Thursday, December 17, 2020

Time To Send In The Tanks?


Friends, some of you are doubtless wondering whether Trump could consider, uh, extreme solutions to remedy the contested election just concluded...and, equally importantly, to retain his grip on the presidency.  In my humble opinion, in the past, when pressed to the wall, Trump has usually cowered before the combined might of the Swamp, but hey -- no one can say for sure how he'll behave in this situation.  He may view it as an existential question.  In other words, he may believe that, if he leaves office, not only is he doomed, and not only will his family be hounded and hunted, but the country itself may never recover.  If so, well...

Along these lines, Michael Flynn is proposing some radical steps, which he hastens to add he has no idea if Trump would even consider:


For what it's worth, CNN takes this talk seriously.  Of course, the people at CNN have been watching an awful lot of CNN, so their judgement is clearly flawed.  Now, as for the suggestion that Trump could be "forcibly removed" from the White House, I think that's the purest nonsense.  The military might well refuse to prop Trump up, but I strongly suspect it would equally well refuse to be a party to strong-arming or arresting him either.  I believe the same is true of the FBI, the Secret Service, and other federal law enforcement agencies.  The last thing anyone wants is a shootout at the White House. 

Why does Trump believe he won the election?  Possibly because he did, as per the "Navarro Report": 

Rand Paul seems to agree:


We may actually find out if some of our suspicions about the voting in Georgia are true, because the Secretary of State there, after much stonewalling, is agreeing to a statewide signature audit.  Funny how he waited until AFTER the electoral college had voted, huh? 

This is a pretty outrageous story.  Kansas has been blocked from requiring proof of citizenship in order to vote.  Why are we so hellbent on making it possible, even easy, for illegal votes to be cast?  Maybe because those votes invariably help "the good guys", as the swamp monsters see it?


Lastly, I sympathize with Russia, which has been denied the opportunity to compete, as a nation, in the Olympics until 2024.  This strikes me as an Orwellian solution to what may well be a real problem: Russia's non-compliance with anti-doping protocols.  Denying the athletes the ability to play for their own country, however, smacks of a violation of free speech and freedom of conscience, if you ask me.  Punish "Russia" all you like, but don't ask Russian athletes to pretend to be anything other than what they are: Russian.  I believe some reflexive, paranoid Russophobia must be operating here.


  1. Dr. Waddy, Peter Navarro thinks China pays directly for tariffs, so he has no credibility when it comes to voter fraud analysis.

  2. Boy, the logical contortions you lefties make to dismiss out of hand all allegations of fraud are something! Why not just clap one hand over each ear and exclaim, "No no no no no no no!" It would be just as effective, and every bit as mature...

  3. Dr. Waddy. I read Navarro's report (I'm a journalism professor -- I have to read such crap). There is nothing in that report that is new. It is just a compilation of the same debunked materials already out there.

    Again, this is not surprising. Navarro is a complete waste of a government salary. When a supposed trade rep does not even know how tariffs work, it is hard to take him seriously. Reading this embarrassing report means I will take him less seriously in the future.

  4. I would agree that Navarro isn't giving us anything new, Rod -- but of course that doesn't mean I disagree with his conclusions.