Conrad Black's Tour de Force

Today Conrad Black has an outstanding take-down of the WSJ's foolish anti-Trump editorial (on Friday). The WSJ editorial is titled "The GOP's Trump Problem"--see, Trump is the problem. Black responds with some heavy artillery of his own:

The GOP’s Trump Solution

At some point, the former Republican establishment will have to familiarize itself with the consequences of being defeated by Donald Trump within its own party.

Black covers a lot of ground. I'll try to summarize the main points, while urging readers to follow the link--you won't regret it. Black talks turkey, explains the facts of political life in lucid terms.

Black's basic thesis is that the WSJ has things exactly backwards. Trump is not the problem for the GOP. Rather, the Never Trumps are the problem. Trump had a remarkably successful term, especially in light of the constant betrayals and the concerted Dem and Deep State assault on our constitutional order. The reality, contrary to the WSJ's view, is that Republicans want more of the Trump agenda--whether led by Trump himself or by a Trump approved proxy. In fact, the disastrous start and likely deepening national crisis we are experiencing under the Zhou Baiden regime (whoever or what cabal actually is pulling the strings) favor this solution for the GOP, in Black's view:

Interesting: McConnell Threatens "Scorched Earth"

Mitch McConnell is definitely a mixed bag. Leaving the downside for some other time, the upside is that he's a great guy to have on your side when the going gets rough in the Senate.

Today he gave a speech in the Senate threatening a "scorched earth" approach if the Dems eliminate the filibuster. I had no idea that the GOP had alternatives, but it turns out that they do. Zerohedge--McConnell Flips Out Over Filibuster, Threatens 'Scorched Earth Senate' If Dems Pursue Power Grab:

If Dems 'blow up the filibuster,' McConnell says he'll require a quorum for every piece of Democrat legislation - which VP Kamala Harris couldn't become a tie-breaker for, and that previous actions would seem like "child's play."

...

In short, McConnell is threatening to make Congressional Democrats' lives miserable if they push for a power grab through the elimination of the filibuster, while Democrats know they'll have to negotiate in good faith if they want infrastructure - or any major legislation - to pass with the support of moderate Democrat Joe Manchin - described in January as the most powerful Senator due to this exact scenario.

That's not "flipping out." That's just splashing some cold water in your face. Looks like the GOP may have more cards in its hand than anyone thought. I sure hope so.

Zerohedge has all sorts of analysis of this, but the above looks like the bottom line.

What Is It About Dems And Witchhunts?

Everyone knew this nonsense about "unity" was eyewash. Likewise, that Pelosi's January 6 Commission would be a latter day HUAC targeting, basically, all normal people, but especially conservatives. Nevertheless, as Roddy Martindale would say, One does like one's perfidy to be subtle--and this isn't subtle at all:

Pelosi’s Pick To Lead Capitol Security Investigation Thinks Hawley Is A ‘Little Piece Of Sh-t’ Who Should Lose His Job

The next time I hear someone say, Thanks for your service! I may literally puke. So many of these retired military and LE have spent years being stroked by sycophants and throwing their supposed weight around--and liking it. It's easy when you can pull rank.

Oh, did I mention?

Pelosi has appointed a retired lieutenant general, Russel Honore, to run her pet commission. Get a load of this guy--runs his mouth off then deletes his tweets:

On January 12, 2021, Honoré tweeted about the US Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.): "This little peace of shit with his Yale law degree should be run out of DC and Disbarred ASAP [Senators] Josh Hawley and Ted Cruz aaa hats these Yale and Harvard law grads is high order white privilege."

On January 7, 2021 Honoré speculated that those in charge of security at the Capitol could have been "complicit" in the attack: "By a percentage, 30 to 40 percent of the officers are Trumpsters. That's a fact Jack".

On the same day he called for a boycott of companies advertising on Fox News, claiming that Sean Hannity is a Russian asset: "These are Sean Hannity's leading advertisers. PLEASE stop buying their shit stocks Sean Hannity speaks #Russian iNFO OPERATIONS TO SUCK UP TO #45" ^{[14] [15] [16]}

On January 15, 2021, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi announced that Honoré would lead a review of security failures following the 2021 storming of the United States Capitol that will focus on “security infrastructure, interagency processes and procedures, and command and control”. ^[17] [18] On February 17, 2021, Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) criticized Honoré appointment: "General Honoré is an extreme partisan and should be the LAST person to head up an investigation of what happened at the Capitol on Jan 6th." ^[14]

Interestingly, in August, 2020, Honore called for a "march on Washington" to "stop" what he referred to as "Trump's sabotage" of the coming election. Incitement anyone?

I wonder what Mitch McConnell is doing right now? Looking for a bridge to other GOPers to burn, if there are any left that he hasn't torched yet? His rhetoric plays right into the latest witchhunt, but I doubt many senators will be amused.

The Internal GOP Struggle Intensifies

With the forces of Big Tech and Media behind them--as well as those of the Army of the Potomac still present in the Imperial City--the Zhou Baiden regime is seeking to persuade We The People of its legitimacy. It remains hampered in that regard by the fact that it dare not put its figurehead--Zhou Baiden himself--forward in public to do the job of persuasion. That would, in the American tradition, entail responding to random questioning in a free wheeling press conference environment--a non-starter for Zhou.

The GOPe has stepped forward, however. Mitch McConnell may have suffered a significant setback in the Senate vote regarding impeachment, triggered by Rand Paul, but he hasn't given up the NeverTrump cause. Within the Senate itself, while McConnell has had to deal with public warnings from established senators who are not normally aligned with Rand Paul--Lindsey Graham and Ron Johnson, for example--he has other tools for control. It appears that Josh Hawley and Ted Cruz--certainly among the most politically ambitious as well as (objectively speaking) intellectually accomplished Republican senators--have been sidelined, at least for a time, by an ethics complaint based on their objections to some of the electors (really). I don't claim to understand Senate rules but, until persuaded otherwise, my working assumption will be that the ethics complaint has McConnell's blessing, even if it was brought by Democrat senators.

In the meantime, McConnell is also providing aid and comfort to the Zhou Baiden both in his Senate role as well as by interfering in internal House matters. To all appearances, McConnell is attempting to establish himself--if not as actual head of the Republican party, then--as at least the senior or elder statesman for all Republicans. Again, I have a working assumption, and that is that McConnell is attempting to leverage his Big Money campaign finance contacts to muscle recalcitrant Republicans. No doubt he is acting at the behest of major donors and the Bushie wing of the Establishment. The outcome is no foregone conclusion--Trump has changed much in the political landscape.

In what follows, I've selected a list of headlines--several of them drawn from Liz Shield's Morning Greatness for today, with added comments. The overall thrust is the attempt to understand who the players in this high stakes contest are and where the battle lines are drawn.

First, let's start with a broad brush type of article, and I'll select just a few passages to place the political warfare in DC within its proper Globalist context:

Good Read On the Mitch - Trump Feud

I'm always cautious with Michael Snyder, but this is an interesting read on an important topic. My working assumption is that, whatever personal animus and political convictions Mitch may have brought to his feud with Trump, there were moneyed interests behind him pushing him. See what you think. One thing is for sure, by now Trump knows who his enemies are. This is a small part of a considerably longer article, so check it out:

Why Mitch McConnell Backed Away From Trying To Convict Trump

Mitch McConnell really wanted to convict Donald Trump and ban him from ever running for office again, but he was forced to back off.  In fact, he just voted for a motion that declared that convicting Trump at this point would be unconstitutional.  That represents a stunning reversal by McConnell, because earlier this month he was telling other Republicans that he wanted Trump gone.  Putting the pieces together, it appears that McConnell really did try to get to 67 votes so that Trump would be convicted, but political reality forced him to back down in a major way.  Now a weakened McConnell will try to move forward as the minority leader in the Senate, and the future of his political career is very much in doubt.

Proof That Trump Buckled To Turtle And Bluto?

Today we hear that Lindsey! is calling on Turtle to renounce impeachment:  

“What we need right now is Sen. McConnell to unequivocally say the second impeachment of Donald Trump after he leaves office is not only unconstitutional, it is bad for the country,” Graham, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said during a virtual appearance on Fox News’ “Hannity.”

My interpretation of that goes thusly: OK, Trump kept his side of the bargain--he didn't pardon Julian Assange. So now you, Turtle, need to try to pull the wool over the eyes of Republican voters one more time by saying bygones are more or less bygones, especially with Trump bygone--for the time being. I further understand this as a pretty clear indication that Bluto's recent attacks on Trump--he "betrayed" an "office" and yada, yada, yada--were a shot across Trump's pardon bow: If you pardon Assange, I, Bluto, disgraced former AG, will testify against you at Turtle's impeachment trial of you, thus giving prestige cover to RINO senators to vote for conviction.

No, I can't prove that, but that's what I think pretty much happened. Trump blinked and didn't do something that he clearly should have done.

On the House side, OTOH, some goodish news. Something in the neighborhood of 115 GOPers in the House have committed to voting for a special GOP conference to consider booting Liz Cheney from her leadership position. That would be based on her vote to impeach Trump. That 115 is something like double the number of votes needed. It looks like this is a pretty clear warning to Kevin McCarthy that he's got some major problems ahead. Snubbing Trump--McCarthy didn't attend Trump's departure--will not have helped McCarthy with those 115 Reps. No conference leader can afford to snub that many members. By the same token, by taking this step these members probably understand that this cannot be an isolated move--they'll need to stick together in the future, as well.

Tucker Re Assange And McConnell

As Tucker says, he doesn't know whether this is true, but this is what he's hearing:

Video: pic.twitter.com/kRYD58nAEn

— Daniel Chaitin (@danielchaitin7) January 20, 2021

UPDATED: Rand Paul On The Bluto - McConnell Strategy

Disgraced former AG Bluto Barr and Cocaine Mitch McConnell appear to be coordinating attacks on President Trump, claiming that Trump incited a mob to attack Congress while it was engaged in "sacred" constitutional duties--putting the finishing touches on The Big Steal. Exactly what the end game is, is anyone's guess. They clearly seem to be egging the Dems on to push for an impeachment trial in the Senate and to convict Trump of ... something. Apparently McConnell believes that Barr's backing will give this push credibility with, well, the GOPe? It surely won't help get Republicans elected come 2022, not if the Georgia runoffs were any indication and not if Trump's approval polling means anything.

To me, all this is mind bogglingly wacky, but each of Barr and McConnell have shown real tone deafness and serious lack of perspective during the past two years. Commenter Ray So-Cal has linked a Zerohedge blog that features Senator Rand Paul being interviewed by Laura Ingraham. Paul speaks lucid good sense:

“I don’t understand how they can be moving forward with this,” he said, before adding

“The thing they’re doing now is an overreaction, and if they think they’re going to have a positive feeling from the public, when they’re going to go through a partisan impeachment again, I think that’s absolutely insane and wrong headed.”

"Absolutely insane and wrong?" Sounds like Trump derangement syndrome on steroids.

So This Is What Lindsey Graham Was Talking About

This morning Lindsey Graham spoke out about a ballot harvesting operation in Pennsylvania nursing homes. As he noted, ballot harvesting is illegal in Pennsylvania. Repeat: Illegal.  He referred to 25,000 ballots that were returned all on the same day. You know that Lindsey knew more than he was giving away. It's interesting to note how up front and Trump-supportive Lindsey has been. I doubt that Mitch McConnell would have let Lindsey go way out on a limb. Think about that, and think about this: Yesterday Bill Barr turned local USAs loose on election fraud and then went to talk to Mitch. Today Gina Haspel, CIA Director turned up at Mitch's office, late in the day (h/t EZ). Who thinks Barr and Mitch aren't on the same page? Because Mitch, too, has been supportive of Trump.

Here, courtesy of CFP, is what Lindsey was talking about:

Pennsylvania smoking gun…

Posted by Kane on November 10, 2020 3:56 pm

Pennsylvania:
Nearly 35,000 ballots were returned on the same day they were mailed out.

23,000 have an impossible return date—earlier than the sent date.

More than 9,000 have no sent date.https://t.co/hHq2y0Bl11

— Praying Medic (@prayingmedic) November 10, 2020

More than 100,000 absentee ballots in Pennsylvania have questionable return dates.

Nearly 35,000 ballots were returned on the same day they were mailed out.

23,000 have an impossible return date — it is earlier than the ‘sent date.’

More than 9,000 have no sent date.

More than 100,000 absentee ballots in Pennsylvania have unlikely or impossible return dates, based on a researcher’s analysis of the state’s voter database.

Over 51,000 ballots were marked as returned just a day after they were sent out—an extraordinary speed, given U.S. Postal Service (USPS) delivery times, while nearly 35,000 were returned on the same day they were mailed out. Another more than 23,000 have an impossible return date—earlier than the sent date.

Full story at Epoch Times…

Highly Recommended Election Eve Read

That would be Thomas Lifson's article at AmThinker today:

Democrats have outsmarted themselves on mail-in voting and on election eve are having a Wylie Coyote moment

Well, we'll forgive Lifson the misspelling. The article itself is a nice overview of Dem miscalculations in their too-smart-by-half election strategy

The plan that seemed so smart once they realized that COVID was a golden opportunity to distract from President Trump’s massive foreign policy and economic triumphs is backfiring.

The plan, in short, was to terrorize Americans with fear porn over the purported dangers of COVID (despite it being 99%+ survivable for all but those over 70, and despite huge progress in therapeutics driving the survival rate even higher), while emphasizing mail-in voting for their base. Republicans, they thought, could be discouraged from in-person voting on Election Day, and with compliant state governors, AGs, and secretaries of state extending deadlines for mail-in votes, the margin of victory could be manufactured in the days afterward.

 

Lifson goes on to explain how this strategery has failed spectacularly. In doing so he cites Larry Schweikart at some length. Among Schweikart's many point, I want to focus on one:

Several things began to severely damage that plan. First, the GOP won 11/14 court cases, with the remaining 3 likely headed to the USSC. Most of these drastically limited the time and/or conditions under which these votes can be counted and for how long.

Then the anvil fell. RBG died. That meant that there would be NO appeals related to fraud that could succeed.

Schweikart, without mentioning Mitch McConnell by name, is highlighting McConnell's enormous role in this momentous election. That role began with facing down Obama and the MSM over the Merrick Garland SCOTUS nomination--keeping that spot open for a potential GOP president: Trump as it turned out.

Trump was undoubtedly not McConnell's choice for POTUS, but since Trump's election McConnell has steadfastly supported Trump's THREE picks for the SCOTUS and shepherded those nominations through to confirmation, maintaining party unity against all odds. With Justice Amy taking her seat on the high court bench this morning, the transformation of the SCOTUS has entered new and unheard of territory. Republicans can look to those 3 cases likely headed to the SCOTUS with a new measure of confidence, without the doubts over what role Roberts will play.

Beyond that, however, McConnell has also played a major role in the 11/14 court victories this election season (so far). This is because, faced by determined obstruction by Chuck Schumer, who has refused to allow judicial confirmations to be expedited through unanimous consent, McConnell has focused on obtaining confirmations of federal appeals court judges. McConnell's strategy is a very smart most-bank-for-your-buck move. While many district court vacancies remain unfilled, the effect of the remake of circuit court benches has been striking. In particular, we have seen the effect throughout these election law cases. 

The result of McConnell's efforts is that a major part of the Dem strategy for disrupting the elections--through jiggering of local elections laws--has been short circuited (pun intended). And now we have the promise of quick resolutions of any post election disputes, as well.

UPDATED: Impeachment Theater #1

I give in. As long as I can keep these brief--because everyone and their brother is commenting about Schiff's absurd Impeachment Theater--I'll provide updates if the news seems noteworthy.

First off, when Jeffrey Toobin, liberal legal gadfly, thinks the Dems have a problem, I think you can take that to the bank:

Adam Schiff has lost CNN:

CNN’s Toobin: neither witness “had direct contact with the president…that’s a problem” pic.twitter.com/4mpgk6fDhS

— Steve Guest (@SteveGuest) November 13, 2019

It sounds like Bill Taylor, the former ambassador, put everyone to sleep right off the bat by delivering a 41 MINUTE opening statement. The idea behind it, as far as could be discerned, seemed to be that Trump is disrespecting the career foreign service by not doing their bidding--so ... he needs to be impeached?

But more interesting is that Mitch McConnell repeated today that if the House sends the Senate articles of impeachment there will be a big ass long trial. Of course McConnell saying this doesn't commit him to a thing, but you may recall that a full scale trial was one of the two approaches that Hugh Hewitt favored: What's The Principled Way For The Senate To Handle An "Impeachment".

McConnell has in the past said that in the case of an impeachment there would be a trial. At that time I suggested this might be be a warning shot across the Dem bow. You might think a Senate trial would be all about Trump, but I'm not sure you should bet on that. We might well find an inordinate amount of time--weeks, in fact--devoted to a defense centered around the Bidens, father and son, and the need to investigate their corrupt dealings. The Bidens might well be called to testify, and then we might be treated to the spectacle of a presidential aspirant and his son both taking the Fifth. If the Dems really prefer Biden as a candidate to Warren, Sanders, or Alfred E. Neumann--or, God help us, Hillary!--they might want to reconsider impeachment altogether. And that may be the message McConnell is sending. 

We've seen the Dem case, and it's pathetic. But impeachment could well turn into a sword that cuts both ways, and most decidedly more in one direction than the other.

To finish up, here's what seems to me a very well informed interview--Jack Posobiec talking to former CIA officer Brad Johnson:

They can't hide Ciaramella from the Senate. They'll track him down in the wilds of Dupont Circle and put him up before the country.

UPDATE: WaPo seems to agree with me on McConnell's strategery (from FR):

Republicans discuss a longer Senate impeachment trial to scramble Democratic primaries

Washington Post ^ | Nov 13, 2019 | By Robert Costa, Michael Scherer and Seung Min Kim 

Some Republican senators and their advisers are privately discussing whether to pressure GOP leaders to stage a lengthy impeachment trial beginning in January to scramble the Democratic presidential race — potentially keeping six contenders in Washington until the eve of the Iowa caucuses or longer. 

Those conversations about the timing and framework for a trial remain fluid and closely held, according to more than a dozen participants in the discussions. But the deliberations come as Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) faces pressure from conservative activists to swat back at Democrats as public impeachment hearings began this week in the House...

(Excerpt) Read more at google.com ...

McConnell: Senate Trial Would "Immediately" Follow Impeachment

The AP reports:

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said months ago that if the House goes ahead and impeaches President Donald Trump, the Senate “has no choice” but to conduct a trial to determine whether the president is removed from office.

The Kentucky Republican told NPR that “if the House were to act, the Senate immediately goes into a trial.” McConnell made the comments long before House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced the House would begin an impeachment inquiry into the president.

That sounds to me rather like a warning. Mollie Hemingway comments:

@MZHemingway 

"Please, we beg of you, please don't throw us into that Briar Patch," the Republican leader added with a strange smirk. 

12:14 PM - 27 Sep 2019

ADDENDUM: Yesterday I published a Twitter thread by Fred Fleitz taking down the whole "whistleblower" narrative:  "A Grevious Violation Of Trust". Today Fleitz has worked the basic ideas in that Twitter thread into an article in the New York Post  that emailer Jim brought to my attention: Former CIA official on whistleblower: ‘How could this be an intelligence matter?’ Although it's largely an expansion of the basic ideas in the Twitter thread it's worth excerpting it in its new form, especially since Fleitz would be particularly knowledgeable about such matters:

the declassified whistleblowing complaint ... appears to be written by a law professor and includes legal references and detailed footnotes. It also has an unusual legalistic reference on how this complaint should be classified. 

From my experience, such an extremely polished whistleblowing complaint is unheard of. This document looks as if this leaker had outside help, possibly from congressional members or staff. 

Moreover, it looks like more than a coincidence that this complaint surfaced and was directed to the House Intelligence Committee just after Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), an outspoken opponent of President Trump, expressed numerous complaints in August 2019 accusing President Trump of abusing aid to Ukraine to hurt Joe Biden. This includes an August 28 tweet that closely resembled the whistleblowing complaint. 

House Republicans need to ask the whistleblower under oath whether he spoke to the press or Congress about his complaint. 

Also very concerning to me is how the complaint indicates intelligence officers and possibly other federal employees are violating the rules governing presidential phone calls with foreign leaders. 

The content and transcripts of these calls are highly restricted. The whistleblower makes clear in his complaint that he did not listen to a call in question, nor did he read the transcript — he was told about the call by others. If true, intelligence officers have grossly violated the rules as well as the trust placed on them to protect this sensitive information. 

I refuse to believe that the leaking, timing and presentation of this complaint is coincidence. I don’t think the American people will buy this either. 

I’m more worried, however, that this latest instance of blatant politicization of intelligence by Trump haters will do long term damage to the relationship between the intelligence community and US presidents for many years to come.