We Must Protect Children, By Which We Mean 35-Year-Olds!

One of the recent Republican immigration proposals: We need to protect children!

Defined as everyone up to 36 years old!

Think I’m kidding?

Try USA Today:

On one of the most contentious issues, the draft proposal would allow an estimated 1.8 million “Dreamers” to apply for “nonimmigrant status”– essentially a conditional legal visa – if they meet certain conditions. They must, for example, have a high school diploma or GED and must be under 36 years of age as of June 15.

Just in case you were wondering why this blog has a “GOP traitors” tag.

Advertisements

Trump Strategy in an Impeachment over “Stormy Daniels”

The short version:

The bad guys might try to impeach President Trump over an alleged violation of campaign finance laws. The BS is that if his lawyer paid off Stormy Daniels and that wasn’t listed as a “campaign expenditure,” it’s a violation.

Yes, it’s retarded, but it doesn’t matter: Many politicians who run for office have this sort of (intentional or unintentional) violation of pointless minutiae. So…

All Trump’s team has to do is find similar “violations” committed by unfriendly members of Congress and shout those violations out to the public.

That forces a hostile member of the House or Senate to answer this question, in voting on Articles of Impeachment:

“Is this action, which you yourself are known to have committed, an impeachable offense?”

LOL.

The details version:

The impeachment thing cannot remove Trump from office because that requires a majority in the House and two thirds of the Senate. But the left of course wants Articles of Impeachment anyway to distract and politically damage the President. In this post in March, I wrote,

I’m not saying they won’t try to impeach him [President Trump] over something – of course they will, if they have the numbers in the House; Trump’s election has them absolutely frantic. I’m saying that it won’t be about the retarded “election meddling” thing.

It looks like it’s going to be either “Firing Comey was obstruction” or the Stormy Daniels thing. The bad guys are trying to argue that under certain circumstances, Trump’s lawyer paying Daniels and not disclosing it would be a violation of campaign finance laws.

The Comey option is hobbled by the videos of dozens of Democrats themselves saying that Comey should be fired or step down around the time of the 2016 election. So it’s more likely to be the absurd Daniels thing.

No problem.

IF any such thing happened, it’s the sort of thing that many politicians do, so Trump’s team should simply do the following:

Research unfriendly members of the House and Senate for possible violations of such pointless minutia. Focus specifically on: (1) Democrats, and (2) Republicans who are likely to cuck in an impeachment vote. Shout these violations from the rooftops so that the public knows all about them.

I think that in this case, it’s better to make the violations known before a possible Articles of Impeachment vote, because that forces Dems and cucks into the hilarious position of saying that something they themselves are known to have done is an impeachable offense. That will discourage some of them.

If there is a threat that damaging info will be released after, it won’t matter to Dems, who will just believe (rightly or wrongly) that the media can protect them. They might be wrong, but it’s their beliefs that will determine their vote. Additionally, bad guys like Dems and cucks don’t mind being flagrantly hypocritical; indeed, all indications are that they like it. So they won’t mind voting to impeach Trump over some alleged violation, and then voting not to impeach a Dem or cuck over the same violation. But it’s different if the public knows before and during the vote that you did the same thing you’re voting on. There’s no hiding from the glare of that spotlight.

Alternative timing is to quietly make it known to unfriendlies that their violations will be broadcast if they vote to impeach. The idea here would be the old chess adage, “the threat is stronger than the execution.” However, that doesn’t apply in this case: What’s relevant here isn’t a threat to disclose a violation (it’s not blackmail). The idea is to put them in the position of voting “This thing which everyone knows I did is an impeachable crime.” That would lose its force it the revelations came after the vote was a fait accompli.

Ideally, the revelations are made known to the public, and if Articles are proposed against Trump, then the faithful GOP members of the House propose Articles against the unfriendlies, and before the vote on Trump’s case.

Do You Believe in Republican Traitors NOW?

I mean “believe in their existence,” obviously, not “trust them.”

Fills me with seething rage:

Republicans considering bill to admit millions more replacement workers:

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/10/03/gop-bill-import-million-guest-workers-for-food-industry/

Un-fucking-believable. This is them giving us, their base, the finger and saying, “What are you going to do about it?”

They are literally laughing in our faces and saying, “What are you going to do about, pussies?”

We must primary at least one of these traitors. Failing that, it’s getting closer to time for non-standard options.

Roy Moore, DON’T Withdraw from the Alabama Race!

I don’t know much about Moore, except that the left and the GOP traitors are against him. That’s enough for me to conclude that the man must be awesome.

The accusations against him are obviously false. The Uniparty’s line on this is “He has to prove his innocence! We must assume that he’s guilty unless he can definitively prove his innocence!” Boom. The fact that they’re forced to resort to that proves there’s no real case against him. By the way, if you think I’m exaggerating about that party line, read Ted Cruz’s statement on Moore:

“As it stands, I can’t urge the people of Alabama to support a campaign in the face of these charges without serious, persuasive demonstration that the charges are not true.”

In other words, anyone should be able to make a random accusation against a candidate and that should be sufficient to force the candidate’s withdrawal from a race. Well, a Republican candidate. I’ve never heard Cruz say that mere accusations against a Democrat should induce the Democrat’s withdrawal.

This is what we mean when we say that the GOP establishment are traitors to their base. That’s not rhetorical color. It’s the reality.

Cruz went on:

“Both last week and this week, there are serious charges of criminal conduct that if true, not only make him unfit to serve in the Senate but merit criminal prosecution.”

Fucking seriously!? Where were all these Law N Order Republican traitors when Hillary “I’m the most blatantly corrupt criminal in the history of Congress” Clinton was in the Senate?

If you think that’s an outrage, try this:

Head of Senate Republican campaign committee says Moore should be expelled if he wins

Sen. Cory Gardner, the chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, said Monday that if Alabama Republican Senate nominee Roy Moore “refuses to withdraw and wins, the Senate should vote to expel him.”

and

Earlier Monday, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell told reporters that Moore should step aside.

It’s literally out in the open now. The Republican establishment is no longer trying to hide their treason. No, really, they’re not. Read those quotes from Cruz, Gardner, and McConnell again.

That’s why I’ve belatedly created a new tag for my blog posts, “GOP traitors.” I should have had it from the blog’s birth, of course, but better late than never.

As Vox Day says in the comments at the above Vox Popoli link,

Notice the media is not saying anything about how Moore can’t win the Senate race, because of the polls. They’re just shrieking at him to drop out. Then ask yourself why that might be.

Remember the rules for how to deal with an SJW attack: NEVER quit because they are pressuring you to do so.