October 8-11, 2019
Oct 08 01:03 Poor misunderstood China Oct 08 15:42 Team Fun coming to Minnesota Oct 09 01:28 Pelosi, first queen, then jury of one Oct 09 11:25 President Trump's transparency vs. Pelosi's, Schiff's secrecy Oct 09 13:00 Jacob Frey's lies multiply Oct 09 22:49 Deep State attack continues Oct 10 14:42 Zelenskiy denies quid pro quo Oct 11 08:16 President Trump's marathon rally
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
Prior Years:
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
Poor misunderstood China
Joseph Tsai, owner of the Brooklyn Nets, insists that Americans just don't understand China :
In an open letter to "NBA fans" posted on his personal Facebook page, Tsai wrote that he felt the need to speak about the issue as someone who had spent his professional life in China. "Supporting a separatist movement in a Chinese territory is one of those third-rail issues, not only for the Chinese government, but also for citizens of China," he wrote. "The one thing that is terribly misunderstood, and often ignored, by the western press and those critical of China, is that 1.4 billion Chinese citizens stand united when it comes to the territorial integrity of China and the country's sovereignty over her homeland. This issue is non-negotiable," he added.
I don't give a damn if freedom of speech is a third-rail issue in China. It's an oppressive Communist regime. Why would anyone think that they'd support freedom to criticize the Chinese government? It isn't as if people my age have forgotten Tiananmen Square:
[Video no longer available]
This Thursday, Chinese negotiators visit our nation's capitol to negotiate a trade deal. It's rumored that Chinese negotiators aren't willing to negotiate on intellectual property theft and other major US priorities. If that's their nonnegotiable position, President Trump should instruct his negotiators to walk away from the negotiations. While it might cause the markets to tank, it'll send the message that some things aren't negotiable. If they aren't willing to change their thinking, then that's their problem.
There are lots of other Pacific Rim countries we can negotiate better trade deals with. It's time to disentangle ourselves from China. It's time we disentangle ourselves from the NBA, too. If the NBA will fight against states that pass bathroom laws but it shrinks like a violet when China gets upset, perhaps we should explain to Adam Silver that their virtue-signaling game stinks.
It isn't like the NBA is a high quality product that I can't live without. For me, just give me a decent Vikings team to get me into early-mid January, then a Twins team that captures my attention the rest of the year. Timberpuppies and Wild stink. I definitely don't need either of those teams.
Posted Tuesday, October 8, 2019 1:03 AM
Comment 1 by Nick at 08-Oct-19 06:56 PM
Fuck China. Stealing Aircraft Maintenance jobs from the US since at least the mid 1990s.
Team Fun coming to Minnesota
Everyone knows that President Trump and Vice President Pence, aka Team Fun, are coming to Minnesota this Thursday. Good for them. They're going all in to flip Minnesota. DFL Gov. Tim Walz sounds worried that President Trump will flip Minnesota. While Ed still thinks it's a longshot, I still think it's possible. I think it's possible because, frankly, the Democrat presidential candidates are pretty mediocre. If there was a positive-sounding moderate voice that didn't listen to the AOC + 3 crowd, I think Minnesota would be offlimits. Democrats don't have a candidate that fits that description.
That being said, they're sending out tons of fundraising emails:
John ,
I'm sure you're aware that President Trump is holding a campaign rally in Minnesota this Thursday, but I wanted to make sure you saw the breaking news that they're tripling down.
Karen Pence and Lara Trump will now be coming to hold a campaign event on Wednesday, and Vice President Pence will be coming to hold a separate rally on Thursday. For both Trump and Pence, this will be the second time they've visited Minnesota this year. They're going all-in on flipping Minnesota red, and they think they can do it with a message of fear and division.
But we know better. Minnesotans resoundingly rejected their scare tactics up and down the ballot in 2018, and as long as we can hold our own against the avalanche of far-right-wing money headed our way, we will again in 2020. So, with all eyes on Minnesota this week, we need to send a clear message. We're setting a goal of 500 individual donors by Thursday night and we're counting on you to hit it.
Most of Gov. Walz's fundraising email is right but he got one thing wrong. Unfortunately, the thing that Walz got wrong is the biggest thing he got wrong. Lara Trump and Karen Pence don't think that they'll flip Minnesota from blue-to-red "with a message of fear and division." If Minnesota flips, it'll be because the economy is helping all population groups. The economy is helping minorities like never before. President Trump signed prison reform, which is already helping minority communities. The energy industry is incredible, with the US as the world's energy superpower.
This looks like fun.
The Democrats, on the other hand, are the dividers. Democrats are the people pushing a divisive faux impeachment drive. Democrats retook the US House by promising the people that they'd fix health care. The Democrats haven't fixed the problems they promised they'd fix. 33 Democrats joined the Problem Solvers Caucus. Thus far, those Democrats haven't fixed anything .
When we had unified Republican government, they focused on making life better for the people. Republicans passed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which helped the economy take off like it never did during the Obama administration. They used the Congressional Review Act to repeal the Obama administration's anti-energy regulations.
To be fair, there's more to accomplish, like fixing immigration and asylum walls and building the wall between the US and Mexico. We still have to fix health care after the Democrats screwed it up with Obamacare. If you want a stagnant economy and rationed health care, including no private health care, vote Democrat. If you want a strong economy, vote Republican. If you want minorities prospering like never before, vote Republican. If you want your constitutional rights protected, vote Republican.
If you want Congress to waste time on a divisive faux impeachment inquiry, vote Democrat.
Posted Tuesday, October 8, 2019 3:42 PM
Comment 1 by Chad Q at 08-Oct-19 06:02 PM
Fear and division only come from the progressive candidates. Trump and Pence have been nothing but positive.
Comment 2 by Nick at 08-Oct-19 07:25 PM
It's time to punish the C-Suite fucks for outsourcing jobs to China, India and elsewhere.
Comment 3 by Gretchen L Leisen at 08-Oct-19 11:31 PM
One thing has become very clear over the past several years - whatever the Democrats accuse the Republicans of doing - that is exactly what the Democrats are doing. It's a diabolical fact which demonstrates the maliciousness of liberalism and the DFL in MN.
Response 3.1 by Gary Gross at 09-Oct-19 12:11 AM
Gretchen, what we're seeing is hardline progressivism. At the heart of that belief system is fascism. At the heart of old-fashioned liberalism is a healthy libertarian streak. Fascism & libertarianism are opposites.
Pelosi, first queen, then jury of one
Tuesday afternoon, Speaker Pelosi, Chairman Schiff, Chairman Engel and Chairman Cummings received this letter from Pat Cipollone, Counsel to the President. The statement stated the administration's case quite clearly, saying "you have denied the President the right to cross-examine witnesses, to call witnesses, to receive transcripts of testimony, to have access to evidence, to have counsel present, and many other basic rights guaranteed to all Americans. You have conducted your proceedings in secret. You have violated civil liberties and the separation of powers by threatening Executive Branch officials, claiming that you will seek to punish those who exercise fundamental constitutional rights and prerogatives. All of this violates the Constitution, the rule of law, and every past precedent . "
Later, Cipollone wrote "For his part, President Trump took the unprecedented step of providing the public transparency by declassifying and releasing the record of his call with President Zelenskyy of Ukraine. The record clearly established that the call was completely appropriate and that there is no basis for your inquiry. The fact that there was nothing wrong with the call was also powerfully confirmed by Chairman Schiff's decision to create a false version of the call and read it to the American people at a congressional hearing, without disclosing that he was simply making it all up . "
Clearly, House Democrats knew that this impeachment inquiry was a sham, an exercise in the nastiest partisanship seen in Washington, DC in decades. Despite that, Speaker Pelosi issued this statement that confirmed what Mr. Cipollone wrote. Ms. Pelosi wrote this:
The White House should be warned that continued efforts to hide the truth of the President's abuse of power from the American people will be regarded as further evidence of obstruction.
This is proof that President Trump's due process rights are being violated by Speaker Pelosi. This isn't an impeachment inquiry. The definition of the word inquiry is "a seeking or request for truth, information, or knowledge." Ms. Pelosi's statement is just that -- a statement. It wasn't "a seeking or request for truth, information, or knowledge" by any stretch of the imagination. It was an accusation. Contained in Ms. Pelosi's words was a verdict that President Trump, in her mind, was already guilty of "hiding the truth" and that he was already guilty of "obstruction."
It's noteworthy that President Trump released the transcript of his call with Ukraine President Zelensky virtually immediately, along with the informant's complaint the following day. It's noteworthy because it's been a week since House Republicans started asking Chairman Schiff to release the transcripts of the witnesses the Democrats questioned. They still haven't received any of those transcripts.
Further, it's noteworthy that each of these witnesses have been interrogated in closed sessions. That's the opposite of meeting a person's due process requirements. This paragraph stings Ms. Pelosi:
Your inquiry is constitutionally invalid and a violation of due process. In the history of our Nation, the House of Representatives has never attempted to launch an impeachment inquiry against the President without a majority of the House taking political accountability for that decision by voting to authorize such a dramatic constitutional step. Here, House leadership claims to have initiated the gravest inter-branch conflict contemplated under our Constitution by means of nothing more than a press conference at which the Speaker of the House simply announced an "official impeachment inquiry .
I titled this post "This isn't a monarchy & Pelosi isn't the queen." It fits that paragraph perfectly. This is important:
To comply with the Constitution's demands, appropriate procedures would include-at a minimum-the right to see all evidence, to present evidence, to call witnesses, to have counsel present at all hearings, to cross-examine all witnesses, to make objections relating to the examination of witnesses or the admissibility of testimony and evidence, and to respond to evidence and testimony. Likewise, the Committees must provide for the disclosure of all evidence favorable to the President and all evidence bearing on the credibility of witnesses called to testify in the inquiry. The Committees' current procedures provide none of these basic constitutional rights.
If we had real journalists working at the NY Times, CNN, MSNBC and the Washington Post, we wouldn't require diatribes like this:
[Video no longer available]
Thus far, Democrats have made up the rules each day. Further, Democrats have violated President Trump's due process rights. Worst, they're doing this all behind closed doors. The only conclusion that's reasonable to draw is that Democrats don't want people to hear what the witnesses have said.
Finally, Democrats are working to hide the identity of the 'whistleblowers'. The whistleblowers' law doesn't cover these Democrat operatives. Further, we found out Tuesday night that one of them was recently employed by one of President Trump's 2020 challengers. Does that sound fair? If that sounds fair to you, I've got a beautiful bridge I'd like to sell you.
During the course of this faux impeachment inquiry, Nancy Pelosi first acted like she was the queen of the House of Representatives, then acted like she was judge, jury and executioner in President Trump's trial.
Posted Wednesday, October 9, 2019 1:28 AM
Comment 1 by eric a at 09-Oct-19 11:38 AM
Boy, you are really hating on Nancy Pelosi. It is a bit unseemly.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 09-Oct-19 05:16 PM
I take hating on the Bill of Rights a bit personally. She wants situational application of the Constitution. I want it to be consistently applied.
President Trump's transparency vs. Pelosi's, Schiff's secrecy
Thus far, all the 'testimony' taken by the House Intel Committee has been taken behind closed doors. Thus far, Schiff's Democrats have leaked Chairman-approved portions of the testimony. Thus far, Chairman Schiff has refused to publish the full transcript of any of the testifiers' testimony.
By contrast, President Trump released the transcript of his call with Ukraine President Zelenskyy. By contrast, President Trump released all 9 pages of the informant's complaint. By contrast, President Trump released the Office of Legal Counsel's opinion.
To summarize, President Trump has specialized in transparency while Democrats have specialized in leaking and secrecy. That's before talking about the Democrats' attempts to hide the identity of the whistleblower. Speaker Pelosi has frequently talked about protecting the Constitution from President Trump, which is a joke. The Constitution requires that a defendant be allowed to confront his accuser. This isn't a suggestion. This isn't proper etiquette. It's required.
Schiff's Democrats don't want that to happen, perhaps because the Democrats' faux whistleblower is compromised :
Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson told lawmakers last week that the whistleblower whose complaint about President Trump and Ukraine has set off an impeachment inquiry previously had " some type of professional relationship " with one of the 2020 Democratic candidates , the Washington Examiner first reported and Axios' Jonathan Swan has confirmed.
This isn't a little detail. By itself, it demolishes the Democrats' faux whistleblower. Let's put it this way. If Trey Gowdy or John Ratcliffe cross-examined this political operative in public, that operative's reputation would be nonexistent within 10 minutes. This faux impeachment inquiry would be on life support at best.
Perhaps that explains why Schiff's Democrats have been so secretive. If the Democrats' witnesses have been that pathetic, I wouldn't want their witnesses' testimony made public either. Then again, if that's what I had to work with, I'd end the inquiry before I got embarrassed in public.
[Video no longer available]
It's time for Democrats to admit that they don't have any evidence that President Trump has done anything worthy of impeachment. Their whistleblower/political operative isn't credible. The transcript of the Trump-Zelenskyy phone call is a major nothingburger. The Mueller report was a much-anticipated dud.
To the Democrats: the first call to impeach Trump came the day after he was elected. There was another call for his impeachment in December, 2016. There have been calls for President Trump's impeachment virtually every month since then. Give it up. President Trump has been under investigation his entire presidency. Thus far, the best investigators in the US haven't found anything.
Perhaps, you should take that as a hint that there's nothing there.
Posted Wednesday, October 9, 2019 11:25 AM
Comment 1 by eric z at 09-Oct-19 11:36 AM
Transparency is telling federal payroll people to hold Congress in contempt? How so?
As to having evidence or not, if one is aggressively tampering with witnesses how exactly can evidence be obtained? Questioning witnesses to establish evidence does have a history arising out of centuries of English common law as the way to gain answers.
Trump's raising national awareness of Biden financial questions, that miasma, is helpful to the nation, but if you do that you have to expect getting your own set of questions - especially about motive. What's to hide? Smoke/fire, all that. Sauce for goose, sauce for gander?
Can't stand the heat stay out of the kitchen.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 09-Oct-19 05:21 PM
The Constitution guarantees due process. It also guarantees that the defendant has the right to cross-examine their accuser. I'll demand that every time. Period.
As for the Democrats' evidence, they don't have any. They've been searching for evidence literally since before his inauguration. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that impeachable evidence doesn't exist.
Comment 2 by eric z at 10-Oct-19 02:35 PM
This House hearing set is, if you want to analogize to judicial proceedings,the equivalent of a grand jury hearing. Only one lawyer present, in secret, and to have a vote on whether probable cause exists to charge wrongful conduct. The Senate then serves as the trial venue. Where cross examination exists as a right. Try to ask some prosecutor holding a grand jury that you want to cross examine and have credibility of evidence weighed. You'd not get far. If that makes you believe that grand juries are unfair, join the club. But the term "cross examination" is nowhere in the text of the Constitution, including all amendments. I agree that prosecutors routinely abuse grand jury proceedings, witness the misuse of the process re the cop who killed Michael Brown in Ferguson. That clown [who lost his next election] had them weighing evidence (behind closed doors with Brown's lawyer barred from things), not whether evidence existed to show probable cause to a citizens panel. McConnell is already in the bag for Trump with the nose count, so if you want to contend that impeachment should not have been started, that was the Pelosi position until Trump's actions were so egregious that her caucus forced the issue. Obama should have asked the Saudis for dirt on the Bush family, and that would have been fine to you? Withholding military aid unless/until? Be fair.
Response 2.1 by Gary Gross at 10-Oct-19 03:11 PM
Actually, it isn't like it except in the sense that it's the first step in the process. Otherwise, it's completely unlike a grand jury investigation. It's unlike it in the sense that, in the past, the hearings (for both Nixon & Clinton) were public. In the Nixon hearings, Republicans & Democrats shared staff. There wasn't a minority staff & a majority staff.
Further, Peter Rodino picked a Republican to be the counsel. It's worth noting that Nixon's lawyer was there every step of the way. You should read this article to get a better understanding of the Nixon impeachment process. BTW, the man who wrote this article for AEI is the son of the impeachment counsel. Needless to say, he had a firsthand view of the process.
You're right that the term cross-examination isn't in the Constitution. What is, though, is the term due process. You're smart enough to know that due process isn't possible without the defendant's lawyer cross-examining the prosecution's witnesses.
If you want to talk about people being in the bag, I've got far more proof that Adam Schiff is in the bag for Pelosi than McConnell is in the bag for Trump. There's no proof that President Trump committed "treason, bribery, high crimes & misdemeanors." At most, he committed a campaign finance violation, something that's usually punishable with a fine. That certainly doesn't rise to the level of a high crime or misdemeanor.
By the time Zelenskiy found out that the military aid was being withheld, military aid was getting released. We know that thanks to the timeline that Jennifer Griffin & Lucas Tomlinson of Fox News put together. That crutch just broke.
Jacob Frey's lies multiply
I recall 2010 like it was yesterday. Marty Seifert was running for governor. His stump speech had a great line in it. Seifert said "On our side, we have an embarrassment of riches. The Democrats just have embarrassments." Fast forward to today. President Trump has restored the economy. The energy sector is the most robust it's been since President Reagan stopped Jimmy Carter's green-capping program.
Meanwhile, the city of Minneapolis is getting more violent. People are leaving. Despite all that, Mayor Frey insists that "we govern with integrity, and we love all of our neighbors." Right. Mayor Frey welcomes illegal aliens into Minneapolis, hates police officers and hates President Trump but he governs with integrity?
The last I looked, the Minneapolis mayor's oath of office includes something about upholding the Constitution of the United States. Sanctuary cities violate the Constitution. So much for governing with integrity. Also, letting low-level crimes go unpunished isn't governing with integrity.
Minneapolis police officers are benefiting from President Trump's visit:
[Video no longer available]
Jacob Frey isn't benefiting from President Trump's visit. He's becoming a national embarrassment instead of just being a local embarrassment. Rather than staying silent, Frey had to open his mouth and verify that he's an idiot, proving again that it's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.
President Trump's speech reportedly will focus on law enforcement. If that's true, he'll win over lots of suburban voters. If that happens, President Trump's chances of flipping Minnesota will increase.
Posted Wednesday, October 9, 2019 1:00 PM
Comment 1 by eric z at 10-Oct-19 02:21 PM
I back Frey. Folks here should not be forced to indirectly pay a political campaign's expenses. It is unjust to expect that.
Comment 2 by Chad Q at 10-Oct-19 05:46 PM
If that was the way it always had been before Trump you might have a point but since this is just that the man child Frey doesn't like Trump, screw Frey.
Deep State attack continues
Anyone that thinks that the so-called whistleblower isn't a Deep State operative hasn't read this article . The article starts by saying "CBS News has learned the full contents of what appears to be a memo written by the whistleblower one day after President Trump spoke with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in July. The memo, dated July 26, is based on a conversation the whistleblower had with an unnamed White House official who listened to the call."
Those opening words instill legitimacy, thanks in large part to a pair of unnamed people talking about a classified call. Why wouldn't the people immediately trust the ensuing document? Speaking of the document, it starts like this:
The president's call with Zelensky was held on the morning of July 25. The whistleblower wrote the memo the next day after speaking with the official in the afternoon. The whistleblower wrote that he or she spoke with the White House official for "a few minutes," and summarized their conversation.
According to the memo, the White House official described the contents of the call as "crazy," "frightening" and "completely lacking in substance related to national security." The whistleblower said the official was "visibly shaken by what had transpired and seemed keen to inform a trusted colleague within the U.S. national security apparatus about the call."
Apparently, we're supposed to believe that an unnamed White House official was frightened to the point of spilling their guts to the unnamed Deep State snitch. We're being asked to trust the people who insisted that they have proof that was "more than circumstantial" W-A-A-Y back in March of 2017. That's the proof that we still haven't seen. Sign me up. I'll trust Shiffty Schiff. Later in the document:
The official described the call as "crazy," "frightening" and "completely lacking in substance related to national security." The official asserted that the President used the call to persuade Ukrainian authorities to investigate his political rivals, chiefly former Vice President Biden and his son, Hunter. The official stated that there was already a conversation underway with White House lawyers about how to handle the discussion because, in the official's view, the President had clearly committed a criminal act by urging a foreign power to investigate a U.S. person for the purposes of advancing his own reelection bid in 2020.
I've read the transcript of the phone call. There's nothing in that transcript that I'd call crazy or frightening. What I'd find frightening, though, is a snitch whose identity is being protected by corrupt politicians like Adam Schiff.
[Video no longer available]
The point that needs to be made constantly is that this snitch/whistleblower/Democrat operative can't be trusted. This document doesn't match up with the transcript whatsoever. Since it isn't difficult to find out who did the transcription but it's virtually impossible to find out who these snitches are, it isn't difficult to decide that Deep State snitches shouldn't be trusted.
Posted Wednesday, October 9, 2019 10:49 PM
Comment 1 by eric z at 10-Oct-19 11:03 AM
The deep state is all over trump for the Syria decision.
It is the one laudable and sane thing the blowhard's done over his single term as president. Besides Tulsi Gabbard and Rand Paul and the millions of regular people who wanted Obama to never go into Syria, the deep state, Bolton/Bush et al., are in a dither. They will grow out of it. This reverses an outright awful decision Biden was a big part of. SYRIA - Not as devastating as Iraq, because it was curtailed earlier, but the Saudi royals can fry their own fish. If he carries it over to the Iran drumbeaters, bless his having not only one but two instances of the blind pig able to find a truffle.
Zelenskiy denies quid pro quo
Democrats are hell-bent on impeaching President Trump, even if it means ignoring what the key witness said. This morning in Ukraine, President Zelenskiy told the AP "We didn't speak about this. There was no blackmail.' Further, in responding "to questions from The Associated Press, Zelenskiy said he only learned after their July 25 phone call that the U.S. had blocked hundreds of millions of dollars in military aid to Ukraine."
I'm predicting right now that this exculpatory information won't matter to Schiff and Pelosi. This won't break their stride. As Newt Gingrich writes in this article , "This coup attempt, which is exactly what it is, has nothing to do with evidence or any single accusation. As House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said when asked what she would do if the whistleblower accusation involving Ukraine collapsed, 'We have many other, shall we say, candidates for impeachable offense in terms of the Constitution of the United States, but this one is the most understandable by the public.'"
Pelosi and Schiff aren't interested in releasing the testimony transcripts because those transcripts will show that the Democrats' impeachment attempt is a purely partisan activity. Democrats have started with this coup attempt literally the morning after Election Day, 2016:
On Wednesday, Nov. 9, 2016, a left-wing group announced emergency protests against Donald Trump in six cities that day. Within 24 hours of Trump being declared president, left-wing activists were gathering in Chicago, Los Angeles, Sacramento, New York City, San Francisco, and Albuquerque. As the organizers at Act Now to Stop and End Racism (ANSWER) announced:
In a shock result, Donald Trump has been elected president - but the people can rise up and defeat his bigoted, extreme right-wing agenda! The ANSWER Coalition is mobilizing across the country to organize and take part in emergency actions.
Democrats don't just hate President Trump. Democrats hate him so thoroughly that they're willing to throw the rules of evidence aside if that's what's required to get rid of President Trump. This isn't a goal with Democrats. It's an obsession with Democrats.
[Video no longer available]
This video was shot on Nov. 9, 2016, the night of Trump's election. That means that Democrats have literally been trying to impeach President Trump since he got elected. For Democrats, this isn't about just removing President Trump from office. For Democrats, it's about telling President Trump's supporters that they made a major mistake and that they'd better repent immediately.
Posted Thursday, October 10, 2019 2:42 PM
No comments.
President Trump's marathon rally
President Trump's marathon political rally ran the gamut of emotions tonight . The word from the MSM was that it was a vitriolic speech. The MSM rightly noted that President Trump reserved his harshest words for Ilhan Omar, Joe and Hunter Biden.
I can't dispute that this 102-minute speech was filled with red meat for the partisans, of which I'm one. Of Omar, President Trump asked "How the hell did that happen?" I'm sure lots of people wonder what they did that they deserve that. Of Democrat leadership, President Trump called them "Chuck and Nancy", sarcastically adding that they're "2 beauties." Isn't that a fact.
At one point, President Trump brought Officer Robert Kroll up onto the stage, to the enthusiastic approval of the audience. Later, Lt. Kroll appeared on Shannon Bream's Fox News @ Night program:
[Video no longer available]
Let's be clear about this. The Trump campaign is going all-in with Minnesota. They came close with a shoestring budget. This time, Campaign Manager Brad Parscale announced that Republicans will spend tons of money to flip Minnesota:
[Video no longer available]
The Trump/RNC team already have 20 paid staff in Minnesota. Parscale anticipates a full-time paid staff of almost 100 by the time the parties' national conventions happen. Based on what I saw at last night's Trump rally, Minnesota Republicans have never been this excited and motivated. Minnesota Republicans want to flip Minnesota this time. I think that's definitely possible. President Trump also hit the hot-button issue of the Somali Refugee Resettlement issue:
"For many years, leaders in Washington brought large numbers of refugees to your state from Somalia without considering the impact on schools and communities and taxpayers. I promised you that as president I would give local communities a greater say in refugee policy and put in place enhanced vetting and responsible immigration control. And I've done that ," Trump said, touting a reduction of refugee settlement by 85% since taking office and his "travel ban" on certain Muslim-majority countries.
This isn't just about keeping a campaign promise, which is a significant accomplishment. It's about imposing accountability on the State Department and organizations that use the program as a cash cow. It also refutes the things that St. Cloud Mayor Dave Kleis told Councilman Jeff Johnson. This proves that Councilman Johnson is right.
Predictably, the haters, aka anarchists, aka #BlackLivesMatter and Antifa, were out causing trouble:
[Video no longer available]
Despite their antics, the rally was a huge success. All of the estimates I heard last night put the combined crowd at almost 50,000 people. The campaign announced that they got almost 100,000 requests for tickets to last night's rally.
DFL Chairman Ken Martin put out this dishonest statement after the rally:
'Tonight Donald Trump's rally was all about Donald Trump , just like his Presidency. No talk about policy, no talk about his vision for America, no talk about what he would do to improve the lives of Americans. Just a bunch of attacks, deflection, and stroking the egos of the blindly-loyal Republican elected officials and candidates who have clearly put their oath to Trump ahead of the oath they took to protect and defend the constitution of the United States of America. To paraphrase the late great Molly Ivins: Trump's speech tonight was much better in the original German.
Despite Chairman Martin's dishonesty, President Trump talked about the progress being made building the wall, the improvements already made in the refugee resettlement program, bringing troops home from the Middle East, cutting regulations that have produced the energy boom and providing veterans health care choice. Other than those substantive improvements, Chairman Martin is right.
Posted Friday, October 11, 2019 8:16 AM
No comments.
