The Long Version

Retired broadcast journalist. Blogging helps scratch the itch. Recovering exRepublican – Sober and still Conservative.

Posts Tagged ‘Barack Obama

Dear Adam Schiff, What is Quid Pro Quo?

leave a comment »

Dear Mr. Schiff,

How exactly do you define Quid Pro Quo?

Is it simply “Get dirt on my opponents or else!” as you and the Democrats have decided? If that is indeed where you are planting your flag then President Trump is right, there is no quid pro quo.

If we look at the entire conversation in question it goes pretty much like this:

Mr. Ukrainian President, you’re newly elected and it looks like you’re taking your country in the right direction, but you need to know something up front. Your country lost 7 Billion dollars of our taxpayers money. Your country convicted two officials, one of which was the head of the anti-corruption bureau, for interfering in the 2016 presidential election by colluding with the DNC and Hillary Clinton campaign.

Now two of your Investigator Generals have been blocked by our State Department after they provided evidence to our Department of Justice regarding this collusion along with evidence of corruption surrounding oil and gas contracts that involved out former Vice President. You should look into that. We also have reason to believe the people who did all of that and made this corruption possible are still in your inner circle. So as a matter of national interest, I can’t give you any more money unless you can demonstrate you’re not part of this corruption but rather are dedicated to cleaning it up.

If that’s how you define quid pro quo Mr. Schiff then yes, that’s all on the tape of the phone call. That’s all in the transcript. IF THAT’S the definition then guilty as charged…

But that’s not your definition is it? Because that wouldn’t fly in a kangaroo court. Not even one run by you and Nancy Pelosi. In your tunnel vision world all you heard in that phone call was “get dirt on my opponent.” Fortunately a majority of Americans heard something quite different.

The conversation with the Ukrainian president which he confirmed, when taken in full context of the full conversation, is not “get dirt on my opponent.” Mr. Schiff believes cherry picking, paraphrasing, and redefining what was said equates what was actually said. It doesn’t.

The other problem is how the Democrats have convinced many Americans that quid pro quo is some new law that’s been broken… It isn’t. In fact the Obama administration was chided by the media for the same thing on numerous occasions leading one US newspaper to label Obama the King of Quid Pro Quo.  

The ignorance displayed in this country regarding anything to do with civics is an indictment on our public school system and an advantage to the Democrats.

Written by DCL

November 8, 2019 at 7:19 pm

What a Difference a Day Makes

leave a comment »

Wouldn’t you know it. Dr. Ben Carson endures 24 hours of non-stop abuse from media, Hollywood, and about every Democrat with a verified Twitter account, when the other shoe drops. But this time it drops right on the noggins of all those finger-pointing, name-calling, elites.

Come to find out, in a 2015 speech, President Obama made comments eerily familiar to those of Dr. Carson.

And perhaps, like some of you, these new arrivals might have had some moments of doubt, wondering if they had made a mistake in leaving everything and everyone they ever knew behind…So life in America was not always easy. It wasn’t always easy for new immigrants. Certainly it wasn’t easy for those of African heritage who had not come here voluntarily, and yet in their own way were immigrants themselves.

There was discrimination and hardship and poverty. But, like you, they no doubt found inspiration in all those who had come before them. And they were able to muster faith that, here in America, they might build a better life and give their children something more.

The Washington Free Beacon published a side by side video showing both Dr. Carson’s remarks and President Obama’s.

Did any of these folks spring to attack in 2015 when the President compared slaves to immigrants?

 Twitter attacks on Dr. Ben CarsonCelebs attack Ben Carson on Twitter

Don’t expect apologies. Expect them to double down. Expect them to defend a statement made by a black politician with a (D) by his name while excoriating the same statement made by a black politician with an (R) by his name.

Is there really any other difference here?

I’m open to reasoned and civil difference of opinion here, but check your team colors at the door. Look at this example free of the blue or red lenses. Just two men who made a very similar observation. Either what was said was right or wrong. It can’t be right for one and wrong for another.  If we go there, if we actually start to condone that kind of thinking and follow it with action, we are all in big trouble.

Let the honest discussion begin.

Did You Hear the One About the Obama Administration Scandal?

leave a comment »

From ObamaforDummies… Enjoy!

Bob: “Did you hear about the Obama administration scandal?,

Jim: “You mean the Mexican gun running?”

Bob: “No, the other one.”

Jim: “You mean SEAL Team 6?”Bob: “No, the other one.”

Jim: “You mean the State Dept. lying about Benghazi?”

Bob: “No, the other one.”

Jim: “You mean voter fraud?”

Bob: “No, the other one.”

Jim: “You mean the military not getting their votes counted?”

Bob: “No, the other one.”

Jim: “The NSA monitoring our phone calls, emails and everything else?”

Bob: “No, the other one.”

Jim: “You mean the of drones in our own country without the benefit of the law?”

Bob: “No, the other one.”

Jim: “Giving 123 Technologies $300 Million and right after it declared bankruptcy and was sold to the Chinese?”

Bob: “No, the other one.”

Jim: “You mean the president arming the Muslim Brotherhood?”

Bob: “No the other one:.

Jim: “The IRS targeting conservatives?”

Bob: “No, the other one.”

Jim: “The DOJ spying on the press?”

Bob: “No, the other one.”

Jim: “Sebelius shaking down health insurance executives?”

Bob: “No, the other one.”

Jim: “Giving SOLYNDRA $500 MILLION DOLLARS and 3 months later they declared bankruptcy and then the Chinese bought it?”

Bob: “No, the other one.”

Jim: “The NSA monitoring our phone calls, emails and everything else?”

Bob: “No, the other one.”

Jim: “The president’s ordering the release of nearly 10,000 illegal immigrants from jails and prisons, and falsely blaming the sequester?”

Bob: “No, the other one.”

Jim: “The president’s threat to impose gun control by Executive Order in order to bypass Congress?”

Bob: “No, the other one.”

Jim: “The president’s repeated violation of the law requiring him to submit a budget no later than the first Monday in February?”

Bob: “No, the other one.”

Jim: “The 2012 vote where 115% of all registered voters in some counties voted 100% for Obama?”

Bob: “No, the other one.”

Jim: “The president’s unconstitutional recess appointments in an attempt to circumvent the Senate’s advise-and-consent role?”

Bob: “No, the other one.”

Jim: “The State Department interfering with an Inspector General investigation on departmental sexual misconduct?”

Bob: “No, the other one.”

Jim: “Clinton, the IRS, Clapper and Holder all lying to Congress?”

Bob: “No, the other one.”

Jim: “I give up! … Oh wait, I think I got it! You mean that 65 million low-information voters who don’t pay taxes and get free stuff from taxpayers and stuck us again with the most pandering, corrupt administration in American history?”

Bob: “THAT’S THE ONE!”

Read more at http://www.youngcons.com/absolutely-greatest-obama-joke-time/#BCWDXlT8kQ0Ps0Pg.99

Written by DCL

January 16, 2015 at 5:48 pm

The Patterns of Deceit

leave a comment »

Press Secretary Jay CarneyIn 2011 Jay Carney, White House press secretary, told reporters President Obama had never met his uncle Onyango “Omar” Obama, an illegal immigrant to the US, and a man the President wrote about in his book Dreams From My Father.

Today, Jay Carney acknowledged the President had not only met his uncle but actually stayed with him for several weeks when attending Harvard.  Why this sudden admission to an act that was flatly denied 2 years ago?

During a deportation hearing for Uncle Obama recently, Omar stated under oath that the President had stayed with him after he arrived in Cambridge to attend law school while then law student Barack Obama looked for an apartment of his own.

Carney stated, “When Omar Obama said the other day, and there were reports that he said the other day, that President Obama, back when he was a law school student had stayed with him in Cambridge, I thought it was the right thing to do to go ask him,” Carney said. “Nobody had asked him in the past and he said that he in fact had met Omar Obama when he moved to Cambridge for law school, that he stayed with him for a brief period of time, until his — the president’s — apartment was ready. After that, they saw each other once every few months while the president was in Cambridge and after law school they gradually fell out of touch.”

When asked why they had said differently back in 2011 Carney confessed, “Back when this arose, folks looked at the record, including the president’s book, and there was no evidence that they had met and that was what was conveyed. Nobody spoke to the president.” Nobody spoke to the President?  Well, if you didn’t speak to the president then you don’t know.  The answer in 2011 should have been I don’t know if the president knows or has met Omar Obama, but I’ll check with him when I get the chance and get back to you.  Right?  Wouldn’t that be the proper way to handle that question without directly asking the president?

No, not with this administration. If anything comes up that looks like it could harm the reputation of this President the first rule of engagement is to deny.  Just lie.

This isn’t a huge story. This isn’t an implication of guilt on the President or an indictment or a smoking gun.  In fact the story is hardly worth repeating. So I don’t want to be misinterpreted as making this into something bigger than it is.

The only reason I bring it up is because it represents a consistent pattern with this administration. They are notorious now for stating untruths, which are later discovered, only to be met with a shrug and that incredulous look only Jay Carney can provide that says, “Really? You’re asking me about that? Really??

Behavioral patterns tell stories with greater depth and clarity than words ever could.

The patterns exhibited by this administration over the past five years are very concerning.

 

Roll Back Thursday – The Filibuster

leave a comment »

Today, Thursday, November 21, 2013 the United States Senate voted to change a centuries old parliamentary procedure in the Senate chamber and invoked the so-called “nuclear option” making it possible to confirm presidential nominees by a simple majority vote rather than the 60 votes necessary to override any filibuster attempt by the minority party.

Senate Majority Leader Harry ReidSenate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Senate Democrats claim Republicans have become career obstructionists holding up judicial and executive nominees from an up or down vote for too long.  So with that in mind Harry Reid said, “It’s time to change the Senate, before this institution becomes obsolete.”  (Now remember this quote when you watch the videos below)

Of course there is fantastic irony at play here that simply can’t be ignored, nor should it be.

A little background.

In the 2005 Senate, Republicans held 55 seats and the Democrats held 45 including Jim Jeffords, an independent from Vermont who caucused with the Democrats. Confirmation requires a plurality of votes, and the Republicans could easily confirm their nominees if brought to the floor. Earlier in 2005, Democrats had blocked the nomination of 10 of George W. Bush’s nominees, saying they were too conservative and that Republicans had blocked many of their nominees back in the 1990s. The old tit for tat response.

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist then threatened to enact the nuclear option.

This is how then Senator Barack Obama, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, and Senator Hillary Clinton reacted to that threat, and their staunch defense of the rules of the Senate and the filibuster.

So what changed folks?

What happened to “as long as I’m the leader, the answer is no!” eh Senator Reid?

Tsk tsk tsk…the lengths we will go to get what we want. Even if it means a complete reversal of ourselves at any moment in time.  Look up the word integrity. You won’t find this behavior exemplified anywhere in its definition. This rebuke isn’t reserved exclusively for Democrats either. Republicans are just as stained when it comes to this kind of gerrymandering to get their way.

Shame on this governing body.  Shame.

Campaign Magic 2012

with one comment

Remember when President Obama said employment numbers were getting better and then right before the election in 2012 they did?  A LOT better!

Some called it a miraculous drop in the unemployment rate from 8.1% in August 2012 to 7.8% in September, causing others, like GE CEO Jack Welch to say those numbers were too good to be true questioning their validity.

More skeptics followed questioning such a large drop at such an opportune time for the President. Of course they were attacked and vilified in the media and basically shrugged off as Obama haters or racists.

Here’s just one example

Well, now the truth is bubbling to the surface (as it always does sooner or later).

Just two years before the presidential election, the Census Bureau caught an employee fabricating data that went into the unemployment report, which is one of the most closely watched measures of the economy.

And a knowledgeable source says the deception went beyond that one employee — that it escalated at the time President Obama was seeking reelection in 2012 and continues today.

The Census employee caught faking the results is Julius Buckmon, according to confidential Census documents obtained by The Post. Buckmon said he was told to make up information by higher-ups at Census.

Here’s the full exclusive report from the New York Post’s John Crudele.

More is surely to come and more “higher-ups” implicated as the crap in Washington always flows up before it flows out.

 

The Path to the Government Shutdown You Didn’t See

leave a comment »

By: Soren Dayton (Diary)  |  October 2nd, 2013 at 07:05 PM As seen on Redstate.com

The press has been falling over itself to attack Republicans for the shutdown and claiming that they are the source of all the irresponsibility in the process. They have conveniently forgotten several important things about how much the Democrats have broken the budget process in the last couple of years and in this year in particular. I wrote back in January about how the Senate Democrats were dismantling the budget process. While the Senate did pass a budget resolution this year, in many ways the situation has gotten much, much worse. A shutdown is, purely for procedural reasons, a natural and logical consequence of the massive failure of the Senate to do its job.

Let’s work through the details.

The budget process starts every year with the President offering his budget in the first week of February. But that’s not what happened. He offered it on April 10, two months after the statutory deadline. In fact, he offered it after both the House and the Senate had passed budget resolutions, so his budget plan was already a moot point. He didn’t do his job, so Congress had to move on without him. (Incidentally, this was the first time that the Senate had passed one since April 29, 2009)

But then the Senate ground to a halt. The Library of Congress offers a very helpful scorecard about how the budget process is proceeding this year that makes it very easy to compare how each chamber did, and how that compares to the past.

This year, the House passed four appropriations bills:

Military Construction and Veterans Affairs on June 4, which passed 421-4. This bill cost $158 billion.
Homeland Security on June 6, which passed 245-182. This bill cost $39 billion.
Energy and Water on Jule 10, which passed 227-198. This bill cost $30 billion.
Defense on July 24, which passed 315-109. This bill cost $516 billion.
The least controversial of these, Defense and Military Construction and Veterans Affairs, totaling $674 billion is over half of the $1.15 trillion that President Obama requested. The Senate could have done something with these and moved the ball forward. The House vote totals prove that these weren’t controversial.

By contrast, the Senate only put a single appropriations bill on the floor, Transportation and Housing and Urban Development, nicknamed, appropriately, THUD. This bill cost $54 billion, less than 5% of the President’s proposal. And they brought it to the floor at the end of July, at the last possible minute before the August recess.

This bill was filibustered by Republicans. Why? Because it pretended that the bipartisan sequester didn’t happen. It returned to pre-sequester spending. In fact, the spend-thrift Senate Democrats spent even more money than the President wanted:

“The vote we just had was symbolically very, very significant,” McConnell told reporters. “There is no question that if cloture had been invoked on this particular appropriations bill, which was even more than what the president asked for, your story line tomorrow would have been Congress on a bipartisan basis walks away from the Budget Control Act.”

So that’s the real history, not the mythical one driven by White House talking points, of this year’s budget process. The House started to do its job. The Senate barely got off the ground, and then only operating in a fantasy-land in which the sequester never happened. Sorry for all the wonky details here, but it is really important to see just how much the President and the Senate Democrats have failed in the budget process and how much of this lays at their feet.