Donna Brazile wants Bill Clinton to be on the campaign trail in 2018

Oh this is good.

The Intercept reports that:

During an event at Politics & Prose bookstore in Washington, D.C., on Tuesday evening for her new book “Hacks: The Inside Story of the Break-ins and Breakdowns That Put Donald Trump in the White House, Brazile weighed in on Gillibrand’s statement about Clinton and whether Democratic candidates should campaign with the Clintons during the 2018 midterm election campaign.

“Absolutely, no doubt, and let me tell you something,” Brazile said. “I worked for Bill Clinton and Al Gore, OK, part of my formative years. Bill Clinton was impeached. In 1998, I went over to the DNC, I left my job with [Reps.] Eleanor Holmes Norton and Dick Gephardt to go over to the [Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee] and the [Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee] and the DNC, and we came within five seats [of taking the House in the 1998 midterm elections]. Bill Clinton paid a huge price and I know everybody wants to re-litigate it today and rather than talk about Roy Moore, a man who has been banned from the mall, and not want to talk about sexual harassment — sexual harassment is a pervasive problem in our society and the workplace.”

At the book event, Brazile said she was worried that the focus on individuals like Bill Clinton would distract from the broader problem. “It’s not just celebrities. It’s not just politicians. It’s not just comedians. Rather than address this issue, we’re trying to make this out of a political issue like, ‘Oh, should he do this and should he’ — this is a pervasive problem in the workplace, and we need to give encouragement to the people who are coming forward with their story,” she added.

“I believe the women and we should stop trying to distract from the issue at hand, which is sexual harassment. It is immoral, it’s wrong, and it doesn’t matter if it occurred 30 years ago or if it occurred last night. We need to speak out and give voice to what is happening in our society.”

Despite Hillary Clinton’s loss to Donald Trump in the 2016 election, Brazile said the Democratic Party needs the Clintons out on the campaign trail. She applauded the Clintons for helping “recruit” new faces for the party.

“I am grateful for their service. Bill Clinton was in Puerto Rico yesterday. I know a little bit about, you know, not having running water after a storm. I know a little bit about what it’s like to have your roof blown off your head after a storm. I am proud that Bill Clinton has continued his service. He’s not perfect. I’m not perfect. John 8 said he or she without sin – I put ‘she.’ I know the men who wrote the Bible didn’t understand that women had a role too, but — cast the first stone,” Brazile said.

“The Clintons have been extremely effective in helping the Democratic Party recruit the next generation of candidates and much more. We need Bernie Sanders out there. We need Hillary Clinton out there. We need Joe Biden out there. When your party has been in the wilderness; when you’ve lost 932 state legislative seats and 11 gubernatorial seats; when you’ve lost over 63 congressional seats, we can’t afford to be going out there and saying, ‘Donna, sit your butt home. Bill, sit your butt home.’ We need everybody to get their butts out there and win in 2018 and beyond – that’s where I stand,” she added.

This is rich on so many levels. I’ll just focus on three issues that spring out from her remarks.

First, Donna Brazile wants Bill Clinton to campaign for Democrats during the 2018 elections, even though he is accused of, among other things:

  • Raping Juanita Broadrick,
  • Sexually assaulting Kathleen Whiley,
  • Sexually harassing Paula Jones, and
  • Sexually assaulting Leslie Millwee.

This is in addition to the recent allegations made by four women that Clinton sexually assaulted them after he was President.

But you see, it’s ok for Clinton to campaign for Democrats, because Donna Brazile believes the women.

Second, Brazile thinks that because he isn’t perfect, and nobody is perfect, not only should nobody complain about what Clinton did to specific women, it is perfectly acceptable for Clinton to campaign. For support, she refers to John 8, in which Jesus challenges those without sin to cast the first stone against an adulteress.

In the most charitable way possible, Brazile’s argument is sanctimonious bullshit. While she wants people to pay less attention to Bill Clinton, she wants people to more attention to Ray Moore because he is alleged to have harassed teen aged girls! She can’t have it both ways!

Or she can try, but then that would make her just another Democrat.

Finally, the primary reason Brazile wants Clinton on the road is she believes he is an effective campaigner and candidate recruiter. But is he really as good as she makes him out to be? After the 2016 election, The Atlantic published an article suggesting that the Democratic party is in serious trouble. Not only did the Jackasses lose the White House and both houses of Congress, but Republicans won the most state governorships since 1922. The Democratic party’s leadership is aging, its bench is weak, and given the sexual harassment allegations hovering over several key leaders, it has a significant image problem.

Having said everything, if Brazile really wants Clinton to go on the campaign trail, who am I to complain? If his presence during the next election further deteriorates the Democratic brand, that would be a-ok by me.

After all, the sooner the Democratic party disappears from American politics, the better.

 

Bill Clinton may be done, but that’s not enough

Bill Clinton and the Democratic Party

That’s not nearly enough.

Clinton accused of sexually assaulting four (more) women

As the Daily Mail reports (via ZeroHedge):

Bill Clinton is facing explosive new charges of sexual assault from four women, according to highly placed Democratic Party sources and an official who served in both the Clinton and Obama administrations.

The current accusations against the 71-year-old former president — whose past is littered with charges of sexual misconduct — stem from the period after he left the White House in 2001, say the sources.

Attorneys representing the women, who are coordinating their efforts, have notified Clinton they are preparing to file four separate lawsuits against him.

As part of the ongoing negotiations, the attorneys for the women are asking for substantial payouts in return for their clients’ silence.

A member of Clinton’s legal team has confirmed the existence of the new allegations.

The negotiations in the new lawsuits are said to have reached a critical stage.

If they fail, according to sources in Clinton’s inner circle, the four women are said to be ready to air their accusations of sexual assault at a press conference, making Clinton the latest — and most famous — figure in a long list of men from Harvey Weinstein to Kevin Spacey who have recently been accused of sexual assault.

The new allegations refer to incidents that  took place more than 10 years ago, in the early 2000s, when Clinton was hired by Ron Burkle, the playboy billionaire investor, to work at his Yucaipa companies.

Clinton helped Burkle generate business and flew around the world with a flock of beautiful young women on Burkle’s private jet, which was nicknamed ‘Air F**k One.’

The four women, who have not yet revealed their identities, were employed in low-level positions at the Burkle organization when they were in their late teens and claim they were sexually assaulted by the former president.

There are two additional tidbits worth highlighting.

First, the story quotes a Democratic party official stating that “Bill is distraught at the thought of having to testify and defend himself against sex charges again.”

I bet he is.

Second, while Hillary Clinton is reportedly furious with her hubby for getting entangled in yet another sexual scandal, she “offered to hire private detectives to dig up dirt on the women”. Bill Clinton’s attorneys, however, persuaded her from doing so.

The bionic mosquito thinks that because of this story, Bill and Hillary Clinton are done. While he may be right, I will be far from satisfied if this is all that happens.

Burn the Democratic party to the ground

The American left in general, and the Democratic party in particular, fought tooth and nail to keep Bill Clinton in office, regardless of the accusations against him. Feminists, who would have otherwise been abhorred by men demanding sexual favors of their female subordinates, defended Clinton regarding his treatment of Gennifer Flowers, Paula Jones, and Monica Lewinsky. Dateline NBC’s 1999 interview of Juanita Broaddrick , who accused Bill Clinton of raping her in the late 1970s (and Hillary Clinton of threatening her to keep quiet), was not aired until after the Senate acquitted Clinton of the House’s two impeachment charges. Moveon.org was created to support Clinton during his impeachment hearings, and became a staple of American politics afterwards.

Ever since, the American left has tried to be two completely opposite things simultaneously: the party of workers, minorities, and women, and the party of power. The left has been made sick by focusing on holding power, primarily through its use of inter-sectional politics. They don’t give a rat’s ass about workers, minorities, or women. What they care about is doing whatever it takes – whatever it takes – to stay in control.

No more.

For the first time in a long time, the American left finds itself needing to make a tactical retreat. That retreat is in the form of media outlets calling into question whether it was a good idea to defend Bill Clinton when the allegations were originally made.

However, the left has a lot more to confront, primarily because it refused to side with the women that Clinton harmed in the first place. If Bill Clinton was forced to accept responsibility for his actions, the culture war in which we find ourselves could very well have been avoided.

The left’s failure to confront Clinton has led to disastrous consequences to American politics and culture. Its hypocrisy have been the primary factors behind the toxic combination of identity politics and social justice warriors with which we find ourselves. Those forces have poisoned American culture, the effects through which we are presently suffering.

It is bad enough that the left has destroyed American finances, industry, and cities. Now we have to contend with the young souls that have been indoctrinated by the left’s overly emotional, Satanic mantras.

It is not enough for the left to finally purge itself of the Clinton legacy. It is far too late for that.

America needs to purge itself of the left.

The American left is bankrupt: financially, politically, culturally, and spiritually. So there’s only one thing left to do.

Without violence, without mayhem, and yet without pity: kill it.

I want the American left dead.

I want its influence dead.

I want it burned to the ground.

And may it rot in the dustbin of history.

And to those who are concerned about the neocon’s influence on American politics, as I am, I have one simple response.

Don’t worry. It’s time will also come.

 

Trump tweets on Obama turn tables on Democrats

For months, Democrats have tried to come up with some sort of evidence, any sort of evidence, demonstrating that Trump was somehow colluding with the Russians to win the 2016 election. Since November, all of the heat was generated by the left, and directed towards Trump.

However, earlier today, Trump launched four tweets that not only can the Democrats not ignore, but will more likely send them into an uncontrollable tizzy.

Frankly, what Trump did was ingenious. He took what the Democrats have been arguing all along, and reframed the discussion that puts the spotlight squarely on them.

When Democrats whine about how Trump’s tweets are not presidential, it has nothing to do with maintaining the dignity of the office. However, it has everything to do with trying everything they can to control what he says.

The Democrats simply can’t handle Trump. Their policies don’t work, and they can’t intimidate him into backing down.

The fact that they have no idea what Trump will post next makes them extremely uncomfortable.

Good.

 

California Democrats kill licensing reform

Reason’s Steven Greenhut reports that a California Senate committee killed a bill, by a party-line 6-2 vote, that would have eliminated licensing requirements for a range of activities, including fitting and selling hearing aids, barbering, and performing custom upholstery services.

While licensing requirements are supposedly designed to promote public safety and health, these rules are rarely relevant to the job at hand. Additionally, such restrictions are usually supported by parties that benefit from barriers preventing newcomers into their respective lines of work.

What’s worse, such requirement require poor Californians to jump through unnecessary hoops in order to work, which leads to fewer of them being employed.

California has the nation’s highest poverty rates, according to a new U.S. Census Bureau standard that includes cost-of-living factors. A good starting place to address that problem is to chip away at unnecessary barriers to work. Trade groups, however, recognize that the best way to inflate their members’ pay is to raise the cost of entry for others—and the more fields regulated this way, the more it keeps poor people in the welfare lines.

“One out of every five Californians must receive permission from the government to work,” explained a 2016 report from the state’s official watchdog agency, the Little Hoover Commission. “What once was a tool for consumer protection, particularly in the healing arts professions, is now a vehicle to promote a multitude of other goals. These include professionalism of occupations, standardization of services, a guarantee of quality and a means of limiting competition among practitioners, among others.”

Consider the freedom issue there too. We need to ask the government for permission to work?

The Little Hoover study found that the laws succeeded mainly in keeping “Californians from working, particularly harder-to-employ groups such as former offenders and those trained or educated outside of California, including veterans, military spouses and foreign-trained workers.” The problem is particularly acute for ex-offenders who often are barred from entering a variety of fairly low-skill professions by licensing rules that forbid them from entering the market.

However, when the Hearing Healthcare Providers of America and the California Nurses Association tell state Democrats to jump, don’t expect them to think about the little guy before they ask “How high?”

 

Trump fires Comey. Chaos ensues.

Given the hullabaloo over President Trump’s firing of FBI Director James Comey, perhaps it’s best to start this post with a silly joke.

I’ll let Scott Adams of Dilbert fame provide it. After all, he’s a professional:

What do Bernie Sanders’ hair and CNN have in common today? They are both saying, “Comey” every time you look at them.

I feel better already!

Both Republicans and Democrats hated Comey, albeit for different reasons. Republicans were appalled when Comey publicly cleared Hillary Clinton, on dubious legal grounds and inconsistently with DoJ/FBI procedures, of charges that she obstructed justice when the FBI investigated her using a personal server for her State Department email. Democrats called for Comey’s head after he re-opened that investigation weeks before the general election, only to close it days for before it.

In fact, Lifezette reports that a reporter reminded Senator Chuck Schumer of his earlier call for Comey to be fired at a press conference yesterday:

“Sen. Schumer, you told me last year before the election that you lost confidence in Jim Comey because of how he handled the email scandal,” one reporter said. “Do you think that the president’s explanation … has credibility?”

“I never called on the president to fire Director Comey,” said Schumer.

Schumer then said Trump should have fired Comey earlier in his young presidency if he had some of the same concerns as Democrats.

It was a clever ploy. But it cannot hide the fact that Democrats have hated Comey for months. Many blame Comey for Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s losing the election. Comey famously released a letter to Congress just before the Nov. 8 election indicating that he was reopening an investigation into how Clinton handled classified emails.

Comey, being Comey, closed the new investigation in record time, ending the investigation two days before Election Day and enraging Republicans by publicly declaring he still would not recommend charges against Clinton.

Schumer indicated Comey’s handling of the matter was a deal-breaker.

“I do not have confidence in him any longer,” Schumer said of Comey on Nov. 2.

However, because the wrong president fired Comey, we are now in the midst of a constitutional crisis. Or something like that.

As Reason’s Jacob Sullum reports:

“We are in a full-fledged constitutional crisis,” Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) declared on Twitter last night after hearing that Donald Trump had fired FBI Director James Comey. New York Times columnist David Leonhardt agreed. So did Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) and Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), although Blumenthal described the crisis as “looming” rather than “full-fledged.”

Yet Sullum points out the obvious; the president has clear authority to fire the FBI Director for whatever reason:

“Under the Constitution,” notes South Texas College of Law professor Josh Blackman, “the president has the absolute power to fire principal officers, such as Director Comey, at will. In that sense, Trump’s actions were entirely constitutional.”

(By the way, I love it that Democrats were silent when Obama attacked Libya without congressional authorization, thus creating the current refugee crisis in Europe, or don’t see an issue with the TSA routinely violating American’s fourth amendment rights who happen to fly, but become butthurt when a non-Democratic president fires someone.)

Meanwhile, Stephen Colbert found it necessary last night to reeducate the sheep known as the Democratic electorate on how to react to the firing:

Tuesday during the taping of CBS’s “The Late Show,” host Stephen Colbert announced the news that FBI Director James Comey had been fired by President Donald Trump.

Colbert’s left-leaning audience cheered.

Colbert reacted by saying, “Huge, huge Donald Trump fans here tonight.”

However, we now come to the core question, why did Trump fire Comey?

While Scott Adams argues that this was a strong move on Trump’s part that exhibits “some ballsy Presidenting”, such a move only works when we know what Trump is trying to achieve. And if there’s anything that Trump has demonstrated since becoming president (**cough** Syria **cough**), he can change his mind in an instant in terms of what he wants to do.

Sure, folks like Susan Rice, Loretta Lynch, and even Hillary Clinton should be feeling more nervous today than they did yesterday. But is Trump really focusing on sending them to jail? Who the hell knows? Philip Giraldi, a former CIA officer, thinks that Trump most likely fired Comey because he neither liked nor trusted him. Given what we know, that’s as good as an explanation as any other.

While the political world explodes in morally indignant outrage, I’m going to wait to see what Trump actually does before reacting.

In the meantime, I’m going to find some more silly jokes.

UPDATE: Roger Stone gives Alex Jones his take on Trump firing Comey.