About That Cow the Media is Having.....

Much is being said about the comment the president made about the use of 'Opposition Research'. Does anyone really think, in the history of American elections, there was ever been a candidate for president who was willing to listen when someone from another country offered dirt on an opponent? Maybe the better question is: Do you think there’s ever been one who didn’t? Or at least who wasn’t open to hearing it?

Before 2016, if any candidate had dished dirt on an opponent and the dirt turned out to be legitimate, do you seriously think it would have been treated as a scandal that the dirt came from overseas?  At what point was it established that taking dirt from a foreign source was a no-no? Obviously some time after the Clinton campaign paid Fusion GPS to pay Christopher Steele to compile his dossier with help from friendly Russian sources. That’s because no one ever treated the idea like it was inherently wrong until it was thought that DJT did it. Funny how that works, Huh?

And when did the bogeyman of “interference in our elections” come into existence? Did you ever hear anyone talk about this, or identify it as any sort of concern whatsoever, prior to 2016?  No, you didn’t. Because it was a ridiculous notion then and it still is.

Countries try to influence the outcome of other countries’ elections all the time. The Obama Administration practically acted as a campaign office for Israel’s Labor Party in its efforts to oust Benjamin Netanyahu. The idea that “foreign interference in elections” is some sort of end-of-world catastrophe was invented very recently, and our oh-so-dutiful media have taken up the cause without the slightest shame or embarrassment.

I Think We Might Be Building a Wall in the Wrong Place

I never went to summer camp. I grew up in the Old World, surrounded by the wonders of the past at hand to explore during summers. But I'm familiar with the concept. That's what threw me when I saw the article by Jeff Reynolds at PJMedia, "Summer Camp to Train Grade School Kids to Be Antifa Activists". In his words "There's so much wrong here it's hard to know where to start."

"I'm so old I can remember when disseminating communist propaganda in public schools was frowned upon. The first thing that struck me, before anything else, was the mask-clad, fist-raising elementary school kids in the illustration. 

Teaching incoming 4th-8th-graders how to riot, become members of antifa, and join a communist revolution seems a bit much—even for Portland, Oregon. 

Notice the star on the mask and the raised fist. Classic imagery from the USSR, China, and other violent Marxist revolutions in the 20th century. One might immediately think of the Brown Shirts, except that Nazis and antifa hate each other. Antifa formed in the 1930s to oppose the rise of the Nazi party and to try to bring a Marxist revolution to Germany. Rather, the imagery is eerily reminiscent of the Vladimir Lenin All-Union Pioneer Organization, or Pioneer Youth. Lenin established this organization to replace the Boy Scouts, which he outlawed after the Bolshevik revolution....."

But According to the Budding Rose website:

Budding Roses is a volunteer-run collective of educators, students, and activists who provide free social justice summer camps and year-round workshops for Portland-area youth in 4th-8th grade.

So, what's wrong with fighting for social justice, you say?

"Budding Roses received funding from the 'Black Rose Anarchist Federation'. Notice that they use the same graphic as the summer camp"

"In any event, you can't tell me that we're not in a war for the soul of our culture. The Marxist revolutionaries are now reaching into our elementary schools to recruit ever younger comrades for the front lines. 

On a side note, the DSA in Portland has announced that they will challenge Democrat legislators in next year's primary over an unwillingness to go far enough left for their tastes. Mind you, Portland Democrats tilt to the left of Trotsky, so this will shape up as a battle royale to rival the craziest stuff advocated by AOC and others." - READ MORE

~ Thank You WHATFINGER NEWS for the Linkage! ~ 

The Continuing Adventures of Mr. Wolff: Skullduggery Crew Guts the Pinhead Author of New Anti-Trump Book

While portraying himself as a reliable chronicler of DJT’s White House in a previous bestselling, but widely panned book, author Michael Wolff made the mistake of going on ABC's "The View" where Boobs McCain went banshee and ripped him up like a bad loan application. He then got ceremoniously kicked off MSNBC's Squinty & Meat Puppet in the Morning for sticking to his guns over an unproven allegation. As we wrote earlier about his newest book, his calmed he's “barely a journalist” and has made that quite evident by parroting celebrity media reporters who often hallucinate their own truths. Yo Michael. We can't all be Jim Acosta ya know!

The guy you might expect to see exiting a back-alley Dominatrix Dungeon late at night, recently accepted an invitation to what he thought was a friendly, liberal leaning Yahoo Skullduggery podcast interview. He wound up being gutted and field dressed by the host.

Oh Michael. You've already proven to us you're a phony opportunist. Perhaps you should write a novel, one about a creepy little weasel who dreams people tells him things that never happened. You don't have to call it an autobiography.

You can skip the introduction and small talk, and jump straight to 25:00 in the video and watch the crew take him to task for his "facts."

~ Thank You MJA@IOTWReport for the Linkage! ~

And Now For Something Entirely Different.....

Let's put aside the politics and cultural nonsense of the day for a bit. Whats you say?  Thanks to the 'Friends Of DMF', with so many new readers that have come aboard and for one reason or another have never expressed their opinion in the comments, I'd like to give them, along with regular DMFers, an opportunity to join in and break the ice.  So here goes.

About once a month, I and a group of Tiger Alumni and other good friends less fortunate, try to get together and have a nice dinner out.  Afterwards, it's drinks and good conversation.  It's become a ritual over time for us that sometime during the later part of the evening, someone is chosen (usually spin the bottle) to come up with a thought provoking question (anything goes) to pose to the group.  Answers are not blurted out that night, but to be given serious thought. Sometime within the next day or so, the questioner sends out their thoughts on the answer first, then receives by reply email the individual answers and forwards to all the group.  It makes for interesting dinner conversation at next get together. And the answers are at times quite uniquely fascinating, knowing all these people so well.

This time, in punishment my honor (since I missed the last 2 dinners) I was granted Inquisitor.  My question was out of left field (seeing it's not a major interest of mine) but welcomed by all in attendance.  Your illustrious Blog Mistress now poses the same concept and question to the DMF readers for your consideration, and mandatory participation:

Question: What individual movie film scene you saw at the theater, anytime in your life, gave you a fright, a thrill or laugh out loud or gave you chill bumps as you watched it?

I had two scenes in mind, but my choice was clear; a majestic Hollywood big budget recreation of an actual historical event. When viewed on a theater big screen for the first time, the majesty of the old Hollywood film making long gone today was on full display.  Not until about 40 sec or so into this scene clip do you realize what you are seeing. I remember vividly to this day how it gave me Chill Bumps.

Short on dialogue. No CGI. No Stunt people. I think it's one of the great movie scenes ever filmed. 

View in full screen if possible. Copy & Paste the URL below if necessary.

 https://youtu.be/vB5Wv8IHVf0

Now, it's your turn. If you can find the scene, post the You Tube URL to the scene with a short description or comment before the link, Please.  

I'm interested to see what your choices are and any comments you have on others. 

Watergate Dinosaur & CNN/MSNBC Contributor Testifies Before Nadler's Clown Posse??

The democrat Kabuki Theater (aka J. Fatman Nadler's Mueller report investigation) reached ludicrous new heights with the House Judiciary Committee kicking off a series of testimonies with none other than John Dean, convicted felon, best known for his role in the Watergate scandal, who valiantly threw various people under the bus to save his own sorry as from a long jail stretch. The purpose of his testimony was clearly a stunt engineered by democrats to compare the Mueller report to Watergate, though that comparison is shaky in reality at best.  

Like senile Watergate reporter Carl Bernstein,  Dean once again gets to bask in the bright lights of his own perceived relevance only because of constant appearances as a commentor on cable news Trump hate-feast masquerading as news helped make him a natural from the dems to exploit and bolster their desperation. For two long years all the democrats talked about was the Mueller Report, because they knew that it was loaded with 13 Angry democrat Trump Haters. In the end, Dems were devastated.

In his opening remarks, J.Fatman Nadler did his usual song and dance about the Mueller report being far more damaging to Trump than it is. Dean’s testimony concluded in pretty much the same way the Mueller investigation did, by offering the American people a big nothing burger to munch on. The best Dean could come up with when accusing the president of obstruction of justice is several times he may or may not have tried to obstruct an investigation. Yeah, and I may or may not have spun gold from straw this morning.

Rep. Jim Jordan Takes him to task: 

A Good Monday Morning

The New York Times Would Like You To Know They Really Are "in no way anti-Trump".

Yes, you read that right. The same day Don Lemon of CNN, the "Dumbest Man in Cable News", proclaimed he and his network are not Liberal (i'll pause why you finish laughing.......okay) we have NYT's deputy managing editor Rebecca Blumenstein at the same event tell the renowned media audience gathered at the European globalist 'Financial Times’ Future of News' turdapalooza in NYC, that her paper "are in no way anti-Trump.”

I guess we should expect nothing but fairness from the paper that published an op-ed titled, “Maybe Trump Is Not Mentally Ill. Maybe He’s Just a Jerk.” And took it upon itself to draft articles of impeachment against the president (just in case democrats needed the help) and wants it fully understood that this is all just in the service of fair news reporting. Could the Times possibly be so lacking in self-awareness that it fails to see how its pages drip with disdain and animosity for a President? How its op-ed writers twist words and actions to accuse him of everything from racism to stupidity to abject corruption yet to be proved?

I've known enough newspaper people to know they are famous for their ability to lack self-awareness. They are overflowing with self-importance, but self-awareness? That’s a little hard to come by.

The Times in the past has claimed it would be glad to give Trump credit if and when he does something right something they think is right. A fair, unbiased newspaper doesn’t presume to judge what’s right. It simply tells you what happened, and lets you make up your own mind. The Times makes all kinds of judgments about what’s right and what’s wrong, just as it makes judgments about what is and isn’t worth reporting. Journalism would be a whole lot better off if media outlets would simply be upfront and unembarrassed about their biases.

Obviously, this web site has a conservative bias with a healthy dose of snark (or as my socially cultured petite little sister says: "Kneecapping those leftist bastards") and we make no bones about that up front. And when you read what we present, you can filter your understanding of our content through the recognition of our bias. It's a lot more credible than an editor of the New York Times making the patently absurd claim that the Times is not anti-Trump. The only way the Times could believe that is if they believe truth itself is anti-Trump, in which case, their bias is confirmed.

~ Thank You WHATFINGER NEWS for the Linkage! ~

Middle Finger Symphony Theater

~ No Tuxedos Required ~

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

This Should Trigger Some Lefties: Buzzy Ginsburg Praises Brett Kavanaugh

In a rare moment of honest recognition, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Buzzy Ginsburg praised Justice Brett Kavanaugh in her prepared remarks at today's Second Circuit Judicial Conference. She noted that after Kavanaugh was confirmed the number of female Supreme Court clerks reached an all-time high, given his staffing choices:

"Justice Kavanaugh made history by bringing on board an all-female law clerk crew. Thanks to his selections, the Court has this Term, for the first time ever, more women than men serving as law clerks."

In their perceived prefect world, this should make liberals & feminist shout from the mountain tops! But seeing who accomplished this historic feat, you probably wouldn't even had heard had you not sought out your Tenacious Editrix. 

Ginsburg went on to praise her fellow justices in that the majority of the Court’s decisions so far have not been made along partisan lines. However, she forecasts plenty of 5-4 decisions in upcoming cases (which involve abortion, gerrymandering, executive deference and some LGTBQ crap). She seemed to be signaling the left is about to lose some high profile cases to those who can't read between the lines. We can only hope.....

(Document Cloud)

~ Thank You MJA@IOTWReport for the Linkage! ~

An Arrow Aimed At America’s Heartland

This is a Wakeup Call to citizens of Middle America of a plot to strip us of our electoral importance by the entrenched elites of the Deep State.

Recently, Nevada became the 15th state to pass a measure granting its Electoral College votes to the candidate winning the nationwide popular vote regardless of how the citizens of their own State voted. This movement is being led by an organization called National Popular Vote. The organization's aim is to disrupt the balance between the States and have intentionally launched this arrow aimed at America’s Heartland. Their objective is to influence a group of States whose electoral votes total 270, which is the number needed to win the presidency, into an alliance binding them to follow a majority vote attainable by a combination of New York, New England, and the Left Coast without regard to how the citizens of the States voted. During the Constitutional Convention the Framers vigorously debated how the government they were designing should operate. When looking at the election of the chief executive they rejected direct democracy because they believed it was too prone to result in a majority that would act as a tyrant.

Looking back across time this collection of largely homeschooled patriots drew upon their knowledge of history and philosophy. Specifically they looked to the writings of Plato who wrote in the Republic that the people or the demos, as they were called in Greek could not be trusted because they would inevitably vote for whoever promised to meet their desires of the moment even if that meant taking from others or from the national treasury. Plato thought the majority would lack the knowledge and wisdom to make sound choices. Of course he didn’t know about our enlightened American education system that spends more time indoctrinating the young skulls about Al Gore’s Climate hoax religion than it does about the founding of this country.

When you read Federalist 9 (Hamilton), Federalist 10, and Federalist 51 (Madison), these deep thinking political theorists identified three key elements they felt existed to help give the new United States a chance for success: its population size, geographic size, and the differing interests of the independent States. In America today intolerant minority factions can be whipped up into tyrannical majorities in a way the Framers never imagined.  At the very time in our history when we are more vulnerable than ever to manipulated majority rule the National Popular Vote movement wants us to embrace direct democracy at the presidential level. The Framers designed a system of government limited in scope and shackled by the Constitution. A system designed to do little as opposed to doing too much.

The Electoral College is the tool given to us by the Framers to make sure all of the States have a voice that is heard. However, if enough States adopt the National Popular Vote this safeguard will be neutralized, not through amending the Constitution but instead by doing an end-run around it. If this happens we’ll take a long step towards the dystopian vision our Framers sought to avoid: the tyranny of the majority.

How do these political manipulators convince people to vote to make their future votes irrelevant? Given today's media, you can probably fool enough people to convince a majority to vote themselves onto the sidelines of History. If this arrow finds its mark a bicoastal electoral juggernaut will trample the voice of the Heartland into the dust of History. - Dr. Robert Owens