Liberals boycott Trump’s inauguration, declaring his presidency deserves no respect

First published January 19, 2017 in the Toronto Sun

From reading the Washington Post (as in, the paper of record in the nation’s capitol) you wouldn’t think America was inaugurating its 45th president, but rather ushering in an historic protest. The paper has devoted more articles to the who’s-who of who is not attending President Donald J. Trump’s inauguration — from celebrities to Democrat politicians — than it has to the historic event itself.

For example, there are multiple articles about the Bruce Springsteen cover band now not performing at the New Jersey ball. Who cares! And several articles on less-than-famous singer Jennifer Holliday, who backed out of singing at the inauguration, after committing to perform — because her gay fans “begged her not to.” I wonder if those same gay fans — who supported Hillary Clinton — had a problem with her accepting huge donations to the Clinton Foundation from Muslim nations like Saudi Arabia (a country where homosexuality is banned and homosexuals are punished by death)? If Holliday were to have sung at Trump’s inauguration, people might have remembered who she was.

One of the worst examples yet of biased journalism was Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank’s disgusting and bigoted Jan. 16, 2017 column “Trump gets no respect. That’s because he hasn’t earned it.” Over the past eight years, Milbank was part of the same left-wing cabal of journos who blasted anyone who dared diss the office of the presidency under black President Barack Obama. Of course, the Washington Post isn’t the only liberal media outlet displaying anti-American behaviour toward our democratically-elected 45th president.

CNN refuses to come to grips with the fact it failed to elect Hillary Clinton, despite its best efforts, by relentlessly churning out fake polls and distorting Trump’s comments. Undeterred, CNN continues to double down on Trump bashing. Appearing on CNN recently, black Democrat professor Marc Lamont Hill called blacks who met with Trump “a bunch of mediocre negroes being dragged in front of TV as a photo-op for Donald Trump’s exploitative campaign against black people.”

Unlike the first black president Barack Obama who showed no interest in meeting with blacks — who overwhelmingly supported him both elections — Trump is meeting with black activists who didn’t support him, to hear their ideas.

But Mr. Hill brayed that Trump meeting with black celebrities like Steve Harvey is bad: “bringing up comedians and actors and athletes to represent black interests is demeaning, it’s disrespectful, and it’s condescending. Bring some people up there with some expertise Donald Trump, don’t just bring up people to entertain.”

Mr. Hill makes the ignorant and dangerous assumption that one black person represents the views of all black people, by virtue of common skin colour. He certainly doesn’t speak for me! In the final days of the election, Hill didn’t express indignant outrage when Hillary used Beyoncé and J-Zay used hip-hop to pander to blacks for votes. THAT was disrespectful.

Disrespectful as well was Congressman John Lewis’ declaration that he wouldn’t attend Trump’s inaugural, because he was an illegitimate president. Lewis said it was because Russia “destroyed Hillary’s campaign” by hacking the Democratic National Committee’s email. Newsflash, Mr. Congressman, that hack brought to light the conspiracy to crush Hillary’s competitor, as well as her reckless (and likely deliberate) use of a private email server (which certainly compromised national security).

Liberals were aghast that Trump had the audacity to call Lewis disrespectful, advising him to do a better job as a congressman. Because Lewis marched for blacks to have voting rights in Selma over 50 years ago (which I respect tremendously) means he’s immune to criticism … and can disparage any white person, including the President-elect? I don’t think so.

Lewis also boycotted the 2001 inaugural of G.W. Bush. Not very American for someone who fought for equal rights, but now won’t respect the office of the presidency equally.

Again, Lewis and Hill aren’t alone in their disdain and lack of respect for the presidency. More than 50 Democrats have vowed not to attend the inauguration. And the Women’s March on Washington is planned for Saturday, where hundreds of thousands will wreak havoc on the city. If this had happened during either of Obama’s inaugurals, lawmakers and protestors would be called racists. But it didn’t happen.

In contrast, even though many people were not happen Obama got elected, America came together to honour our country’s enduring peaceful transition of power. Lost in all the Trump hate and bombast being spewed by the left wing media is the fact that Trump’s inauguration is unconventional — just like his campaign was. It is focused on working class Americans, not wasting money on pomp, ceremony and self-congratulations. Trump capped inaugural ball tickets at $50 a piece, to make them affordable.

Liberal lawmakers and protesters should hold a fake inauguration so they can revere their ‘legitimate’ candidate Hillary Clinton. In their make-believe ceremony, they could act out the peaceful transition of power they demanded of Trump.

It would give the rest of us a break and — God knows — be a better use of their time.

Trump puts CNN in its place

First published January 11, 2017 in the Toronto Sun News

Like a pack of junkyard dogs, the media has salivated (and drooled) in anticipation of U.S. president-elect Donald Trump’s first post-election press conference.

But the mainstream media was quickly put in their place.

In a raucous exchange, Trump trumped the badgering of CNN’s Jim Acosta, when he refused to take the reporter’s question.

This, because the network turned over tons of on-air real estate (thereby lending credence) to yet another intelligence report about how Russia rigged the election.

Acosta kept trying to get in his question.

“You are attacking our news organization, can you give us a chance to ask a question, sir? Sir, can you …”

Trump shut him down.

“You are fake news. Go ahead,” said the president-elect, dismissing the accusatory Acosta.
After CNN’s concerted effort to rig the election in Democrat Hillary Clinton’s favour by pumping out fake news and polls, it was nice to see Trump finally put CNN in its biased place.

The press conference was dominated by questions about a newly leaked report by outgoing President Barack Obama’s intelligence agencies that Trump’s campaign advisers conspired with Russia to win the election.

“I think it’s a disgrace … That’s something that Nazi Germany would have done and did do,” Trump insisted.

Clearly, the intelligence community has declared jihad on Trump as payback for doubting its claims that Russia rigged the election in his favour. On the eve of his press conference, the spy agencies leaked a two-page memo of “unverified allegations” that they had given Trump last week.

Among the filthy allegations were that Kremlin officials conspired with Trump’s campaign staff to undermine Clinton’s campaign and win the election. The report claimed that Russian officials had evidence they could use to blackmail Trump.

“Would a reasonable observer say that you are potentially vulnerable to blackmail by Russia or by its intelligence agencies?” asked a reporter.

To which Trump responded:

“Lemme just tell you what I do. When I leave our country, I’m a very high-profile person, would you say? I am extremely careful,” he said, adding he always advises those with him on foreign trips “be very careful, because in your hotel rooms and no matter where you go, you’re gonna probably have cameras.”

During the press conference, Trump hammered the report as fake news devised to undermine his presidency.

He also reiterated his commitment to building a wall along the Mexican border. He vowed to protect American jobs by slapping companies with “a major border tax” for taking production out of the U.S.

He added that “Obamacare is the Democrats’ problem. We are going to take the problem off the shelves for them.”

But the other noteworthy news — unfortunately eclipsed by the Russia conspiracy stuff — were remarks made by Trump’s tax attorney Sheri Dillon. She outlined the myriad ways Trump went above and beyond the requirements of the law to divest himself from any potential conflicts of interest.

Dillon said Trump has even addressed “any potential problems that could arise from foreign dignitaries staying in his hotels.” He will “donate all profits from foreign government payments made to his hotels to the United States Treasury.”

When did Obama donate any profits from his books to taxpayers? That was rhetorical.

Indeed, we have someone in the White House who knows the value of money and will treat taxpayers’ money like his own.

Democrats wage war on Trump’s nominees

First published January 10, 2017 in the Toronto Sun News

Desperately gasping for any oxygen they can find, Democrats are making yet another run at the legitimacy of Donald Trump’s presidency.

This time they’re trying to block Trump’s cabinet nominees during Senate confirmation hearings by painting them as a bunch of racists, billionaires, warmongers, union haters — or all of the above. This, despite the fact that many of Trump’s picks — like State Department nominee Rex Tillerson — held real jobs their entire lives. You get the drift.

Democrats are whining incessantly that Trump is trying to pack too many hearings into one day.

Never mind that President Barack Obama and former president George W. Bush held five or more confirmation hearings in a single day. On Wednesday, the Senate will hold five confirmation hearings and Thursday it scheduled three, which is hardly unprecedented (as the left keeps repeating, in hopes we’ll believe that lie … just like the fake polls).

But as we witnessed during the 2016 election, the left doesn’t apply the standard of objectivity or parity when it comes to Trump. The left applies the standard of double standard, in fact.

Trump’s nominee for attorney general, Alabama’s Sen. Jeff Sessions, kicked off the first day on Tuesday of what’s sure to be a contentious week of confirmation hearings.

For starters, Democrat Sen. “Dick” Durbin couldn’t wait to try to knock out Sessions appearing before the Senate judiciary committee.

In an effort to falsely paint Sessions as a racist, Durbin noted that he (Durbin) invited former drug dealer Alton Mills to the hearing.

Mills is the black convicted drug courier whose sentence Obama commuted in 2015, after Mills served 22 years in prison for delivering crack cocaine “to make ends meet.”

Instead of blaming Mills for breaking the law, Durbin trashed Sessions for not supporting changing America’s federal mandatory minimum sentencing guidelines for non-violent drug crimes.

Durbin said the law disproportionately impacts black men, implying that Sessions was a racist.

Perhaps, black men should stop committing drug-related crimes so they wouldn’t have to worry about doing the time. And maybe liberals, like Durbin, should be reminded that Sessions, as attorney general of Alabama, prosecuted a KKK member who lynched a black teenager in 1981.

“I abhor the Klan and what it represents and its hateful ideology,” Sessions added in his opening statement for his nomination hearing.

But Durbin’s denigration of Sessions wasn’t nearly done.

Durbin introduced an illegal alien who served in the military and whom he had invited to the hearing to bolster the Democrats’ push for amnesty.

The man had been brought to the U.S by his illegal alien parents and was allowed to remain in the country thanks to Obama’s executive order — the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals — which granted amnesty to about 750,000 illegal aliens.

By introducing the illegal alien veteran, Durbin made the point — as many Democrats have before — that the young man wouldn’t have been able to protect and serve America were it not for Obama’s amnesty order.

Sessions sounds like a man who will follow the laws of our land, something that Obama has managed to circumvent for eight years.

The real problem Senate Democrats seem to have with Trump’s cabinet picks is they’re not Hillary Clinton’s. And thank heavens they never will be. The real spectacle in this week’s confirmation hearings looks like it will be Democrats stooping to new lows of indecency.

U.S. intelligence officials clinging to power

First published January 8, 2017 in the Toronto Sun News

“Russia, Russia, Russia,” that’s who the left and some on the right blame or credit for president-elect Donald Trump’s triumph over Hillary Clinton.

GOP Senator John McCain, chairman of the senate armed services committee, scheduled a hearing, purportedly to get to the bottom of the alleged Russian conspiracy.

But come on — it was really a hearing for the old codger to exert his waning influence as the Trump administration begins to assemble, as well as a deliberate attempt to soil the credibility and legitimacy of the 45th president.

President Barack Obama’s intelligence officials, who were trotted out by the committee to testify, were more than happy to oblige McCain’s smear of Trump (who has vowed to overhaul the nation’s intelligence agencies).

You see, it’s all about these government bureaucrats clinging to their power.

After preparing a top secret 50-page report for Obama, James Clapper, director of national intelligence, testified that he and his comrades believed without a doubt that the Russian government interfered with the 2016 election.

Clapper characterized Russia’s meddling in the election as moving beyond the cyberattack of the Democratic National Committee e-mail to “activism.”

Along with spreading fake news on social media, Clapper said the Kremlin used the Russian government-funded RT America channel to pump out news “disparaging our system, our alleged hypocrisy about human rights.”

Well duh, that’s what the Russians do. RT is a hard charging, anti-American propaganda machine whose mission is to help fulfil Russian President Vladimir Putin’s campaign to make Russia great again on the world stage.

But the bigger problem here was the failure of U.S. intelligence.

“Whatever crack, fissure, they could find in our tapestry … they would exploit it,” Clapper added.

If it turns out that the Kremlin is to blame for the hack, what this looks like is an embarrassment for Obama’s top spies who couldn’t prevent it. Note to Barack Obama: feckless foreign policies have consequences.

U.S. intelligence still isn’t absolutely certain (without a doubt) that Russia interfered with the election. This top-secret report concludes that Putin directed the cyberattacks to rig the election. It also mentioned U.S. intelligence officials intercepted messages from the Russians who cheered Trump’s victory.

I was happy that Trump won and I’m not Russian.

Buried in a Washington Post story, reporters wrote that U.S. officials said “although the messages were seen as strong indicators of Moscow’s intent and clear preference for Trump, they were not regarded as conclusive evidence of Russian intelligence agencies’ efforts to achieve that outcome.”

No wonder Trump is skeptical and dubious of these claims.

The article noted that U.S. officials warned that such communication “signals intelligence” which can be taken out of context and isn’t always reliable, because the Kremlin is a cagey and formidable adversary.

Buried even deeper, the Washington Post reported that the messages from Russian officials revealed that they thought Hillary was going to win, and were stunned when she didn’t.

This “intelligence” report appears to be anything but conclusive.

But that hasn’t stopped the liberal news media and the left from trying to take down Trump — even in the face of his obvious victory and fast-approaching ascension to the presidency.

As I’ve argued on multiple occasions, the “who” behind the leaked e-mails doesn’t change what they say.

Those e-mails exposed to the American people the dishonesty and ruthlessness of the DNC and the liberal media, which colluded with Hillary’s campaign to elect her at any cost — including propagating fake polls. The ever-diligent DNC staff worked assiduously to take out Hillary’s competitor, Sen. Bernie Sanders, in the primaries.

Maybe we actually needed Russia or somebody to dump some intelligence on voters and level the playing field in the 2016 election.

After all, Hillary had the left-wing media trying to dishonestly rig the election in her favour.

Obama’s legacy a nightmare

First published December 27, 2016 in the Toronto Sun

After grinding America into the dirt, stabbing Israel in the back (and front), and ceding world influence to Russia, President Barack Obama bragged he would have been a better candidate than Hillary.

And his royal highness brayed he could have beaten President-elect Donald J. Trump.

Looks like Obama really believed Barbara Walters who said he was “the Messiah” and his staff who obsequiously dubbed him “Black Jesus.”

The arrogance and denial overflowing from Obama never ceases to amaze.

Obama’s acknowledgment, finally, that Hillary ran an awful, over-confident campaign, was right.

“If you think you’re winning, then you have a tendency, just like in sports, maybe to play it safer,” Obama said in his interview with former White House adviser David Axelrod.

And the same goes for a president who’s delusional about his legacy.

Gloating as he often does — even in the face of defeat — Obama said:

“I am confident in this vision because I’m confident that if I — if I had run again and articulated it — I think I could’ve mobilized a majority of the American people to rally behind it,” Obama told Axelrod.

Obama’s “vision” over the past eight years is exactly what Americans rejected. First and foremost, is his no-growth economy where unemployment has gone down only because adults have given up looking for work.

Then there’s the culture war Obama waged on America, mandating public colleges give transgender students bathroom choices, along with forcing Christians (in the private sector) to bake cakes for gay weddings. And of course, we can’t forget Obama’s praising the bogus Black Lives Matter movement, while demonizing police.

Let’s not forget Obama’s absence from the world stage and his do-nothing foreign policy which gave rise to ISIS in Syria and elevated Russian President Vladimir Putin to be the defining voice in the Middle East. Because Obama kept dithering, President Bashar Assad — with the help of Putin and Iran and China — has committed genocide on his people.

Of course, Obama’s destabilization of the Middle East wouldn’t have been complete without his Iran overture. After 35 years of U.S., Obama gave the terrorist regime that vows to wipe Israel off the face of the earth, a nuclear bomb and $400 million in cash.

Of course Obama’s love of Muslim terrorists and contempt for American greatness wouldn’t be complete without his parting gift to Israel. Last week, he refused to veto the United Nations Security Council resolution condemning the construction of Israeli settlements in the West Bank. His contempt is predictable, considering Obama urged Israel to return to the pre-1967 war territory lines as a start of peace talks with Palestinians.

Yet against the backdrop of Obama’s eight-year nightmare, he thinks he could have beaten Trump.

“President Obama said that he thinks he would have won against me. He should say that but I say NO WAY!” Trump tweeted.

Exactly right! Obama was a failure for the country and the Democrat Party. Thanks to Obama’s vision, Republicans won the presidency, control of Congress, and in 25 states — Republicans control both the state legislatures and governorships.

But Obama didn’t stop waxing prosaic on his formidable candidacy and faux legacy.

“See, I think the issue was less that Democrats have somehow abandoned the white working class, I think that’s nonsense. Look, the Affordable Care Act benefits a huge number of Trump voters. There are a lot of folks in places like West Virginia or Kentucky who didn’t vote for Hillary, didn’t vote for me, but are being helped by this … The problem is, is that we’re not there on the ground communicating not only the dry policy aspects of this, but that we care about these communities, that we’re bleeding for these communities.”

What? Working-class union voters in coal-producing states like West Virginia, Kentucky watched their jobs evaporate under Obama, who declared a war on coal. Those same blue-collar workers are now choosing between paying their mortgage or their UNAffordable Obamacare premiums. The problem wasn’t that Democrats didn’t communicate their message well, it’s that voters didn’t want Hillary’s four more years of Obama’s failed, crushing policies.

From the start of his campaign, Trump vowed to go after the blue-collar white voters in Democrat stronghold states like Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania that Hillary took for granted.

Not only did Trump beat Hillary among white men without a college education (by more than Ronald Reagan beat Walter Mondale in his historic 1984 landslide), but he also equaled Reagan’s margin among non-college-educated white women. According to exit polls conducted by CNN, Trump won white union members without a college degree by 58%, to Hillary’s 32%.

It may have taken eight years for Americans to see Obama’s vision wasn’t filled with sunshine and lollipops. But in 2016, voters saw through Obama’s transformational lies and there is no way they would have rallied behind “Black Jesus” a third time!

Sore losers blaming Russia for Hillary’s defeat

First published December 20, 2016 in the Toronto Sun News

When will it sink into the Democrat Party’s collective psyche that Donald Trump won the election fairly and they need to get over it?

First, liberals fuelled a “faithless electors” campaign to get 538 members of the Electoral College to vote against the will of the people. But even though seven electors went rogue, electors confirmed Trump the winner Monday. One would think this would settle matters.

But Bill Clinton and Hillary revealed what a graceless loser looks like. Taking questions in a Katonah, N.Y. bookstore, the Record-Review reported Bill blamed Hillary’s loss on FBI Director James Comey re-opening the investigation into her use of a private email.

Then Bill doubled-down on trashing Trump.

“He doesn’t know much. One thing he does know is how to get angry, white men to vote for him,” Clinton replied to a man who asked if Trump was smart.

Speaking to big donors at New York City’s Plaza Hotel, Hillary blamed the Russia email hacks for her loss, saying Russia had “a personal beef against me.”

The reality is Americans have a beef with the Clintons — they’re sick and tired of them.

Even President Barack Obama has joined the why-Hillary-lost-the-election excuse-making train. While Hillary was riding high in the fake polls and trumped-up headlines before the election, Obama dismissed concerns about Russia hacking the election. But he too can’t come to grips with the reality of Hillary’s epic loss, so is changing his tune.

In a press conference full of histrionics, Obama declared he was confident Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered the hacking of the Democratic National Committee email system and that of Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta. For added drama, Obama said the “intelligence” he’d seen convinced him Putin tampered with the U.S. election.

“Our goal continues to be to send a clear message to Russia and others not to do this to us because we can do stuff to you,” warned Obama.

You mean like all the stuff Obama has done to Russia since Putin helped his thug buddy President Bashar al-Assad butcher, burn and bomb Syrians over the past six years?

Never mind, let’s stay focused on Obama’s Russia hysteria. If Obama had such Red Fever about election rigging, why didn’t he order a comprehensive review of the cyber attacks before Nov. 8? Moreover, Obama reads presidential daily briefs prepared by the CIA, and places utter confidence in them. So he could have easily called for an investigation before the election.

If Comey could complete a second investigation into Hillary’s private email use, reading through thousands of emails in mere days, surely Obama could have investigated the hacking swiftly.

But Obama also conceded in his partisan, double-speak press conference that the hacked emails were “not some elaborate, complicated espionage scheme.” In other words, whoever was behind the leaked emails didn’t change the content. The emails revealed that the DNC was in the tank — from day one — to rig the primary process against Bernie Sanders, to make Hillary the Democrat presidential nominee. And the liberal media was in the tank to do anything and everything possible, including spreading fake news, to help elect Hillary president.

Obama complaining that the media didn’t treat his Hillary “fairly” is laughable. Day in and day out, the liberal mainstream media was obsessed with bashing Trump as a lecherous, nativist, racist man, who was Putin’s puppet, and everything else notorious in between. Only Trump wasn’t. To Obama’s point, the American people made an assessment of Hillary and her emails — those that were both hacked and those stored on her personal server — and they didn’t like what they read.

If U.S. intelligence ultimately proves Putin was behind the attack, it won’t necessarily mean Russia rigged the election any more than Comey did. It will mean Russia stole emails and leaked them to the public. There is a difference.

Obama should get on with the business of leaving office instead of fuelling lies and misinformation that undermine Trump’s presidency. And Bill and Hillary should go back to enriching themselves at the Clinton Foundation. That’s what they do best.