It’s real. And bridging it is neither possible nor desirable. First, a bit of old-school fisking for the Left side.
The wheels are not off the bus. The kids, and the rest of us, are going to be all right. Come the new year, the country will switch from the Trump Show, where our president hears voices on Fox TV and does what they say, and move to Court TV. That channel will play a police procedural akin to Law & Order where an elite squad of dedicated detectives, known as the Special Counsel’s unit, investigates especially heinous crimes and a team of attorneys prosecute the offenders. The rule of law, not the vagaries of politics or Ann Coulter, triumphs.
The rule of law has already been trampled by Mueller’s contra-Constitutional farce, and it’s the “vagaries of politics” that have driven it from the start.
In this setting, the president’s tweets can and will be used against him. Throw shade on law enforcement (they’re all enemies out to get the White House), poison the jury pool (Michael Cohen’s a rat, Michael Flynn’s a patriot), and otherwise flick sand into the wheels of justice (appoint attorneys general who’ve pre-judged the case), but justice will still grind on. There is always decorum in the court. One lie, much less 7,000, can send you to prison.
Oh, so Tweeting is illegal now, is it? The president’s tweets will be used against him right enough…and so will absolutely anything and everything else the Mueller Coup crowd can dig up, every bit of it well outside his “Russia collusion” mandate—itself nothing but a subterfuge. Law enforcement entire is not “out to get” Trump, which he knows quite well. But the corrupt FBI and DoJ most certainly are, a home truth that only a diehard-shitlib asshat could deny. Justice isn’t going to “grind on”; it’s going to be ground under the wheels of the Deep State juggernaut.
With the first phase of police work just about over—the search for the real colluder, or colluders, hundreds of hours of FBI interviews with all the lying under oath that suggests, grand jury appearances, arrests and indictments, witness flips and plea deals—the main action moves to court.
The “real colluders” have already been found—Obama and Hillary. That “action,” alas, will remain closeted and is never going to “move to court,” although if we still retained anything resembling “rule of law” it assuredly would. “Hundreds of hours of FBI interviews” suggests not “lying under oath” but politically-motivated harassment of a despised outsider by a rogue, overly-powerful bureaucracy—an open attempt by DC Swamp creatures to preserve their undeserved power and privilege by nefarious means. Because, y’know, that’s what it is.
Problem for Flynn was that Sullivan can tell the difference between out-of-control prosecutors and Robert Mueller, who is completely in control. In the Trump investigation, all the misconduct is on the defense side, with the president’s unconscionable attacks on the FBI, cooperating witnesses, and Mueller’s staff, whom he labels as biased Democratic hacks.
It’s Mueller, whose very office is at best Constitutionally questionable, who is “out of control.” He long ago skipped gleefully over the boundaries of his limited official mandate and never looked back, now jailing people for things that aren’t even illegal (Cohen) and piffling, decades-old technicalities that previous Obama officials were guilty of but never questioned about at all, and which have nothing whatsoever to do with “Russian collusion.” “Biased Democrat hacks”? Nearly EVERY ONE of Mueller’s henchmen are, umm, Democrat-Marxist donors. Not party members, mind, but donors, and big-money ones too. They are the very living incarnation of “biased hacks.”
Sullivan won’t hear all Trump-related cases, but he’s involved in many. When he learned last spring that a mother and child were being flown out of the country while their case for asylum was pending, he ordered prosecutors to “turn that plane around.” And he threw a wrench into Trump’s unilateral changes to our asylum laws at the end of December.
There are complex rules for refugees and asylum-seekers, both national and international. The US is under no legal obligation whatsoever to accept them (or anybody else) willy-nilly, according to the whim of weepy liberal media propagandists, without reference to those procedures. That was so before Trump, and it’s still so now, no matter what some sniveling, hankie-soaking Citizen Of The World might wish were the case.
Trump will soon find himself as burdened by the law and order as he is by Democrats refusing to build his wall. His foundation has been charged in New York as a slush fund that took money in but gave not much away.
*cough cough* Clinton Foundation *cough cough*
Although our founding fathers were unlikely to imagine a frequently bankrupt casino mogul as president, they protected us against him. They didn’t stop at two branches of government. In their enduring wisdom, they created a third, which sits astride the law and punishes those who think they are above it but are not.
Sorry, but the Founders were not only LIKELY to imagine the bloated, tyrannical abomination insidious termites like Carlson have replaced legitimate government with, they actually DID. They spelled out their abhorrence of the kind of government favored by shitlibs starkly and unequivocally…in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, among many other writings.
As for the courts, they aren’t supposed to “sit astride the law.” Neither are they supposed to alter it, modify it, or make it up from any “emanations and penumbras” that suit them. Their role, strictly and specifically limited as are those of their co-equal branches, is to interpret it: in the case of the Supreme Court, to ponder its concordance with Constitutional requirements, and either approve it or strike it down as is appropriate. In the lower courts, to apply it fairly and without bias. That’s all.
I could easily dismantle this wet-brained liberal balderdash further, but enough of the bint’s tiresome, specious nonsense. There’s no point in bothering further with it; like the rest of her ilk, Carlson is wholly divorced from reality, not amenable to or interested in logic, truth, or reason. Instead, via Doug Ross, let’s have a look at some 24-karat truth from the other side of our Great Divide:
Trump was elected not based on any single issue, but because Americans believe that we are no longer citizens of a republic; that we are subjects of an elected aristocracy, composed of a self-absorbed and unaccountable permanent political class, which serves international interests at the expense of the American people.
They maintain their authority by an ever-expanding and increasingly intrusive government and use a compliant media to manipulate public opinion in order to maintain the illusion of democracy. The size and pay scales of the federal government now exceeds much of the private sector but is unconstrained by regulation and, ever more frequently, by legality.
It is not a contest between the Democrat and Republican ideologies driving the inanity emanating from Washington, D.C., but a battle between the entrenched power of the bipartisan political establishment versus the freedom and well-being of the American people.
It is a conflict between those who want to adhere to the Constitution and the rule of law and “they,” who wish to continue the practices of political expediency, crony capitalism and a two-tiered system of justice.
It is a choice between a government of the people, by the people and for the people or “elective despotism” when lies, corruption and tyranny are embraced by the political-media establishment.
The election of Donald Trump was not the consequence of colluding Russians tapping on keyboards in darkened basements, but one of hope based on a single proposition, the possibility of honest, representative and effective government.
Three years before the start of the American Civil War, Abraham Lincoln said a government cannot endure permanently half slave and half free — that a house divided against itself cannot stand.
Likewise, a government separated from the people cannot stand.
Nor should it. That’s the burden of responsibility the Founders laid on We, the People. That’s the test we’ve failed, by tolerating the ongoing Leftist campaign of undermining, uprooting, and destroying instead of crushing the pestilential insects when they first infested the national garden.
These two posts are perfectly adequate and accurate summations of the viewpoints balefully staring each other down across the Great Divide. Can any reasonable person possibly imagine a way to reconcile them that doesn’t amount to capitulation and defeat? In light of the relentlessness and duplicity demonstrated by the Left, can any but a purblind, dimwitted naif hold out hope for an acceptable compromise with them? Kurt hammers the point home:
Every day that they refuse to allow the man we elected president to fulfill the most basic function of a national government – securing its national borders – they make a deliberate choice to accept more dead Americans. Oh, and more crime, poverty and welfare costs too. They are willing to let it all happen because their power means much, much more to them than your prosperity, your security, or your life.
In a country where the ruling class gave a damn about those it governs, the scumbag who murdered Corporal Singh would never have snuck in, and if he had, he would have been tossed before racking up two DUIs. But he wasn’t. California is a sanctuary state. It’s just not a sanctuary for citizens like you.
When they want to strip American citizens of our Second Amendment rights (and, not coincidentally, our ability to resist them), they howl that disarming all of us would be worth it if it saved just one life. It’s a stupid talking point with regard to the Bill of Rights, because even if rights were subject to a costs/benefits balancing test (they aren’t), the fact is that only a fraction of a fraction of the 300 million-plus arms that our citizens keep and bear will ever be used in a crime.
But what about saving just one American citizen’s life from murderous foreigners who, as opposed to our freedom-preserving weapons, are not even supposed to be here? Unlike the American patriots exercising their gun rights, every single illegal alien is a criminal just for illegally entering and/or remaining. Then they also need fake IDs to function. Identity theft is a crime, at least for you and me. Then there’s the voter fraud, the welfare fraud, the property crimes, and the violent crimes. Oh, not all illegals are violent criminals, but every single one spits on our laws, laws we the people enacted via our elected representatives.
So what do you call it when the government ignores the law, which is the will of the people expressed through the legislature we voted for? It’s sure not “a republic.”
In order to keep those illegals flowing in, our miserable elite is as willing to let democracy die as it is to let you die.
Who thinks this will end well? Anyone?
The American people are not blind. They see the truth, and they are not going to be denied justice forever. The election of Donald Trump was not the worst case scenario. It was the first case scenario. What comes next, if the elite keep denying the will of the people, will be even more disruptive, even more divisive. They might win today’s skirmish over the wall, but tomorrow there will be new corpses and greater anger.
The elite’s selfish and cruel sacrifice of the lives and lifestyles of America’s citizens risks tearing apart the United States.
So? That’s a-okay with them; their plan all along was to dismantle and replace it anyway, and to replace its uncooperative patriots, the ones the brainwashing didn’t take root with, by whatever means they find convenient.
Either a bloody, desperate fight is coming or we resign ourselves to slavery, oppression, and injustice. It’s a godawful fix we’re in, but I can’t see any other alternatives left to us other than those two.