Advertisement

In recent years, the term “fact-checker” has come to mean “partisan spin doctor pretending to dispense objective truth.” But President Trump made their job very hard with his SOTU Address. While Democrats are accusing him of lying from force of habit, he made a point of couching his accomplishments in verifiable statistic form, such as saying that the unemployment rate is the lowest in over 50 years, and that we’ve added 12,000 new factories after losing 60,000 under the last two Administrations. So when this fact-checking team looked into his claims, they had to admit he was telling the truth.

https://fox61.com/2020/02/04/verify-fact-checking-president-trumps-third-state-of-the-union-address/

In fact, surprisingly, he actually understated one accomplishment: "Since my election, the net worth of the bottom half of wage earners has increased by 47%, three times faster than the increase for the top one percent." Actually, according to the latest numbers from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, the wealth of the bottom half has increased by 55.86%, which is 3-1/2 times the increase for the top one percent.

Of course, this didn’t prevent Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer in the Democratic response from claiming that the economy is only “strong for the wealthy who are reaping rewards from tax cuts they don’t need” while it “doesn’t work for working people.” Those tax cuts helped fuel the economic boom that created the job creation that led to low unemployment that’s forced employers to increase wages and benefits to attract good workers. Electing Democrats who’ll raise taxes would undo all that. Besides, it’s an objectively false claim (see paragraph directly above.) But claiming that Republicans only care about the rich and want workers to suffer is all that Democrats know how to do, so they’ll just keep doing the same thing despite what Trump does or what those lying research numbers say.

Sadly for them, for once, fact-checkers verify that (to quote “Seinfeld”) Trump’s accomplishments are real, and they are spectacular. He wasn’t just bragging. Besides, it’s not bragging if you can really do it.

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

Some Democratic Iowa Caucus results are finally starting to trickle out. With 71% of precincts reporting, Pete Buttigieg is narrowly leading Bernie Sanders in the delegate race by 26.9% to 25.2%. Warren is trailing at 18.4% with Biden at 15.4%, barely edging Amy Klobuchar. Sanders leads in the popular vote. So the top two Democratic contenders for President of the United States so far are a small town mayor and an elderly socialist, with Joe Biden a distant fourth. Biden’s also not strong in the next two states, but hopes to win in his “firewall” of South Carolina. However, recent polls show his support is falling there, too.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/iowa-democratic-party-caucus-results

One of President Trump’s first reactions, when he was accused of trying to get Ukraine to investigate the Bidens because Biden would be his opponent in 2020, was to say he never thought Biden would be the nominee. It would be ironic indeed if the one person who actually got anything right in the Iowa Democratic Caucuses was Donald Trump.

PS – While the media are trying to make Republican reactions to the Democrats’ debacle in Iowa the story instead of the debacle itself or the rise of open socialist Bernie Sanders, political strategist James Carville has been around long enough to know not to believe your own blather. And he’s straight-up terrified at the suicidal impulses of his own party.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/james-carville-bernie-sanders-scared-to-death

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

The Department of Homeland Security has announced travel restrictions on six new nations due to their failure to provide security criteria to prevent terrorists from entering the US. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi blasted the move, claiming it was “discrimination disguised as policy” and would bar 350 million people from predominately African nations from entering the US. DHS fired back that the actual number of people affected is approximately 12,400. If 350 million people wanted to come here, that would mean the entire populations of all those nations coming to the US and more than doubling our present population. Which I’m sure would be fine with Nancy, as long as they all vote Democrat.

https://www.westernjournal.com/pelosi-claims-new-travel-ban-affects-350-million-real-number-actually-12k/

The conservative satirical news site The Babylon Bee had a story on Monday’s Iowa Democratic Caucuses that I think fits this situation perfectly as well.

https://babylonbee.com/news/democrats-in-chaos-after-primaries-require-basic-math

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

Tweet of the Day! Former Obama official and MSNBC analyst (natch!) Richard Stengel tweeted about the Dems’ Iowa Caucus fiasco, “The two guys happiest with the Iowa results are Donald Trump and his pal Vladimir Putin. Please don't subscribe to conspiracy theories launched by either one of them. Simple human incompetence is almost always the right explanation.” Putting aside that Stengel cited the debunked Russian collusion conspiracy theory to denounce conspiracy theories, the Wall Street Journal’s James Taranto offered the perfect response:

“’Simple Human Incompetence.’ Now there’s a campaign slogan.”

https://twitter.com/jamestaranto/status/1224763448308969493

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

Super Bowl Post-Script: Jay-Z denied that he and wife Beyonce were making any kind of political statement by sitting during the National Anthem. He says they co-produced the show and were just absorbed in making sure everything was running smoothly (the mics, camera angles, etc.)

However, he added, "I didn't have to make a silent protest. If you look at the stage, the artists that we chose, Colombian (Shakira), Puerto Rican, J-Lo…we were making the biggest loudest protest of all." So in case you thought they forgot to add a lot of politics to an inappropriate place, rest easy. And here I thought the halftime show was just a protest against good taste and public decency.

https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/jay-z-explains-seated-super-bowl-national-anthem

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

Finally, Mitt Romney buys the load of Schiff. He's still upset he choked against Obama & begged for Sec of State but was passed over by President Trump(thank goodness!). He makes a fine Democrat Senator for Utah. I sure miss Orrin Hatch who was a statesman. Utah deserves better. We all do.

(Note to Alexa from the Gov: I assume you mean Mike Bloomberg IDENTIFIES as a 5'8" man. Or maybe that's his height if you include the box he's standing on.)

From Betty:

Last evening, my husband and I were talking about the possibility that Mike Bloomberg requested a box to stand on for the debate. I asked Alexa how tall Bloomberg was, and she immediately replied 5'8". I then asked how tall President Trump was, and she replied 6'2". A few seconds later, Alexa said she found another item that I might like. She then started repeating the news item about Trump saying "the great state of Kansas" when congratulating the Chiefs on their Super Bowl win. I interrupted her and asked why she was quoting stories to trash President Trump. She said something like "I'll take note of that." We were stunned that Jeff Bezo's Alexa is providing unsolicited commentary on President Trump.

From the Gov:

Thanks, Betty. I'll take note of that! It doesn't surprise me at all. I wonder if Alexa ever volunteers news about the record-low unemployment rate or the latest lie from James Comey or Adam Schiff. I also wonder if Alexa will fit down the garbage disposal if you shove really hard.

In the aftermath of closing arguments in the Senate impeachment trial, House manager Adam Schiff has not come off well.

True, Barbra Streisand tweeted that “Adam Schiff is so impressive. His knowledge of the law...his passion...his articulateness. His sincerity! He speaks the truth and would make a great president.” Personally, I think the best reason of all NOT to vote for someone for President is that Barbra Streisand said he’d make a great President.

But there has also been quite a bit of this: “...Schiff is not just dumb, he’s so deluded it’s bordering on the very kind of insanity Einstein spoke about.” And it continues: “Schiff is obsessed with Donald Trump. I don’t just mean he’s got a bit of a problem with him; I mean he’s pathologically demented in his absolute detestation of all things Trump. Every day since Trump was elected, Schiff’s been plotting to try to get rid of him…The impeachment has been about Adam Schiff, his ego and his career.”

And how about this: Adam Schiff, with his “curiously smug bug-eyed smirk” is “a man whose stratospheric ego is matched only by his astonishing superciliousness...”

Who do you think said all this? Some wild-eyed far-right-wing conspiracy theorist? Was it Dan Bongino? Sean Hannity? Maybe Devin Nunes? Me?

No, it was Piers Morgan, in a February 3 opinion piece for the Daily Mail. (If it had been me, I would have included the word “weasel.”)

According to Morgan, Adam Schiff “put his own gigantic ego and steely political ambition ahead of his party” and, with this monumental failure, helped his political nemesis get re-elected as President this coming November. He notes that the polls have been moving up for Trump throughout this impeachment process, especially on his handling of the economy, with its record low unemployment and overall stock market performance. I would add that thanks to Schiff and those in cahoots with him, Trump is coming across right now –- for the most part –- as the adult in the room, the man who’s keeping his head while all about him are losing theirs and blaming it on him (thank you, Rudyard Kipling). The same goes for his outstanding legal team, who acted like professional adults while the House managers were lying outrageously and calling names.

Adam Schiff has campaigned incessantly to get rid of Trump, Morgan says, though I would add that “The Squad” and others in the far-left, “impeach the **” crowd have pushed just as hard and deserve similar condemnation. Schiff, though, was and is the face of this impeachment. He’s the one who led the way with lie after demonstrable lie and who shoved through those horrendously unconstitutional committee rules that called for secret hearings in a secure basement “skiff” and completely shut out the President’s defense. He will go down in history for that.

It wasn’t just that Schiff conducted the impeachment improperly; Morgan thinks he was insane for starting an impeachment in the first place. Morgan didn’t like Trump’s phone call --- he thought Trump did something “stupid” --- but he’s never thought it rose to the level of an impeachable act. And with Republicans in the majority in the Senate (thank God), his efforts were destined to fail. Everyone knew that.

From a political standpoint, it was indeed stupid to hand the President another big win, as he’d already beaten Robert Mueller and the whole bloodthirsty, relentless special counsel team. In Morgan’s words, the Russia collusion allegation “was all bullsh*t.” He goes on to say that with Schiff’s D.O.A. impeachment, “they pulled the trigger on a hyper-partisan political gun that was only ever going to fire bullets into their 2020 election chances.”

It seems Schiff has attracted condemnation from both sides. Leftists and other anti-Trumpers hate him for giving the President a victory that will help propel him into another term. Trump supporters can’t stand him for his many shameless lies, his attacks on the Constitution and the damage he’s done, plus the huge waste of everybody’s time. If he thought he was going to further his political career, he may have done just the opposite. On the other hand, he does represent California --- and he at least can be assured of Barbra Streisand’s vote.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7961369/Sanctimonious-Schiff-impeachment-left-Democrats-needing-Hail-Mary-November.html

And remember my commentary from yesterday about how Alan Dershowitz is being trashed in order to delegitimize the President’s acquittal? Some legal “experts,” including Michael Gerhardt, who was on the panel of impeachment witnesses on “legal expert day” in the House, are saying the entire White House defense team could be brought up on ethics charges. Not the lying house managers Adam Schiff and Jerrold Nadler –- the WHITE HOUSE lawyers. He says THEY were lying. I kid you not.

But Jonathan Turley, the law professor serving on that same panel whose argument “helped” Trump by sticking to constitutional principles (even though, like Dershowitz, he’s not a Trump supporter) struck back with an excellent commentary, saying “The White House team were effective advocates for their clients and we do not disbar lawyers for making arguments or defending individuals that we do not like.”

Gerhardt, a legal analyst for CNN (big shock), said this to host Poppy Harlow: “I think what we are seeing...is that the lawyers who presented [Trump’s] case in the Senate basically misled or lied to the Senate. And so...at some point, we are going to see ethics charges brought against these lawyers for making false statements, which we all know are false.” But he is never specific about what statements are false, and Turley admonishes him by saying, “It is incumbent on an attorney to be specific about the false representation” when calling for ethics charges. In fact, he even warns Gerhardt that impugning the conduct of other lawyers without sufficient support can, in itself, be an ethics violation.

Turley gives the White House lawyers credit for showing that it was the House managers who misrepresented facts that were in the record. He points out that Adam Schiff was given four Pinocchios by the WASHINGTON POST for his denial of any contact between his staff and the “whistleblower.” Schiff still maintains the ridiculous farce that he doesn’t even know who the “whistleblower” is. I’d say that if we’re going to start throwing around ethics charges, Schiff should be at the top of the list.

“Lawyers often present one-sided views of the record that the other side views as unfair or unsupported,” Turley says of Gerhardt. “We do not declare on national television that the entire opposing legal team ‘will’ (not even ‘may be’) called before the bar.”

As for Schiff, I thought it was funny that after delivering piles of unsubstantiated drivel on the Senate floor on Monday, he said this: “He is who he is. Truth matters little to him. What’s right matters even less. And decency matters not at all.” It was funny because even though I knew he was talking about Trump, he was actually describing himself.

https://jonathanturley.org/2020/02/02/gerhardt-the-entire-white-house-defense-team-will-face-bar-charges/

Schiff's Folly

February 2, 2020

For all intents and purposes, Schiff’s Folly, the crime-free, evidence-deficient impeachment of President Trump, is dead.  The plug was pulled Friday night, and we’re just waiting for the corpse to stop twitching.  It happened when the Senate voted 51-49 to refuse the request of Democrat House managers to call more witnesses.  The vote was mostly along party lines, with only Republican Sens. Susan Collins and (prepare to be shocked) Mitt Romney voting with the Democrats.
I don’t blame Sen. Collins, since she’s facing a tough reelection in a liberal state (Maine) and is already taking flak for her brave vote to confirm Brett Kavanaugh.  I assume Majority Leader Mitch McConnell probably told her that her “no” vote wasn’t needed.  I also assume that Romney voted with the Democrats for the same reason that the scorpion stung the frog that was giving it a ride across the river: “It’s in its nature.” 
In announcing the vote, McConnell stated the exact argument I made in my open letter to Senators: that having claimed to have proven their case with “overwhelming” evidence “beyond any doubt,” the House managers now demanded to set a dangerous precedent of making the Senate engage in a protracted round of new testimony, document searches and executive privilege appeals that it was the House’s job to do, if they needed that evidence to prove their allegedly “overwhelming” case. In short, if the prosecutors fail to find convincing evidence of a crime, they shouldn’t ask the jury to go hunting for it for them
Lindsey Graham said the same, in even sharper tones:
As expected, Minority Leader Chuck Schumer went on one of his patented pompous, scolding lectures, calling the vote a “perfidy” (for Democrats, they sure hate democracy) and “a grand tragedy. One of the worst tragedies that the Senate has ever overcome.” He said, “America will remember this day, unfortunately, where the Senate did not live up to its responsibilities, where the Senate turned away from truth and went along with a sham trial.”
 I think it’s more likely America will remember a couple of weeks ago as the day the Senate started going along with a sham trial.  Friday will be remembered as the day they ended it.
To prove the game is well and truly over and the fat lady has sung, even CNN’s Jeffrey Toobin admitted that what people will remember about “impeachment” is that Trump won.

A few amusing "impeachment" side notes: the Iowa Caucuses are tomorrow night, so by stretching this through Wednesday, Mitch McConnell forced Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar to spend the entire final weeks when they should have been campaigning in Iowa sitting in DC, listening to Adam Schiff lie.

One hilarious moment came when the Democrats’ final chance to speak during Q&A came and, for possibly the first time in his life, Jerrold Nadler sprinted to the microphone, ignoring Adam Schiff’s panicked cries of “Jerry! Jerry! Jerry!” Nadler gave the expected bad and off-putting answer, although to be fair, it was probably no more annoying than Schiff would’ve been. And at least it gave us this hilarious viral moment.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/jerry-nadler-adam-schiff-podium-impeachment

When the vote to call more witnesses predictably failed, several hundred anti-Trump protesters outside the Capitol let out with screams of anger and outrage. Have you noticed that leftists endow sounds with magical powers? They think that words they disagree with cause them physical harm. They believe that talking about a problem means they’re solving it. They elect candidates based not on qualifications or experience but on rhetoric that makes their legs tingle. They think that calling something “debunked” or “proven overwhelmingly” means that it is, even when it clearly isn’t. And for some reason, they seem to think screaming at the sky conveys some actual political power, when it just makes them look emotionally unstable. They’re like roosters who think their crowing makes the sun come up. Go ahead, scream at the sky. Who cares, other than people who are trying to sleep?

To be fair, I can understand why they screamed at the sky: they were being forced to relive the first traumatic time they did that, on Election Night 2016. Once again, they were hysterical with rage to discover that even after going to all that trouble to rig the system, they still lost to Trump.