web analytics
a

Facebook

Twitter

Copyright 2015 Libero Themes.
All Rights Reserved.

8:30 - 6:00

Our Office Hours Mon. - Fri.

703-406-7616

Call For Free 15/M Consultation

Facebook

Twitter

Search
Menu
Westlake Legal Group > Posts tagged "democrats" (Page 191)

Joe Biden Has A New Campaign Slogan He Borrowed From Michael Avenatti

Westlake Legal Group biden_2020-300x152 Joe Biden Has A New Campaign Slogan He Borrowed From Michael Avenatti white house twitter Social Media Social Justice President Trump Obama Never Trumpers Morning Briefing Iowa Hollywood Hillary Clinton Front Page Stories Front Page fox news Featured Story Featured Post elections donald trump democrats corruption Conservatives Campaigns Barack Obama Allow Media Exception 2019

I’m Going To Borrow That Slogan From YOU, Creepy ( Former) Porn Lawyer

How can you not love Joe Biden and his fledgling campaign? From the issue of keeping his hands to himself or “borrowing” words and phrases from other people, he just can’t help himself and I can’t get enough of it.

Joe Biden and Donald Trump are both in Iowa today for a series of speeches and events that are the official, unofficial kick off to their 2020 faceoff against each other. Now I know that I might be counting my chickens too soon but you all know you want this to happen.

Joe kicked off his first event with the theme that he will be carrying throughout the primary season that is simply, “Donald Trump Sucks” and I’m the guy to beat him. Biden has already been skipping events where he knows he will have to fight other Dems and decided to play it safe by just going right after Trump.

However, good ole Uncle Joe who ran for his party’s nomination in 1988 and had to drop out for plagiarizing Neil Kinnock from Britan, has once again decided to borrow another slogan from someone who not only hated Donald Trump also but has endorsed the former Veep.

Still creepy but not a lawyer to a porn star anymore, Michael Avenatti.

According to Fox News

Former Vice President Joe Biden was applauded Tuesday by Democrats in Iowa when he slammed President Trump with his own twist on the president’s famous campaign slogan.

“He says, ‘let’s make America great again,’” Biden said of Trump in Ottumwa. “Let’s make America America again.”

Turns out, that’s not the first time voters have heard that line: Michael Avenatti, the anti-Trump lawyer who briefly promoted a possible Democratic presidential run of his own this year before being indicted on multiple charges, repeatedly used that same slogan in public remarks as he pushed back against Trump.

Avenatti most recently used the line – in endorsing Biden for president in April.

“I am extremely happy that @JoeBiden has decided to enter the race,” Avenatti tweeted at the time. “He offers Dems the very best chance in 2020, especially in key states. He has the fight, intelligence and fortitude to beat Trump and begin to make America, America again. He has my enthusiastic support.”

Isn’t he precious?

Biden has already been tagged this cycle for lifting some lines and now they decide to just go right to the guy who is in a helluva lot of trouble with Nike, Stormy and a bunch of others and just take his phrase. Who from the Hillary Clinton campaign did the Bernie Sanders camp plant in Joe’s? That person should win the campaign manager of the year.

Make America, America Again? How about making the last one of Joe Biden’s three campaigns run competently. You would think after 31 years of trying to do this you might have taken some notes on what NOT to do in the future but hey Joe, you gotta be you.

Really, who am I kidding? I’m going to root for this trainwreck of a campaign go all the way and then watch Trump taunt him about going behind a school to whoop his behind. Let’s do this ASAP.

We need to make America Laugh Again.

Check out my other post on Pinterest Blocks Pro Life Group Live Action, Calling It PORN. and my podcast Bourbon On The Rocks plus like Bourbon On The Rocks on Facebook and follow me on the twitters at IRISHDUKE2 

The post Joe Biden Has A New Campaign Slogan He Borrowed From Michael Avenatti appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group biden_2020-300x152 Joe Biden Has A New Campaign Slogan He Borrowed From Michael Avenatti white house twitter Social Media Social Justice President Trump Obama Never Trumpers Morning Briefing Iowa Hollywood Hillary Clinton Front Page Stories Front Page fox news Featured Story Featured Post elections donald trump democrats corruption Conservatives Campaigns Barack Obama Allow Media Exception 2019  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

“Deeply Immoral”: Dan Crenshaw Blasts Rashida Tlaib’s Anti-Poverty Plan, Says It Creates More Govt Dependency

Westlake Legal Group DanCrenshawWPCFdinner “Deeply Immoral”: Dan Crenshaw Blasts Rashida Tlaib’s Anti-Poverty Plan, Says It Creates More Govt Dependency washington D.C. Texas republicans rashida tlaib Politics Policy North Carolina Michigan Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post entitlements democrats Dan Crenshaw Culture Congress Allow Media Exception

Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-TX-2). Screen grab via C-SPAN.

Fresh off of getting failed Democratic Congressional candidate Brianna Wu (MA) to tweet a self-own acknowledging his point on Christian teachings, Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-TX-2) has moved on to the next Democrat who needs a reality check: Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI-13).

Crenshaw appeared on Fox News Monday to discuss a variety of topics, but the one that got the most attention was Tlaib’s trillion dollar plan to combat was she calls income inequality. The Washington Post describes the plan:

Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) has released a plan to spend trillions of federal dollars on direct cash subsidies to working class and poor Americans, including the unemployed and those with no earnings.

Tlaib’s bill would give direct cash help to those at the bottom of the income distribution — annually offering $3,000 to individuals and $6,000 to families — in an attempt to reduce poverty in the United States and bolster the wages of the poor.

[…]

By contrast, Tlaib’s plan offers the full $3,000 or $6,000 credit to those with no income — a significant break from orthodoxy among more centrist Democrats, who have traditionally argued giving federal cash to the unemployed will discourage them from finding jobs.

Speaking with Fox News‘s Martha MacCallum Monday, Crenshaw called Tlaib’s plan “deeply immoral”, and said it was crafted out of a “misunderstanding of economics”:

“It’s a misunderstanding of economics because one, we always have to ask the question ‘how are we going to pay for it?’,” he claimed.

“Are we going to put our children in even more debt? Are we going to raise taxes on somebody else?

“It also doesn’t make sense because it basically entices people not to work. If you are making $49,000 a year, then you’re going to have an incentive not to take that extra job or extra promotion because you’re going to lose your benefits.”

Tlaib’s plan, the Livable Income for Families (LIFT) Plus Act, would offer direct payments of $3,000 to people making less than $50,000 per year.

Watch video of the interview segment below:

Tlaib’s plan is (surprise!) an even more expansive version of the one Democratic presidential candidate and Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) proposed back in January, which Townhall‘s Ian Snively dissected earlier this year.

————————
—Based in North Carolina, Sister Toldjah is a former liberal and a 15+ year veteran of blogging with an emphasis on media bias, social issues, and the culture wars. Read her Red State archives here. Connect with her on Twitter.–

The post “Deeply Immoral”: Dan Crenshaw Blasts Rashida Tlaib’s Anti-Poverty Plan, Says It Creates More Govt Dependency appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group DanCrenshaw-300x150 “Deeply Immoral”: Dan Crenshaw Blasts Rashida Tlaib’s Anti-Poverty Plan, Says It Creates More Govt Dependency washington D.C. Texas republicans rashida tlaib Politics Policy North Carolina Michigan Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post entitlements democrats Dan Crenshaw Culture Congress Allow Media Exception  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

CNN Reporter Pushes Fake News After Trump Presents Copy of U.S-Mexico Border Deal at Presser

Westlake Legal Group cnn-banana-620x348 CNN Reporter Pushes Fake News After Trump Presents Copy of U.S-Mexico Border Deal at Presser white house U.S.-Mexico Deal Politics No Credibility jim acosta Illegal Immigration Front Page Stories Front Page fake news donald trump democrats CNN brian karem Border Deal

This is not an apple or a banana, or something. I forget which is supposed to represent the truth in their silly ad campaign.

Today, Donald Trump gave a short presser to intrepid news reporters at the White House. Some of the questions naturally revolved around the new border deal between the U.S. and Mexico, which was reached late last week. After spending days calling Trump a moron for threatening tariffs, he delivered a victory they all said wouldn’t happen and Mexico gave some serious concessions to help stem the flow of illegal immigration.

That has many in the media shifting into overdrive to spin the results. One such outlet that’s been as guilty as anyone is CNN and Jim Acosta’s replacement (he’s busy risking his life giving interviews about his silly new book) decided to get in on the act.

After the President held up a piece of paper asserting it was a copy of the deal with Mexico, CNN’s Brian J. Karem took to Twitter to make this accusation.

Mr. Karem really thought he had the President here. Isn’t it just hilarious how he presented a blank piece of paper as the deal? What a conman, am I right?

His post has 17.7K likes as I’m typing this and it spread like wildfire in the left-wing echo chambers.

There’s a problem though, as there usually is with these sensational Trump stories.

Not only is the language of the agreement visible, you can even see the signatures on the paper. It’s clearly, 100% not “blank,” as CNN’s reporter described it.

Karem gave a belated correction which currently has only 383 likes and 39 retweets. Notice how these people always purposely don’t delete their tweets, knowing they’ll continue to garner views and followers despite being false.

This led to questions about why Karem assumed it was blank in the first place.

We know why he did what he did though. CNN exists as a rabidly anti-Trump network at this point. Even as their ratings keep collapsing, they continue their crusade. If that means spreading fake news, which will now become fact to liberals everywhere, then so be it. They can just give a meek correction and move onto the next purposeful screw up.

In a stunning show of no self-awareness, Karem tweeted this out later in the afternoon.

In reality, it looks like it’s Karem’s credibly that just got blown to bits.

————————————————-

Enjoying the read? Please visit my archive and check out some of my latest articles.

I’ve got a new twitter! Please help by following @bonchieredstate.

 

The post CNN Reporter Pushes Fake News After Trump Presents Copy of U.S-Mexico Border Deal at Presser appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group FakeNewsShirt-1-300x180 CNN Reporter Pushes Fake News After Trump Presents Copy of U.S-Mexico Border Deal at Presser white house U.S.-Mexico Deal Politics No Credibility jim acosta Illegal Immigration Front Page Stories Front Page fake news donald trump democrats CNN brian karem Border Deal  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Nearly Two Hundred Corporate CEOs Declare That Killing Babies Is What Makes Their Business Thrive

Abortion is shaping up to be a surprise issue in the 2020 election. We’ve seen the Democrat party move from the Clintonian formulation of “safe, legal, and rare,” to a more aggressive stance on the issue. The center of the current Democrat field supports laws that allow abortion to be performed up until the baby is delivered, and, if we’re to take Virginia Governor Ralph “Blackface” Northam at his word, even a baby that has survived the birthing process is not all that safe. Simultaneously, several states are acting to restrict abortion. Some, like Alabama, are apparently doing it to force a Supreme Court reconsideration of Roe v. Wade, and others are focused on ensuring that abortion clinics have to obey the same regulations as an immediate care facility where you can get a hangnail trimmed knowing that the abortuary corporations involved will never spend money to make women safer.

As the momentum in the argument seems to be swinging in favor of life, Planned Parenthood, NARAL Pro-Choice America, the American Civil Liberties Union and the Center for Reproductive Rights, have enlisted the aid of some 180 corporations to claim that abortion is all that makes them financially viable.

More than 180 CEOs signed an open letter opposing state efforts to restrict reproductive rights, as business leaders weigh how to most effectively exert pressure against abortion bans.

Square chief executive and Twitter co-founder Jack Dorsey as well as fashion icon Diane von Furstenberg and others wrote that restrictions on abortion access threaten the economic stability of their employees and customers and make it harder to build a diverse workforce and recruit talent.

What goes along with it is a list of companies that really don’t matter. Here is a partial list of companies who think they can’t survive unless babies are slaughtered.

Westlake Legal Group companies-that-like-to-kill-babies-620x771 Nearly Two Hundred Corporate CEOs Declare That Killing Babies Is What Makes Their Business Thrive yelp twitter pro-abortion Politics planned parenthood Naral Pro-Choice America Front Page Stories Featured Story democrats Center for Reproductive Rights American Civil Liberties Union Allow Media Exception Abortion

Screengrab fromhttps://dontbanequality.com/

This is how the astroturf entity “Don’t Ban Equality” fluffs the argument.

When everyone is empowered to succeed, our companies, our communities and our economy are better for it.

Restricting access to comprehensive reproductive care, including abortion, threatens the health, independence and economic stability of our employees and customers. Simply put, it goes against our values and is bad for business. It impairs our ability to build diverse and inclusive workforce pipelines, recruit top talent across the states, and protect the well-being of all the people who keep our businesses thriving day in and out.

The future of gender equality hangs in the balance, putting our families, communities, businesses and the economy at risk.

Note the neat jujitsu here? The use of “equality” as a synonym for abortion. This is the same strategy used when licensing sexual deviance was sold as “marriage equality.”

Pro Tip: if your business model is improved by killing people then maybe you should rethink what you’re doing. I’m sure that a lot of the employees here would be “empowered to succeed” (wtfingf does that even mean?) if they were able to off elderly parents or sickly family members or spouses they’d grown tired of, that doesn’t mean we should condone it and campaign on behalf of doing so.

The entire argument that the absences of a readily available abortion is either a health issue (it isn’t, there is literally no health condition that requires abortion to cure it) or one that disadvantages women in or out of the workforce is just nonsense. The idea that any company, in the long run, is better off with fewer customers or fewer potential employees is simply economic illiteracy. The overwhelming majority of women do not have an abortion…don’t believe that 1-in-3 bullsh**, that math only works in gender studies classes.

Unfortunately, the real takeaway here is that these companies don’t like families. They see a spouse and children as something that distracts the nice little drones in the their cubes from putting in yet more hours. Why would any woman want to go to work for a company that puts more of a premium on killing babies than on nurturing them? Why would any person really care what the priesthood of Moloch thinks is best? Why does anyone think that someone who believes in killing babies has the moral authority to lecture anyone on anything?

We can only hope that the 2020 election is fought on the battleground of abortion, if for no other reason that to watch Vichy Republicans pull themselves through their own sphincters making the case why abortion doesn’t count as an issue because Trump is on the ballot. I think a national debate about abortion…including educating the nation on what actually happens during an abortion…is long overdue. This whole idea that inconvenience is reason for murder must be treated the same way as chattel slavery. It must be eradicated.

=========
=========
Like what you see? Then visit my story archive.

I’m on Facebook. Drop by and join the fun there.
=========
=========

The post Nearly Two Hundred Corporate CEOs Declare That Killing Babies Is What Makes Their Business Thrive appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group abortion-baby-in-hand-300x200 Nearly Two Hundred Corporate CEOs Declare That Killing Babies Is What Makes Their Business Thrive yelp twitter pro-abortion Politics planned parenthood Naral Pro-Choice America Front Page Stories Featured Story democrats Center for Reproductive Rights American Civil Liberties Union Allow Media Exception Abortion  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Kansas Democrats are moving to ranked choice voting

Westlake Legal Group CalVoting Kansas Democrats are moving to ranked choice voting The Blog ranked choice voting Kansas democrats 2020 Democrat primaries

If you’re a Kansas Democrat looking forward to the big primary battle next year you’ll probably notice a couple of minor changes. Okay… I lied. They’re not minor at all. First of all, if the plan recently submitted to the DNC is approved and implemented, you’re not going to have a caucus next year at all as you’ve been doing for decades. You’ll be switching over to a normal primary election.

Okay… I lied again. It’s not a “normal” primary in the sense of how most of the rest of the country runs a primary. You’ll be asked to fill out a ranked choice ballot. In addition to voting for your favorite candidate, you’ll be asked (though not forced) to fill out a second choice, third choice, fourth choice, etc. (Kansas.com)

Last week, the state party submitted its plan to the Democratic National Committee to ditch Kansas’ traditional caucus system in favor of a primary election with ranked-choice voting.

Kansas Democratic Chairwoman Vicki Hyatt said she thinks the new system will make it easier to vote and increase Democratic turnout. “I’m hoping it will generate a lot of energy,” she said.

It won’t be an official state-run election, but it will have more of the trappings of one than the previous caucus process — which has been used since 1992 to divvy up delegates between Democratic candidates.

It appears, in the opinion of yours truly, that the Kansas state Democratic Party is opting to remove one problem and insert another one instead. As regular readers likely already know, I’m not a fan of either of the systems involved in this switch.

Ditching the caucus system is, as I see it, a good thing. I know some of you, particularly in the smaller states, love your caucuses and defend the tradition. But let’s face it… they’re not terribly democratic. It strictly limits the times when people can participate and it forces them to stand up in front of their fellow community members and declare their choice. And that’s true even if one of the other people is your boss who supports a different candidate. So switching to a primary with secret ballots and generous voting hours is a plus.

But this ranked choice ballot detracts from the change because it’s such a sketchy way to handle the counting of the votes. Just look at the history of the recent change to ranked choice voting in Maine and how many courts went back and forth on whether it was even legal.

And even if you accept that ranked choice is constitutional, that doesn’t make it good. The system supposedly ensures a majority instead of a plurality for the winner, but so what? Who says you have to have a majority? And this new system doesn’t really give someone a majority anyway. Each candidate gets however many first choice votes they received but then they get the second choice votes of people whose first selection was the least popular candidate. It’s just a mess.

Then again, as a Defense Secretary once famously said, sometimes Democracy is messy. Kansas can go ahead and make this change and see how the people like it. Just don’t try to force it on the rest of us, please.

The post Kansas Democrats are moving to ranked choice voting appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group CalVoting-300x159 Kansas Democrats are moving to ranked choice voting The Blog ranked choice voting Kansas democrats 2020 Democrat primaries  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Pelosi Is Giving Mark Zuckerberg the Silent Treatment Over a Video On Facebook

Westlake Legal Group rsz_f07c7864-5d7c-4b34-8895-98e1e607df21-620x413 Pelosi Is Giving Mark Zuckerberg the Silent Treatment Over a Video On Facebook Social Media Politics Nancy Pelosi Mark Zuckerberg Front Page Stories Featured Story facebook democrats Censorship Allow Media Exception

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg is really trying to get a hold of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for a video that popped up on his social media platform, but she’s reportedly not calling him back due to her anger over it.

According to the Washington Post, Zuck has reached out to Pelosi in recent weeks but hasn’t received a reply of any kind over her frustration of a video released by a political group that showed Pelosi looking drunk and slow during her speech at the Center for American Progress last month. Facebook had refused to take the video down as it did not violate any of its rules.

According to WaPo, sources familiar say she doesn’t want to hear an explanation from Facebook as to why they didn’t take it down:

According to the people familiar the matter, Pelosi has not been eager to hear Zuckerberg’s explanation for the company’s actions.

The impasse between the nation’s most powerful Democratic lawmaker and the social media titan highlights broader tensions within the Democratic Party about Facebook and the company’s efforts to counter both foreign interference in elections and the spread of viral lies and blatant falsehoods.

A spokesperson for Pelosi declined to comment. Facebook declined to comment on Zuckerberg’s private communications.

While this may seem like a case of hurt feelings, knowing Pelosi and her subliminal way of communicating her intent, this looks to me like Pelosi looking to gin up hard feelings against Facebook, which may grease the wheels for better manipulation of social networks like his.

Calls have increased to break Facebook apart and turn the social network in a government utility, and Pelosi is likely only too happy to do it. The fake video would work well to become one more example of how platforms like Facebook disseminate false information and one more bullet in the Democrat’s gun in its quest to censor the internet.

Facebook itself has a long-standing “policy that stipulates that the information you post on Facebook must be true” according to WaPo. Censoring things like the video would increase accusations of censorship and bias, which is what Zuckerberg reportedly fears.

He rightly should, too.

Whether the video is doctored or not is irrelevant. People can release footage disproving the video’s claims. Pelosi is angry because Zuck didn’t censor the attack against her right off the bat, which says a lot of about Pelosi and how she thinks the private sector should cater to her and her whims.

It also works in Pelosi’s favor that she not know the reason Facebook didn’t censor it so that when the question is asked in a more public atmosphere, say a committee hearing, the question itself can elicit more distrust from the public.

That distrust turns into more calls for a government takeover.

The post Pelosi Is Giving Mark Zuckerberg the Silent Treatment Over a Video On Facebook appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group AP_18019789501804-300x213 Pelosi Is Giving Mark Zuckerberg the Silent Treatment Over a Video On Facebook Social Media Politics Nancy Pelosi Mark Zuckerberg Front Page Stories Featured Story facebook democrats Censorship Allow Media Exception  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Bizarre: Beto Says He’s Staying in Presidential Race Because Polls Said He’d Lose Against Ted Cruz in 2018, Too

Westlake Legal Group BetoORourkeCharlotteNC4 Bizarre: Beto Says He’s Staying in Presidential Race Because Polls Said He’d Lose Against Ted Cruz in 2018, Too Texas Ted Cruz polls Politics North Carolina It Is Okay To Laugh Iowa Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post elections democrats Culture Campaigns Beto O'Rourke beto Allow Media Exception 2020 Elections 2020 2018 elections

2020 presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke (D) campaigns in Charlotte, NC – 4/15/19. Screen grab via ABC News.

Beto O’Rourke’s presidential campaign has fallen so far in polling over the last couple of months that he’s now apparently taken to believing he actually won his 2018 Senate race against Ted Cruz.

During a stop in Cedar Rapids, IA over the weekend, O’Rourke told a journalist that he was not worried about recent polling numbers that put him at 2% in the crucial state of Iowa. Why? Because polls said he wasn’t going to win his race against Ted Cruz, either (bolded emphasis added):

“There is a lot of time before the Iowa caucuses. We’ve never been guided by a poll before, “ O’Rourke told Yahoo News at the opening of his Cedar Rapids field office. “If you were to look at the Texas Senate race, the first couple of months after we were in, no poll was going to say that we were going to win. When I first ran for Congress in 2012, against an incumbent and against some very long odds no poll at any point said that we were going to win. And yet yet we did. And if I am lucky enough to to be the nominee and then to become the president of the United States, no poll will guide the decisions that I make.”

Watch video of the exchange below:

Except, ya know, O’Rourke sorta lost his Senate race against Cruz.

As Hot Air‘s Allapundit noted, it’s “as if Stacey Abrams’s delusion somehow became infectious and Beto caught it from her.”

Or maybe he got his words twisted and really meant to say that early polls didn’t give him a shot at even coming close to defeating Cruz. Let’s hope that’s all it is. Because we sure don’t need another delusional failed candidate like Stacey Abrams on our hands.

————————
—Based in North Carolina, Sister Toldjah is a former liberal and a 15+ year veteran of blogging with an emphasis on media bias, social issues, and the culture wars. Read her Red State archives here. Connect with her on Twitter.–

The post Bizarre: Beto Says He’s Staying in Presidential Race Because Polls Said He’d Lose Against Ted Cruz in 2018, Too appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group BetoORourkeCharlotteNC4-300x164 Bizarre: Beto Says He’s Staying in Presidential Race Because Polls Said He’d Lose Against Ted Cruz in 2018, Too Texas Ted Cruz polls Politics North Carolina It Is Okay To Laugh Iowa Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post elections democrats Culture Campaigns Beto O'Rourke beto Allow Media Exception 2020 Elections 2020 2018 elections  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Entrenched Politician Elizabeth Warren Suggests Newcomer Trump Will Not Give Up Power, Needs to be Pried from Office

Westlake Legal Group elizabeth-warren-620x434 Entrenched Politician Elizabeth Warren Suggests Newcomer Trump Will Not Give Up Power, Needs to be Pried from Office progressives Presidential Election Liz Warren Liberal Elitism Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post Elizabeth Warren elections democrats Campaigns Allow Media Exception 2020 Democrats 2020

Elizabeth Warren – Caricature by DonkeyHotey, licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0/Original

 

Is it projection, or obliviousness, that leads a political animal to accuse others of being political?

It would not be a day in D.C. without an elected official displaying a stark lack of self-awareness. Elizabeth Warren, in her continued attempt to appear as normal and every-day gosh-darn normal as you people in those strange flyover states, is still struggling with image control. After a bungled beer video Liz is still working on that “relatable” thing, bare she’s trying!

Her latest comes from the Team Warren Twitter account which, in true “Hello fellow kids” fashion has in its bio the opening of “Welcome Stans”. (Ugh, I swear…) The account gives a video that has Warren in an impromptu discussion with a young girl. Warren also has a children’s book that is centered upon herself, I would point out, and maybe if she focused a bit more on those who are of proper voting age she may be polling higher, but I’m not a campaign advisor, so what do I know?!

The conversation was so impromptu and off-the-cuff-candid that it was captured on video, with subtitles provided.

 

The young girl asks Senator Warren a question, borne of undiluted curiosity in a completely natural and not-at-all pre-planned fashion. “Why is there still sexism now?” asked the young one. Warren next goes on a lengthy and involved response, that in no way actually addressed the girl’s concerns.

I kind of think it’s people who have power,” says the Senator with a more than 1/1024 percent amount of earnestness, “don’t actually like to give it up! So you kind of have to pry it away.” She also mentioned having to “fight for what you believe in”, so says the woman who was given the Democratic Party nomination for the Massachusetts Senate seat. (As a complete newcomer she ran unopposed, somehow, so not much of a “fight” there.)

Now, this is a clear reference towards the current President, Donald Trump. This is a woman who has been in DC for 7 years, and has worked the system prior as a lawyer. Trump has never been in politics before the 2016 election. But he is the one who needs to be pried out of his office, for some reason, though he has not even completed the first term. The implication is clear; he is not a rightful occupant of the White House and it is possible he will not vacate in proper fashion once evicted, so to speak.

The irony is this is coming from someone who is comfortably cemented in DC politics, who has been shielded and coddled by her party and now she feels practically entitled. She has made a disaster of herself with her heritage issue, and yet continues to be propped up to the extent that she is one of the front-runners for the party nomination.

Yet here she stands, uninfluenced by shame, suggesting that it is others who are not rightfully in place, and may need to be forcibly extricated in order to make room for her arrival. Amusing that the woman who cannot even admit to errors of her claims of genealogy, because she needs to cling to her position of power, suggests anyone else is having a hard time surrendering their own.

The post Entrenched Politician Elizabeth Warren Suggests Newcomer Trump Will Not Give Up Power, Needs to be Pried from Office appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group elizabeth-warren-300x210 Entrenched Politician Elizabeth Warren Suggests Newcomer Trump Will Not Give Up Power, Needs to be Pried from Office progressives Presidential Election Liz Warren Liberal Elitism Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post Elizabeth Warren elections democrats Campaigns Allow Media Exception 2020 Democrats 2020  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

John Dean’s ‘Big Thrill’

Westlake Legal Group trump-2019482_1280-620x499 John Dean’s ‘Big Thrill’ Special Counsel Richard Nixon President Trump Mueller Investigation John Dean Front Page Stories Featured Story donald trump democrats Allow Media Exception 2020

Issues & Insights’ Thomas McArdle recalled an incident detailed in a book entitled “Very Strange Bedfellows: The Short and Unhappy Marriage of Nixon & Agnew” written by Jules Witcover. Witcover, a reporter who covered the Watergate scandal, described an April 1971 (recorded) conversation which took place in President Nixon’s office one year before the Watergate break-in. Nixon and his chief of staff Bob Haldeman were mulling over ideas to remove Vice President Spiro Agnew from the 1972 ticket. White House counsel John Dean was on the phone.

Feigning that he needed Dean to nail down the details of how a new Vice President would be appointed under the Twenty-Fifth Amendment, Nixon finished a phone call with Dean, then quipped to Haldeman: “That’s his big thrill for the month.””

Indeed, the first of many big thrills to come.

Leading up to his gig as the star witness in the Watergate hearings, Dean had been a willing participant in unethical behavior. Always an opportunist, he was willing to do whatever was necessary to achieve his goals.

New York Times writer Jack Anderson reported that Dean had been dismissed by Washington law firm Welch & Morgan for “unethical conduct” that was “grounds for disbarment,” in 1966. The reason? He had been tasked with negotiating for a client’s TV broadcast license and instead, “tried to make a private deal.”

Dean himself had been deeply involved in every aspect of Watergate. As further proof of his duplicitous nature, he stayed on as White House counsel even after he had begun cooperating with Senate investigators. He plead guilty to obstruction of justice in October 1973 and on August 2, 1974, he received a sentence of 1-4 years in a minimum security prison. Upon surrendering himself one month later,

He was diverted to the custody of U.S. Marshals, and kept instead at Fort Holabird (near Baltimore, Maryland) in a special “safe house” holding facility primarily used for witnesses against the Mafia. He spent his days at the offices of Jaworski, the Watergate Special Prosecutor, and testifying in the trial of Watergate conspirators Mitchell, Haldeman, Ehrlichman, Robert Mardian, and Kenneth Parkinson, which concluded on January 1, 1975. All except Parkinson were convicted, largely based upon Dean’s evidence. Dean’s lawyer moved to have his sentence reduced and on January 8, Judge Sirica granted the motion, adjusting Dean’s sentence to time served, which wound up being four months. With his conviction for felony offenses, Dean was disbarred as a lawyer in Virginia and the District of Columbia, so he could no longer practice law.

He was as involved in the scandal as all of these men, yet he escaped justice. He has since parlayed his Watergate “fame” into a profitable career. This man has always looked out for number one.

John Dean will be forever defined by his role in bringing down President Nixon. Why else would the House Judiciary Committee showcase him at the opening of their Mueller Report hearings? After all, as McArdle points out, Dean “has nothing to do with Donald Trump, nothing to do with Russia, nothing to do with Mueller’s investigation, and who throughout his career could be trusted on virtually nothing.” During questioning, he repeatedly had to remind Republican members of Congress that he was not a “fact witness.” McArdle adds:

Some have compared Democrats squiring in Richard Nixon’s disgraced White House counsel and Watergate conspirator John Dean, in their first step on a road they hope will lead to Trump’s impeachment, to bringing in Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein. It’s really more like Robert Redford and Dustin Hoffman, the stars who played the Washington Post reporters in the movie of their book “All the President’s Men.”

The stunt is a cinematic opportunity to let the establishment media do what they’ve been pining to do for over two years now: juxtapose video of Dean’s blockbuster testimony to the Watergate committee with the various goings-on today and hope the public conflates Nixon and the current White House occupant.

Since Watergate, Dean has positioned himself as an expert on impeachment. He gets his thrills by determining where any given president’s offense or scandal would fall on the “Watergate” scale.

Regarding Reagan’s Iran-Contra scandal, he told Newsweek  “it involves matters of national security. Watergate, on the other hand, involved the political security of Richard Nixon. These are Major-league matters versus Little League.” This was worse than Watergate. Therefore, Reagan should be impeached.

During the Iraq War, he told anyone who would listen that President Bush getting us into a war we didn’t need to be involved in was worse than Watergate. Accordingly, he should be impeached. 

Speaking before the House Judiciary Committee on Monday, Dean said, “In many ways, the Mueller report is to President Trump what the so-called ‘Watergate road map’… was to President Richard Nixon. Mueller has provided this committee with a road map.” Similar to Watergate. Thus, Trump must be impeached.

John Dean is a convicted felon. Who is he to be passing judgement on American Presidents Republican Presidents?

In their desperation, Democrats just can’t stop humiliating themselves. And they will continue to beclown themselves until November 3, 2020.

And the next day, they will cry. Again.

Now THAT would be a thrill.

The post John Dean’s ‘Big Thrill’ appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group trump-2019482_1280-300x241 John Dean’s ‘Big Thrill’ Special Counsel Richard Nixon President Trump Mueller Investigation John Dean Front Page Stories Featured Story donald trump democrats Allow Media Exception 2020  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Ghoul Alert: ‘Teen Vogue’ Instructs Young Girls on How to Get Abortions – Without Parental Consent

Westlake Legal Group abortion-on-demand-without-apology Ghoul Alert: ‘Teen Vogue’ Instructs Young Girls on How to Get Abortions – Without Parental Consent Teen Vogue Social Media sex education Pro-Life Politics North Carolina New York Media journalism Front Page Stories Front Page Feminism Featured Story Featured Post democrats Culture Allow Media Exception Abortion

I’m not sure what’s worse: Teen Vogue sexualizing 9-year-old drag queen boys, the magazine publishing a “guide to anal sex“, or a more recent story they did advising teenage girls how to get abortions without parental consent:

The magazine has a monthly “Down to Find Out” advice column, which is maintained by feminist writer Nona Willis Aronowitz, who was super-excited to announce her column gig last month:

In her latest column, Aronowitz advises a 16-year-old girl on how to get an abortion – without the consent of her parents:

Q: I’m 16, I’m pregnant, and I don’t want to be. I’m not sure if I’m allowed to get an abortion without my parents’ permission, but I’m really scared to tell them because they are both against abortion. What should I do?

Aronowitz, who is also the author of a subscription-only newsletter called “F*cking Through the Apocalypse”, told the teen she once had been a pregnant teenager, too – but had pro-abortion parents who helped her obtain access to Plan B “without judging or admonishing” her. Other teens weren’t so lucky, she lamented. But according to Aronowitz, that shouldn’t deter a teenager from getting an abortion (bolded emphasis added):

And it’s only logical that if teens are mature enough to become parents, they are mature enough to decide whether or not they want to give birth. Having access to abortion should be your right, regardless of your parents’ beliefs.

Noting that 37 states have some form of parental consent laws on the books, Aronowitz advised:

If you live in one of the handful of states in which a minor can get an abortion without parental involvement — and if you don’t want to tell your parents — you’re all set. But if the law does require that your parents are involved, it’s time for some soul-searching about how you think they’ll react when confronted directly with their pregnant child’s desire to not be.

Aronowitz first advised that teenage girls whose parents are not pro-choice to try and tell them anyway, unless they felt like they would be in danger or kicked out of the house. If they did, Aronowitz suggested the teens go for what’s called a “judicial bypass procedure”:

If yes, there is a legal option in 36 states that would let you get an abortion without parental approval called a judicial bypass procedure — an infantilizing holdup to which nobody should have to resort. The process for a judicial bypass is different in every state, but in each case that it’s an option, it involves a minor testifying before a judge and receiving court approval to access abortion care without telling their parents.

Whether or not a state requires a judicial bypass, Aronowitz lets her teen readers know they can contact a local abortion fund if they need help paying for their abortion (without their parent’s knowledge, of course). She also urged young girls “talk to another adult” about what they are going through if they don’t want to talk to their parents.

In response to Aronowitz’s column, Twitter users let her have it:

That would certainly be a switch!

Flashback: Teen Vogue Writer Rages: Pregnant Chelsea Clinton “Should’ve Shut Her F**King Mouth”

————————
—Based in North Carolina, Sister Toldjah is a former liberal and a 15+ year veteran of blogging with an emphasis on media bias, social issues, and the culture wars. Read her Red State archives here. Connect with her on Twitter.–

The post Ghoul Alert: ‘Teen Vogue’ Instructs Young Girls on How to Get Abortions – Without Parental Consent appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group abortion-on-demand-without-apology-300x181 Ghoul Alert: ‘Teen Vogue’ Instructs Young Girls on How to Get Abortions – Without Parental Consent Teen Vogue Social Media sex education Pro-Life Politics North Carolina New York Media journalism Front Page Stories Front Page Feminism Featured Story Featured Post democrats Culture Allow Media Exception Abortion  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com