-wing wacko spewing moronic hatred for President Trump, I think, Wow! If this President can make a whack-job like that hate him, he must be doing a pretty good job.
Think about it.
Adam Schiff, Eric Swalwell, Jerrold Nadler, Nancy Pelosi, Maxine Waters, Alexandria-Ocasio Cortez, Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, Juan Williams, Chris Matthews, Joe Scarboro, Mike Brezinski, Rachel Maddow, Chris Cuomo, Peggy Noonan, George Conway, Peter Strozk, Lisa Page, James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Hillary Clinton, Max Boot, Jennifer Rubin, Michael Gerson, Bill Kristol, Peter Wehner, Trevor Noah, Tom Hanks, Shakira, Russell Simmons, Rosie O’Donnell, Ricky Martin, Miley Cyrus, Mac Miller, Louis CK, John Oliver, John Legend, JK Rowling, George Clooney, Eva Longoria, Demi Lovato, Chrissy Teigen, Chris Brown, Joe Walsh (not the Eagles’ Joe Walsh, the phony politician Joe Walsh.)
Whew! And that’s mostly the rookie league. (Maybe Pelosi is AA.)
We haven’t yet gotten to the Democrat politicos running for the Democrat nomination. (Triple A)
There, you have one billionaire (Tom Steyer) who called Trump a “failure” in a TV spot he’s paying for himself, hopefully to get past 1 percent.
Then you have another billionaire, a former New York Mayor who just “apologized” for the stop and frisk policy he inherited from his predecessor—Trump’s personal lawyer—but cannot otherwise explain the dramatic drop in violent crime during his term.
If you look at just the list above, there are some common threads.
First are the overstuffed Hollywood types—some of whom I’ve only briefly heard of—who just know so much about politics that we should be overwhelmed by their intelligence quotients. Then we have the writers and TV personalities who fall into the category of “pundits”. They are trying to make a living by badmouthing the President. And, finally, we have the politicians who are green with envy. They should have his political skills.
Why do they hate this guy so much?
Well, he stands for the concept that this is the United States of America, as my father used to say, and any little boy or girl can grow up to be President or accomplish anything they want to accomplish by simply putting one foot in front of the other and moving forward.
Contrary to what the clowns on the list above would have you believe, Donald Trump is not successful because his father was rich. In fact, he went against the wishes of his father when he went into Manhattan real estate.
He’s successful because he took some giant risks.
Not everything he did worked.
His experience in Atlantic City as an example. Hillary Clinton famously asked in a debate, “I mean, ask yourself, how can anybody lose money running a casino? Really.”
Of course, she demonstrated her ignorance of that business because she asked that question without knowing that one of the two largest casino companies in the nation, Harrahs, was almost two years into Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code. That’s right, the company now known as Caesars Entertainment because, yes, it happened to own Caesars Palace in both Las Vegas AND Atlantic City.
Caesars today operates approximately 47 casinos in 13 U.S. states and five countries, including the Caesars, Harrah’s, Horseshoe and Bally’s brands. When stupid people ask stupid rhetorical questions, they often get they asses handed to them.
I mean, ask yourself, how can you take any of the clowns I have listed above seriously?
After a period of silence, Dr. Bandy Lee and her committee of mental-health “experts” have again burst onto the scene, angling to participate in the impeachment of President Trump. They are defying the Goldwater Rule, which holds that it is unethical for physicians to diagnose patients they have not personally examined. They claim that President Trump is a such a serious threat to the nation that they are allowed to violate rules.
“We don’t believe there is the need for any further evaluation, and we are making ourselves available for the impeachment hearing because we believe that mental health issues will become critical as pressures from the impeachment hearings mount,” Dr. Lee told the Washington Examiner. “In other words, the more successful the impeachment proceedings become, the more dangerous the psychological factors of the president will become.”
Obviously, the thing to do is to increase the psychological pressure on a person you declare to be unstable.
Dr. Lee’s “medical assessment” of the President’s “mental capacity to fulfill the duties of his office” includes the examination of tweets, public appearances, and the 448-page Mueller report. “There is very little that a personal examination will add,” Lee said.
She denies that she is actually making a diagnosis. Indeed, “unfitness for office” is an opinion, a conclusion that is not in the DSM, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of currently defined psychiatric diagnoses.
Regardless of one’s opinion about President Trump, this self-appointed “Independent Expert Panel for Presidential Fitness” should concern all Americans. Where does a group of academic experts get the ability or the authority to determine whether the President is “capable of keeping the country safe”?
The U.S. Constitution provides several methods of “regime change,” which is what Congressional Democrats, the mainstream news media, and this Panel seem
determined to achieve. The first is elections. In 2016, Americans voted for a change from the policies of Obama and Clinton and the imbedded bureaucracy. Ever since then, the losers have been seeking to nullify this result. Attacks on the President by the press have been unrelenting. Unlike Abraham Lincoln or Woodrow Wilson, this President has not imprisoned any journalists or shut down any newspapers. But he does make sarcastic remarks—and his opponents would like to deny him the forum of social media.
Second is the 25th Amendment, which provides for the removal of a President for incapacity. This might have removed Woodrow Wilson after a devastating stroke had it been in existence at the time. It requires action by the Vice President and a majority of executive officers or a body appointed by Congress—not a few activist academics. This has so far been a non-starter.
Finally, there is impeachment, for “high crimes and misdemeanors.” In American jurisprudence, proceedings are supposed to be triggered by a crime—not by the Soviet KGB method of “show me the man, and I will name his crime.” Or worse, “KGB Plus”—show me the man, and I will invent his crime.
In a world where there are so many ever-changing rules that everyone might be inadvertently committing “three felonies a day,” anyone could be prosecuted. But one is at least supposed to have certain rights: confronting the accuser, assistance of counsel, access to all the evidence, the right to call and cross-examine witnesses. And knowing exactly what the charges are.
Why should psychiatrists be intruding themselves into this legal process? Are there Thought Crimes that they have a special ability to discern?
Ordinary Americans should be very concerned. If this can happen to the President, it can happen to them. And it does.
One alarming example is the “fitness for duty” evaluations to which physicians may be subjected by people who for some reason want to destroy them. There are virtually no due-process rights. The examiner has the status of a physician, but no obligation to act in the “patient’s” (target’s) best interest. Some psychiatrists may presume to have god-like power to judge a person’s emotions, intentions, and capacity—asserted in the name of safety or “security.” “Red flag” laws are another example.
President Trump may be right in saying: “They’re not coming for me. They are coming for you. I’m just in the way.”
Bandy Lee and associates are showing us a method to remove undesirables if legal process fails.
Jane M. Orient, M.D. obtained her undergraduate degrees in chemistry and mathematics from the University of Arizona in Tucson, and her M.D. from Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons in 1974. Her views are her own. This is an edited version of her column that originally appeared in pennypress.com. Reprinted with permission.
f the Democrat jihad against President Donald Trump has shown us anything about the so-called Deep State it is that there is a class of professional bureaucrats—so called “experts”—who think they're accountable to…nobody.
Certainly not the President.
And they think of us as “the American People” in the pejorative. Not that they work for us. No, they work for some mythical country in which “the people” don’t get a vote because we’re far too stupid to have any actual say in things like foreign affairs, or military issues or trade or the law.
They populate the Departments of State, Justice, Defense and, even the White House itself.
And many of these people don’t have the common sense that God gave a goose.
That was all on display during the Schiff Show, the last two weeks. The question you need to answer, now that the arrogance of these people has been fully on display is where do we go from here?
There is still some question—not much—as to whether or not Nancy Pelosi is willing to endure the inevitable results of an impeachment. Assuming she is—or just cannot avoid it—Donald Trump will most likely be re-elected for the same reason he won in the first place. That is, to drain the swamp of the arrogance exhibited by the so-called deep state.
A swamp that the House Democrats put on full display through their patron saint Adam Schiff.
And, like the Kremlin, this group of governmental super studs has their own newspaper. Only, instead of Pravda, theirs is the Washington Post. With headlines like “Trump’s GOP support hardens despite damning impeachment testimony”.
Had I written a headline like that DURING WATERGATE, I would have been hustled off to a public relations firm if I wanted to continue my career in the media. The writers and editors at the Post have become nothing but pimps and pimpettes (call them “presstitutes” like they do in the Phillipines) for the group of deep staters and Democrats I have described above.
But, again, they all seem to have forgotten that this is a very large nation with a huge silent majority that has simply had enough.
You can take a map of the United States and find the WalMarts where you can “smell the Trump support” West of the Hudson River, South of the Cook County line and East of the Los Angeles County line. In the last election that produced 63,000,000 votes AFTER NBC leaked a private conversation with Billy Bush which would have certainly disqualified most candidates.
How bad a light does that cast the deep state?
The fact is that you, I and our neighbors have had enough. We are tired of being called stupid and not well educated. We are tired of a world where common sense is derided as “impeachable” by geniuses like Schiff and his little buddy Eric Swalwell.
And to put the cherry on top of the sundae, the President saw that the rules of engagement for the wars we are fighting in the Middle East were being used to ruin the lives of service members (but never those with stars on their shoulders) who actually killed the enemy. We wanted to have a war but make actually killing the enemy illegal.
So, he issued two complete pardons and a commutation.
Immediately upon those actions, some two star pissant admiral in the Navy told a Navy Seal who had his sentence overturned by the President that he would face a board to remove him from the Seals.
That board will convene shortly. Or not. What do you think will happen?
Can you say “military-industrial complex”? Well President Trump can say “civilian control” and did. Ask the now former Secretary of the Navy.
Want to try and remove him? As they used to say on a game show—which is what this really is—COME ON DOWN!
If you ever wondered why Donald J. Trump was elected our 45th President, you only needed to watch the testimony last week of William Taylor, George Kent, and Marie Yovanovitch.
If you ever wondered what Washington based bureaucrats do to represent us, you only needed to watch the testimony last week of William Taylor, George Kent, and Marie Yovanovitch.
And, if you ever wondered why real Americans refer to Washington as a swamp which needs to be drained, you only needed to watch the testimony last week of William Taylor, George Kent, and Marie Yovanovitch.
Taylor, Kent and Yovanovitch aren’t inherently bad people. But they live in their own little worlds where what they think is more important than what the President—whose pleasure they serve at—thinks. And they are an integral part of what former (and the late) President Dwight Eisenhower warned us about on his way out—the military, industrial complex.
They have—and freely admit—zero first hand experience of the subject matter allegedly being “investigated” by Adam Schiff.
Now, diplomacy—in context—is a good thing. In theory, that is what keeps mushroom clouds away from Peoria, Illinois, Tulsa, Oklahoma and Reno, Nevada among other places where you can “smell the Trump support” at the local WalMart Supercenter. But it is the President and Commander in Chief who gets to set our foreign policy—not some diplomat at State who serves at the pleasure of the President. Any more than an FBI director who also serves at the pleasure of the President. And the real world is not an episode of Madam Secretary or the West Wing.
The truth is that impeachment is purely political.
The House, if it has the votes, can impeach the President because it does not like the cut of his suit.
Ask the dumb Republicans who impeached Bill Clinton in 1998.
How do you impeach a President who has less than two years left in his second term? But Newt Gingrich did it and ended up bringing dishonor on the institution for no good reason. And did I mention that the Senate told him to pound sand? In an almost predictable vote mostly along party lines, the Senate fell way short of the 67 votes necessary to remove him from office.
So, let’s assume that the currently sitting House goes ahead with impeachment.
What do you think might happen to these guys—Adam Schiff et al—who have such a flimsy case against Trump in a Republican controlled Senate?
The Senate vote will be utterly predictable. And that’s assuming the Senate doesn’t dismiss the charges without a trial. (If this is what passes for an impeachment investigation, who’s to say the Senate cannot hold a 20 minute trial to dismiss the charges?)
The anger from the 63,000,000 voters who elected Trump and told both the media and the Washington establishment, “Enough already!” will be palpable enough to elect him again and take that anger out on the House.
People like Schiff and his little buddy Eric Swalwell may not realize this, but they are doing their best to make the House of Representatives irrelevant to the real Americans outside of the swamp. It would appear that these guys were beat up every day when they were freshmen in college by the seniors and now, they are going to show all of us.
I wasn’t in the room when our founding fathers wrote the impeachment clause, but I read a lot and I have serious questions that Adam Schiff’s version—along with Rashida Tliab’s “impeach the motherf**ker”—were what they had in mind. I’m pretty sure when they wrote the term “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors” they weren’t thinking about a President doing his job.
So my question is simple.
What will the left do when what I have predicted actually happens?
Apparently, AT&T bought CNN thinking it was some kind of an entertainment outlet.
It is, but only to those of us who understand that Ted Turner’s creation has devolved into something which no longer resembles, in any way, journalism.
How bad is CNN’s coverage of the President?
Well, depending on who you choose to believe, studies from Harvard to the Media Research Center place the ratio of positive to negative coverage between 91% negative to 93%. Every media analyst agrees. CNN’s coverage is so biased that it can hardly be called coverage.
And it seems to be cheerfully brought to you by the American Telephone and Telegraph Company. At 208 S. Akard Street in Dallas, Texas. CEO Randall Stephenson and Chief operating Officer John Stankey.
When these guys bought Directv, I was a fan. When they brought out Directv Now (Now ATT TV Now) as a streaming service I was and still am a fan. When they bought Warner Media, I was OK with that.
I figured that CNN was already so screwed up, it had only one way to go—up. I was wrong.
I was against the Justice Department’s antitrust action. Still am.
That said, who knew that the two executives I listed above (along with their emails) were closet liberals?
My suspicion still is that they’re not. What they, are, I think, is scared to death—like the dog which caught the car. They have no idea what to do. Owning HBO is one thing. You can always disavow Bill Maher.
But a news outlet? That involves editorial judgment and CNN already had less than none. It needs grown-ups to instill some discipline. Stephenson and Stankey are supposed to be those adults. Only nobody told them. They were too busy getting Hollywood elite sweet nothings blown up their skirts.
On one hand, they don’t want to make the left mad. After all, the left controls show biz—right? On the other hand, they really don’t want to have to choose up sides against a President who could easily be re-elected. Much of their communications business is heavily regulated. And, just to make things interesting, an activist management company, Elliott Management, took a $3.2-billion position in AT&T and wants change as well as seats on the Board.
So, wouldn’t the smart money be to make those clowns in Atlanta actually run a news outlet as opposed to taking virtually every opportunity to tilt to the radical left?
Apparently, Mr. Stephenson’s testicles were there when he bought into the entertainment business, but seem to have softened when it comes to making tough decisions regarding the content of his acquisitions which could ultimately send his share price plummeting.
Here’s a hint as to how another executive has handled it.
Apple’s Tim Cook—hardly a Trump fan—has kept an open channel to the President even though he supported Trump’s 2016 opponent.
That makes sense, considering their common interests, especially where it comes to China, trade and intellectual property.
Do you really think Trump would refuse Stephenson’s call?
As long as his company is channeling Nancy Pelosi, it is probably a difficult call to have.
But if Stephenson and Stankey could say, with straight faces, that they are aiming to make CNN a “just the facts” news outlet, you can bet Trump would take that call.
It’s high time the folks on Akard Street in Dallas started worrying about their shareholder value. They could fix CNN in two weeks. Nobody is asking that they try and duplicate Fox. Just be fair. If they don’t, and 63,000,000 Trump voters take offense, well, they don’t make fallout shelters deep enough to protect them from the economic consequences.
The big story at the beginning of the week was the chilling deaths of nine American citizens in Mexico—apparently at the hand of either one or two drug cartels.
And we’re worried about ISIS?
And the Democrats want open borders?
Now, let’s put this in context. This was a group of people who are part of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints. They are at war with the state of Utah over polygamy and I’m not personally a fan of their interpretation of LDS orthodoxy because I covered the arrest of Warren Jeffs and the aftermath when I was with a national TV network.
That said, they were residents of Mexico, American citizens, not taking welfare from either Arizona or Utah and didn’t deserve to be caught in a drug cartel ambush.
And, frankly, the silver or lead philosophy which is prevalent in our neighbor (that is, take our silver or our lead) to the south is killing many Americans because that is where heroin and fentanyl comes from and flows to those “sanctuary” cities and states where the so-called leadership does everything possible to protect these thugs from deportation.
This just happens to be such an egregious case that it screams for extraordinary action.
Drone strikes. Let’s wipe them out the same way we wiped out ISIS.
Those folks at Creech Air Force Base in Indian Springs, Nevada (40 miles North of Las Vegas) can take out a terrorist halfway across the world with a Hellfire missile launched from a Predator drone.
I can hear our so-called “State” department screaming now, but why should we let some scumbag like El Chapo (or his son) wreak horrifying violence on United States citizens when we’re perfectly willing to use our military resources to wipe out a scumbag like Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi in Syria. The fact is that no matter how nicely we discuss the concept of sovereignty the Mexican government has been bought and paid for by the drug cartels just as surely as ISIS became a state unto its own in the Middle East.
If we’re going to place the lives of young American soldiers, sailors and airmen in harm’s way, at least they should be protecting the lives of Americans.
And if the cartels wish to fight back…they’ll discover exactly what we spend over $700-Billion a year on.
Now, theoretically Mexico is a sovereign nation.
So we need to give them fair warning.
President Trump can tweet that warning and then act on it the next time we see a problem.
What’s going to happen?
The Mexican Army will come across the border? They’ll cut off our access to Cabo? Cancun?
To steal a line from W.C. Fields, “On the whole, I’d rather be in Philadelphia”.
The truth is that Mexico has long been a nation which is at a level of corruption that even Bugsy Siegal's Las Vegas never approached. Even Chicago has never been quite as corrupt as Mexico. Even Joe Biden’s son apparently hasn’t taken any money from them.
The only thing stopping the President might well be the Obama holdovers in the State Department. Just like those clowns who testified against the President in secret, performing for Adam Schiff.
To hear them tell it, the President shouldn’t be allowed to set our foreign policy.
I’d like to see the President at this exact time, go to Congress and ask for a declaration of war not against Mexico but the drug cartels. Let’s see who votes against that.