The Russian Fiction

Let’s not bicker and argue about who hacked who

Obama complained for months about the Russians tampering with the US election to get Trump elected.  Apparently for all of Trump’s lack of political experience and his apparent intention to start World War III the first time he loses his temper, he is also somehow irresistible to the Russians.  It has nothing to do with Trump’s desire to sell the American uranium industry to the Russians, Hillary already did that.

For some unexplainable reason, Russia is willing to start a cyber war to install Trump.  So much so that they “hacked the election”.  They literally caused you to vote for Trump. The Russians worked intentionally to aide Trump.  I’m not even sure if we can call this America anymore or if we are just a puppet of Russia.  And of course, if Trump doesn’t denounce Russia and concede this sham election, he should be hung for treason, right?

Back to reality.

What does the media mean when they say Russia hacked the election?  Russia did not tamper with voting machines.  Russia did not funnel fake news to the mainstream media who then dutifully reported it.  In fact, the last major example we have of that was when the CIA told the President who told the media that Iraq had stockpiles of WMDs.  Russia did not get into your computer and use subliminal messages to make you feel like voting for Trump.  None of that happened.

In fact, it’s not clear that this was a Russian national effort.  Apparently the CIA has identified some Russian officials (unnamed) who might be involved.  But there’s another wrinkle.  The CIA might not even know what they are talking about.

The “hack” of the election wasn’t a hack of the election at all.  It was a hack of the DNC servers.  To be clear, no one invented the Podesta emails.  No one modified them.  Whoever the hackers are, whether Wikileaks who took responsibility for it or Russian officials according to the CIA, all they did was publish real, actual emails written by real, actual Democrat staffers.

According to the CIA, the hackers hit the GOP and DNC, but only released the DNC emails. The FBI disputes that, saying the GOP servers were never hacked.  If the GOP servers were never breached, that eliminates the CIA argument that the Russians were trying to hurt just the DNC.  In fact, the argument was flimsy to begin with.  It’s possible they hacked the GOP and just didn’t find anything incriminating.

So did Trump really win simply because Russia hacked the DNC?  Did people walk into the voting booth thinking to themselves “Gosh, I just can’t vote for a party that let’s their servers get hacked by the Russians”.  It seems like Hillary Clinton’s loss had a little bit more to do with what was on those emails.  Contained in the Podesta emails was evidence of media manipulation, CNN sending debate questions to Hillary ahead of time, racism within the party, Hillary’s health issues, and of all things proof that Team Hillary not only rigged the DNC primary, but also promoted Trump in the GOP primary because they thought they could beat him.

Just to make sure the reader caught that: Hillary Clinton and her team rigged both party’s primaries in 2016.

Problem emails didn’t just come from Wikileaks.  Team Hillary also got in trouble with the emails released by the FBI from her illegal server, and the undercover video of Scott Foval and others by Project Veritas.  Those two sources showed how the DNC bussed people across state lines to vote illegally, and even paid homeless people to go into Trump rallies and cause violence.  One would think the CIA might be interested in that.  At least one might think that had more to do with Hillary’s loss.

Calling on the Russians to hack and rig an election is nothing shockingly new.  Ted Kennedy did it in 1984 to try to get rid of Reagan. But the Russians didn’t decide the US election in 2016. If they are truly involved, all they did was shed light on the treacherous, terrible, racist, and illegal things the DNC was already doing to hack the election.

Maybe we should send them a thank you card.

Advertisements

Faithless Elector Calls on Fellow Electors to Abandon Trump

This makes a very unlikely scenario possible

A Trump elector wrote a New York Times Op-ed today vowing to not cast a vote for Trump. Christopher Suprun is one of Trump’s 306 electors, chosen by Texas to represent the people of Texas in casting a vote for Trump on the 19th.  Despite being pledged to Trump by the voters, he has decided that he knows better than the voters who selected him. Some have estimated as many as 7 faithless electors this year who will choose an alternative to Trump.
 
This is nothing new. There have been some 157 faithless electors over the years. In 2004, an elector reportedly made an error when he wrote John Edwards rather than John Kerry. In 1872, 63 electors chose not to vote for Horace Greeley, who died after election day. In every election Nixon ran in, two wins and one loss, at least one elector defected.  
 
7 electors only represents about a sixth of the margin that put Trump over 270. Unless there is a major shift, Trump will still receive the 270 electoral votes needed to win. If there is a major shift, Congress will choose between Trump, Clinton, and anyone else who gets electoral votes.
 
The 7 electors who have so far declared that they will not choose Trump have indicated they will vote for John Kasich. Calling themselves the Hamilton Electors, if they can sway another 30 electors it could create an unprecedented situation.  Congress would then choose one of the top three candidates who received electoral votes.  It would be possible in that situation for Congress to choose John Kasich, making him the next President instead of Trump.
The chances of this happening are slim to none.  Even if enough faithless electors banded together to stop Trump, it’s highly unlikely that the Republican Party would either split their vote allowing Hillary Clinton an opening or go against the will of their own voters. Kasich’s own top adviser has poured cold water on the idea.
Faithless electors have never changed an election outcome.  29 states have laws against faithless electors, but the penalties are minimal fines and none have ever been enforced. What might make 2016 different is that Trump comes into the Presidency with historic unfavorable ratings, Christopher Suprun wrote about his dissenting vote in a New York Times Op-ed, making it very visible ahead of time, and some electors have received death threats. They have more to think about than they might in a normal election year.

Trump vs. The Media

Why they are losing and how they can win again

On October 10 before a national debate with Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump pulled off the prank of the century on the media.  Dogged by an old video of Trump saying horrible, demeaning things about women, he invited the press to a meeting to discuss it and apologize.

When they arrived, Trump had a panel set up.  He was there with four women from the Clintons’ past.  Juanita Broaddrick was a woman Bill Clinton had raped, Kathleen Willey and Paula Jones were two women Clinton had sexually harassed and assaulted, and Kathy Shelton was a lawyer who had represented a child rape victim in a case Hillary Clinton cheated to win for the defendant.  The war between Trump and the media was on, and Trump was up 1-0.

In a recent Washington Post article, they recognized Trump’s constant victories over the media and lamented how they really don’t know what to do about it.  Obama went as far as to blame Trump’s victory on bars and restaurants that play Fox News.  In fact, their recent attempt to marginalize competing news sources by labeling them as “fake” has become a parody itself as more information is released by Wikileaks showing how the mainstream media sent the Clinton campaign debate questions ahead of time, let them edit articles, and apologized if they thought an article was too harsh on her.

voting-boothWhile the Washington Post was calling out the “fake” right wing media for making claims that 3 million illegal aliens hacked the election by voting illegally, the New York Times was claiming that Putin and the Russians hacked the election by distributing fake news, hacking DNC emails, and possibly even interfering with the voting booths themselves. You can now identify which way a fake news source leans just by looking at who they think stole 2016.  This works for everyone from CNN and NYT to Fox News and Breitbart.

How do the mainstreams fix this and get back on the path to being trusted and having political influence?  It might help if they sought a truce.  The media has a very adversarial relationship with Trump.  On July 23, the Huffington Post put out a piece about how to defeat Trump. Disgraced, yet highly respected journalist Dan Rather said the media must do what he did to Bush and be more biased to beat Trump. The media that ignored Joe Biden for 8 years now has 24 hour surveillance on Trump’s Twitter account just waiting for a gaffe to jump on.

When Trump saved 1,000 jobs at Carrier, the media congratulated themselves for finding a silver lining in something Trump had done.  Then of course they predictably changed their minds on the deal labeling it an empty PR stunt that encourages crony capitalism.  It’s funny how Obama hasn’t even left office yet and suddenly stimulus, crony capitalism, and picking winners and losers is a bad thing again.

For the mainstream media to win again, it would help if they weren’t so obviously biased. They have become so predictable that we almost wonder if Trump says some of the more crazy things he says on purpose.  A prime example came this past week when Trump tweeted that flag burners should maybe get a year in jail.  Predictably, the media went crazy.  Typically blind NPR went running back to the 1980s to criticize Trump for making the same unconstitutional error that George HW Bush made.  In the process they skipped 2005 when Hillary Clinton co-sponsored a bill to put flag burners in jail for a year.  This of course has us all curious if Trump knew about Clinton’s bill, or if he just got extremely lucky.

If the media wants to beat Trump, they need to stop trying.  They need to go back to what they learned in journalism school and seek fact rather than substantiation of their truth. They need to ask questions again. Skepticism is a lost art.  A little balance wouldn’t hurt either.  CNN may be making a game changing move in their attempts to bring Megyn Kelly on board.

If they keep trying to be the propaganda wing of the Democrat party, Trump is going to keep beating them.

 

How Trump won and Clinton lost

Five things the media missed…

The question has been asked and answered several times.  In an attempt at self-diagnosis, the media has theorized about why the perfect, most qualified candidate in history lost to a racist, sexist, xenophobic, homophobic deplorable.  They are still missing the correct answers.  Here are five facts and perceptions the media continues to overlook.

The Black Vote

One of the biggest aspects of Hillary Clinton’s loss that the media is only now recognizing is the million or so African Americans who stayed home.  Barack Obama won 93% of the black vote in 2012, Hillary received 88%.  That was the lowest percent in this demographic since the last white Democrat to run and lose in 2004.  An inconvenient truth for the DNC is that after losing two elections in a row against Bush, about 1 million new African American voters came out to vote for the first African American candidate. Then they disappeared. It was the largest demographic shift from 2012 to 2016. Nothing significant has changed in the DNC platform in 20 years.  Obama successfully played the race card, Clinton had no such luck with the gender card.

A Flawed Candidate

Part of the reason the gender card did not work is that Hillary Clinton was not what many women wanted to be representative of the historical first female President.  Clinton was flawed from the start.  Anyone looking at the email scandal could see that she had violated the law.  Democrats could justify voting for Clinton because the FBI refused to recommend an indictment, but even then Comey’s statement was basically that Clinton was too incompetent to be a criminal or hold a government job.

Clinton was the chosen one.  But unlike Obama, she knew it and ran on it.  Obama at least bothered to have a message.  Even during the debates, Hillary seemed to be scared to stray from memorized platitudes and applause lines.  It didn’t help when she experienced public health issues or lashed out at critics.  Throughout the whole thing she acted as though she was entitled to the Presidency and offended if anyone didn’t agree.

Of course, most people who would be discouraged to vote for her because of her criminality or entitlement were already #neverhillary.  Cheating in the primary, controlling the media, and all of the filth that came out of the Podesta emails swayed independents more than the blind DNC is willing to admit.  Even when Sanders came out and endorsed Clinton, it was not enough to change the fact that she had canceled the revolution.  More people stayed home in 2016 than voted.  The crowds that belonged to Bernie Sanders did not follow Hillary Clinton.

Third Parties Failed

The Clinton campaign has lashed out at third party voters since the end of the campaign. But Gary Johnson voters did not have a significant effect on the election.  If you think Gary Johnson’s 3% was anything significant, I would remind you that third party votes have been 2-3% since the last Clinton era when third parties took 10% in ’96 and almost 20% in ’92.  2016 should have been the best opportunity for a third party to make an impact because nobody liked the two main choices.  Consistently in polls, Gary Johnson pulled from both parties.

Gary Johnson was a flawed candidate.  A liberal Republican pretending to be a Libertarian, Johnson was joined by liberal Republican Bill Weld who spent more time praising and defending Clinton than advancing Johnson.

Gary Johnson himself was a clown who demonstrated often that he had no foreign policy intelligence and was probably high during the entire campaign.  Libertarians selected Johnson and pressed forward with no intention of winning, but hoping and praying that someone would realize they existed.  2020 may change their fortunes, but 2016 can objectively be seen as nothing other than a massive failure.  They gave it a Ralph Nader effort and walked away with the same result.

Not All Republicans Are Alt-Right

When Hillary Clinton labeled a large portion of Republicans as “deplorables”, I called that her “47%” moment.  Democrats made a huge miscalculation when they tried to substitute substance with sectarian attacks.  The problem is most Republicans do not believe that they are racist, sexist, bigoted, and many do not even consider themselves homophobic. That is probably because they aren’t.  Sure, some are.  The KKK, who Trump denounced 14 times, are all those things.  But the vast majority of Republicans view the KKK through the historical lens of their past involvement with the Democrat party.  The vast majority of Republicans feel no connection to the KKK and are offended when they are lumped together.

The vast majority of Republicans are also smarter than the media thought.  When Trump said Mexico was sending rapists and murderers, Republicans understood that he was talking about illegal immigrants and simply making the point that scientists, doctors and engineers are not crossing our border illegally.  Republicans also read through his poor communication skills to understand that he was talking about illegal immigrants and not Mexicans in general.  When celebrities called Trump Hitler, many Republicans rolled their eyes remembering they said the same thing about Romney, Bush, and others.  Trump was the beneficiary of generation so over inundated by superlatives and hyperbole that it has lost any affect.

When Democrats even today toss out insane metaphors and analogies, most recently how Trump’s cabinet selection has been Stalin-esque, sane people roll their eyes.  That is a big part of why Trump won.

The “Alt-Left” and Right Anger

What do you call it when someone refuses services to a particular group based on their beliefs?  What do you call it when one group that hates another group takes to the streets and destroys private property whenever they don’t get their way?  What do you call it when it is OK for one group to discriminate, but not the other?  These are the perceptions that drove the angry vote.  When celebrities, professors, and Wall Street try to marginalize conservatives or label them as dangerous, that drives conservatives to the polls.

The anger vote has been a narrative in the media since Trump won the primary.  The anger vote was significant, but the causes have been misdiagnosed.  The media narrative seemed to equate the anger vote with white supremacists and fringe members of the Right.  Even now, leftists like Jon Stewart and Michael Moore are correcting the Left’s perception on what drove rightwing anger.  It wasn’t simply a case of a bunch of racists not wanting a black or female President.  It had very little to do with the Supreme Court ruling in favor of gay marriage.  It had far more to do with reaction to destructive policies hurting our country and the “Alt-Left”, AKA SJWs.

Republicans voted for Trump mainly because of failed policies.  Obamacare drove insurance rates through the roof.  After 8 years of reported national recovery, people were still waiting for their own recovery.  Hillary Clinton listed two litmus tests for Supreme Court justices. They amounted to invalidating the 2nd amendment and legalizing all forms of abortion at all stages of a pregnancy.  We lost ground in every foreign engagement we involved ourselves in, including making ridiculous deals and ransom payments to Iran, consistently being embarrassed by Russia and China, losing in Iraq and Afghanistan, and rushing head first into messy entanglements in Syria, Libya, Egypt, and wherever else we could arm terrorists.

Perhaps the most Republican anger came at SJWs (Social Justice Warriors).  Again, these are just observations of the sentiments that were expressed by the Right.  The feeling was that professors created safe spaces to protect primarily liberal students from primarily conservatives students.  Conservative views were oppressed in Universities in demonstrable ways.  Anyone who disagreed with Obama or Clinton were too quickly labeled racist.  Eventually, the term “Alt-Right” was coined and used as a catch all to quickly dismiss anyone who was angry at the Left.

For every 100 sincere Black Lives Matters protesters attempting to bring light to police brutality, there were another 100 paid by George Soros to smash windows and set cars on fire.  In fact, many BLM protesters turned out to be Occupy Wall Street protesters recycled.

It seemed as though the entire race war was scripted.  While black protesters hugged police officers in the streets and people sought healing, bussed in groups of community organizers chanted “Pigs in a blanket, fry ’em like bacon” and called for violence against police.  The angry Republicans were the ones sitting in their cars stopped on the highway by Occupy Wall Street and Black Lives Matter protesters.  Angry voters were driven by what should have been a charge of indifference, but was instead over-inflated into a charge of all historical racial and financial injustice.

Occupy Wall Street, the original Soros funded mob, was no better.  Americans across the country who still believe in the American Dream were being accused of hoarding and oppressing these liberal tent dwellers. Yet the movement collapsed in on itself and the DNC put forward a candidate who made $500,000 an hour giving speeches to Wall Street. It is no wonder American workers voted for Trump.

The Result

In the end, the election came down to two candidates who were so scary that neither side could afford to back down.  Trump didn’t win because half the country is racist.  He won because half the country was scared of Hillary Clinton, scared of her policies, and scared of how the SJWs already viewed them.  Desiring everything Hillary Clinton did not represent, and regardless of what Trump did represent, half the country voted #neverhillary and for the only viable alternative they had.  Trump wasn’t a great communicator.  He didn’t have to be.  All he had to say was “I’m going to make America great again, and I’m not Hillary Clinton”.