This Is A Coup Against Our Right To
Kurt Schlichter, May 18, 2017
The blizzard of lies and distraction blowing
through Washington is not just any routine stuffstorm, but a calculated attempt
to bring down a president – our president,
not the establishment’s president. And more than that, it’s an attempt to ensure
that we never again have the ability to disrupt the bipartisan D.C. cabal’s
permanent supremacy by inserting a chief executive who refuses to kiss their
This is a coup against us.
It’s a coordinated campaign by liberals and their allies in the bureaucracy and
media to once and for all ensure their perpetual rule over us. We need to fight
it, here and now, so we don’t have to fight it down at
the bottom of this slippery slope.
It’s brazen. It’s bold. It’s insulting to our
intelligence. They aren’t even trying to hide their lies anymore. Truth is
irrelevant; this is a choreographed dance routine and everyone has his moves.
Call it Breakin’
2: Electric Leakaroo,
except instead of trying to save the community center they’re trying to save
their power and prestige.
To buy the media narrative on this latest
Russian nonsense, you must believe:
1. That whatever was revealed was
super-secret, though we don’t know exactly what it was. When in doubt, assume
it’s on par with the nuclear codes!
2. That there was no good reason to share this
info with Russia, like coordinating our fight against our joint enemy or to
prevent another Russian
Because why would we want another power fighting ISIS or civilians not to be
blown out of the sky?
3. That LTG McMaster, who literally wrote the
book on soldiers standing
up to misbehaving civilian leaders and displayed
immense personal courage in battle,
turned chicken and sat there silently as Trump monologued about this unknown
mystery info of doomsday-level import.
4. That LTG McMaster lied on camera.
Twice. And that Secretary of State Tillerson lied too.
5. That random anonymous sources in an
intelligence community that hates Trump with a burning passion must be believed
without question, though we don’t know their identities or their motives.
6. That these anonymous randos must be
believed, even though they were not actually in the room to, you know, actually
hear what happened. The traditional bar on hearsay is apparently now just a
7. That when the Washington
the rest of the media publishes classified stuff (including intelligence
provided by allies) leaked by anyone not named “Donald Trump,” it’s awesome.
8. That the Washington
the rest of the media, which has been wrong over and over again in their
reporting, are not
9. That the Washington
the rest of the media are objective and have no anti-Trump bias, even though
they are literally
hits on the president.
10. That there are unicorns.
The latest pseudo-scandal is that Trump
doesn’t think Mike Flynn did anything wrong, and told James Comey so back in
February. So basically, Trump expressed the same view he had of the whole Flynn
nonsense to Comey as he has expressed to every interviewer. Comey did nothing,
and said nothing (even when testifying to Congress) for nearly three months,
because it was nothing. The Russian snipe hunt continued throughout unabated.
That off-hand comment was a pretty poor attempt at obstruction of justice since
it didn’t obstruct anything – to the limited extent these Russian witch hunts
can be confused with “justice” at all.
So the Menschian thinkers who usually
scream “Treason!” are now screaming “Obstruction of Justice!” It’s adorable when
they learn new terms and try to use them correctly; they’re so proud of
themselves and their vocabulary building that you almost feel bad having to
point out that they sound like idiots.
It is nice, though, to have liberals
finally come out against the abuse of executive power, misuse of classified
material, and Russians. Welcome to the party, except we know you’re full of
It’s all lies, and they know it and we
know it. Normal people just shake their heads and wonder why Washington is so
consumed with political nonsense instead of solving problems. But then,
Washington does not produce solutions. It produces only political nonsense.
This is a concentrated, coordinated effort by
elite insiders to take down not this president – Trump’s not the point here –
but to take down us,
the normal American they seek to rule. Someone came to Washington who wasn’t
part of the club, and that’s intolerable. So they are desperate to expel him,
and by extension, us.
Every day will be a crisis, every action
he takes will be the worst thing that has ever happened, and every step towards
keeping his promises a crime.
Repeal Obamacare? TRUMP’S SENTENCING
MILLIONS TO DEATH!
Talk to Russians? IT’S TREASON!
Telling Comey he wishes this nonsense
would stop? OBSTRUTION OF JUSTICE EVEN THOUGH NOTHING WAS OBSTRUCTED!
Now, this campaign isn’t aimed at us.
Normal people, people who don’t live in DC or NYC or LA, just tune it out. After
all these years, and with the help of the web, we normals know the game. We’re
woke, as the dorky leftists say.
The target of this constant barrage is
the soft and the stupid, the smug and the sanctimonious, the wusses and the
surrender flunkies. That’s why you get the girlish-handed likes of David Brooks
writing dainty columns that give Trump such a pinch! That’s why David Frum
starts using words like “courage” to impugn actual men who have done actual
man-things, like LTG McMaster. That’s why Kasich spews his bilious funk of
sanctimony and submission, among other funks. It’s all to appeal to the
Fredocons, the soft-headed RINOs who are smart, not dumb like everyone says, who
just want something for themselves – attention, approval, and media pats on
their pointy little heads.
So these fussy ninnies, fresh from having
some v-capped crone screeching at them that they will vote to take away her
right to have taxpayers fork cash over to kill the baby no man will ever give
her, wander outside into a wall of mics and cameras and pause. Then they talk,
and when what they say trashes Trump sufficiently, the smiles from the press
come, and the nods, and then the faux respect. Now they are no longer mean old
Rethuglicans but dauntless heroes, at least in Georgetown, because they are
willing to dance and caper to the tune of the establishment.
This tsunami of baloney isn’t aimed at
us. It’s aimed at them, the Republicans who are foolish enough to believe their
new friends when they whisper words like “honor” and “patriotism.” Some of the
marks are real patriots who fall prey to these liars when they couch their bogus
narrative in national defense terms. But the majority of the marks are just
When targeting the dummies, the goal is
simple. Draw off enough weak, attention-addicted RINOs to make it impossible for
the President to govern. Then, hopefully, us normals will shrug, and slink away,
having relearned our place. After all, we’re deplorable.
And when the liberal establishment
retakes power, and the mavericks and goody-goodies get tossed aside, the
bureaucracy, media and the Democrats will conspire to ensure that no one can
ever take their power from them again. But they haven’t considered the
consequences. We’ll object.
So we have to fight against this cable network
coup. Because, if we don’t fight now, we all may
end up fighting later.
Snowflake Professor Resigns Over
Steve Sheldon, May 18, 2017
A University of Kansas associate professor
from the departments of History and of American Studies recently resigned citing
concerns over campus carry in Kansas, which becomes effective July 1. Professor
Jacob Dornan states in his resignation letter that
“Kansas can have great universities, or it can have concealed carry in
classrooms, but it cannot have both.”
He blathers on: “In practical terms,
concealed carry has proved to be a failure. Campus shootings have become all too
frequent, and arming students has done nothing to quell active shooter
situations because students do not have the training to effectively combat
shooters and rightly fear becoming identified as a suspect themselves.”
Excuse me, Mr. Professor, are you aware that
according to a Crime Prevention Research Center report, 98.4%
of mass public shootings occur in gun-free zones? Dr. John Lott, noted
criminologist and President of the Crime Prevention Research Center (CPRC)
states that, "Since at least 1950, all but four public mass shootings in America
have taken place where general citizens can’t carry guns for protection. In
Europe, every mass public shooting has occurred in a gun-free zone. And Europe
is no stranger to mass public shootings. It has been host to three of the four
worst K-12 school shootings and, in the past eight years, a per-capita casualty
rate 50 percent higher than the United States."
Maybe they don’t teach statistics in the
history department, but in the real world, for something to be considered a
fact, it must be backed by significant statistical information. Can you cite the
number of mass shootings that occurred on college campuses where guns were
actually allowed? Can you cite statistical evidence that crime goes up where
concealed carry is allowed? Can you give statistical evidence of your claim that
“concealed carry has proved to be a failure”? Perhaps you and your fellow
"academics" should spend a little more time looking at CPRC numbers.
Let’s look at mass shootings during the
past year or more occurring on school campuses. Roseburg, OR: nine killed, seven
wounded, guns not allowed on campus; Antiago, WI: two wounded, none killed, guns
not allowed; Los Angeles, CA: one innocent killed, no guns allowed; Townville,
SC: one killed, two wounded, no guns allowed; Columbus, OH: two wounded, no guns
allowed; San Francisco, CA: four wounded, no guns allowed. (Note: this may or
may not be a complete list as several sites list shootings that would include
accidental discharges, suicides and other situations where the shooter did not
set out to kill more than one person. The number killed does not include the
shooter, if the shooter was also killed or committed suicide during the event.)
So, how does one make an argument against
concealed carry by citing the occurrence of shootings in places where it is not
allowed? Apparently, they don't teach logic at universities anymore. That's like
stating my diet is not working, because other people are fat.
The nutty professor goes on to make this
argument later in his letter, suggesting the notion that “concealed carry does
not deter gun violence” is actually fact. To make the assumption that violence
or the threat of violence does not deter it is just plain ridiculous. One would
think that a history professor would know better. After all, most major
conflicts in history have been resolved through literal acts of war.
Next, he uses the tired line that
students choosing to protect themselves by secretly carrying a firearm are going
to somehow stifle debate, because they will be intimidating to other students
who don’t know they are carrying a firearm. How exactly does that work
again? How is it possible for someone to be intimidated by another who is
carrying a gun, when they have no knowledge that said person is in fact
Even worse is the argument that they will
turn a heated classroom debate into a lethal gun battle. Can someone please give
an example of somewhere when this has actually happened? Anywhere? Ever? Just
like the “blood in the streets” and “Dodge City all over again” arguments, these
fallacies only occur in the fertile minds of the anti-gun Left, which are far
removed from most realities or anything factual.
Given the current state of academia, he
might have a point about chilling free speech - although, today’s campuses
aren’t exactly bastions of free thought for anyone right of center. If today’s
university students need to run to their safe spaces to cuddle with their
blankies because someone muttered the President’s name, then the thought of
another student carrying a gun would probably require them to purchase diapers.
So long and good riddance Professor
Snowflake. Don’t let the door hit you in the backside on the way out. Maybe next
time around, KU can hire someone who is a conservative, which would be the most
diverse thing any university could do these days.
Before Impeaching Trump, Why Not Take
a Few Steps Back?
John Kass, May 18, 2017
Are you ready for President Mike Pence?
There's enough out there now about
President Donald Trump that mentioning a President Pence isn't all that
There's a drumbeat now, sending tingles
up and down Democratic legs -- and Republican Never-Trumper legs -- and other
sensations through America's turgid Twitter thumbs.
The New York Times is all but accusing
Trump of obstruction of justice in the FBI investigation of former National
Security Adviser Michael Flynn, with Democrats calling for impeachment
The Washington Post has tagged Trump at
best a bumbler, impulsively dishing out classified information on ISIS to the
Trump's credibility is in tatters just as
he planned to make his first foreign trip, and now Washington is a hot mess,
amplified by the social media echo chamber and the ravenous appetites of cable
Given Trump's animosity toward the
Washington establishment, and their absolute loathing of Trump and his
working-class voters, there's also the smell of blood on the floor.
But with all the shrieking and screaming,
and partisan dancing, I'd like to suggest something:
Take a few steps back, America. That's
right. Take a few steps back.
Get yourself a pocket copy of the
Constitution and hold on.
It might be comforting to blow it all off
as partisan politics, or run with your partisan pack and howl at the orange
moon. Politics is at play, yes, and agendas are everywhere, and hypocrisy is the
water of life in Washington, but these are serious stories that are draped
across Trump's neck.
Allegations of obstruction of justice are
serious, and compulsively giving up classified intelligence is also quite
serious. And they deserve your serious consideration.
But whether you voted for him or you hate
him, and tens of millions of Americans did one or the other in November,
remember this about the president.
Trump won't be hanged by the morning.
He might even make it to next week.
Still, The New York Times story about
former FBI Director James Comey and Trump is the kind of thing that bleeds an
The Times, through sources, reports on a
memo Comey apparently wrote before Trump fired him, about a conversation he had
with the president in the Oval Office in February.
It was about Michael Flynn, Trump's
national security adviser, who is under investigation by the FBI.
"I hope you can see your way clear to
letting this go, to letting Flynn go," Trump told Comey, according to the Times
story on the memo. "He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go."
There's only one thing wrong with the
story far as I can tell. The New York Times didn't print a copy of the Comey
It has sources who read the memo. These could
be other FBI agents or Comey himself, or his lawyers. And given it comes out of
Washington, is it possible there could be a political agenda here?
We really don't know what Comey said or
wrote or thought. We know the Trump White House denies it all. But that's today.
The president might tweet out something else in the morning.
You can make the beginnings of an
obstruction of justice case with that one. Trump helped the Democratic narrative
with his recent interview with NBC about his decision to fire Comey.
"Regardless of recommendation I was going
to fire Comey, knowing, there was no good time to do it," Trump told NBC. "And
in fact when I decided to just do it, I said to myself, I said you know, this
Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story. It's an excuse by the
Democrats for having lost an election that they should have won."
The Russians didn't cost Hillary Clinton
the election. Hillary was doomed months before any alleged Russian interference
or hacking of Democratic email.
She was the establishment candidate in
the year of insurgency, and the Democrats, the party of the state, still can't
deal with it.
"The White House said it didn't happen
and I think they need to come forward with whatever evidence they have," said
Sen. Angus King, of Maine, an independent who caucuses with the Democrats.
"If it's a tape, now's the time," King
told CNN. "If it's contemporaneous notes, if there was someone else in the room
that took notes, if the president wrote a memo afterward about what was said in
that meeting, we need to have that before us."
He's absolutely correct. But my guess is
that Trump doesn't write memos after he leverages somebody to do what he wants
done. It's all muscle with him.
And memos are a Washington thing,
something that clerks and lawyers do to cover their flanks. And apparently,
Comey's flanks are covered, but until we actually read the memo, until Comey
testifies under oath as to the nature of their conversation, we just don't know.
"There's a reason why newspaper articles
are not admissible in any courtroom in the United States, Republican U.S. Rep.
Trey Gowdy said on Fox News. "I'm not knocking the reporter. The reporter does
good work. But we're a long ways from a conviction, the fact that we simply have
a headline in The New York Times."
Comey will, and should, testify before
Congress. And every American should be able to read the memo and hear his
But headlines do have a way of driving a
herd, don't they?
When the Stanly County School
Board closed Oakboro Elementary School I was highly upset with the loss of
another elementary school being closed in Western Stanly county. The fastest
growing area in Stanly County is in the western end. Now that the new school
board has declared it will re-open Oakboro Elementary School I question if it
really should be opened. The number of students that have signed up to attend
Oakboro Elementary School are dismal at best and from talking to former teachers
and workers at the school there dosen't seem to be that much excitement about it
re-opening the school without spending a ton of money fixing it. The more I look
at the growth patterns in Western Stanly County it becomes apparent that
Ridgecrest Elementary School should be re-opened. Locust is on the cusp of
becoming another Harrisburg and the bulk of the growth will be north of Highway