Perhaps the Finest Example of TDS We’ve Seen Yet.

by Robert Laurie

Everywhere you look, you see them: Panicked progressives and NeverTrumpers, running wild in the streets, screaming that the sky is falling. America – democracy itself – is doomed and soon we will awaken to find ourselves in a post-apocalyptic Mad Max hellscape. Once powerful pols and pundits will roam the barren land searching for seersucker and bowties, trying desperately to organize the kind of cocktail parties they used to enjoy.

What could have caused such a tectonic shift, you ask? In a word “him.” The beast. Donald J. Trump. He came crashing into town, defeated their mighty champion, and now they’ve lost all hope. This is the core of Trump Derangement Syndrome. Everything they understood to be true about their place in the political pecking order has been upended and they’re terrified that “the old way of doing things will never return.”

No one has made that clearer than Matthew Walther, the “National Correspondent” for an occasionally-respected publication called “The Week.” He’s convinced that an army of Trump supporters are, at this very moment, conspiring to eliminate the 22nd Amendment. This would remove presidential term limits and keep Trump in the Oval Office …for all of eternity! As he puts it “Trump may never leave the White House.” He warns you…this is not idle speculation:

"I don’t think it’s reasonable to dismiss the possibility of a third term for this president as idle speculation. The 22nd Amendment can be repealed like any other, and both geography and math favor Republican attempts at amendment. The end of presidential term limits would not necessarily be, in the long term, a one-sided partisan affair. It is perfectly reasonable to imagine a future in which a popular young Democratic president is elected to third and even fourth terms, perhaps non-contiguously, with a four-year interlude from a lucky but ultimately ill-fated Republican challenger. 

I do not know a single supporter of the president who opposes the idea, at least in theory, of Trump serving more than eight years. The man himself has entertained it openly, praising Xi Jinping for getting rid of term limits in China. Meanwhile, speculation about whether Obama would have beaten Trump if he had run for a third term is a liberal cottage industry. Obama, who agrees that he would have been elected again if he had run two years ago, is a young man. Perhaps he could be the one to beat Trump in 2024. 

If you think two more years of Trump in the White House sounds like a nightmare, imagine having to read about his late-night Oval Office tweets for another decade, or even longer."

This is perhaps the finest example of TDS we’ve seen yet. Not only has he killed us with net neutrality, tax cuts, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh, but now international media outlets are speculating that he’s going to repeal the 22nd Amendment and stay in office for life!

You have to be a spectacular imbecile to think that he, or the voters who put him in office, are in any way looking to go down this path.

Thank You Whatfinger News for the Linkage!

Joe Scarborough Writes SHAMEFUL Piece On The Anniversary Of 9/11

It’s the 17th anniversary of 9/11. It’s the day that we stop and remember those who lost their lives. It’s the day we remember those who willingly gave everything. It’s the day that reminds us that true evil exists. It’s a constant battle. But America? America is resilient. We can overcome anything. We have and will continue to do so. We will never forget.

I reject anyone who tries to use days like today to push another political agenda, like say, hating Trump. Who would do such a thing on a day like today? Joe Scarborough. He did that. He wrote a piece about how President Trump is destroying the American dream more than terrorists who literally crushed the dreams of thousands of people by TAKING THEIR LIVES. 

Read More

Thank You Whatfinger News for the Linkage!

Ye Shall Know Him by His Fruits

Over the weekend, among the incessant yelling of racism, speculation of who is the mysterious "Q"etc. the question still burned as of who wrote the scathing Op-ed in the NYT last week.  I've believed all along it was just a in-house NYT hit piece. Until they prove it's not, I will not believe otherwise.  Some others much smarter than I believe it is a genuine piece from inside the administration, but with a bit of media misdirection attached......

"The most surprising aspect of the furor surrounding the infamous unsigned New York Times Op-Ed, ostensibly written by a member of the Trump administration, is that anyone believes its author is a senior official. Assuming this person isn’t an employee of the Times, and it is by no means unknown for the Gray Lady’s journalists to fabricate quotes and attribute them to anonymous “officials,” the author of this hit piece is at most a mid-level staffer. Indeed, if this character is actually employed in the Trump administration, it is almost certainly at a level of insignificance verging on invisibility. 

First, the editors of the Times are virulently anti-Trump. Their assurances about the prominence of this furtive functionary simply can’t be trusted. Moreover, as Phelim McAleer at Townhall points out, the nation’s “newspaper of record” has a long history of exaggerating the seniority of officials it quotes anonymously. 

Not coincidentally, the solipsistic voice and callow perspective that “Anonymous” brings to the Op-Ed tends to undermine the claim that it was written by a high-ranking official in any administration. Most senior members of the Trump administration are over 50 years old and many are well beyond 60. Yet, throughout the entire essay, there is an unmistakable thread of historical illiteracy and presentism that one would normally associate with a Millennial. 

The piece consists primarily of shopworn clichés that can be heard in any bar in any college town in America (or on CNN if you’re stuck in an airport). This self-styled “defender of our democratic institutions” solemnly states that “President Trump’s impulses are generally anti-trade and anti-democratic,” that he “shows a preference for autocrats and dictators,” that “the country is bitterly divided,” and that the “root of the problem is the president’s amorality.” 

None of this is original. Nor is it accurate. But it does contain a revealing cliché that serves as an indicator of the author’s lack of seniority — the tired trope concerning how Trump has bitterly divided the country. It’s only possible to believe this nonsense if you are too young to remember the deep divisions in public opinion over Vietnam, the Nuclear Freeze movement, the Clinton impeachment, and Iraq. It is not merely inaccurate to blame Trump for today’s political divisions. The youthful hubris of our anonymous genius is such that it obscures the reality that Trump’s successes were actually accomplished by the President and his loyal aides: “There are bright spots.… But these successes have come despite — not because of — the president’s leadership style.” In other words, “Anonymous” has saved the nation from Trump’s “misguided impulses.” 

So, what do we know about the unnamed author of the New York Times hit piece? If this person is a member of the Trump administration, the taxpayers are footing the bill for the deliberate obstruction of their will as expressed in the 2016 presidential election. The good news is that the sophomoric opinions expressed in the anonymous Times Op-Ed are probably nothing more the impotent puling of a powerless cubicle critter."

* Excerpts from David Catron @The American Spectator

Thank You Whatfinger News for the Linkage!

A Good Monday Morning

Middle Finger Symphony Theater

* No Tuxedos Required *

Brought To You By BLUESJUNKY: Honorary Chair of Music - Middle Finger Symphony Music Director

Thank You Whatfinger News for the Linkage!

Fist Bumping at the DOJ?

Trump’s Internal Resistance Celebrates. There were smiles—and fear that the anonymous New York Times op-ed could backfire on those inside the bureaucracy trying to blunt the president. Some officials interviewed by The Daily Beast cheered the underlying message of the anonymously written op-ed. But several worried about its lasting impact, beyond provoking a familiar Washington parlor game: outing a dissenter.

Handling the fallout of politically motivated anonymous quotes or leaks is a rite of passage for every president. Early in Barack Obama’s administration, a 66-page report on the future course of the Afghanistan war, penned by then-commander Gen. Stanley McChrystal, was sent to Bob Woodward before the president had announced his formal decision. Later in his time in office, a White House official famously described Obama’s foreign policy as “leading from behind.” “It was sort of a breach of the Obama ethos,” said one top aide from Obama’s comms shop. “But on the scale of everything we were dealing with, it was a small deal.”

What Trump is confronting now is far different, veterans of past White House stressed. The leaks and anonymous quotes aren’t being offered to influence a political outcome or force the president’s hand one way or another. The piece thrust much of Washington, D.C., into a whodunit mystery, with rampant speculation about the authorship and outright shock from veterans of White Houses past that it happened at all. Matt Bennett, a former Clinton aide, emailed, “Even during the impeachment, when all of us were horrified by his personal conduct, no one in the Clinton White House (or administration) would EVER have done anything like this… I can’t imagine this happening in any modern presidency other than Nixon’s.”

At the Department of Justice—which has been eyed suspiciously by the White House for nearly two years as a source of insubordination—the atmosphere was tense Thursday morning. Two officials inside the department said they’ve been passively resisting the president since he took office in 2017. “We see ourselves as rebels,” one official said laughing, adding that the op-ed marked a perfect time to celebrate. “We even went around fist-bumping each other,” another official said. But a third, who feels similarly about Trump, sounded darker notes about where Trump’s ire over public embarrassment could lead.

(Daily Beast)
H/T- Konan The Bar Barron 

Thank You Whatfinger News for the Linkage!

Sit Down, Spartacus.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has no meaningful cards left to play, so we get embarrassing verbose grandstanding and melodramatic cosplay by junior Senators.  This situation is of the making by the American left. They developed the doctrine, which magnified the political importance of the judiciary. They politicized and personalized the Court and the appointment process. They made ideology the primary qualification for a judicial appointment. They shattered institutional norms and precedents in pursuit of victory.

Republicans are now playing by the Left’s rules and winning. What we are seeing in Kavanuagh’s confirmation hearings is the visual manifestation of the Left’s impotence, for which they have only themselves to blame.