LMAO

Jonathan Turley. He doesn't seem like the kind of guy who'd write publish, like, joke tweets. I mean, very serious guy, right? So how do you explain this tweet:

Jonathan Turley

@JonathanTurley

Replying to

@JonathanTurley

..With a special counsel, Yates would enter office in a position analogous to Jeff Sessions. Like Sessions, Yates would be expected to recuse herself since she featured prominently in signing key surveillance applications and was involved in key decisions.

2:30 PM · Dec 1, 2020·

Uh, Jonathan. Two things. 1) Yates is not Sessions. 2) Yates is a Dem. 

OTOH:

Kamala Says Biden Will Be 'Kept Comfortable' While A Discussion Ensues About Whether To Keep Him Alive

Back To Obama

Here's some good news, via Steve Sailer--Obama hasn't given up on America!

Feel better?

The Atlantic

@TheAtlantic

"I'm not yet ready to abandon the possibility of America—not just for the sake of future gen­erations of Americans but for all of humankind," writes @BarackObama:

11:11 PM · Nov 12, 2020

And that may have been the cue for Biden to give us a foretaste of what a Back To Obama movement might look like. Remember how Obama said he wanted to Trans-form America? Again, per Steve Sailer:

So we’re already back to the good old days of the Late Obama Age Collapse when square-jawed macho crazy men in dresses were given important jobs in the National Security establishment:

More late f/m trans alpha a-type personalities fighting new emotional career hurdles in Biden's department of defense. @Steve_Sailer https://t.co/i4zNzrHsQj

— Groyper AlvaradoSpawn (@laenorca_stille) November 13, 2020

That reminds me of an article that appeared yesterday: Trump Must Tackle The Military’s Diversity Cult. The author is right but, as it happens, Trump has other things on his mind just now. Nevertheless, it's a salutary reminder that the people who want to Trans-form America are still in place and still committed. Here's an excerpt:

The mainstream media is deeply upset that the president will not tolerate anti-American, anti-white, left-wing propaganda masquerading as government “training.” Government agencies, universities, and federal contractors are all racing to comply with Trump’s executive order, leaving many “professional diversity consultants” and other leftist grifters out of work.

This is a serious achievement, but much more work remains to topple the diversity cult embedded within our government, our businesses, and our universities. If Trump is able to gain a second term, he must make this a priority.

There’s no better evidence of this insanity than the commander of Air Force recruitment complaining that the service’s pilots are too dang white.

Major General Ed Thomas wrote in an October op-ed for Yahoo on why it’s a problem that 86 percent of Air Force pilots are white men. According to him and the rest of his service chiefs, diversity is a “war-fighting imperative.” He backs up his argument with the claim that we “risk losing ground to Russia and China, both of which are integrating potential game-changing technologies like artificial intelligence and hypersonic flight.” He says, without any hint of irony, that the solution to this problem is “improving our diversity.”

Notice he does not say we are losing our “diversity edge” to China or Russia, nor that these two countries are catching up to us thanks to racial quotas and white (or, in China’s case, Han) privilege training. They just seem to be finding the best people in their population to advance their military capabilities.

Back to Steve Sailer:

Meanwhile, this sensible book by a Wall Street Journal reporter warning about the dangers of the trans fad among adolescent girls has just been banned by Target stores:

Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters by Abigail ... https://t.co/rADRKsNQyU via @amazon

— Steve Sailer (@Steve_Sailer) November 13, 2020

Thank you so much for bringing this to our attention. We have removed this book from our assortment.

— AskTarget (@AskTarget) November 12, 2020

In Prog Trans-formed Biden America, book banning will again be a thing!

Regarding Barr's Remarks Today On The Durham Investigation

By now everyone will be aware that AG Barr stated today that he "doesn't expect" that the involvement of Obama and Biden in the Russia Hoax "will lead to a criminal investigation over either man. Our potential on criminality is focused on others."

That's a kind of good new - bad news statement. The good news is for Obama and Biden. The bad news has to do with those "others" on whom Durham is focused, because I assume that that this increases Durham's determination to take his investigation as high up the chain of command in the Obama administration as possible.

Strictly speaking, Barr's words could be parsed in a number of ways, and contradictions founds.

One standard for every American? Except ex POTUS and VPOTUS? How does that work?

On the other hand, "doesn't expect ..."? Is Barr open to surprises?

Rather than nitpick, however, I think we understand where he's coming from--he, unlike Dems, is actually concerned for the country. He wants--again, unlike Dems--to point the way to depoliticizing justice in America. It's a laudable goal and worth striving for--no matter how unrealistic it is. Here is Undercover Huber's summary:

MULTIPLE UPDATES: The Ukraine Hoax

Well--where to start? One place might be by reprising today's news. So far. Zerohedge obliges:

Pelosi To Announce Formal Impeachment Enquiry Despite Trump Release Of Ukraine Transcript

Update: Chuck Schumer appears to have let slip what Democrats' next play will be as he demanded that the Whistleblower's complaint still be released (which inevitably is a partisan document), claiming that the Trump call transcript "is insufficient." 

That would appear to be an entirely defenseless position to take (as the source did not actually hear the complaint or read the transcript), but they have to keep the suspicion alive. 

Additionally, Rep. Adam Schiff says the whistleblower wants to speak to his House Intel committee, and testimony may happen this week. 

And finally, WaPo appears to have been ready for Pelosi's announcement with a pre-packaged story... 

... 

Stocks are bouncing back hard and impeachment odds tumbling after President Trump announced he has "authorized the release tomorrow of the complete, fully declassified and unredacted transcript..." somewhat stealing the jam out of Nancy Pelosi's Democratic Party plans later this evening...

Oh, that's interesting about WaPo getting a pre-packaged story. The media are interested in certain pre-packaged stories, not so much in others. Don Surber explains:

Media goes kamikaze on Trump

MULTIPLE UPDATES: My Prediction: Ukraine Damage Will Go Deep

Yes, my prediction is that the damage from the Biden-Ukraine scandal--and that's what it is, despite the efforts of NeverTrump bloggers to cast a shadow on Trump--will not be confined to Biden. It will be used by Trump to play up issues that will resonate with and expand his base.

Democrat corruption is one of those issues, of course. Every Blue State voter knows all about that, and this Hunter Biden story is crasser than most, because Hunter is such a despicable person and his father is such an enabler.

Democrat corruption also plays right into the issue of "privilege". What could be more privileged than getting to fire prosecutors who are looking at your ne'er do well kids? Only white Dems get to do that. But, come to think of it, who but white Dems get to lie about their ethnicity to get great paying jobs at elite places like Harvard--with no consequences? They even get to run for president without being challenged on that. But Trump's gonna change that once the campaign starts in earnest. Every middle class person who's paying through the nose for college tuition will hear about that, and about the liberal elites who cheat their kids into those colleges the middle class can't get into.

In a less direct way, this will also play into the immigration and tariffs issues. The nation will likely sense the connection between liberal preference for foreigners over the American middle class--and the Dem tendency to enrich themselves through foreign dealings. Yes, Hillary will be a topic (cf. link, above), and none of this will help the hoity toity Warren.

Finally, if Biden is eliminated before the primaries even start--and I'm betting on that--the Dem race will be a cut throat contest of extremists. Both Warren and Sanders will be competing for the biggest share of the same pool of liberal extremists--because that's who votes in Dem primaries now. Warren is a shrill, hectoring, extremist on virtually any issue you can name, and the country will be treated to her trying to outdo the unrepentant socialist Sanders.

‘I Will Shoot You!’ I Said

No, I didn't say that. Rod Dreher says he said that. I've cited and recommended his work quite a few times. He's a recovering liberal but still an utterly unhinged NeverTrump--and, if I do say so, a bit of an emotional exhibitionist. This is a good illustration of the common wisdom, too often ignored, that you can't never tell. How many of you who are familiar with Dreher's work would suspect this side of him?

Interestingly, I've lived in Deep Blue states my entire life. The percentage of concealed carry permit holders in Massachussetts--yes, Massachussetts--is an easy twice as high as in my own Deep Blue state, which in turn is easily twice as high as some Deep Red states. Go figure, eh?

And here's what Dreher is talking about re the Castle Doctrine law in his state of Louisiana.

Of course, laws vary from state to state. In Maryland, for example, I understand that it's OK to fire off a double barrelled shotgun to scare someone away--a procedure that comes highly recommended by a former VP.

‘I Will Shoot You!’ I Said

by Rod Dreher 

View on my street this afternoon. The man on the left is a mentally ill man who was threatening his mother

Here’s a line no child should ever hear their father say: “If you come onto this property, I will shoot you!”

My kids heard me shout it three times this afternoon, at a large (6’5″) man in his twenties who was pursuing his mother. I saw her in the street and invited her to come shelter in my house. He followed her up my driveway, screaming at her. He only stopped when I threatened him with violence — and then only after I yelled it several times.

I called 911. A sheriff’s deputy came and arrested the young man. This was not the first time I’ve called 911 on this guy. He and his mother moved in to a rental house on our block a few months back. The first time I called was when I saw him screaming and cursing at her in their front yard, and he took a swing at her. It has been a nightmare over there all summer. According to the deputy today, the sheriff’s department has been out ten times to deal with him.

...

I’m not sure what happens next, but that dangerous, insane young man cannot come back to that house, or this street. Not after today. I don’t know what it’s going to take, but we hit the breaking point today.

I am not a big Second Amendment guy, but I am grateful that in this country, and in this state, one is allowed to own a gun. I am grateful that I do own a gun, and know how to use it. I am also grateful that I live in a state with a castle law, and that if that insane man had come after his mother, to whom I had given shelter, and me, on my own property, I could have used deadly force to stop him — and would not have been charged. Thank God it didn’t come to that. This time. I have to use the time that that man is in jail this next week to make sure that there isn’t a next time. Not on this street.

Does Paul Mirengoff Have Things Backwards Re Ukraine?

Paul Mirengoff at Powerline has been blogging about Ukraine and the "whistleblower." In his latest post--Why did Trump freeze U.S. aid to Ukraine?--he repeatedly frames the issue as a question of Trump demanding that "a foreign leader ... investigate the president’s potential opponent in a upcoming election." He goes on to point out that the US did, in fact, freeze aid to Ukraine for a time and states:

If Trump froze aid to Ukraine because its government did not investigate Trump’s political opponent, this would, in my view, constitute serious malfeasance. Congress, on a bipartisan basis, has approved U.S. aid to Ukraine in order to help that country resist Russian aggression. Freezing this aid because the Ukrainian government wouldn’t go after a Trump domestic opponent would be truly scandalous.

He then suggests that the timing of the release of aid create a presumption that must be overcome by Trump--the presumption being that pressuring Ukraine in this way raises a "good faith suspicion" of a quid pro quo which is illegal:

The administration unfroze aid to Ukraine last week. Is the delay in the release of the aid long and unprecedented enough to raise a good faith suspicion that a quid-pro-quo was at work? If so, Were there legitimate reasons — reasons unrelated to advancing Trump’s political interests — that overcome the suspicion and reasonably explain the delay?

Here's the problem I see with this argument. Mirengoff keeps talking about the possibility that Trump was pressuring Ukraine to "investigate Biden." I can think of no reason why Mirengoff would think this is what was going on. Ukraine knows exactly what happened--Biden is on record telling the world that he spoke directly to Ukraine's leaders, demanding that they fire a certain prosecutor. Ukraine has no need to investigate. They can deal with the matter any way they see fit. Something else, I think, is going on.

UPDATED: The State Of The "Whistleblower" Foofaraw

I've been occupied today. Here is a response I just wrote to commenter Cassander:

It appears that the big issue is that the Obama appointed ambassador to Ukraine was refusing to do her job and was blocking Ukraine officials from entering the US (2018) to discuss this matter--the Biden investigation--with US officials.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/09/corrupt-obama-ambassador-refused-visas-to-ukrainian-officials-to-enter-us-and-hand-over-evidence-obama-admin-misconduct-to-trump-officials/

Paul Mirengoff, citing Never Trump and one week presidential candidate David French, finds something improper about Trump's personal lawyer, Giuliani, getting involved, supposedly at the request of the State Dept:

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2019/09/report-trump-urged-ukraines-president-to-reopen-investigation-of-hunter-biden.php

However, John Solomon--who has spoken with persons who were personally involved--says that Giuliani's involvement was more complicated than people like David French think.

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/462422-missing-piece-to-the-ukraine-puzzle-state-departments-overture-to-rudy

The Ambassador to Ukraine was yanked ahead of schedule (5/2019), apparently after stepping in in a big way in the Ukraine elections--demanding that the Ukraine anti-corruption prosecutor be fired.

So it seems that normal State Dept. functioning wasn't happening, due to Obama holdovers, and that may explain Ukraine reaching out to people who could communicate with the US government for them, since normal channels were being blocked.

ADDENDUM: This illustrates that ever since the US sponsored coup in Ukraine (2014) our relations with that country have been anything but normal, beginning with the Obama/Clinton use of Ukraine to try to smear Trump. The abnormal relations continued after the election with the Obama appointed ambassador's very unusual--even very suspicious--actitivies.

The bottom line appears to be that Trump will emerge pretty much unscathed, but that Biden won't. And that once again we have received confirmation that Ukraine is at the center of the Russia Hoax.

UPDATE: Not so much an update as an addendum. Don Surber let's loose in enjoyable fashion: Democrats have impeached themselves. Here's how he starts off--but he keeps going:

The Democrat Party began the week by demanding the impeachment of Justice Brett Kavanaugh over an incident 30 years ago that the alleged victim does not recall. The Democrat Party ended the week by demanding the impeachment of President Donald John Trump because he may have said something to a foreign leader that was heard third-hand by a "whistle blower." 

In 1972, Democrats lost the presidency in a 49-state landslide because they called for taxing everything. 

They still do, but now they also want to impeach everyone and anyone who disagrees with them. The Queen of Hearts in Alice's Adventures in Wonderland shouted "Off With His Head" about someone every minute or so. She would be part of the Democrat Party's moderate wing today.

"Whistleblower" Endgame? WaPo: No Quid Pro Quo

The WaPo is reporting that, in his July 25th phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, President Trump did not offer an explicit quid pro quo if Ukraine launched an investigation into former Vice President Joe Biden's son as initially reported. Per Zerohedge, Did Trump-Biden-Ukraine Drama Just Implode? WaPo Reports No "Quid Pro Quo" Offered During Phone Call:

The latest 'smoking gun' Democrats have been clinging to in search of that ever-elusive Trump impeachment may have just imploded - after the Washington Post quietly reported on Friday evening that a July 25 phone call between President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky did not contain an explicit quid pro quo if Ukraine launched an investigation into former Vice President Joe Biden's son as initially reported.  

While President Trump did reportedly "pressure the recently elected leader to more aggressively pursue" the investigation, "Trump did not raise the issue of American military and intelligence aid that had been pledged to Ukraine, indicating there was not an explicit quid pro quo in that call." 

... 

So - the current US president asked Ukraine to conduct a legal investigation into the former US Vice President, who openly bragged about withholding $1 billion in US loan guarantees unless they fired the guy investigating his son and his son's company - and there was no quid pro quo offered in exchange for that investigation - at least not on that phone call. 

Recall that in the past I've placed great emphasis on the various attempts to discover Trump in some situation that could be construed as a quid pro quo exchange--especially the Trump Tower meeting between top Trump campaign aides and the Russian lawyer, Veselnitskaya. The obvious reason for all these efforts, including the present one, is to try to claim that Trump has violated some federal criminal statute, such as the Bribery Act. Before the election that would have led to Trump being indicted as a candidate, and at this point it would have been grounds for impeachment. In each instance Trump has proved far too smart to get involved in such obvious illegality, and the present case is apparently no exception.

UPDATED: Brief Update On The "Whistleblower"

Multiple reports are now strongly suggesting that what the Deep State--and Congressional Dems--found so "troubling" was that Trump is said to have sought information from the new Ukrainian head of state regarding the Biden family's corrupt dealings in Ukraine. That is, understandably, "troubling" for Dems, but the fact is as Trump hater Phil Mudd puts it: the POTUS can say anything he wants to foreign leaders, and if he wants to ask them about the corrupt dealings of US politicians, well, the POTUS is the chief law enforcement officer of the United States and is the logical person to deal directly with foreign heads of state. Nor is Congress entitled to be part of those conversations. So play that on your whistle. And if you don't like that, go talk to Bill Barr about it.

UPDATE: Don Surber, We spy on our president? seems to be saying that this whole thing could have been primarily a hit job on Biden to ensure that Warren gets the nomination. Surber is very shrewd and I'd would never idly disagree with him on such matters--so I won't:

Well, well, well, the much trumpeted whistle-blower scandal promoted by the Washington Post and the New York Times turns out to be an attempt to bring Joe Biden's cocaine-addled son to justice. 

Last year, Biden bragged that as vice president, he put the arm on Ukraine not to prosecute Hunter Biden in a bribery scandal. 

The son received $600,000 a year from Burisma Holdings, Ukraine gas company, for a no show job. 

Ukrainian prosecutors were investigating the company's bribery.
Biden stepped in to stop it. 

He said last year, "I remember going over (to Ukraine), convincing our team … that we should be providing for loan guarantees. … And I was supposed to announce that there was another billion-dollar loan guarantee. And I had gotten a commitment from (then Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko) and from (then-Prime Minister Arseniy) Yatsenyuk that they would take action against the state prosecutor (Shokin). And they didn’t…

"They were walking out to a press conference. I said, nah, … we’re not going to give you the billion dollars. They said, ‘You have no authority. You’re not the president.’ … I said, call him. I said, I’m telling you, you’re not getting the billion dollars. I said, you’re not getting the billion. … I looked at them and said, ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money.’ Well, son of a bitch. He got fired. And they put in place someone who was solid at the time."

That is corruption. 

Biden should be prosecuted for using his public office for private gain. The fact that he was so casual about it -- bragging about it -- shows this was a common occurrence for him and Obama. The fact that the media did not blow this up into a Covington Catholic MAGA Cap scandal shows the media is in on the scam. 

... 

The Daily Beast reported, "An explosive whistle blower complaint that is threatening to paralyze much of Washington, D.C., now may upend the 2020 presidential campaign." 

Sure, just like the Times allegation five days ago led to the impeachment of Justice Kavanaugh. 

Prediction: This will fade, and then Warren will use this against Biden. She is tenacious and she wants to win.

But the real scandal is that this "whistle blower" as the press hailed him was spying on our president.

...