Evening Edition - January 10

January 10, 2019

Breaking: Michael Cohen to testify before Democrat-led House committee

In breaking news, now that the House Oversight Committee is under the control of Congressional Democrats --- Maryland Rep. Elijah Cummings, former ranking Democrat, is the incoming chairman --- former Trump attorney Michael Cohen has agreed to appear in an open hearing (and possibly also a closed-door one) to answer questions before he begins serving his prison sentence.

In a statement, Cummings thanked Cohen for agreeing to testify, adding, “I want to make clear that we have no interest in inappropriately interfering with any ongoing criminal investigations, and to that end, we are in the process of consulting with Special Counsel Mueller’s office.”

You bet they are.

When Cohen raises his hand and swears to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, it’s going to be very hard for people in the room to keep straight faces, but, being lawyers, politicians and media people with knives out for Trump, they’ll manage.  This guy is so disreputable, he surreptitiously recorded his own client.  He also has made it clear that his intention is to go after the President, no holds barred, and now he’s been given what might be considered the ultimate forum in which to do so, being questioned by people who share that same goal.

It seems unusual to have Cohen testify in public while Mueller’s investigation is still going on.  But there may be little choice in the matter, as it would have to be done before he goes off to the clink.  In fact, one may speculate that offering this “cooperation” could be a way for Cohen to have his sentence reduced under his plea deal.  Mueller may, of course, choose to restrict their lines of questioning.

Cohen's testimony has already been scheduled.  The date is February 7.  As this is a developing story, we’ll have more analysis soon.

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/424794-michael-cohen-to-testify-publicly-before-congress

--------------------------

Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer might not have inspired any confidence that Democrats give a flip about border security, but they sure inspired a lot of hilarious comments and memes.  Here’s a round-up of the latest and funniest. 

https://www.westernjournal.com/ct/hundreds-memes-mocked-creepy-schumer-pelosi-last-night-got-best-ones-right/

----------------------------

There’s a growing debate in conservative circles over whether Republicans are devoting too much time and attention to refuting the factually-challenged but “morally right” proclamations of “Democratic” Socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.  She complains of being picked on, but then, when you run to Twitter and TV cameras every day to make outrageous statements about wanting to turn America into Sweden through massive tax increases and government expansion backed by math that looks like someone sat on a calculator, you have to expect people to respond less than respectfully. 

Some Republicans are concerned that responding to every jaw-dropping bit of babble from a loose cannon freshman Congress member gives her too much attention and importance, while allowing the really powerful Democrats like Nancy Pelosi to avoid the scrutiny they deserve and let the very real damage they’re inflicting slide under the radar.  But others argue that responding is vital because AOC is such a media darling, she’s gaining a dangerous amount of influence among young people in the same way that her fellow attractive radical, Che Guevara’s, face is on the T-shirts of many students who don’t have a clue about the horrors that flowed from people actually taking his leftist politics seriously.

I can understand the arguments on all sides, but I’d toss another point into the mix: I salute her for providing Republicans and Americans in general a valuable service by exposing what the rising radical leftwing of the Democratic Party really believes. 

She’s too inexperienced to have that built-in filter that so many slick professional politicians do, the one that prevents them from telling Americans their true beliefs. So while cautious Democrats mouth platitudes about, say, being all in favor of border security, in theory (while refusing to support anything that provides it), she just blurts out what she (and, I suspect, many others in her Party) really think: socialism is great, taxes should be jacked up to the sky, America needs to become Sweden, and this latest stunner:

“…The women and children on the border seeking refuge and opportunity in the U.S. with nothing but the shirt on their backs are acting more American than any person who seeks to keep them out ever will be.”

https://www.westernjournal.com/ocasio-cortez-claims-illegal-immigrants-american-trump-supporters/

I for one thank her for summing up perfectly the attitude among many Democrats that only she is honest (or at least, unpolished) enough to lay it right out there:  They honestly think that people who are trying to enter the US illegally are better Americans than actual American citizens who believe that people should respect our immigration laws. So of course, it would be a good thing to overwhelm the current voting population of US citizens with millions of illegal immigrants.  Explains a lot, doesn't it?

Frankly, not since Hillary Clinton stood up on national TV and declared that she considers a huge percentage of Americans to be a basket of irredeemable, racist, sexist, homophobic, Islamophobic, xenophobic deplorables has any Democrat been quite so honest about what that party’s leaders really think of everyday Americans.  When Hillary accidentally blurted out her honest beliefs, it was considered a shocking one-time gaffe.  With AOC, it’s like a fire hydrant that nobody can turn off. 

Republicans need to walk a careful line between giving her so much attention that it elevates her importance and not downplaying or ignoring what she has to say.  Make no mistake: what she’s spouting might be crazy, but it’s what the leftists who want to seize power at every level of government truly believe.  We owe her our gratitude for exposing it, and Americans ignore it at their peril. 

 ---------------------------

 

“Science Proves The Obvious,” Part 1: The uber-liberal cities of Berkeley and Seattle imposed a big tax on sugar-sweetened sodas and other drinks, both to raise revenue for their government programs and to discourage people from drinking them because…well, liberal politicians think it’s their business what you choose to drink. 

The University of Washington conducted a study to find out the effects of the tax on drink prices.  They found that the cost of the tax was indeed not being absorbed by stores but passed along to consumers.  Depending on the type of store, as much as 104% of the cost of the tax was being added to the prices of sodas and other sugary beverages.  But they also studied prices of drinks not affected by the tax.  While those didn’t change in supermarkets, in smaller stories and drug stores, untaxed bottled teas and diet sodas, energy and sports drinks also went up significantly in price.  Maybe because stores thought as long as one set of prices was going up, they could raise them all.  Who knows? 

The study has yet to determine whether the tax has had any impact on how many sodas residents drink, but it did prove a couple of things that have been blindingly obvious to conservatives for years but that liberals stubbornly refuse to acknowledge:

First, government interference in the market raises costs all around for consumers. 

Second, corporations don’t pay taxes; they pass them along to consumers.  Liberals deny that, and there is a rising chorus on the left demanding higher taxes on corporations to make them “pay their fair share.”  But this study proves not only that taxes on businesses raise prices for consumers, but that liberals know that’s true. At least in this case, they admitted that raising prices was one of the main reasons for the tax.   

So how come taxes on soda companies get passed along to consumers in the form of higher prices, but that simple economic reality doesn’t apply to the rest of the corporations they want to tax more? 

 

------------------------------

“Science Proves the Obvious,” Part 2:  Ignoring the basic laws of market-based economics, New York City raised the minimum wage three times in three years, with it rising to $15 an hour starting on January 1.  And it’s not just the bottom earners: if they get a raise, everyone else expects one, too, and that adds up to crippling costs to businesses. 

Result: even in the middle of an economic boom, small businesses are struggling to stay afloat.  Economists predict that, just as in other places that have raised the minimum wage far above the going market rate, businesses will be forced to raise prices, which will eat up the raises that caused the price increases. This liberal denial of economic reality will soon be coming to 20 states and a number of cities.

https://www.westernjournal.com/ap-minimum-wage-rising-in-20-states-and-numerous-cities/

In liberal cities such as Seattle and San Francisco, there have been news stories about people who voted to raise the minimum wage with no understanding of how it would affect businesses and reduce jobs for unskilled workers. They later expressed anger and confusion about why their favorite indie book stores, boutique shops and local restaurants were all going out of business.

California has been on the forefront of raising the minimum wage far above the market rate, and a study by two university professors estimates that it will cost the state roughly 400,000 jobs by 2020.  Of course, those are jobs for minimum wage workers, not “compassionate” liberal politicians, so I doubt the politicians will care.

https://www.westernjournal.com/minimum-wage-increase-crushing-small-businesses-nyc/

------------------

Campus Reform man-on-the-campus interviewer Cabot Phillips does a terrific job of illustrating how many of the things today’s students believe are the truth are actually the equivalent of biased Twitter memes posted directly into their brains by their liberal professors.  His latest is one of the best yet. 

Click the link and watch him read quotes to college students of Trump statements on the importance of border security and enforcing immigration laws.  See their furious reactions, as they brand Trump’s comments “hateful,” “unacceptable,” “rude,” “racist,” “divisive,” “jingoist,” “prejudiced,” “dehumanizing” and worse.  Then watch their brains melt down when he informs them those weren’t quotes from Trump, they were actually quotes from Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, back before the Democratic Party went around the bend in favor of open borders and illegal immigration. 

https://www.westernjournal.com/ct/watch-students-speechless-trumps-quotes-immigration-turn-dems/  

Incidentally, before anyone challenges me with the current DNC/media talking point that “of course, the Democrats support secure borders and immigration laws, they just don’t believe a wall will help,” I’d direct you to Stephen Miller’s recent challenge to Wolf Blitzer to name a single thing Democrats have supported in recent years that would secure the borders and keep out criminal illegal aliens.  Quite the opposite.

https://www.westernjournal.com/ct/blitzer-says-dems-want-border-security-trump-adviser-literally-leaves-speechless/

LEAVE ME A COMMENT BY CLICKING HERE. I READ THEM!

Leave a Comment

Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

Your Information
Your Comment
BBML accepted!
Captcha

More Stories

Leave A Comment

Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

Your Information
Your Comment
BBML accepted!
Captcha

Comments 1-15 of 15

  • Joan Spicer

    01/14/2019 07:23 PM

    I read a post that might make the Wall problem a non-issue. It stated the funding $50 billion has already been passed and funded in 2006 or 2013 I may have gotten the year wrong. It was I believe before Obama took office c

  • Fran Matkovich

    01/11/2019 08:04 PM

    We are doing this shutdown all wrong! The Senate and the House should not get paid until they come to an agreement!

  • Debra Fossum

    01/11/2019 11:34 AM

    Too bad President Trump couldn’t just tell Congress and the public that if they are determined to let terrorists in across our border then let’s stop wasting taxpayer money on anti-terrorist efforts. Let’s go back to being reactive instead of proactive. How much money would be saved? Imagine how the public would react. Sporting events like the Super Bowl, Hollywood events like the Academy Awards, and fundraisers for reelection campaign’s would no longer be well attended for fear of a terrorist attack. How many people’s pocketbooks would be affected by that? Suddenly building the wall doesn’t sound so expensive.

  • Laura Corbino

    01/11/2019 07:25 AM

    Dear Gov. Huckabee;
    Do you know what scares me? It's that Schumer and Pelosie are sounding like Neville Chamberlin and Oswald Mosley.

  • Deborah Kaba

    01/11/2019 06:48 AM

    As for the label of the Pelosi-Schumer rebuttal photo:

    "Six flags over Taxes"

    Truly, they are the poster couple for why there should be term limits.

    Maybe they chose six flags because they thought it might deceive the populace into thinking they actually like (tolerate) our country.

    Is it illegal to have a go-fund-me to remove one section of Chuck and Nancy's homes' walls every day until they start negotiation? It's not like we'd remove their whole fence - just partial like the US - Mexico border. A few gaps here and there shouldn't lower their security, right?

  • Jody Maas

    01/11/2019 12:23 AM

    Thank you. Have read your valuable interpretations/reactions for some time.

    I am disappointed that I cannot copy and paste some verbiage to comment areas of other Facebook posts.

  • Jerry Korba

    01/10/2019 11:36 PM

    Reading the opening paragraph about Seattle and its tax on sugary drinks to fund government programs tells me the IQ of those voters is not very high. I really do not want to be mean however if you price your way out of the soda and sugar beverage game and people start drinking ice water with lemon what happens to the tax revenue. Young people buy soda and sugar drinks I am hopeful that they go to school and are not working full time the soda may not be affortable that leaves our 21 to 35 crowd drinking beer, wine, and drinks with alcohol lost tax money I am hope 35 year olds have families now and are not partying as much and not letting their kids drink the sodas and the rest of 35 and older drink the good liquor mix it with a little water you pay a little extra your hangover will be less hurtful. You people there in Seattle stay there don't leave I don't want you voting anywhere near me. I hope some one can help you elect different lawmakers. Good luck with that. Remember don't leave Seattle Thank you . California and New Yorkers are leaving their states because of very low IQ voters. Not only are they leaving the mess behind they will bring a mess to their new location. We need to quarantine Dems and liberals!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Joy Michaud

    01/10/2019 11:23 PM

    I think Pelosi and Schumer should put on white {pant}suits and shoes, stand side by side, and welcome everyone to Fantasy island.

  • John wilt

    01/10/2019 10:33 PM

    How can the current course of our National illness not lead us to civil war? The question is, rather when will it start and can the nation survive? Sounds just like what the communist predicted. If you read these answer this question.

  • Bill Taylor

    01/10/2019 09:19 PM

    Mike,
    I think that you should NOT equate seeking refuge, via our asylum laws, at ports of entry with illegal immigration. It is most definitely NOT the same as I see it. Please be intellectually honest even when the ‘other side’ may not be.

  • Anita Mae Barker

    01/10/2019 09:16 PM

    And so we go on and on. Web try to understand what the heck is going on. Thanks for your help. Blessings.

  • Patty Helms

    01/10/2019 05:43 PM

    In your Science Proves Obvious 1, here's another obvious point. Let's say all the higher taxes on sugary drinks works and people stop drinking them. What happens to those tax dollars? They just taxed themselves right out! I say the same thing about higher taxes on cigarettes. When all the people finally stop smoking, what will government do for all the tax money they just lost!?! That's why government, in general, doesn't like these vapor smoking devices...they haven't put outrageous taxes on them yet!
    Thank you. Keep up the good work!

  • Lawrence E. Foster

    01/10/2019 05:37 PM

    The democrats in congress are trying to reduce the congressional utility bill by installing an "unprecedented" (Chuckie Schumer's word of the week) number of dim bulbs.

  • Georgeanna Autrey

    01/10/2019 05:37 PM

    I think you are spot on in your comments, The democrats are out to ruin our beloved United States of America and unless God in his mercy spares us and Donald Trump is reelected I believe we are doomed. I enjoy your show on TBN and watch it every Sat. night . Keep up the good work and God Bless

  • Stephen Russell

    01/10/2019 05:22 PM

    Sugar tax: Only Tax I favor IE counter obesity & other diseases alone& same for Snacks.
    Force companies to reduce sugar IE on fruit cups, fruits alone.
    Otherwise Im against taxes.
    Research sugar & salt abuse & kids etc.
    needed nationwide.
    I cant drink Pepsi due to bubbles & super sweet.
    Any soda I cant drink