Follow Dr. Waddy
Tragically, Google has suspended the service that allows blog readers to subscribe by email to the blogs of their choice. This means that, in order to keep up with all the WaddyIsRight excitement, you might want to add "WaddyIsRight.com" to your favorites and visit this site OBSESSIVELY! I can't think of any better use of your time, can you? Alternatively, send me an email at firstname.lastname@example.org and I will try to get you subscribed from my end.
Saturday, December 28, 2019
Friends, as we approach the new year, we should reflect, as always, on what could be better in our lives, and on what is already good, and thus worthy of our thanks and praise. The truth is that we stand on the shoulders of past generations, almost all of which had to struggle much harder than we do to survive and prosper. The article below makes a very persuasive case that, for the vast majority of humanity, the decade we are now ending has been the best ever, in a material sense, and the 2020s portend even more progress. I defy anyone to read it and not feel a sense of renewed optimism about the future of humanity.
On the less savory side, I recommend this article about the FDA's move to raise the minimum age to purchase tobacco products from 18 to 21. As you know, I'm not a fan of taking away people's rights, especially when it's done for no better reason than their age. Expect an article in the near future about this travesty, to which I regret to say many Republicans have contributed.
Friday, December 27, 2019
Friends, every day in Trumpland is better than the last, and, we assume, that formula might hold true for every year as well. My latest article, soon to grace the electronic pages of Townhall, recaps some of the greatest triumphs for Trumpism in 2019, and it looks forward to some wonderful opportunities in 2020. I would argue that, in 2016, we put the Left on the ropes. We had a chance to finish them off politically in 2018, and sadly we blew it. Winning the House was enough to put the wind back in their sails. 2020, though, could be the coup de grace. Now, don't get me wrong: the Left and the Democratic Party have tremendous advantages, especially in their domination of the culture, but there is still a realistic path to their permanent marginalization. Simply put, it's the path of self-marginalization. We conservatives can't defeat the Democratic Party and its ideological handmaidens, but it and they can defeat themselves. That process begins with Americans falling in love with Donald Trump all over again in 2020 and reelecting him. That, in itself, would probably be enough to cause the Dems to lose their marbles. They already have, you say? True, but not so much as to delegitimize their cause for the majority of voters. We need the Democrats to embrace their vindictiveness, their intolerance, their anti-social tendencies, their lionization of anti-state violence, their hostility to capitalism and Christianity, and all those horrifying qualities that make the modern Left so contemptuous. We need these qualities to be trumpeted day and night by a media that is either cleansed of its bias (unlikely) or so captivated by the spectacle of leftist self-destruction that they can't help but cover one of the greatest news stories of our lifetimes. And it all begins, as I said, with the reelection of Donald Trump in 2020. Decision Day is now roughly ten months away. My resolution for 2020, therefore, will be to make a maximum effort to win the presidential election, and hopefully the House as well, so we can finally put left-wing extremism to bed and make America whole and wholesome again -- or great, if you prefer. Are you with me???
2019 Was Great; 2020 Ought To Be Greater
2019 was a year of phenomenal accomplishments for President Trump and for the conservative movement.
First and foremost, our economy continued to surge ahead, the stock market soared, and job and salary growth drove unemployment rates lower and the standard of living ever higher. Joe Biden may have tried to make the case in the last Democratic debate that the middle class is getting “killed” in this economy, but only the most starry-eyed of partisans could believe that...uh, malarkey. The state of our economic union has seldom been stronger.
In foreign policy, President Trump resisted the siren song of the warmongers and neocons, avoiding new military entanglements and setting us on the path of eventual withdrawal from Syria, Afghanistan, and West Africa. He continued to extend an olive branch to North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, which may or may not be accepted someday. He successfully challenged our NATO allies to shoulder more of the burden of our common defense. Above all, Trump has been true to his word: he has been an “America First” President, who involves the United States in foreign conflicts only when our vital national interests are at stake.
On trade, President Trump achieved major new free trade agreements with Japan and Canada/Mexico, and he stood firm in our trade war with China — the first American President to stand up to China and its trade manipulation in the post-Cold War era. America's willingness to play hard ball on trade even had the important consequence that Mexico stepped up its efforts to combat illegal immigration. A year that began with a tidal wave of irregular migration, much of it from Central America, is ending with many miles of new border fortifications in place, and illegal crossings way down.
President Trump secured record levels of funding for the U.S. military and for veterans, keeping his promise to maintain our national security and to do right by the brave men and women who fight, and have fought, on our behalf. Moreover, Trump added a new branch to the U.S. armed forces for the first time in more than 70 years: the Space Force. America is thus well-positioned to be a leader in both the civilian and military exploitation of space, the “Final Frontier”. Will the United States of the Milky Way someday herald Donald J. Trump as one of its founders? It would be foolish to scoff.
Perhaps most consequentially, in the medium term, President Trump, in cooperation with Mitch McConnell and a solid Republican majority in the Senate, maintained a steady flow of conservative, originalist judges onto the federal bench. This is the Trumpian accomplishment that inflicts the most consternation on liberals, and, not coincidentally, it is the accomplishment that patriots and conservatives should most prize, because it guarantees that those who believe in and cherish our Constitution will have a powerful voice in debates about our country's future for decades to come.
Perversely, we have the Democrats to thank for another potentially salutary development in 2019: the partisan, political, and unpopular impeachment of President Trump. The chances of Trump's removal from office are zero — but the chances that this farce of an impeachment will represent, in effect, a donation-in-kind to Trump's reelection campaign, and to Republicans trying to unseat swing-district Democrats in the House, are substantial. Thus, the albatross of impeachment, hanging around the necks of so-called moderate Democrats, combined with the stupefying weakness of the Democratic field of presidential candidates, may be the necessary preconditions for conservative and Republican wins in 2020 and beyond, portending even more Trumpian progress in the years ahead.
All in all, 2019 was a banner year for President Trump and for all those who believe in the values and goals of his popular, conservative movement. We have much to be thankful for, and ample reason to believe that 2020 will be a year filled with opportunity and optimism for our great country.
Dr. Nicholas L. Waddy is an Associate Professor of History at SUNY Alfred and blogs at: www.waddyisright.com. He appears weekly on the Newsmaker Show on WLEA 1480.
And here it is at Townhall:
And here it is at Townhall:
Wednesday, December 25, 2019
Merry Christmas, to one and all! It's worth remembering that Christmas, although it has plenty of ancient and modern pagan connotations, is first and foremost a holiday celebrating the birth of Christ, who most Americans acknowledge as their Lord and Savior. And the beauty of Christianity, I've always felt, is its message of infinite and inclusive forgiveness: God offers everyone, warts and all, redemption and salvation. That's why we call the message of the New Testament "good news," right? The birth of Christ is just one of many ways that God tells us, "I value you, and I want to know you better." So...give and receive presents this Christmas, sure, but remember that the greatest gift of all has been sitting under your proverbial tree all along: God's love.
In other news, the Newsmaker Show featured a guest even more famous than me last week, if you can believe that: Bill O'Reilly! I've always liked Bill. He's a voice of reason in these dark times of sensational journalism, although the Left certainly doesn't see it that way. They went gunning for old Bill, and to a point they got him. His star has faded, but he's trying to make a comeback, and he's still got plenty of great insights on American politics. You'll find them in the second half of this program:
Incidentally, I don't agree with 100% of Bill's analysis. I think Donald Trump was won over to conservatism partly because of the opportunism that Bill describes, yes, but I believe that the "push factor" of the Left's disdain (to put it mildly) has to have played a major role too. Trump doesn't like criticism -- that much is clear -- and the relentless and scurrilous attacks on him and his family must have been powerful motivation to break completely with liberals and Democrats. I also disagree with Bill in his assertion that Trump has no core beliefs. Everyone does, to some extent, and it's obvious that his moral and ideological compass is better suited to the Republican Party than it is to the Democrats. Above all, Trump is a nationalist -- and nationalism has no place on the Left, unless it's in knee-jerk Russophobia, and, as I've said before, that's mostly for show, as far as I can tell.
Lastly, if you're looking for the perfect last minute Christmas gift for your favorite conservative commentator of all time, might I suggest this incredibly handsome Trump-Space Force-themed Christmas sweater? I'm usually a medium. Thanks a million! 😉
Saturday, December 21, 2019
Friday, December 20, 2019
Friends, I know many of you can't stomach the Democratic debates, but you can rely on me to do opposition research for you. I watched with great interest as the Democrats, by and large, bored the nation and each other, but there were, believe it or not, a few moments of genuine entertainment. In particular, while the national front-runners, Biden and Sanders, escaped unscathed, Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar made a decision to let Mayor Pete Buttigieg have it. Neither Warren nor Klobuchar has been particularly aggressive in the past, so this is a sign that both are feeling vulnerable, and it's Buttigieg who they seem to regard as the greatest threat to their respective candidacies. All are competing, one assumes, for the same educated white voters in Iowa and New Hampshire who have an outsize influence on American politics. Buttigieg and Klobuchar are ideologically moderate, while Warren is progressive, which adds to the intrigue. In any case, I've found it interesting recently that the mainstream media is increasingly focusing on the disdain that many progressives feel for Buttigieg. My guess is that the progressives don't like his policies and values, while the Bidenites don't like the fact that he's stealing some moderate votes from their guy. All in all, I thought Buttigieg parried the attacks last night very effectively. He's a smart guy, and, if the polls are to be believed, he's still in front in Iowa. Thus, we can't count him out. It amazes me, though, that the national front-runner, Joe Biden, would be essentially ignored by his competitors in a major debate. Are they inclined to dismiss him? That would be a mistake, in my opinion. The oddsmakers, by the way, now have Biden ahead again, but nowhere close to a cinch. This race is a long way from over, and a brokered convention is still a decent possibility.
In other news, Jeff Van Drew is officially a Republican! Welcome to the GOP, Jeff! What took you so long? Tell all your friends about us, huh?
And, in news that will bring joy to many a conservative heart, the U.K. Parliament has voted in favor of Boris Johnson's withdrawal agreement. That means...sayonara, E.U.! Hello, sovereignty. Hooray!
Thursday, December 19, 2019
Friends, it's official: Donald J. Trump is only the third U.S. President to be impeached by the House of Representatives. It's big news, and yet you could be forgiven for saying: "Ho-hum." We've all seen this coming for a long time. The only suspense was in the question of whether swing-district Democrats would stay on-side and vote for impeachment, despite the danger it places them in for the 2020 election. Almost all of them did. That doesn't mean that Trump is guilty as sin, of course. It means those vulnerable Democrats are more afraid of a primary opponent picking them off from the left than they are of losing in the general election in November. For many of them, a vote for impeachment is therefore simply a vote for self-preservation -- the prime directive of politics, if you will...
There are only three surprises, therefore, in this whole mess. First, the Democratic Party is shrinking. New Jersey Congressman Jeff Van Drew, formerly a Democrat, is joining the GOP because of his opposition to the articles of impeachment, and because he knows that an opponent of impeachment is not welcome in today's Democratic Party. That's excellent news! Let's hope many free-thinkers and independent-minded centrists and liberals will be similarly disgusted by the campaign of persecution and vilification that Democrats have unleashed against our President.
Second, Tulsi Gabbard, a Democratic Congresswoman from Hawaii and a candidate for President herself, voted "present" on both articles of impeachment. Her reasoning was straightforward: she doesn't think a partisan impeachment is in the country's best interests. Naturally, she's right, but consider the courage it takes to buck the impeachment obsession among Democrats. Gabbard will be, and in fact already has been, viciously attacked by her fellow Democrats for her refusal to endorse impeachment. The question that will inevitably arise in the wake of her votes is this: if the Democrats thoroughly alienate her, might she make the journey to the GOP -- or might she run as an independent centrist in 2020? The latter move would be a game-changer -- not because she'd have a prayer of winning, but because anything that splits the Democratic/left-leaning vote will almost certainly help Donald Trump win re-election. Tulsi's iconoclasm could therefore have world-historical consequences. Stay tuned.
Lastly, the big news tonight is that Nancy Pelosi isn't guaranteeing that the House will forward the articles of impeachment to the Senate. Is this mere gamesmanship, or is Pelosi seriously considering dispensing with a Senate trial of President Trump? It's true that Democrats have little to gain from such a trial, but, if there's to be no trial, then what was the point of impeachment in the first place?
And that, I would argue, will be the question on many a leftist's lips going forward. Impeachment was a purely symbolic win for the Democrats and for the Left -- and it's a win that may well come back to haunt them in 2020. Just ask Newt Gingrich how well partisan impeachments tend to work out for the party that engineers them... This isn't over. Not even close.
And, for good measure, here's some straight talk about the Democrats' baseless claims of "voter suppression":
Wednesday, December 18, 2019
Friends, this week's Newsmaker Show involves a laser-like focus on the question of the Democrats' and the Obama administration's brazen abuse of the FISA court to spy on and essentially frame Carter Page and, indirectly, President Trump for "Russian collusion". Brian and I explore where things went off the rails and how to fix the system. In particular, we ask what role the courts should play in refereeing our political process...which seems increasingly necessarily, as bipartisan consensus breaks down about the rules of the game.
In addition, historically speaking, Brian and I tackle the arrival of the Mayflower at Plymouth Bay, the abolition of slavery in 1865 and the question of how to interpret America's checkered past, the presidency of Woodrow Wilson, the "Christmas Bombing" of North Vietnam in 1972, and the horrors of the Battle of Verdun. Don't miss a single second!
And, if you have the time and the inclination, read this excellent piece by Attorney General Bill Barr, who eloquently praises those who work in law enforcement and encourages all the rest of us to show them the respect they deserve:
Tuesday, December 17, 2019
Friends, you simply must read President Trump's no-holds-barred letter to Nancy Pelosi on the eve of the impeachment vote. Trump eloquently expresses the feelings of so many of his supporters in this muscular missive. It's classic Trump, and should have every Democrat in Congress shaking in his or her boots:
Well done, and well said, Mr. President!
Friends, President Trump has good reason to be smiling. Support for impeachment continues to tick down, even in polls that are modeled to give the mainstream media more or less what they want. In fact, according to the RealClearPolitics average of impeachment polls, opposition now tops support. The Dems seem determined to press on, despite flagging enthusiasm in the electorate, and we can only say: thank you, dummies! You've just handed Republicans running for election to the House of Representatives in 2020 a golden opportunity. Let's see if we can capitalize on it, shall we?
Since your appetite for polls has been whetted, look at these intriguing results from the recent U.K. election. Young people, sadly, were thoroughly deluded by Corbynism. That's a bummer, but older voters, who of course vote in much greater numbers, were solidly Tory. Could a similar pattern emerge in the US in 2020? Older voters could be turned off by many of the extreme proposals of the current crop of Democrats. They may not always love Trump, but they're not socialists or PC kooks either. That gives Trump and Republicans a potential...Trump card?
Lastly, for those of you who can't get enough analysis of that thumping Conservative win in the U.K., take a gander here:
Friends, file this away under "amazing, but true". Former U.S. President Barack Obama is officially on record claiming that women are superior to men. Read all about it here:
Unfortunately, this kind of casual bigotry has become commonplace on the Left. Men, white people, Christians, police officers, capitalists -- the list of scumbags, from the liberal perspective, is long, and it's often defined demographically rather than ideologically. To put it another way, it's pure prejudice that Obama is venting, and he's far from alone. Can you imagine if any Republican said something similarly disparaging about women??? We'd never hear the end of it.
Lefties, it's time to stop your divisive identity politics and instead judge every man, woman, and child on this planet by their abilities and their character, not their gender, race, religion, or any other such category. We thought we outgrew your bigotry a long time ago. Sadly, we were mistaken.
Saturday, December 14, 2019
Here's a little good cheer for all you Boris Johnson fans out there. I'm not sure I would agree with the author that political correctness is dead on arrival now, but it certainly has suffered a reversal...
Friday, December 13, 2019
Friends, like you I'm sick of hearing about impeachment. Lindsey Graham said it best: it's a "crock," and the sooner this country moves on, the better. That being so, the House of Representatives, which sadly Democrats control, does have the "sole Power of Impeachment," and thus, if the House votes to impeach, we have to go through the motions. My latest article, soon to appear in American Greatness, considers the merits of the Democrats' case through the lens of their two articles of impeachment. I find the arguments for impeachment severely wanting, as you might imagine. See if you agree.
The Democrats Want To Impeach President Trump...Because He Made Politics Political
As Democrats in the House of Representatives gird themselves to vote for articles of impeachment against President Trump — potentially booting him out of office and nullifying the results of the 2016 election — Americans should reflect on their audacity.
Neither of the articles of impeachment references a specific crime in any statute book. Instead, the Democratic leadership has made up two brand new offenses: “abuse of power” and “obstruction of Congress”. What they have in common, in addition to their novelty, is their vagueness, which makes them profoundly unsuitable to serve as the grounds for the cancellation of the people's will, as expressed in the last presidential election.
With respect to “abuse of power,” while the media has obsessed over questions of a “quid pro quo” involving pressure on Ukraine to investigate the Bidens in return for military aid, the truth is that the substance of the Democrats' charges relates to Trump's motivations, not his actions. Pressuring foreign governments to act in certain ways is absolutely normal in the conduct of U.S. foreign policy. It is, therefore, the Democrats' charge, as stated in the article of impeachment, that Trump pressured Ukraine to “announce investigations that would benefit his reelection, harm the election prospects of a political opponent, and influence the 2020 United States Presidential election to his advantage,” that really matters. In other words, Trump acted “for corrupt purposes in pursuit of personal political benefit...[He] compromised the national security of the United States...[and] ignored and injured the interests of the Nation.” That, at the end of the day, is the substance of the Democrats' case against President Trump; he betrayed the country and his oath of office.
The most obvious problem here is that the Democrats have advanced no proof that President Trump's Ukraine policy is or was guided by his desire to win the 2020 election. They consider this notion to be incontestable, since, by process of elimination, they can think of no other reason why anyone would suspect the illustrious Biden family of wrongdoing. This is a long way from proving President Trump's corrupt motivations, however.
But there is a deeper, more fundamental flaw in the Democrats' “abuse of power” case against the President. We should recall that every President, and every member of Congress, is subject to election and reelection. It is seldom the case that any elected official will make important decisions without reference to his or her “personal political” interests. Moreover, whether those decisions, taken in part to advance one's political career, ultimately redound to the benefit or harm of the nation is inherently subjective.
The Democrats have thus advanced a new standard for impeachment — that no politician should ever behave politically — which is, on its face, impossible to sustain because of its ambiguity and its incompatibility with political reality. How many actions of President Obama, for instance, were derided by Republicans as motivated by “personal political” motives? How many, according to Republicans, “harmed” the nation? Democrats are plunging us into an impeachment maelstrom, wherein any federal officeholder could be, and perhaps will be, impeached on the slightest provocation, if the House of Representatives is ill-disposed towards him or her and suspects that their underlying motivations were “political”.
The truth is, therefore, that this new, improvised, and ambiguous philosophy of impeachment is itself an “abuse of power.” It's propagators should be punished accordingly, but not through a politicized impeachment process. They should be evicted from office by the voters at the earliest opportunity: in 2020.
The same logic applies with respect to the Democrats' second article of impeachment, which charges President Trump with “obstruction of Congress.” The Democrats allege that Trump has “directed the unprecedented, categorical, and indiscriminate defiance of subpoenas issued by the House of Representatives pursuant to its 'sole Power of Impeachment'.” They further allege that “no President has ever ordered the complete defiance of an impeachment inquiry or sought to obstruct and impede so comprehensively the ability of the House of Representatives to investigate...”
The first flaw in this logic is that Congress could, if it sorely wished to compel the testimony of any administration official, or obtain any relevant document, litigate the matter to a satisfactory conclusion. If, as the Congress claims, it is unconstitutional to deny the Judiciary Committee, say, the testimony of Mike Pompeo or John Bolton vis-a-vis the impeachment inquiry, then why not solicit the federal courts, up to and including the Supreme Court, to issue an order compelling them to comply with their obligations? That is precisely how the standoff with President Nixon in 1974 was ultimately resolved: the Supreme Court ordered Nixon to hand over the Oval Office tapes, and he did so. Congress could pursue the same remedy now, but it refuses, because it is in a headlong rush to impeach President Trump — for what are transparently “personal political” reasons: Congress hates Trump, but it also wants to dispose of impeachment before the start of an election year.
Once again, though, there is a deeper, more fundamental problem with the Democrats' case against President Trump for “obstruction of Congress.” It is absolutely normal for presidents to refuse to turn over documentation to Congress, and to order administration officials not to appear at hearings. This is called “executive privilege.” The executive branch need not accede to every request of Congress for information, because there is a presumption that the proper functioning of the executive requires a degree of privacy and discretion.
The Judiciary Committee's fig leaf to conceal this gaping hole in their rationale for impeachment is that Trump's non-cooperation with House investigations has been “unprecedented” and “comprehensive” — two more ambiguous standards that, once again, could arguably be applied to any President, in any era, failing to comply with a Congressional subpoena for any reason. A disagreement about the extent of executive privilege, however, should not constitute an impeachable offense.
Take the “Fast and Furious” scandal of 2010-2014. The Obama administration decided to sell guns to Mexican criminals in order to obtain intelligence on the drug cartels for which some of them worked. The intelligence never materialized, but a Border Patrol agent was killed by one of the guns. Republicans in the House of Representatives understandably wished to obtain testimony and documents from the Obama administration about this travesty, but the Obama Department of Justice refused to comply, citing executive privilege. Ultimately, the House held Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress, and a federal court upheld Congress' right to receive the information.
By the logic of the Democrats now sitting on the Judiciary Committee, this “unprecedented” failure to comply with a Congressional investigation should have been impeachable. The fact that a federal court found that executive privilege did not apply in this case suggests that the actions of the Attorney General, and presumably of the President, were unconstitutional — and yet neither man was impeached. This is because Republicans respect the gravity of impeachment and preferred to let the American people render a verdict on the fitness of President Obama and his Attorney General. Now, though, Trump-hating Democrats prefer to substitute their own judgment for that of the American electorate. They would happily impeach Donald Trump on any pretext, because it is what their infuriated electoral base demands.
In the end, the Democrats in the House of Representatives have invented two novel justifications for the removal of a president from office, and they have crafted these justifications in such a way that they can be used against any president, now and in the future, who rubs Congress the wrong way. By jettisoning Congress's traditional restraint on matters of impeachment, and seeking to remove President Trump for alleged wrongdoing that is not susceptible to proof beyond a reasonable doubt, Democrats are opening the floodgates to a wave of “personal political” impeachments that may arise in the decades ahead. Future American politicians may thus view the results of U.S. federal elections not as determinative of the country's leadership, but as mere suggestions from the voters, which may be vetoed by our all-knowing political elite. By no means should this very real abuse of power by House Democrats be tolerated by the American people.
To save our democracy, therefore, we must defeat the campaign to impeach and remove our 45th President, Donald J. Trump.
Dr. Nicholas L. Waddy is an Associate Professor of History at SUNY Alfred and blogs at: www.waddyisright.com. He appears weekly on the Newsmaker Show on WLEA 1480.
And here it is at American Greatness:
And here it is at American Greatness:
Friends, how sweet it is!!! The Conservatives under Boris Johnson have triumphed in the UK's general election, earning a sizeable absolute majority in the House of Commons. This is a repudiation of Corbyn-style socialism, but more importantly it is a vindication of British democracy, in the wake of the decisive vote for Brexit in 2016. Now, we can count on five years of responsible, Conservative rule in Britain, a strong, close relationship between the US and the UK, leading in all probability to a fantastic new trade deal between our two countries, and, above all, BREXIT! Britain will imminently leave the European Union. British sovereignty will be restored and, with any luck, the European Union will be back on its heels, licking its wounds, and scratching its collective head for years to come. Who knows -- it may even shrivel up and die. We can only hope.
Well done, Britons! And well done, Britain!
Wednesday, December 11, 2019
Friends, on this week's Newsmaker Show, Brian and I review the latest developments in the impeachment saga, and we're aghast at the Democrats' tenacity and imbecility. What else is new? Brian and I also talk about the high stakes in the upcoming British election (it's tomorrow!!!), and we delve into two fascinating historical topics: the abdication of Britain's King Edward VIII, and Hitler's declaration of war against the United States.
Don't miss it!
In other news, consider this startling revelation: Joe Biden is considering softening the blow that is his presidential candidacy by promising the voters that he would only serve one term! If you ask me, that's clear evidence that Biden considers himself "past it". Such talk will, and should, devastate his campaign:
And, for those of you who want closure on New York State's case against ExxonMobil, which I've written about in the past, here it is. New York lost big. Will this stop the assault on the energy industry? Not by a long shot, but it might slow it down a little.
Monday, December 9, 2019
Friends, today the Inspector General's report came out on FISA abuses and whether or not the investigation into Carter Page and the Trump campaign was a politically-motivated set up. By and large, the report criticizes individual actions by DOJ and FBI personnel, but it doesn't conclude that the investigation was illegitimate or biased. That's frankly not a huge surprise. The DOJ doesn't often hoist itself on its own petard. What's more interesting -- much more interesting -- is today's official statements from Attorney General Bill Bar and U.S. Attorney John Durham. Durham is pursuing the criminal investigation into the propriety and the legality of the "spying" on the Trump campaign and the Trump administration relative to "Russia-gate". If the Trump-Russia affair really was a politically-motivated set up, John Durham is the man who will find that out, and who will punish any wrongdoers. Well, Barr and Durham are putting us on notice that they won't go along with the IG's whitewash of this scandal. They believe that there's more to the story, and that the surveillance and investigation of a major party presidential campaign, and then of a president and his advisors, based on the "thinnest" possible evidence of alleged criminal conduct, is troubling. Moreover, they strongly imply that the headlong rush in the Obama DOJ, FBI, CIA, etc. to believe the conspiratorial nonsense in the Steele Dossier begs the question of whether inflicting damage on Trump was the point all along. Remember, Barr and Durham didn't need to issue any statement at all. That Durham did so, and that he specifically called into question the "predication" of the inquisition against Trump, is big news. It means, in a nutshell, that the forces of good at the DOJ have only begun to fight. The Dems had better enjoy their impeachment sideshow while they can, therefore, because they may find themselves in the crosshairs very soon.
Saturday, December 7, 2019
Friends, in 1984 President Ronald Reagan famously won re-election in a landslide partly because of the country's economic strength in the wake of the "stagflation" of the 1970s. The "morning in America" tv ad run by the Reagan-Bush campaign is worth a look:
Steve Cortes makes a strong case that, for essentially the same reasons, it may be "morning in America" again, and the economy may carry Donald Trump over the finish line in 2020 -- or at least it should:
In other news, there's more polling evidence that the Democrats have failed to win Americans over to their argument for impeachment. Read these polling results carefully. Note that, as usual, it's adults and registered voters who are polled, not likely voters. Note that, as usual, the voters' acceptance of any of the Republicans' counter-arguments isn't tested. Do Americans believe that the Bidens may have committed wrongdoing in Ukraine? Do they believe that Ukrainian officials may have tried to interfere in the 2016 election? Do they believe that the Democrats and the Obama administration were motivated by political calculations when they pursued allegations of Russian collusion in 2016 and beyond? We don't know, because pollsters don't care. These are non-issues to them. The only thing they want to know is: can we "get" Donald Trump... The answer, as usual, is no, you can't!
Friday, December 6, 2019
Friends, my latest article analyzes President Trump's savvy approach to the recent NATO summit in London, which I believe will go down in history mainly because it did no harm to the electoral prospects of Boris Johnson and the Conservatives, who are poised to win the general election on December 12th. As you'll see, I believe that a Tory win could open up huge opportunities for Johnson and for Trump...
Thursday, December 5, 2019
Friends, you'll want to read this story. It's about the controversy surrounding Adam Schiff's subpoenaing of phone records from his fellow Congressman Devin Nunes, from White House staffers, and even from a journalist. He included information in the House Intelligence Committee's impeachment report about their private communications! Somehow the American people need to know that Devin Nunes and Rudy Giuliani had the temerity to talk on the phone! Incredible. And a journalist can end up in an impeachment report too, for no better reason than that the chairman of the relevant committee doesn't like the cut of his jib. This is scary stuff. As Nunes points out, though, it's part and parcel of the Left's conspiratorial mentality. The "proof" for their outlandish accusations goes as follows: we know Trump and Giuliani are guilty, because we want them to be, so clearly anyone whoever spoke to them must be in on it. And we'll destroy them too. What nonsense!
And here's Rand Paul's take:
This is an interesting update on the energy-unfriendly policies of New York State. If the author is right, we may be staring much higher energy prices in the face before long. Maybe that would finally get the attention of Cuomo and state legislators and force them to stop persecuting the energy industry? Don't hold your breath.
Wednesday, December 4, 2019
Friends, with the British general election just days away, and Trump ally Boris Johnson comfortably ahead in the polls, President Trump's visit to London for the NATO summit couldn't come at a more sensitive time. On this week's Newsmaker Show, Brian and I discuss whether NATO is up to the challenge, and whether Trump will be on his best behavior. Much is at stake, because a Boris win would seal both Brexit AND, in all likelihood, a U.S.-U.K. trade agreement. The "special relationship" could be special-er than ever!
Brian and I also talk about the latest impeachment machinations, the many permutations of what could happen after a hypothetical House vote to impeach the President, and the legacy of smog -- once a grave ecological and medical threat, and now a non-issue in most Western countries.
Listen in, and be enlightened!
Sunday, December 1, 2019
Friends, amidst all the news that doesn't amount to a hill of beans, there's this nugget:
The worst nightmare of the Chinese leadership is that the unrest in Hong Kong will spread like an infection to other parts of their communist domain. And it could easily happen: many Chinese are frustrated by the lack of freedom the regime permits, and by the intractable social and environmental problems it ignores. Frankly, I'm surprised that the Chinese bigwigs have allowed things to get so out of hand in Hong Kong. That they have done so is a testament to how flatfooted they become when their usual techniques to control and manipulate public opinion come up short. What is clear, though, is that China is sweating, and now is therefore not the time to pick a fight with the world's only superpower and its "America First" President. China has been playing a long game with Trump, coyly refusing to seal a deal to end our trade war because they seem to assume that time is on their side. My advice: it isn't, so get busy inking a trade agreement while you still can. President Trump's signing of the recent pro-Hong Kong bills passed by Congress was a shot across the bow of the Chinese leadership. The U.S. can do much more to destabilize China if it wishes. But that isn't our wish, and it certainly isn't Trump's. We want -- we demand -- trade fairness and reciprocity from China, but in return we will gladly offer China a free hand to resolve its own internal problems. Think on that, Chicoms. How many battles do you want to fight simultaneously? How many PR headaches can one regime endure? It's time to admit defeat on trade, while perhaps also claiming victory in a broader sense, since truly free trade between the U.S. and China will benefit both sides. It will also bring stability and trust to the U.S.-China relationship -- a development that would benefit the whole world. Stop dragging your feet, China! Bow to the inevitable. Bow to Trump.