Advertisement

Wednesday was night three of the GOP virtual convention, and while it’s hard to compare, this might have been the best night yet. Michael Goodwin of the New York Post said that Trump is producing the greatest reality show on Earth, and I would second that. If you aren’t watching it (and if you’re watching on a liberal network where they yak over 90% of the speeches, you aren’t really watching it), then be sure to watch the final night tonight, and go to YouTube to catch up on the previous nights uninterrupted from CSPAN. It makes the Democrats’ Convention look like a Zoom meeting set up by 14-year-olds, not that that would be too hard.

Funny, everyone was talking about all the severe limitations put on the convention, yet Trump has delivered possibly the best convention ever. But then, over-delivering despite having severe limitations put on him could describe his entire Administration.

Here’s a link to the full live-stream of night three that starts after CSPAN's opening with a WaPo reporter repeating Democrat talking points – disappointing, since CSPAN had been simply airing the event with no editorializing up until now to let viewers make up their own minds.

And here are last night’s live blogs by PJ Media

And Townhall.com

Plus a good article on five important parts of night three, although the author correctly admits that there were so many inspiring stories and great speeches that it was hard to narrow it down to only five.

Night three’s theme was a salute to heroes, and they weren’t make-believe movie superheroes but regular Americans who’ve gone above and beyond the call of duty. There were more great speeches and stories than I have room to recount, here are just a few highlights:

Ohio mom Tera Myers, who refused to be pressured into aborting her Down Syndrome son or letting him go without an education. She fought for school choice reform and helped create a program that gives parents of special needs kids the freedom to choose education that fits them best…

Chen Guangcheng, the blind Chinese dissident (reading his speech by Braille), describing the heartless tyranny of the Chinese communist government and its mandatory one-child policy that he exposed. FYI, while visiting China in 2011, Joe Biden told his hosts, “Your policy has been one which I fully understand — I'm not second-guessing — of one child per family”…

Republican Rep. Dan Crenshaw, who lost an eye and nearly died from an IED explosion during his third tour of duty in Afghanistan…

Madison Cawthorn, who will be the youngest House member if elected in North Carolina in November, is paralyzed from a car crash when he was 18. In a stunning moment, he ended his speech by using a walker to rise from his wheelchair and stand for the Pledge of Allegiance…

Sister Deirdre Byrne, who is not only Mother Superior of the Washington Little Workers sisters but also a doctor and a colonel and reservist in the U.S. Army Medical Corps, praised Trump for his defense of the unborn, whom she called “the most marginalized group in the world.” She branded Biden/Harris as "the most anti-life presidential ticket in history" and warned, "While what I have to say may be difficult for some to hear, I am saying it because I’m not just pro-life, I’m pro-eternal life, and I want all of us to end up in Heaven someday."

And what a fantastic speech by civil rights icon Clarence Henderson, who risked his life by defying Jim Crow laws and ordering food at a segregated Southern lunch counter in the ‘60s. Pointing out that that’s what “peaceful protest” really looks like, he recounted the history of the Republican Party’s leadership on civil rights issues, and ended by referencing Joe Biden’s claim that if you don’t vote for him, “you ain’t black.” Henderson said if you think it’s strange that he’s a Republican, then “you don’t know history.”

And there were many more moving and inspiring real life stories and terrific speakers, including Kayleigh McEnany (who discussed her double mastectomy, and how Donald and Melania Trump were among the first to call her afterwards)…Kellyanne Conway, who was the first woman to manage a winning Presidential campaign, talked about how Trump has put more women into major positions of power than any other President…Former DNI Richard Grennell, who said he was sickened when he finally got to see the pathetic “evidence” that the Democrats had for their Russian collusion charges …Rep. Elise Stefanik, who defended Trump so well during the ludicrous impeachment trial, called that "not just an attack on the President. This was an attack on you." Also, like all the blue city violence, impeachment was never mentioned even once at the DNC Convention. They’re hoping we’ll forget about their giant partisan waste of time and money…

Plus more great speeches by South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem (who is sparking Presidential buzz), Burgess Owens

…both Mike and Karen Pence, Joni Ernst, and a must-see speech by former NFL player and lifelong Democrat Jack Brewer, who took a rhetorical flamethrower to the idea that blacks have to believe false narratives and vote for Biden/Harris because they don’t like Trump’s “tone.”

I think Sen. Marsha Blackburn had the funniest line of the night: “Nancy Pelosi says China would prefer Joe Biden…Yep!...I BET they WOULD!”

And how great was it to see Mike Pence speak from Fort McHenry, where the Star-Spangled Banner that inspired Francis Scott Key to write our National Anthem once flew? At this convention, even disabled people stand to salute the flag. On the other side, they kneel to the Anthem, burn the flag, try to “cancel” Francis Scott Key and want to change the National Anthem to John Lennon’s “Imagine.”

I could go on and on, but go to YouTube and watch it yourself if you haven’t already. Trump and his people are doing the impossible: they’re making a political convention a binge-watchable series. Tonight is the final night, and Trump himself will be speaking. It's "Must-See TV!"

One of the most moving speeches on Wednesday night of the Republican Convention was given by a man named Sam Vigil. Sam who? This soft-spoken gentleman is not famous and certainly never thought he’d be speaking to the nation, but he came to speak about being touched by crime, as his wife Jackie was killed in their own garage during what was apparently an attempted carjacking.

They lived in Albuquerque, which he said is “one of the most violent cities in the country.” Most homicides go unsolved. In a sad irony, Jackie had immigrated from Colombia, known for violence, to seek a better life in America.

For eight months, the overwhelmed local police made no arrest in Jackie’s murder. But after President Trump launched Operation Legend this July, the FBI took over the case and in just days, they arrested four people, with the fifth arrested later in Texas on unrelated charges. Mr. Vigil thanked Trump for delivering justice for his wife and “for all the other innocent victims of violent crime.”

"I know he will never stop fighting for justice,” Mr. Vigil said, “for law and order, and for peace, security and our communities.”

Watching this in context of all the violence happening around the country, I thought that, more than anything, this election comes down to order and freedom vs. chaos and the resulting loss of freedom. The President wants us to be able to go about our lives in safety, whether it’s from a carjacking in Albuquerque or a vicious assault on the streets of Seattle.

The other side WANTS chaos, as they think that, one way or another, it will keep Trump from another term. But notice that they’re suddenly becoming more subversive about this, saying publicly that they are against violence. This is because polling shows that violence by BLM and other groups appears to be backfiring. Their plan to blame Trump isn’t working.

Even their friends in the media are trying to help, but they blew their own cover, right on the air.

Democrats don’t care how the violence is hurting people, just that it might be hurting then in the POLLS. The practice of going into restaurants and bullying diners is especially not playing well. So even Biden has (finally) come out and said he’s against violence. Even though nobody even brought it up during their convention, he and Kamala Harris will say whatever they need to now.

There are other ways the left thinks chaos can help them ultimately get what they want. For example, they can send the message that the riots we see in major cities will spread to all of America if their side loses.

They even blame Trump for their own acting out. One of my staffers said she was reminded of her niece having a tantrum when she was in her “terrible two’s,” screaming at her mother, suddenly shrieking wildly, “YOU MADE ME THIS WAY!” Imagine a two-year-old (!) with that kind of instinctive understanding of how to make her mother feel guilty for what she herself was doing. We are dealing with emotional two-year-olds, trying to manipulate in just the same way.

Give in to them, and that’s how they'll get their way with EVERYTHING –- by creating chaos and threatening escalation if we don’t appease them. They’re using race as the pretext for this, and they’ll take the conflict as far as they think they have to.

Prof. Glenn Reynolds at PJ Media came to a similar conclusion: “The left wants it to be about black vs. white, immigrant vs. native, etc. Trump’s making it clear that it’s about people who are constructive, productive, and generally happy, vs. people who are destructive, parasitic and generally miserable, and that that difference transcends things like race. This is a huge, underappreciated –- and very traditionally American –- message. By promoting it at this crucial time, Trump may very well be saving America.”

Amen. That’s what it will come down to. Americans can’t go about their lives and be productive and happy under the constant threat of chaos.

Hillary Clinton recently brought up another way that chaos can help her side get what they want. Remember at the 2016 debates when she was “horrified” that Trump wouldn’t promise to accept the upcoming election results (when he had no way to anticipate how they might conceivably be messed with)? Here’s what this ghoulishly hypocritical woman says now.

So, Biden should not concede “under any circumstances.” Putting Biden in the White House is simply “an organizational challenge,” even if America has clearly elected Trump. Imagine the chaos THIS creates. It shows she cares nothing for “democracy” and what Americans want, only power.

A commentary in Wednesday’s WALL STREET JOURNAL called “Mail-in Voting Could Deliver Chaos” describes the mess that could happen with mail-in balloting and one candidate simply refusing to concede. The WSJ has a paywall; but one of the authors has posted it.

Also, check out Dan Bongino’s podcast from Wednesday, Episode 1331, starting at 34:15.

The WSJ article greatly worries Bongino; he says to “get ready for the idea” that we won’t have a result even by December. But by FEDERAL LAW, the dates for the election and Electoral College voting are set in stone, and THE CONSTITUTION sets Inauguration Day as January 20. Period.

Mail-in ballots do not change this, but they must be postmarked no later than Election Day, in this case November 3, to count. Of course, the “mailbox” hoax is already being used ahead of time to discredit mail-in results, even as Democrats have pushed for mail-in voting.

State electors are supposed to resolve disputes six days before the Electoral College meets (this year, December 14), and if they can’t, the STATE LEGISLATURE has those six days to resolve the matter. If it can't, THE STATE FORFEITS ALL ITS ELECTORAL VOTES.

It’s easy to see how, at the state level, Democrats might mess with this system in key swing states to affect the electoral vote count. And even if Trump is inaugurated, they’ll say they “really” won, using the electoral chaos they created to delegitimize his second term, just as they used the “Russia” hoax they created to delegitimize his first term.

RealClear Politics goes into even more detail on what could go wrong with mail-in voting.

No wonder Democrats have pushed so hard for this. Anyway, get ready for anything. These people will sit by while violence destroys cities and gets people killed as long as they can blame it on Trump --- the very one who (unlike them) is genuinely interested in making life better and more productive for Americans.

From Karen B:

Just a note for my right-leaning family and friends from my left-leaning self as we near voting day:

They say we want to disband police departments (and that we hate the police): we don’t, that’s a lie. We want to weed out racism and unnecessary police brutality and for those who abuse their power to be held accountable.

They say we want to release all prisoners: we don’t, that’s a lie. We want to weed out racism and ensure the punishments match the crimes and to deprivatize prisons.

They say we want open borders: we don’t, that’s a lie. We want asylum seekers to be given their chance to seek asylum. We want to help people who are cg from unimaginable terror and poverty help to give them the chances we have. We want to ensure children aren’t separated from their parents and that nobody is kept in cages. But we do want proper vetting.

They say we want to take away your guns: we don’t, that’s a lie. We want logical gun control to help prevent mass shootings.

They say we want to wage a war on Christianity and Christian values: we don’t, that’s a lie. We want people of all religions to be able to practice and worship freely.

They say we want to get everything for free: we don’t, that’s a lie. We want to work hard and make sure that healthcare and education are affordable for all.

They say we want a war against traditional marriage: we don’t, that’s a lie. We want people of all sexual orientations to be able to love freely, no matter who you love.

They say we want to destroy or rewrite history: we don’t, that’s a lie. We want to recognize the ugly parts of our past and do everything we can to say “that’s not okay, let’s not honor those aggressors, let’s not let those things happen again”.

They say we want to take away your constitutional rights: we don’t, that’s a lie. We choose to believe science and wear masks and try to prevent the spread of this disease.

They say we hate America: we don’t, that’s a lie. We just recognize our faults and want us to do better, be better.

Stop with the us vs. them. Stop with the straw man arguments. Stop with the fake news. Stop with Fox News. Our position is one of empathy, compassion, and logic. Stop believing the hype. Stop with the division. Just because we want equality for all doesn’t mean we want to take anything away from you.

From the Gov:

Thanks for writing, Karen. You are a very thoughtful and idealistic person. But who is this "we"? When you say “we,” I don’t think you can include the leftists with power in the Democrat Party in your description of what “we” do and do not want. You are a moderate, and today's Democrat Party is NOT moderate.

For example, it’s certainly not a “lie” to say that many who fund and support the Democrat Party and various leftist organizations want to defund the police. YOU don’t, but many of them do. Some in Congress openly call for it. Trump wants bad cops out, of course, but law and order and the safety of Americans is a must.

It’s not a “lie” to say that many who fund and support the Democrat Party want to open up prisons. YOU don’t, but many of them do. Brace yourself, but I’d say that your goals of rooting out racism in the prison system sound downright “Trumpian.”

It’s absolutely not a “lie” to say that many on the left want a “borderless” world. YOU don’t, but many leftists with a lot more influence than you want exactly that. I’m sure you know that the left is continuing to lie (REALLY lie) about Trump and the “children in cages.”

It’s not a “lie” to say that many on the left want to confiscate all guns. YOU might not, but it’s the dream of many in your party. With a handful of Supreme Court justices bent on reinterpreting the Second Amendment, they could do it.

It’s not a “lie” to say that many in your party want to wage a war on Christianity or Christian values. YOU don’t want to, but activists on the left are waging that war, mostly in courtrooms.

It’s not a “lie” to say that some people want everything for free. YOU don’t, but many do. Democrats are seriously considering how they’re going to do reparations. Rioters justify their looting. I’m glad to hear you have a sense of responsibility. Did you know that, by improving the economy so much, Trump had made it much easier for people to get jobs and work hard?

It’s not a “lie” to say that many want a war on traditional marriage. YOU don’t, but some do. (See “Christianity,” above.) The next step is abolishing even the idea of marriage as a partnership; why not polyamory? And over the past several decades, Democrat policies have helped destroy the traditional family –- especially black families, where 70 percent are born out of wedlock and male role models are largely absent.

It’s not a “lie” to say that many on the left want to tear down or rewrite history. Oh, yes, they do. YOU might see it as “recognizing the ugly parts” and learning from our past, but they see it not as a chance to learn, but to exercise mob rule, pulling down statues of...abolitionists, suffragettes, saints, whatever. Many don’t know what they’re doing. And a concerted effort to rewrite history is going on right now.

It’s not a “lie” to say that many on the left want to take away our constitutional rights. YOU apparently don’t, but many in your party do. I’ve touched on a few of these above. Another right that many would love to take away –- and they’re working on it –- is freedom of speech. As for masks, effective treatments, etc., there's a LOT of dispute within the scientific community about all that, and, unfortunately, it got politicized.

It is absolutely not a “lie” to say that many on the left hate America. YOU don’t, but many do, from the rioters on Seattle streets to billionaires who fund your party and leftist causes. Some are calling for the outright destruction of our country. Thanks to them, America is far from “being better.”

I’d love it if you would show this letter to your family and friends, both left and right-leaning. It would be great to hear their reaction. I fear your idealism causes you to look at your party through rose-tinted glasses, ironically at a time when the left is finally showing its true colors. It might surprise you to hear that you sound in a lot of ways like today’s Republican Party. You really are too smart and thoughtful to be led around by the far-leftists of the Democrat Party. Maybe they’re not who you think they are. And I haven’t “lied” about them at all.

Rachel Maddow's New Gig

August 26, 2020

Please sit down before reading this. If you’re standing up, you might laugh so hard, you’ll fall down and hurt yourself. Ready? Good…

Guess who’s decided to become a “fact-checker.” Rachel Maddow of MSNBC! That’s right: the woman who spent three years spinning ever wackier Trump-Russia collusion conspiracy theories has decided that the Republicans at the convention are such “LYING LIARS WHO LIE” (trademark registered) that she just has to “correct the record” for her extremely undemanding viewers.

And what is her first subject on her maiden voyage into the uncharted territory of actually checking a fact? She claims that Cissy Graham Lynch misled viewers by calling Trump a champion of religious freedom rights because if he cared about religious freedom, he wouldn’t have instituted the “Muslim ban.”

I have to thank her because I’d almost forgotten about that hoax. That was one of the earliest examples of the media deliberately distorting what Trump said or did, and it set the template for all their "reporting" since (whatever Trump says or does, ascribe the worst possible motives to it.) If you don’t remember, thanks to Obama/Biden letting ISIS spread across the Middle East, there was a threat of terrorist attacks on our homeland. When Trump first came into office, he wanted to restrict travel from a handful of nations that had active anti-American terrorist cells and no structure for vetting emigrants. Liberals immediately misrepresented this as a “Muslim ban,” even though not all the nations on the list were majority Muslim and there were many other majority Muslim nations that were not on the list. It was really about keeping out terrorists, but the media spun it as "Trump hates Muslims."

This was the earliest example of Democrats and the media being willing to trade the safety and security of their fellow Americans for bad publicity for Trump. It would soon be followed by many more.

How appropriate is it that Rachel Maddow based her first “fact-check” of Republicans on a known partisan lie? But then, anyone who would rely on her to give them the “facts” about Trump would also probably take advice about proper Oval Office decorum from Bill Clinton. Oh, wait: that was actually part of the Democratic Convention.

She pressed on in her "fact-check" to talk about Trump’s executive order exempting the Little Sisters of the Poor from having to provide contraceptives and abortifacient drugs to employees under Obamacare. Maddow condescendingly “explained,” “The anti-abortion right has decided to say in recent years that contraception including things like the birth control pill, they've decided to call that abortion. So if you take birth control pills you're, like, constantly having abortions all the time. That's what that reference is to. And that may be very familiar rhetoric in the anti-abortion right.”

Umm, we’re not talking about the “anti-abortion right.” We’re talking about an order of Catholic nuns, who understandably don’t want to be forced to pay for contraceptives. That’s why this is a religious freedom issue.

Maybe she should just go back to the Russia collusion fairy tale and leave discussions of religious freedom rights to people who know anything at all about religion. Or facts.

It’s actually good that U.S. Attorney John Durham is still putting the finishing touches on his report on FISA abuse, as we’re going to need some focused post-convention time to take a look at it. There’s a story to be told, a very important story, and we should soon know a lot more about how the "Russia" hoax came together. In fact, one can get a “sneak peek” right now by looking at Kevin Clinesmith’s plea agreement and seeing how it relates to parts of Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s internal report.

Thanks to Margot Cleveland at THE FEDERALIST for connecting more dots. She's done the tedious part; now we get to talk about it.

As you know, Kevin Clinesmith, who worked in the FBI’s Office of General Counsel, pleaded guilty to one count of falsifying evidence; the plea agreement was released last Wednesday. He admitted that he had added four critical words --- “was not a source” --- to an email from an “unidentified government agency” (let’s just say the CIA because we know it was) concerning Carter Page’s “operation contact” with that agency. One of the agents involved in Crossfire Hurricane had told him they wanted “something in writing” about it, so he altered the email and forwarded it to that agent. (While pleading guilty, he still claims it was not his “intent” to mislead. Trying to have it both ways.) This revised email cleared the way for the fourth FISA.

But wait --- there had already been an original FISA application and two renewals, and they hadn’t mentioned this. What’s the story there? Well, according to Clinesmith’s plea agreement, the CIA had provided “certain members of the Crossfire Hurricane team” with a memo indicating that Page had been approved as an “operation contact” for them from 2008 to 2013 and detailing information that Page had provided them about “his prior contacts with certain Russian officers.” But we know this information was not included in the first three FISAs. (The Horowitz report says so, and Clinesmith makes a point of it in his plea agreement.)

If I understand correctly, THIS is the “suspicious” contact with Russians that gave the Crossfire Hurricane team their reason (excuse) to accuse Page of being a Russian agent. But in truth, there was no reason to spy on him over this; he had already been debriefed by the CIA about it, and the CIA had informed "certain members" of the team of his relationship with them before the initial FISA application was made. The FBI just left it out of the applications.

To accomplish this, the Crossfire Hurricane team even left it out of the information given to the division that HELPS with FISA applications, and one member of the team, Stephen Somma –- more on him coming up –- gave them incorrect information when explicitly ASKED about Page’s relationship with the CIA. This key information about Page is one of the “17 substantial errors or omissions” in the FISAs that Horowitz attributed to the FBI.

So, now we need to know the identities of the “certain members of the Crossfire Hurricane team” who received the memo about Page from the CIA, because they are the ones who kept the information out of the application and first two renewals. In the IG report, one is identified as “Case Agent 1,” and that person was identified by THE NEW YORK TIMES as the aforementioned Stephen Somma, who happens to have been Stefan Halper’s FBI “handler” as well! So we’re likely to be hearing more about Mr. Somma.

Cleveland’s article has more detail on how Somma mischaracterized Page’s work in Russia, moving the dates of it years earlier so it became “beyond the scope” of the FISA application. Clever, these FBI agents.

The Horowitz report says Somma claimed “not to recall his state of knowledge” about Page’s history with the CIA. One has to wonder if his memory might improve while under questioning in Durham’s criminal investigation, under threat of perjury.

Cleveland –- who has a FANTASTIC memory –- remembers that Somma, as Case Agent #1, had expressed great interest early on in surveilling Carter Page. But according to the IG report, the Crossfire Hurricane team didn’t become aware of the “dossier” till September. Before then, only Steele’s “handler” and a few agents in the New York Field Office knew about it, starting in early July.

But guess where Somma was working in early July, before joining the Crossfire Hurricane team in August? The New York Field Office, where he was a special agent for counterintelligence with a focus on...Russia.

Cleveland goes into more detail on who else among the team might have known about Page’s CIA involvement and kept it out of the application. Joe Pientka is certainly a possibility.

But the big stinky cheese at the FBI at that time was Director Comey, and this is one slick dude when it comes to protecting himself. As you might recall, Comey slithered his way out of having to talk about classified material with IG Horowitz by refusing to have his security clearance reinstated. Smooth, huh? The memo sent to the FBI about Page’s CIA activities would have been classified, for sure, and without a security clearance, Comey couldn’t have been shown the memo or asked anything about it.

A criminal investigation is different, though. Maybe Durham can put the squeeze on the big cheese. And maybe we’ll finally learn the whole sordid story.