I really dislike conspiracy theories. By taking the focus away from valid points that should be debated and take up oxygen on discussion that is just plain dishonest. Do you know what I dislike even more? That would be patterns of credible evidence emerge that make the conspiracy theories start to sound rational. As I slip on this particular tinfoil hat I’ll have to once again quote the great Damien Sandow and ask you to allow me to beg your indulgence…
As with any discussion on Trump I have to preface it with my personal up front opinions. First off, I’m not a fan of Trump. Having grown up in New Jersey I had a front row seat to the rise of The Donald and don’t believe that he would make a good President. If you want a more detailed explanation Jonah Goldberg gives a good analysis. That said, I understand respect those who are ready to vote for Trump, and Kurt Schlichter has written a number of pieces explaining the reason to vote for Trump, and I’ll be among them.
With all of my disclaimers out of the way, let’s dive into the ugly parts of the discussion. Trump has held a number of questionable positions to be running as a Republican – on the borders, on abortion, on his views of his Presidential opponent, etc. Before the comments erupt in arguing these points, please refer back to the last paragraph on the pros and cons of voting for Trump. But the one conspiracy that has hung in the back of my mind is the conspiracy theory that he’s running just to throw the election for Hillary. Before all of you Trump supporters erupt, please hear me out.
Early in Trump’s campaign I thought it would have made more sense for him to run as a Democrat. With the Dems having been pulled insanely to the left it would have made a good fit for Trump to run as a centrist Democrat (a sadly near-extinct species). between the smaller, less qualified field and his sharp tongue he would have been great for slicing through their BS. Granted, he would have had to face the Clinton machine, but based on a number of his changing views it would have made more sense. Unfortunately, the Republicans made made two fatal mistakes in running against Trump in the primaries. First, when an insurgent candidate gains steam with one issue some mainstream candidate generally latches on and co-opts it, along with the insurgent’s support. Unfortunately, the highly intelligent political consultant class told their candidates to basically ignore the issue, allowing Trump to own it. The second mistake, (which helps explain the first), is the fact that Conservatives are tired of our “Leaders” ignoring the principles we elected them to follow, and their cowardly unwillingness to defend themselves and our principles from the dishonest bile from The Radical Left, whether from politicians, or especially from the media. Cruz understood this better than any other candidate, but nobody owned the mantle as a fighter better than Trump.
So now we have Trump vs. Hillary. The first real evidence I saw to back this “Agent Provaceteur” theory was the day after Hillary had it revealed that she had several dozen highly classified e-mails on her illegal, unsecured, home server. You might recall that the same day that the Hillary story broke, Trump also used that day to announce the endorsement from Sarah Palin that he’d obtained. Could this have waited a few days? Probably. Does this mean he was in the bag for Hillary by helping to suck her story out of the news cycle? Maybe, maybe not. But I’ve seen a few more examples of this, culminating with how he handled the day that we learned that Hillary had the father of a mass-murderer terrorist standing directly behind her at a campaign event. And how did he react to this, by being uncharacteristically non-Trumpian about the incident. As Jim Geraghty summarizes:
Remember yesterday’s point that Donald Trump had been given a golden opportunity, now that Seddique Mateen, the father of the Orlando terrorist, had attended a Hillary Clinton rally, been seen behind her, and declared she was “good on national security” and good on gun control?
Here’s how Trump responded to this opportunity:
In not so typical Trump fashion, Donald Trump hasn’t touched the story about the father of the Orlando Pulse nightclub shooter showing up at Hillary Clinton’s rally in Kissimmee.
People who subscribe to the theories that Trump doesn’t want to win or that he’s trying to help Hillary Clinton win — I don’t — will point to this bizarrely passive response.
The Clinton campaign seems to recognize what a potential liability this is:
The Clinton campaign said earlier Tuesday they were not aware of his presence.
“The rally was a 3,000-person, open-door event for the public,” a campaign official told Fox News. “This individual wasn’t invited as a guest and the campaign was unaware of his attendance until after the event.”
Instead, at an event yesterday, Trump offered this word salad:
“Hillary wants to abolish — essentially abolish the Second Amendment. By the way, if she gets to pick, if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks.Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don’t know.But I tell you what, that will be a horrible day, if Hillary gets to put her judges in, right now we’re tied.”
And yes, I know that Trump has attacked Hillary and has had fun mocking her radical loon attack dog, Fauxcahontas. But I’m seeing too many cases of Hillary serving up golden opportunities for Trump to crush her and instead he serves up some easy sound bites for her Eunochs. As he did on Wednesday, via PJ Media’s Tyler O’Neill:
Donald Trump on Wednesday repeatedly called President Obama “the founder” of the Islamic State, also known as ISIS.
“ISIS is honoring President Obama,” the Republican presidential candidate said at a rally in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. “He is the founder of ISIS. He is the founder of ISIS, OK? He’s the founder. He founded ISIS. And I would say the co-founder would be crooked Hillary Clinton. Cofounder — crooked Hillary Clinton.”
These comments mark a reversal for Trump, who last week called Clinton “the founder of ISIS.”
Note to Trump: Spouting off crazy at your opponent (like suggesting your opponent’s father had ties to the Kennedy assassination) doesn’t dominate the news cycle when the media hates your opponent more than you. When they are in “Protect the Queen” mode, loose cannon comments will dominate the news cycle, especially if they provide convenient cover for them to ignore her string of what now seem to be daily scandals.
I’m also seeing too many stories about his lack of a ground game, failure to advertise in swing states, poor organization, etc. I’m just having a hard time believing that somebody with Trump’s years of business experience would be incapable of seeing the mistakes he’s making and not making tactical adjustments.
So back to you Trump supporters – I’ve made no bones about my dislike for our nominee, will have no problem voting for him in November, and I despise conspiracy theories. It’s just that every day that goes by the evidence suggests that he’s trying to lose this election. And no, enthusiastic supporters at rallies and deciding that the poll numbers Trump once bragged about continuously are no longer valid are evidence that Trump will defeat Hillary.
The “Sports” web site Deadpsin.com writes an annual preview of every NFL team under the theme of, “Why your team s*cks”. The 2015 edition of my beloved Philadelphia Eagles was sadly, and accurately, described as a team that “spent a whole season planting dynamite inside its own a**hole.” Please Trump supporters, help me believe that we’re not just planting dynamite in our own a**hole.
Follow Brother Bob on Twitter and Facebook
Cross posted at from Brother Bob’s Blog
This is Mike Pence’s position of the political grid:
http://www.ontheissues.org/images/s020_090.gif
This is Donald Trump’s:
http://www.ontheissues.org/images/s030_070.gif
Here is Hillary’s:
http://www.ontheissues.org/images/s080_010.gif
And here’s Tim Kaine’s:
http://www.ontheissues.org/images/s070_020.gif
According to Open Secrets Hillary’s camp has spent more than $200 MILLION in PAC money to get elected.
Hillary has an astounding $34 Million from ”other” than individual contributors, PACs, herself and the Gov’t.
I wonder what those ”others” are?
Another $84 Million is being spent be 3rd parties AGAINST Trump.
Open Secrets says Donald Trump has spent $76 million.
Almost all of this is his own money.
Zero are PAC funds and Gov’t matching funds.
The non-self-funding is individual contributions.
If you get any information about Trump from Jonah just recall that he was Donald’s first target for his GOPe stance: Trump accused Jonah of not even being able to pick out his own clothes.
Jonah has neither forgotten nor forgiven.
He has kept account.
I strongly suggest you listen to a couple of Trump rallies, LIVE and uncut.
Here:
http://rsbn.tv/ Schedule on the right side of the page.
Stop taking your talking points from GOPe.
Was it Socrates or Plato who dialogued about horses with rich men’s sons.
All the rich men’s sons were opining based on high-falutin theory.
After much debate about how many teeth a healthy young horse has, he finally asked a servant boy.
The servant boy was able to answer correctly because he had experience, 1st hand, looking in horses mouths.
Well, Brother Bob, I’ll get the ball rolling. I can handle the crapstorm of foam, spittle and tears which will follow. As I have said before, I have read every book that Mr. Trump has written, going back over twenty years, and watched as many of his speeches as I have time for. The things that have stood out consistently over those twenty years are these:
Donald Trump respects and supports military and law enforcement personnel.
Donald Trump loves the USA.
Donald Trump treats everyone the same, regardless of sex, skin color, or sexual preference. He just flat doesn’t care about any of those things. He judges by ability and performance, which is why so many people hate him. It is also why his companies have a higher percentage of female executives than just about any Fortune 500 company.
Very, very few people who know him, worked for or with him, or have had business relationships with him have said anything negative about him. Most are positive in their comments. Yes, there have been a few, but it is a very low percentage.
In other words, the people who know him the best like, respect, and appreciate the man.
He has helped many people with whom he was not associated, not by forming a foundation and asking others to give, but by quietly giving himself. That’s real charity, not filling cronies pockets with a charity-shaped object the way liberals are so fond of doing things.
Anyway, that’s just a small sample of the reasons that I will vote for Mr. Trump – not things that some media star has said about him, but things that he has actually said and done himself.
@Nanny G: #1
Annnnd, you beat me to it. Nicely played, Nanny G!
The main-stream news media pretty much covers up the crimes commited by the demacrats
I think you’ve al missed my point. While I don’t like Trump, I respect his supporters and will be voting for him in the fall right alongside you.
My question to everybody is why does someone with his business acumen (and I mean that sincerely) keep making such stupid mistakes? Why is he not adjusting and taking advantage of how Hillary keeps setting herself up to be crushed?
@Brother Bob:
They are NOT stupid mistakes, to answer the question berifly, BBob.
You haven’t read The Art of the Deal, have you?
It is common in making a sale (and what is politics, if not selling yourself?) to use hyperbole to exaggerate your own position and to make your opponent’s position look worse.
So, ”that house” (I want to buy) becomes nearly a dump!
All of a sudden, you (the seller) are stuck with a dog of a house, unless you begin bringing down the price to match the dumpiness of the house.
In politics (also in sailing) it has been called ”tacking,” as the two opponents go back and forth between two positions until a best possible choice for the voter is apparent.
Bill O’Reilly is a famous tacker, whose shows favor Left, then Independent, then Right, as the days of the week go by.
Donald Trump OVER-states his positions for this reason, too.
It causes the media to give him free coverage.
It gets his supporters and detractors thinking.
It gives him time to hone his actual position after watching the frothing mouthed opponents and their water-carrying media.
He has said Muslims must be prevented from immigrating here UNTIL we know what is going on.
He has tempered that to Muslims from terror-exporting places must be prevented from coming here until they can be properly vetted.
Meanwhile the media went from sounding like mad dogs about Trump’s ”racism,” (as if “Muslim” is a race) to accepting the fact that Presidents all have this right and even Obama has exercised it!
Only people like Hillary and her truly rabid supporters still dredge up older, hectoring comments of Trump’s and act as if he’s still saying all those things NOWADAYS.
But, to pull that lie off, Hillary has to outspend Trump 5 to 1!
She has already spent over $300 MILLION of other people’s money on negative ads,
Trump has spent a total (counting the primary) of only $76 Million of mostly his own money.
But people are far more familiar with where Trump is right now than where Hillary is right now.
Hillary is creating pod casts so she can hide from her public.
Trump goes in front of huge crowds once, usually twice and sometimes three times a day!
When Trump calls a news conference, he takes on ALL questioners.
He stays however long they want.
When Hillary claims she’s having a news conference, it is of a short duration, she invites only her buddies and she is pre-feed every syncophantic question.
Over the long run, even with the media in her corner, everyone will be bludgeoned with this distinction.
Hillary is the one who will look bad.
Duncan Hunter, Republican congressman from California, says it all very well:
Why Donald Trump Has the Temperament to Be President
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/08/donald-trump-2016-temperament-214161
Read it, it’s short.
Get your information straight and your knickers might not be so twisted around!!!
Democracy and free market capitalism were founded on conspiracy theories.
Note to Trump: Spouting off crazy at your opponent (like suggesting your opponent’s father had ties to the Kennedy assassination) doesn’t dominate the news cycle when the media hates your opponent more than you.
is THAT what he really said?
“His father was with Lee Harvey Oswald prior to Oswald’s being — you know, shot. I mean, the whole thing is ridiculous,” Mr Trump said on Tuesday.
“I mean, what was he doing — what was he doing with Lee Harvey Oswald shortly before the death? Before the shooting?”
and its all over this:
Rafael Cruz appears in images with Oswald taken in August of 1963, a few months before Kennedy’s death. In August 1963, Oswald was working on behalf on a pro-Castro group Fair Play for Cuba Committee in New Orleans
so, where did he say that there were ties to the kennedy assasination? there are ties to the MAN who assasinated kennedy, not the assasination itself. they BOTH were all in on the communist front in cuba, and were giving out pamphlets together.
but do you realize the difference between knowing a person and being part of that persons actions? the mother of mark david chapman knew him all his life, but that does not mean she was part of his game to kill John Lenin…
the press had fun playing lets game the idiot public, and the people who were not idiots were played by the people who were idiots who are not careful about what they hear, and what it means, and what is actually being said… ie. they hear what they want to hear…
why did they do that? because they wanted you to pay attention to the Tin Hat story and ignore the story in front of you about Fair Play for Cuba Committee in New Orleans, and NOT ask the question: “Why was cruz father supporting communist castro??”
In 1967, the CIA Created the Label “Conspiracy Theorists” … to Attack Anyone Who Challenges the “Official” Narrative
link to the dispatch itself:
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/CIA-conspiracy.jpg
its interesting as the whole thing was to take something that is normal and happens all the time, which is conspiracy, and turn it into something that never exists
b. To employ propaganda assets to and refute the attacks of the critics. Book reviews and feature articles are particularly appropriate for this purpose. The unclassified attachments to this guidance should provide useful background material for passing to assets. Our ploy should point out, as applicable, that the critics are (I) wedded to theories adopted before the evidence was in, (II) politically interested, (III) financially interested, (IV) hasty and inaccurate in their research, or (V) infatuated with their own theories.
back to the real question… the real question was not that Cruz father plotted with kennedys assasin, we have no idea of that, and probably never will. but what about what we DO know? that he was supporting Fair Play for Cuba Committee in New Orleans
The Fair Play for Cuba Committee (FPCC) was an activist group set up in New York in April 1960 The FPCC’s purpose was to provide grassroots support for the Cuban Revolution against attacks by the United States government, once Fidel Castro began openly admitting his commitment to Marxism and began the expropriation and nationalization of Cuban assets belonging to U.S. corporations. The FPCC opposed the Bay of Pigs invasion of 1961, the imposition of the United States embargo against Cuba, and was sympathetic to the Cuban view during the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962.
Subsidiary Fair Play for Cuba groups were set up throughout the United States and Canada. Among its twenty-nine early notable supporters were William Appleman Williams, Norman Mailer, Truman Capote, James Baldwin, Jean-Paul Sartre, Allen Ginsberg, Lawrence Ferlinghetti, Waldo Frank. Alan Sagner and Carleton Beals
so we find Cruz father was supporting the same thing allen ginsberg and truman capote and norman mailer were supporting… doesnt mean they were supporting a wackadoodle intheir company who would go out and act… does it?
The Fair Play for Cuba Committee has been the subject of much speculation. It was accused by some of being a Soviet front, with little real support outside of a few dedicated American communists. However, it seems to have been connected to the Trotskyist Socialist Workers’ Party The FPCC achieved notoriety through the activities of Lee Harvey Oswald in New Orleans. Oswald would later be accused of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Vincent T. Lee shut down the national Fair Play for Cuba Committee in December 1963 when its landlord evicted the group from its national office; the notoriety accorded to it, following the Kennedy assassination, made it impossible for the committee to continue its work
The Socialist Workers Party (SWP) is a far-left political organization in the United States. The group places a priority on “solidarity work” to aid strikes and is strongly supportive of Cuba. The SWP publishes The Militant, a weekly newspaper that dates back to 1928, and maintains Pathfinder Press. The Socialist Workers Party traces its origins back to the former Communist League of America (CLA), founded in 1928 by members of the Communist Party USA expelled for supporting Russian Communist leader Leon Trotsky against Joseph Stalin.
they might hear of the french turn, and how we get RINO and how we have communist democrats…
Early in 1934, some French Trotskyists of the Communist League conceived of the idea of entering the French Socialist Party (the Section Française de l’International Ouvrière or SFIO) in order to recruit members for the Trotskyists, or so some critics have charged. The group retained its identity as a factional organization inside the SFIO and built a base among the party’s youth section, continuing their activity until popular front action between the SFIO and the mainline Communist Party of France made their position untenable. This tactic of “entering” the larger social democratic parties of each country, endorsed by Trotsky himself, became known as the “French Turn” and was replicated by various Trotskyist parties around the world.
The Communist League, the French section of the International Left Opposition, remained at this time a small and predominantly middle-class organization. Leon Trotsky saw a great opportunity in the United Front for an expansion of the Trotskyists’ ranks. While he saw no possibility of re-entering the Communist Party because of its lack of internal democracy, he believed that the Trotskyists could build a base in the SFIO, which had moved to the left under the leadership of Léon Blum. Trotsky formally proposed the “French Turn” into the SFIO in June 1934.
and THIS is where the USA gets its left vs right paradigm
Left Opposition
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left_Opposition
The Left Opposition was a faction within the Bolshevik Party from 1923 to 1927, headed de facto by Leon Trotsky. The Left Opposition formed as part of the power struggle within the party leadership that began with the Soviet founder Vladimir Lenin’s illness and intensified with his death in January 1924. Originally, the battle lines were drawn between Trotsky and his supporters who signed The Declaration of 46 in October 1923, on the one hand, and a triumvirate (known by its Russian name troika) of Comintern chairman Grigory Zinoviev, Communist Party General Secretary Joseph Stalin and Politburo chairman Lev Kamenev on the other hand. The troika was supported by the leading party theoretician and Pravda editor Nikolai Bukharin and by Sovnarkom Chairman (prime minister) Alexei Rykov, who would later be branded the Right Opposition by Stalin. Trotsky and his supporters were joined by the Group of Democratic Centralism.
The grainy photo on the cover of the “pulitzer prize winning National Enquirer rag has been debunked so many times, you all need to stop loving Pecker so much. http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/289524/ted-cruzs-dad-was-good-friends-with-lee-harvey-oswald-or-something/
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/05/03/fact-check-donald-trump-ted-cruz-rafael-cru
I am still waiting and watching, but wondering WTF I cant say I will vote for this bored millionaire.
Someday we may find out it was a bet for one dollar bill between Soros and Trump that he could beat Hillary this election. Print that in the Pecker Press.
@kitt: As much as I dislike Trump, there are good reasons to vote for him – Here is one of Schlichter’s articles that gives good reason to vote for Trump.
I just wish he’d start acting like he wants to win this damned election
@Brother Bob: You call that good reason after the horrible way Schlicter derides Trump? Sad BB
@Richard Wheeler: To paraphrase one of Schlichter’s articles, I’ll vote for the candidate who’s not promising to abolish the Bill of Rights.
And Trump hasn’t committed treason.
@Brother Bob: He made a decent speech on terrorism today he needs to stay the course, stay on policy and mention the scandals that just happen to follow Hillary around. IF he should win I dont expect much he isn’t helping the down ballot, he isn’t a statesman, no clue how to craft a law or get legislation passed, and the government doesnt run like a business.
@kitt: I agree that Trump will get a lot wrong, but my hope is that he’ll also destroy parts of the Leftist infrastructure that’s destroying the country in the process. And unlike Hillary, he hasn’t made a priority of abolishing the Bill of Rights. And he hasn’t committed treason.
@Brother Bob: The left is trying real hard to get the voter ID law reversed here, so racist! The minorities are too stupid to know how to get a free ID, Acorn is too busy getting names from the obits to assist their live voters in obtaining one.
Then The Prez gives Hillary a thinly veiled threat, his protection could end any moment if she doesn’t tow the progressive treasonous line. http://www.newsweek.com/clinton-win-trump-lose-obama-democrats-2016-election-490582 Still no hopes or predictions here for justice.
@kitt: The Radical Left opposes voter ID laws because they are racist.
@Brother Bob: We will just have to agree that we agree on that but Trump will not win.
Founder of Black Box Voting, a nonpartisan, nonprofit investigative reporting and public education organization for elections, Bev Harris, has become known for her work researching the truth behind electronic voting machines. She discussed the latest advances in voting technology and how they further remove the checks and balances for transparency of the vote count.
Soros has a connection to these machines hmmm.
http://www.coasttocoastam.com/show/2016/08/15
This is an interview with Donald Trump by Oprah almost 30 years ago:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUdoN-WkmxQ
As I have said before, the man is consistent. He is and has always been a patriot.
There are many more videos of him from 30, 40 years ago. Watch them and tell me that he’s an unpredictable loose cannon. Tell me that he’s evil.
Listen to what he has actually said, not what some media string puppet “interprets” him as having said.
@Petercat: “the man is consistent” – I do not think that phrase means what you think it means.
@kitt: “Agree to agree” Heh. I still think that Trump has two paths to victory: 1) A massive attack here where he doesn’t use the response as an opportunity to step on his own d***, or 2) He absolutely nails the debates. Both are unlikely, but both are possible
@Brother Bob: #19
It means exactly what I think it means. My understanding of the English language is pretty good.
@Petercat: Consistent? Such as on immigration, health care, Hillary’s worthiness as a leader, etc? Those are just the ones I can think of off the top of my head