The Democrat play book.

quote:

Originally posted by P220 Smudge:
Those new ads are absolutely on point. He needs to hammer them with this stuff at every turn until election day.

1000% on target. He just needs to keep firing for effect.

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
Per Catherine Herridge: IC Inspector General told lawmakers the whistleblower did not disclose contact w Schiff/Committee staff - so IG never looked into it. IG “had no knowledge of it”.

Given that the ICIG's earlier explanation contained the following quote, he should have darn well looked at it!

"From the moment the ICIG received the whistleblower’s filing, the ICIG has worked to effectuate . . . the whistleblower’s intent . . .."

The ICIG and the DNI are either really deep state or, more than likely, just dupes.

Given the political climate and known resistance efforts, the ICIG and the DNI should have been more curious - especially in light of the convenient alterations to the reporting procedures to allow just the president to get targeted while shielding a known politically biased "complainant."

DUPES.

quote:

Originally posted by wcb6092:
[FLASH_VIDEO]<iframe frameborder="0" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/bbixdV2F6Ts" width="640"></iframe>[/FLASH_VIDEO]

Biden tried to get Fox to drop the ad, but they refused his request.

CNN refuses to run this ad because it not only disses Fredo, but also they claim the ad is a lie

https://dailycaller.com/2019/1...ws-trump-ad-ukraine/

quote:

Originally posted by oddball:

quote:

Originally posted by wcb6092:
[FLASH_VIDEO]<iframe frameborder="0" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/bbixdV2F6Ts" width="640"></iframe>[/FLASH_VIDEO]

Biden tried to get Fox to drop the ad, but they refused his request.

CNN refuses to run this ad because it not only disses Fredo, but also they claim the ad is a lie

https://dailycaller.com/2019/1...ws-trump-ad-ukraine/

Sure thing creepy. Just as soon as every dem controlled network drops all untrue programming about the President.

I deleted a post about the new whistle blower form

The new form does have a question if you have filed your complaint with congress.

But the new form does seem to be missing a Part 3. Maybe just a typo.

old form:


The old form (that the CIA spy actually filled out) asks if there have been any "disclosure" to congress.

So how did the CIA spy fill out the old form ?

originally saw this issue in a post by Sean Davis

a subtle difference from old form to new.

New form asks if the complaint was "filed" w anyone else

Old form asks if the complaint was "disclosed" to anyone else

Maybe I am getting too paranoid

But it is very bothersome that the new form was probably created after the complaint was submitted. I suspect that because the Intel IG said the whistleblower used the old form.

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
I deleted a post about the new whistle blower form

I must admit, that was a provocative post. I went to look at Sean Davis' Twitter feed for more.

Given the gravity of the form changes, you would think that it would have been handled more clearly and definitively.

It's almost as if they were carelessly making it up as they went. . . . or it was, perhaps, a deliberate effort to deceive under the guise of incompetence.

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
New form asks if the complaint was "filed" w anyone else

Old form asks if the complaint was "disclosed" to anyone else

Hard to see that as Congressional intent.

As with Qui Tam actions, disclosure to other public parties usually negates use of the procedures.

Why give protection for blowing the whistle on what is already publicly known or alleged?

Indeed, this new "form" uses publicly known information but, ta da, a partisan intent on taking down a president, for instance, is now shielded?

The new use for the form is as a weapon.

That was not Congress' intent.

It may be Schiff's and the blow hard's intent but not that of the Congress that passed the legislation.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/...-is-the-nom-n2553776

Democratic donors on Wall Street and in big business are preparing to sit out the presidential campaign fundraising cycle — or even back President Donald Trump — if Sen. Elizabeth Warren wins the party’s nomination.

In recent weeks, CNBC spoke to several high-dollar Democratic donors and fundraisers in the business community and found that this opinion was becoming widely shared as Warren, an outspoken critic of big banks and corporations, gains momentum against Joe Biden in the 2020 race.

“You’re in a box because you’re a Democrat and you’re thinking, ‘I want to help the party, but she’s going to hurt me, so I’m going to help President Trump,’” said a senior private equity executive, who spoke on condition of anonymity in fear of retribution by party leaders.

The executive said this Wednesday, a day after Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced that the House would begin a formal impeachment inquiry into Trump.

The business community’s unease about Warren’s candidacy has surged in tandem with her campaign’s momentum. CNBC’s Jim Cramer said earlier this month that he’s heard from Wall Street executives that they believe Warren has “got to be stopped.” Warren later tweeted her response to Cramer’s report: “I’m Elizabeth Warren and I approve this message.”

Some big bank executives and hedge fund managers have been stunned by Warren’s ascent, and they are primed to resist her.

“They will not support her. It would be like shutting down their industry,” an executive at one of the nation’s largest banks told CNBC, also speaking on condition of anonymity. This person said Warren’s policies could be worse for Wall Street than those of President Barack Obama, who signed the Dodd-Frank bank regulation bill in the wake of the 2008 financial meltdown.

If that gives them heart burn, just look at the other dwarfs touting socialism.

Did anyone just see Martha MacCallum argue with and constantly interrupt Rudy Giuliani on Fox? What the Hell?? I've never emailed foxnews, but I just fired off one to thestory@foxnews.com to ask her to let her guests speak. Damn!! I asked her if she thinks that people go to baseball games to watch the umpires.

Para, they all do it. Hannity has fantastic sources on, and he doesn’t let them tell their story. Laura interrupts constantly with her unpleasant voice.
Well, Tucker isn’t so bad; and Mark Levin on Sunday nights is quite a good interviewer, much to my surprise given his radio show.
I am surprised at Martha, she’s usually more professional.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
Did anyone just see Martha MacCallum argue with and constantly interrupt Rudy Giuliani on Fox? What the Hell?? I've never emailed foxnews, but I just fired off one to thestory@foxnews.com to ask her to let her guests speak. Damn!! I asked her if she thinks that people go to baseball games to watch the umpires.

We saw it, and my wife and I had the same reaction - turned it off in favor of “Adam’s Family Values” - much better.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
Did anyone just see Martha MacCallum argue with and constantly interrupt Rudy Giuliani on Fox? What the Hell?? I've never emailed foxnews, but I just fired off one to thestory@foxnews.com to ask her to let her guests speak. Damn!! I asked her if she thinks that people go to baseball games to watch the umpires.

The PRECISE reason, when he was still on Fox News, that I could no longer to STAND Bill O'Reilly. Drove me NUTS!

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
How we feelin' this morning, my fellow patriots? Strong and defiant?

From afar as Australia, my oath today is as strong as it was the day before that.

Even my blood type is positive.

A great patriotic weekend to all.
Enjoy the shenanigans.
I know that I do.

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

The dems scream and howl about Trump going against all the traditions and norms of governance, yet here they are going against all the traditions and norms of legislative processes and government oversight in order to bring down a duly elected president because they cannot and will not accept the results of the 2016 election. Incredible hypocrisy.

Indeed, the 2016 election acceptance and peaceful transition of power hasn't occurred.

Every day is a present ...

Resistance Hero Robert De Niro Slapped With Sexual Harassment Suit By Longtime Aide

https://www.zerohedge.com/poli...t-suit-longtime-aide



'Resistance Hero' Robert De Niro — who since Trump took office has become known for his epic self-righteous rants against the president in interviews and public venues, such as his profanity-laced anti-Trump tirade at last year's Tony Awards, or more recently his dropping F-bombs on a CNN live show — has been slapped with a $12 million lawsuit by his former personal assistant of 11 years, Graham Chase Robinson.

Robinson, who served as the Vice President of Production and Finance at De Niro's company, Canal Productions, alleges “years of gender discrimination and harassment,” and additionally that her boss created a “hostile work environment” — notably including “gratuitous physical unwanted contact” and consistently making “sexually charged comments”.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: wcb6092,

I often say, "If there's an obnoxious person around your life, you don't necessarily have to waste your time taking them on. There will be others who eventually experience the behavior who are as obnoxious who'll come along to do it for you."

They sued each other.

He had such stature as an actor but without someone to write his script, he's proving to be a rather small man. Too bad.

Something a little more light-hearted from Ann Althouse via Glen Reynolds-Instapundit:

quote:

I was looking into the life story of Volodymyr Zelensky, because I was trying to figure out what language he spoke in the notorious telephone call with President Trump. This mattered as I analyzed a WaPo article about the supposedly low number of words per minute compared to a phone call between Trump and the President of Mexico.

And I stumbled into the movie "Rzhevsky Versus Napoleon," in which Zelensky played Napoleon:

Fascinating. Distracting. And there's this in the cast list:
Jean-Claude Van Damme as himself

So Jean-Claude Van Damme was in a movie with Volodymyr Zelensky. Well, what, if any, is Jean-Claude Van Damme's connection to Trump?

First, there's this, from "Trump Solo" by Mark Singer in The New Yorker, back in 1997, when Trump was "solo" because he'd just broken up with Marla Maples:

We hadn’t been airborne long when Trump decided to watch a movie. He’d brought along “Michael,” a recent release, but twenty minutes after popping it into the VCR he got bored and switched to an old favorite, a Jean Claude Van Damme slugfest called “Bloodsport,” which he pronounced “an incredible, fantastic movie.” By assigning to his son the task of fast-forwarding through all the plot exposition—Trump’s goal being “to get this two-hour movie down to forty-five minutes”—he eliminated any lulls between the nose hammering, kidney tenderizing, and shin whacking. When a beefy bad guy who was about to squish a normal-sized good guy received a crippling blow to the scrotum, I laughed. “Admit it, you’re laughing!” Trump shouted. “You want to write that Donald Trump was loving this ridiculous Jean Claude Van Damme movie, but are you willing to put in there that you were loving it, too?”

And then there's this from December 2017 (again, from The New Yorker, where I get my Van Damme news), describing a scene from just before the 2016 election:

And last October, in an interview with TMZ conducted outside a restaurant while he was holding his small dog, Van Damme said, among other things, that the next President of the United States needed to “have a vodka with Mr. Putin” and “try to make peace.” He then downplayed the attention being paid to Donald Trump’s use of the phrase “grab ’em by the pussy,” and said, though he loves his “brother Muslims,” “right now, we need Donald Trump.” In that video, and in other public moments, Van Damme has had the appearance of a man who still takes himself quite seriously....

Now, continuing with the New Yorker, look at "The Risk of Nuclear War with North Korea/On the ground in Pyongyang: Could Kim Jong Un and Donald Trump goad each other into a devastating confrontation?" (September 2017):

When it came time for Kim Jong Il to choose an heir, his four daughters were ineligible, because of their gender. His eldest son, Jong Nam, was more a playboy than a statesman, and, in 2001, he was caught trying to enter Japan on a forged passport, to take his four-year-old son to Tokyo Disneyland. The next-oldest son, Jong Chul, was reserved and gentle. While in Switzerland, he had written a poem called “My Ideal World,” which began, “If I had my ideal world I would not allow weapons and atom bombs anymore. I would destroy all terrorists with the Hollywood star Jean-Claude Van Damme.” According to Fujimoto, Kim Jong Il said that Jong Chul was unfit to rule “because he is like a little girl.”
I don't know what more you need to know. Connect the dots

https://althouse.blogspot.com/...s-in-movie-with.html