Russian hacking

Trump Spanks the Press: Get Used to it, Girlie-Boys

Trump Spanks the Press: Get Used to it, Girlie-Boys

By Erik Rush

Ever since President-Elect Donald Trump reacted to press allegations concerning lurid sex acts and Russia hacking the November election by collectively bending the Washington press corps over and doing the predictable thing (figuratively speaking of course), far-left politicos have come to resemble a gaggle of frail, scrawny older men in period costume clinging to one another and squealing in girlish terror while being menaced by the cast of “The Expendables.”

Like anthropogenic climate change, stories of Russia hacking the November election and making Donald Trump our President-Elect have been thoroughly debunked, but these have by design already grown legs enough to gain some traction – at least amongst the blisteringly stupid. As in the case of anthropogenic climate change dogma, those purveying it don’t actually believe the lies; cultivating a segment of society that actually does believe them and that is substantial enough to affect change is the true objective.

Since Trump’s election – and even moreso since his schooling of the press last week – the left has been in a state of abject meltdown as regards any prudent strategy, with dedicated lefties articulating the truly outlandish in their attempts to paint Trump as a B-movie villain who ascended to the presidency through some sort of arcane dark magic, novel technology, or mass mind control technique, and who must be stopped at all cost.

Considering that liberals were oh-so-keen to remind us on many occasions that Obama was a duly-elected chief executive despite the fact that he routinely used the Constitution as bath tissue, destroyed our health care system, sabotaged our economy, and fire-hosed Miracle-Gro® onto radical Islam, one would think that they might at least wait to see what Trump did in his first few months as President before passing judgment. Not a chance.

Now, the left doesn’t fear and despise Donald Trump because he is an ideological conservative, because as we know, Donald Trump is not an ideological conservative. In fact, an ideological conservative president from among the field of Republican candidates Trump faced in the primaries last year (and there were one or two) might have been easier for progressives to hold in abeyance because such an individual could have been more inclined to adhere to the Beltway decorum that has aided in keeping socialist policies alive.

In this regard, Donald Trump is a different breed of cat, and one that is apparently immune to the rhetorical poison arrows loosed by progressives. Rather than cowering like a wee lass at press conferences, Trump comes out swinging – or ready to bend them over, as the case may be. He is like the prize fighter who knows that going for the knockout is a far better strategy than trying to out-point his opponent and hoping the judges will appreciate his technique and finesse.

In short, the left is terrified that like Obama, Trump is going to do as he pleases as President, only in his case it will be to the benefit of America rather than to her detriment. This has made them even more desperate and careless in their speech, and the farther left they are along the political continuum, the more desperate and careless their speech is proving to be. Spinning bizarre and fanciful calumnies and making petulant demands for conciliation when they are at a political disadvantage (nothing new; they’re just doing more of it at present) illustrate their present distraction.

Rep. John Lewis (D-GA), continuing the piteous spectacle of cashing in on his former glory as a civil rights leader (though this status is debatable), told NBC News’ Chuck Todd last week that he doesn’t see Donald Trump as a legitimate commander-in-chief following Russia’s nonexistent interference in the November election, and that he would skip Trump’s inauguration. While this might make him a hero in the eyes of the aforementioned blisteringly stupid, to others he simply comes across as a pasty old fool, a sad, aging black caricature in the school of the imbecilic Maxine Waters and the treacherous, subversive Elijah Cummings.

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), continuing the piteous spectacle of cashing in on his former glory as a war hero (though this status is also debatable), told Fox News’ Martha McCallum this week that he was leaning toward voting to confirm Trump’s Secretary of State pick, former Exxon-Mobil CEO Rex Tillerson. There had been doubts as to whether McCain, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, would do so due to Tillerson’s alleged chummy relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Calling Putin a “butcher” and a “thug,” McCain nevertheless voiced an apparent intent to support Trump’s nominee. This is quite ironic considering McCain’s work in recent years at the behest of one Barack Hussein Obama toward keeping the Muslim Brotherhood in charge in Egypt and bringing the butchering thugs ISIS into power in Iraq and Syria. In truth, McCain should be standing trial for treason alongside Obama, Hillary Clinton, Obama senior adviser Valerie Jarrett, and a host of politicos and private sector traitors from both parties who helped to facilitate those developments in the Middle East. McCain’s actions also typify the endemic corruption and treasonous modality that have become standard operating procedure in Beltway politics.

The left’s deportment over the last few weeks serve to reinforce what I’ve maintained for some time, and what I will continue to articulate: Dedicated progressives are a vile breed, whatever letters they happen to have in parentheses after their names. They are patient and well-entrenched however, so stamping out their influence is going to be a job bigger than any president. In a very real sense, our work is just beginning.

Originally published in WorldNetDaily

Posted by Erik Rush in Columns
Imperious Progressives: Shameless Sore Losers

Imperious Progressives: Shameless Sore Losers

By Erik Rush

There’s very little that epitomizes the subversive deportment of powerful progressives – as well as their elitist, narcissistic perspective – more than Barack Hussein Obama’s description of the Electoral College as “a vestige” and “a carryover from an earlier vision of how our federal government was going to work.” This sage wisdom came in support of a campaign that was on at the time to convince Republican electors to disregard the outcome of our recent general election and deny Donald Trump the presidency when they cast their official ballots.

Also last week, a host of Hollywood celebrities, no doubt at the behest of losing Democrat candidate Hillary Clinton and the White House, voiced their support for the move to confound the Electoral College certification via a truly embarrassing public service announcement.

Now, we’re aware that Obama and other progressives hold a similarly dim view of the Constitution as they do the Electoral College, although few would be rash enough to articulate this publicly. Obama has previously criticized aspects of the Constitution, citing things he might have included or excluded at its inception, but he’s never suggested that he would scrap the entire document, which his description of the Electoral College before reporters at a White House press conference last week appears to recommend with regard to that body.

Frustration, outrage, and desperation make for curious behaviors however, and Obama’s above referenced words surely illustrate this.

Early in the last century, political elites who considered themselves intellectually superior and more worldly than the men who founded this nation determined that a massive, paternalistic federal government – with their class at the helm – would be a far better governmental model for the modern age than that of the constitutional republic. Their condescension and disdain for ordinary folk were both symptoms of this, and drove their justification for that point of view. The only question was how to bring it about in such a way that they would not be hung for treason en masse.

Factor in the radicalism of certain political aspirants who came of age during the 1960s and 1970s, their racialist hatred of the old, white, wig-wearing slave owners who founded America, and an unhealthy dose of malignant narcissism, and we can readily understand Obama’s words.

On December 12, conservative radio talk shows were abuzz with discussions of Obama having announced that he was ordering a review into hacking aimed at influencing U.S. elections. This is ironic for a few reasons, not the least of which being the documented reports of election tampering having taken place during the 2012 general election and the 2008 Democratic primaries, which favored Obama and contributed to his re-election in 2012 and his nomination in 2008, respectively.

This represented the most baseless sort of “fake news” that the left has (ironically) been decrying for weeks. Tangential to the announcement of Obama’s decree, a slew of wholly unsubstantiated news reports emerged contending that Russia had somehow influenced the election in Trump’s favor. How the Russians supposedly accomplished this remains a mystery; in truth, the purpose the accusation was to delegitimize Trump’s presidency, or to derail the electoral certification entirely. This was an intended if feeble objective of Obama’s words vis-à-vis the Electoral College.

Reports surfaced which cited anonymous officials in the Central Intelligence Agency who accused Russia of hacking the election. For those who may be wondering since when CIA officials had to be anonymous in bandying about accusations of foreign subterfuge, such incredulity is well-placed. This inconsistency is indicative of these accusations (likely crafted in the office of CIA chief, Obama pal and alleged Muslim convert John Brennan) being, for wont of a more delicate term, utter dog squeeze.

A major irony has to do with this issue arising after Obama’s October assurances to the public that there was no danger of fraud being an issue in the November election. Another irony lies in Obama’s action in light of then-candidate Donald Trump having raised the issue of possible election fraud back in October. President Obathhouse did in fact roundly chastise Trump for being a weenie who was attempting to set the stage for an electoral crisis in the event that he did not win the presidency. Still another is illustrated in the Obama administration having been involved in widespread and illegal overseas regime change, particularly their overt attempts to oust Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during Israel’s 2015 election.

To liberals and socialists in positions of influence, the rules are never the same for the unwashed as they are for the exalted – if they apply at all. Denying voters their duly elected President would be of no more consequence than denying citizens their rights under the Constitution, which they seek to do on a regular basis. It is for this reason that liberals and socialists should be disenfranchised and excluded from the political process entirely.

These attempts to sabotage Trump’s presidency before he even takes the Oath of Office speak to a desperation that throws caution to the wind with regard to potentially exposing their subversive nature. Their deep conceit however, precludes the recognition that one reason Trump was elected in the first place had to do in a large measure with the public being fed up with the byproducts of that subversive nature.

This deficiency on their part represents a decided advantage that we, their political opponents, have over them should we prove prudent enough to exploit it.

Originally published in WorldNetDaily

Posted by Erik Rush in Columns