Ask yourself why they would do something like this..

And by “this” I mean why would a law firm risk their reputation and engage in clear shady criminal behavior to donate to democrats in general, and the Clintons, in particular. From the article:

Hillary Clinton’s campaign is returning thousands of dollars in donations linked to what may be one of the largest straw-donor schemes ever uncovered.

A small law firm that has given money to Sen. Elizabeth Warren, Sen. Harry Reid, President Obama and many others is accused of improperly funneling millions of dollars into Democratic Party coffers. The program was exposed by the Center for Responsive Politics and the same team of Boston Globe investigative reporters featured in the movie “Spotlight.”

The Thornton Law Firm has just 10 partners, but dollar for dollar, it’s one of the nation’s biggest political donors, reports CBS News correspondent Tony Dokoupil.

But according to the firm’s own documents – leaked by a whistleblower — days or even hours after making these donations, partners received bonuses matching the amount they gave.

“Once the law firm knew that we had these records, they didn’t deny that this was the case,” said Scott Allen, Boston Globe’s Spotlight editor.

“If you give a donation and then somebody else reimburses you for that contribution, that is a clear violation of the spirit and the letter of the law at the state and federal levels,” Allen added.

First I want to mention that for every one of these cases of malfeasance we uncover there are, like in the case of roaches or other pests, hundreds if not thousands of others we never hear about. The democratic party is a corrupt influence peddling monopoly. I think we have so much evidence today that if you need the power of government to help you make money, from something that will be economically destructive and produces no value, you buy favors from a democrat, that this assertion is indisputable.

The democratic party may pretend that they are the party of the little people and that it is the others that are in bed with the evil oligarchy of the rich, but the facts bear out differently. When you need favors, you buy it from democrats. This reality is by design, and has enriched a ton of the worlds most corrupt people. And Clintons are not just the pinnacle of that corruption, but have positioned themselves in such a way that they are the gatekeepers of that influence peddling monopoly as well as above the law.

It is also not a coincidence that the legal profession is so predominantly skewed towards the left. sure they would like you to believe it is because they share the empathy shown on the left, but the reality, as more and more instances like this show, the legal profession depends heavily on government over regulation to make big money. And who sells better favors for them to make big money than the democrats?

Before you idiotically try to defend the Clintons, note that these Clintons have been caught repeatedly violating these laws. When it was exposed that they took foreign donations, recently revealed details show Clinton’s reaction wasn’t to shut that practice down, but to try and make sure they could keep doing it.

Think hard about the fact that the Clintons, and democrats in general, react when caught by basically counting on the DNC operatives with bylines to defend them and to keep doing more of the same. Can you imagine the level of corruption these people would reach if they were rewarded with the WH?

Have you heard about this from the DNC operatives with bylines yet?

You would certainly think that Attorney General Loretta Lynch facing a federal lawsuit to give details of a secret meeting she had with Bill Clinton on a plane on June 27 would be top news. But the only place I found this was in the foreign press. I am certain the reason that the DNC operatives with bylines are not reporting it is because it would be yet another nail in the coffer of the corrupt Clinton and democratic party apparatus. It is a scandalous thing that when this occurred the DNC operatives with bylines chose to attack those pointing out this smelled of something downright dirty and corrupt. It is even more disturbing that they are ignoring the story and just more proof that they are completely in the bag for these criminals. The sad truth is that we have been turned into a banana republic by these crooks.

Down With The Global Progressive Consensus

I was going to include the latest (maybe the greatest) Pat Condell video in a comment section here, is response to Cress still whining about the Brexit vote and how somehow Brits standing up to authoritarianism, wanting more control over their own affairs, and wanting a separation from a government entity that did not have their best interests at heart, that somehow this was voting “against” something instead of “for”. But since Pat is addressing his video to Americans and the upcoming election, it was well worth a tussle;

When Trump first hit the mashed potato circuit, his calling card was border security, given the refugee crisis that is turning Europe into a garbage dump (as championed by Sweden before them) this is not a model I want to emulate. Many Brits did not like it either, thus, Brexit.

And in yet another example of the EU wanting to be more like the Soviet Union in it’s hay day, they now want to pass a uniform (code for increase) corporate tax rate for all EU members;

France and Germany are pushing plans to introduce a minimum corporation tax rate across the continent, it was reported today, in a move that could result in higher taxes on British companies.
European officials will debate plans to set a EU-wide floor on corporation tax in order to crack down on tax havens such as Ireland and Luxembourg, it emerged.

See, some EU countries, specifically Ireland and the Eastern European nations, have figured out that lower corporate tax rates makes them more competitive, provides incentives for big corporations to settle there, which not only provides much needed tax revenue, but it hires their workers and buys their goods. These upstart countries figured out that 15% of a lot provides more tax dollars than 40% of a little.

Well, we can’t have that. So now the EU will use it’s iron fist and autocratic power to compel these other nations to raise their corporate tax rates, more in line with the crazy European model of taxation thru the kazoo. And you wonder why some Europeans are fed up with Brussels telling them what to do. A few hundred years ago 13 peep squeak colonies felt the mother country no longer had their best interest at heart, desired and fought for a separation. How lucky the Brits were that they did not need to shed blood in order to achieve autonomy.

As usual. Pat make a compelling case for Trump. I think he is somewhat mistaken in saying Trump speaks his mind and that is a good indicator of what he believes. Most of the time Trump does not even know what he believes. But the “American way vs. the European way” is accurate.

My prediction has not changed, Trump will lose, but how delicious would it be to see the left, academia, MSM, and Hollywood all self combust in a fiery conflagration?

Irrelevancy Sucks

I just sent in my absentee ballot today. First time I went absentee, figured the whole process was going to be so painful I might as well suffer without witnesses. Voting in general is a disappointment, mainly because in the land of the heathen (SF Bay Area) I am always downvoted and am rendered impotent. As least they have dispensed with the pretext, most races (US Senate, State Senate, State Assembly) I am given the choice between 2 democrats, yippie.

This election there was more than the usual amount of propositions. California, always considering itself trailblazing or trendsetting, just loves to fiddle with things, thus they lead the country in placing initiatives or propositions before the people. If the vote is agreeable to the leftist legislature, they pat themselves on the backs ushering themselves (and us) even closure to their European model. If it somehow goes astray, like prop 8 in 2008 (outlawing same sex marriage) they go judge shopping, and get the results declared unconstitutional.

As usual, most propositions involve either raising my taxes for their pet projects, or layering more governmental regulations in areas they wish to exert more control. 2 things, obviously, I am dead set against.

A cursory examination of my property taxes reveals 8 different school bonds that my dopey neighbors have voted for over the years, the earliest dates back to 1991. Low and behold, there are 4 more (2 state wide and 2 local)initiatives on this ballot proposing 3 more bonds and a quarter cent raise in the sales tax (already 8.625%), all for the children, these suckers never learn. Factor in that we pay the highest state taxes in the country (13.3%)and it gets to be ridiculous.

Some interesting propositions on this year’s ballot;

Prop 56, a $2 increase on the cigarette tax (already $.87, this would put is into New York/Connecticut territory)

Prop 59;

A yes vote supports advising the state’s elected officials to use their authority to overturn the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision, potentially through an amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

What, no prop. encouraging the overturning of Heller?

Prop 62, abolishing the death penalty (yet again). I am voting “yes” on this, not from some squishy position of morality, but just from a fiscal POV. It is too costly, delays the outcome way too long, and makes a mockery of anything resembling justice. Life without the possibility of parole, and save some bucks.

Prop 64, marijuana for everyone, hot dog!!

My wife showed me a flyer we got in the mail yesterday from the Independent Party of California, recommending choices for the propositions. As a lark, we went through them one of one. On every one (except the death penalty prop) they were counter to my ballot. Yep, land of the heathen.

Why You Don’t Vote for the Worst

You may remember, back in 2008, there were a lot of Republicans who said that they should cross over into the Democratic primaries and vote for Clinton. The reason, they said, was because Clinton was a worse general election candidate than Obama and that it made it more likely that the Republicans would win. Lee had some colorful comments on the subject that proved perspicacious.

To all those Limbaugh/Hewitt drones who voted for Hillary in the open primaries, the idea being that McCain could beat Hillary but not Obama. I ask, are you out of your fucking minds? Have the last 16 years not taught you anything? When you have a chance to kill a beast you take it, lest the beast rise up and slash out your throat.

You cannot count on the Clintons losing anything, ever. They are the sleaziest, most disgusting family in the history of American politics. We had a chance to be rid of Hillary once and for all, and when she is elected president, you fucking right-wing talk show morons will have nobody to blame but yourselves.

Clinton eventually lost, but the primary was very close. Had Clinton not come so close, the DNC would not have spent the last eight years making absolutely sure she was the nominee in 2016.

Moreover, supporting Clinton in 2008 ran the very real risk of electing Clinton in 2008. As it turned out, there was no way McCain was going to win with a depression hitting. And for all of Obama’s failures and flaws, I’m convinced that the last eight years would have been worse under Clinton.

This is something I’ve said many times: we should always push for each party to nominate its best candidate (or their least bad one). Elections are hard to predict. In 1991, Bush 41 looked invincible, so much so that SNL did a skit where Democrats debated to not be the nominee. In 1992, he was smoked by a philandering hillbilly and the Mayor of Munchkintown.

As early as last year, according to the Podesta emails, the Clinton campaign was hoping that Trump would be their opponent. The Federalist has a brutal takedown of how many liberals openly pined for Trump to be the nominee. Conservative journalists, who had stories of Trump’s corruption and scandals, looked in vain for the media to carry the torch. The entire Liberal Echosphere was invested in making sure Trump was the nominee so that Clinton would win.

And so here we are, a week out from election day, with Clinton clinging to a 2-point lead in the polls and Trump surging. The Democrats are panicking and not without reason. But this is at least partially a dish of crow. You wanted this guy. You dumped on reasonable conservatives like Jeb Bush. You openly prayed that a bridge-builder like Rubio wouldn’t get the nod. You slammed Kasich as being somehow worse. Enjoy what you have helped create.

Yes, the Republicans own this shit show. But the Democrats and their media allies have a least a partial stake. And let this burn in the lesson: never ever support the worst candidate on either side. Always hope that each side nominates their best. Because elections can turn on a dime. And the next thing you know, that horror show — whether that horror show is Clinton or Trump — is the most powerful person on Earth.

If only they would really do it!

I have to admit that when I saw the headlines claiming that “Just 65 Percent of Feds Commit to Staying During a Trump Administration“, I was immediately telling myself that while I really didn’t need another reason to vote against the Clinton crime syndicate and the democrat mafia in general, that this was one heck of an incentive to do so anyway. Heck, having a bunch of useless liberal parasites in a bloated, inefficient, corrupt and abusive bureaucracy up and quit, to me, and probably many others, is a huge bonus. Doubly so if these losers would also move to Canada or Europe like they often threaten they will. One can dream, can’t one?

Possibilities

A new Milo video surfaced yesterday, it is interesting on a number of levels, take a look;

I suspect that when called out as stooges, lap dogs for the progressive left, journalists like this take it as a badge of honor and expect more kibble in their bowl as reward from their handlers, the MSM. But how great is it, and pundits/political personalities can go places politicians only dream of, to call out idiocy for what it is, and shame an interviewer for asking a shameful question.

Milo presents a well thought out concise argument for why Trump supporters want change, or want to protect valuable rights like free speech. The message is powerful, the messenger (Trump) is a doufus.

Much hand wringing has taken place within the last year predicting the demise of the GOP as a party if Trump loses. Analogous to that whole tree/forest thing, if nobody really gives a shit about the longevity/viability of a failed party (can’t win national elections, what better definition is there?) then is it’s demise really death at all? Mike Pense and I share the same hierarchy of importance; Christian first, American second, and Republican (conservative more for me) third. The principals are important, not the mouth piece. If the wine is sour, throw it out. What Jefferson wrote about abolishing governments applies equally well to political parties;

“That to secure these rights, Governmentsparties are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Governmentthat party becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Governmentparty, more in line with it’s ideals.

The European model is defective, the progressive model is defective, people will see that they are not being served by those in power, at least that is my hope.

An Exercise in Irony

So … here’s a question for the class. The polls are tightening, mostly because Trump is gaining from undecideds and Johnson/Stein voters (remember the hysterical Democrats imploring people not to vote for Johnson? Good times.) At the moment, Clinton leads in battleground state polls, although those can sometimes lag national trends. But right, now Nate Silver is projected about a 5-10% chance that Clinton loses the popular vote, but wins the electoral college.

I really hope that doesn’t happen. Trump and his supporters would melt down something fierce. It was bad enough in 2000. But it would provide on point of entertainment: watching the entire political-media complex argue the exact opposite of what they did in 2000. Republicans would scream about the will of the people; Democrats would scream about following the process.

So, here’s the question. A number of states have signed onto the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact in which, if enough states sign on, these states would agree to shift their electoral votes to the popular vote winner in the case of an electoral-popular split. Every single one of these states is a blue state, most of them very blue.

If there is an electoral-popular split this year (or close to it), how fast will those states withdraw from the NPVIC? Which will be the first to bail? Which will be the last state in?

Kicking Michael Moore

There are days when I miss the old Moorewatch site. Thankfully, Moore has receded from public consciousness (although he’s out with another dopey documentary this month that, ironically, would be against the law to show if the Citizens United decision has gone the other way).

But yesterday, he showed that he’s just as much of an idiot as always with a series of hilarious tweets:

Clinton is not suffering from the abuse of men. She’s suffering from problems created all by herself. It was not Anthony Weiner who created a private e-mail server. It was not Bill who lied about it to the American public. It was not Newt who blazed a 25-year path of corruption and deception so deep that she can’t even win a Presidential race against an authoritarian hamster. Hillary’s problems of her own making.

As opposed to being decided by campaign donations, cattle futures and travel office firings. And I’m not sure if Moore is up to date on things, but tens of millions of women vote GOP and the GOP has a number of great women in their tent, such as Nikki Haley or Susana Martinez.

Now we get stupid. There were a number of women involved with the Manhattan Project. The work that led directly to the atomic bomb was produced by Lise Meitner. Indira Gandhi was heavily involved in India’s nuclear program.

There were many women involved with the Nazis, notably Leni Riefenstahl (to whom Moore was compared by some Moorewatchers). There are many many women who work in the fossil fuel industry or part of corporate boards of fossil fuel companies. One of the most famous “climate deniers” is Judith Curry (who does not, in fact, deny global warming, but argues for the lukewarm case). And the first famous school shootings in America was carried out by Brenda Spencer.

Moreover, Moore is tweeting this out in support of Hillary God-damned Clinton, who has vocally supported every war for the last 25 years, unleashed our Libyan intervention, played a key role in creating the mess in Syria and wants to risk a war with Russia by establishing a no-fly-zone in Syria. Clinton is a war-monger of the first order. Does anyone doubt she would unleash nuclear weapons if she felt it was necessary?

I could go on but I couldn’t reply better than Ken at Popehat:

The Left has spent the last 35 years condemning everything the Iron Lady every did (while quietly taking her policies). But now that’s time to elect the Iron Dingbat, we’re back to the “women will be so much better!” line of BS.

Power corrupts. And power knows no gender. Clinton, if she’s elected, may be a great President or an awful one. My bet is on the former latter. But either way, it will be because of who she is, not what she is.