HANSON – Architecture of regime change; BARROW & FOODY – Handel reached out; SPIERING – Kelly’ oss; RCP: SC 5TH; SCHLICHTER – Left loses; SCARBOROUGH – Noncitizen votes for Obama; AP – US bombers over NKor.
LEADS: CHANG – NKor murder; RUSHBO – GA PJ Boy; LOWRY – Hate speech is legal; LEVIN – 06-20-17.
RECOMMENDED: NRO – NKor’s brazen act; LAST – Paglia opens fire but not at GOP!
“In summary: to have any hope of retaking the White House, Democrats must get off their high horse, lose the rabid rhetoric, and reorient themselves toward practical reality and the free country they are damned lucky to live in.” Camille Paglia
“Has anyone out there actually met a Trump voter who said something like this?”
‘I supported Trump, but now I don’t because his refusal to passively sit back and let a Washington insider with an obvious conflict of interest and his Democrat staff drive him out of office on the basis of a Hillary-driven lie far outweighs Neil Gorsuch, pulling out of the climate scam, beating ISIS, and repealing Obamacare.’ Kurt Schlichter
Victor Davis Hanson, NRO: “The Architecture of Regime Change”
“The ‘Resistance’ is using any and all means — lies, leaks, lawbreaking, and violence — to overturn the results of the 2016 election.
“The problem with the election of President Donald J. Trump was not just that he presented a roadblock to an ongoing progressive revolution. Instead, unlike recent Republican presidential nominees, he was indifferent to the cultural and political restraints on conservative pushback — ironic given how checkered Trump’s own prior conservative credentials are. Trump brawled in a way McCain or Romney did not. He certainly did not prefer losing nobly to winning ugly.
“Even more ominously, Trump found a seam in the supposedly invincible new progressive electoral paradigm of Barack Obama. He then blew it apart — by showing the nation that Obama’s identity-politics voting bloc was not transferrable to most other Democratic candidates, while the downside of his polarization of the now proverbial clingers most assuredly was. To her regret, Hillary Clinton learned that paradox when the deplorables and irredeemables of the formerly blue-wall states rose up to cost her the presidency.
“We are witnessing a desperate putsch to remove Trump before he can do any more damage to the Obama project. Political, journalistic, and cultural elites of a progressive coastal culture aim at destroying the Trump presidency before it can finish its full four-year term.
“The branches of this insidious coup d’état are quite unlikely anything our generation has ever witnessed. . .”
Rushbo: Georgia Pajama Boy
“Do you know that more money has been spent on this race than any congressional race in history? Something to the tune of $25 million for a district election. Now, the Jesse Helms race in the Senate, North Carolina, that got a lot of money, but that was a Senate seat. This is a district seat. This is Georgia 20, 25 mill, most of it Democrat money. It’s come in from the usual places, Hollywood and George Soros shell corporations all over the world.
“Early voting has set a record. What’s the number here? Over 140,000 people have already voted in this district race, 140,000 early voters. This includes 36,000 who did not vote in the first round. Now, nobody knows how these votes have been counted yet, so all they can do is guess what it means. And here you got the political consultants and the strategists on both sides, each saying the heavy turnout benefits their candidate, because each is saying the heavy turnout shows the enthusiasm. Anti-Trump enthusiasm is sweeping America, the Drive-Bys say.
“The sad fact is, for them, it isn’t. Anti-Trump enthusiasm is not sweeping America. It is where it is, and it’s where it’s always been since the election, but it isn’t growing. But the Drive-Bys want you to think something else. So 140,000 early voters, impossible to predict why and what that means. I just saw on Fox, Chris Stirewalt, who is one of their political directors or strategists, was saying that the Democrats have a lot to lose here.
“And I said to myself, “What? The Democrats have a lot to lose? That’s not what the narrative is.” The narrative has been Trump’s future is on the line. The Trump presidency is on the line. If anybody has anything to lose, it’s Trump. But now today all of a sudden it’s the Democrats who stand to lose big if Pajama Boy loses. . .’ emph added, jb
Bill Barrow & Kathleen Foody, AP: “In Georgia, Handel reaches out to Democrats and thanks Trump”
“DUNWOODY, Ga. (AP) — Republican Karen Handel declared victory in Georgia’s 6th Congressional District with a promise that she’ll work to gain the confidence of voters who backed her Democratic opponent.
But Handel’s thank you to President Donald Trump in the same speech Tuesday night is unlikely to comfort backers of the Democrat who came to symbolize anti-Trump resistance.
Handel won about 52 percent of the vote to quell the upstart phenomenon of Jon Ossoff, a 30-year-old Democrat who raised more than $23 million and became a symbol of opposition to Trump.
The thank you to Trump was Handel’s most public show of support of the man who wasn’t embraced by many voters in the well-educated suburban Atlanta district in November and who she handled delicately throughout a primary and runoff election to fill the congressional seat vacated by Tom Price to take a spot in Trump’s cabinet. . .”
Charlie Spiering, BigGovt: “‘Laughing My Ossoff’ — Kellyanne Conway Celebrates Humiliating Democrat Defeat”
RCP: “South Carolina 5th District – Live Results”
Norman, R, 44,889, 51.1 percent
Parnell, D, 42,053, 47.9 percent.
NRO: “North Korea’s Brazen Act”
“In a previous era, the death of Otto Warmbier, a 22-year-old American student, at the hands of the regime in North Korea likely would have been considered an act of war. On January 2, 2016, Warmbier was detained by regime officials, allegedly for attempting to steal a propaganda poster. Convicted of a “hostile act” against the state, he was sentenced to 15 years of hard labor. Upon his release into U.S. custody last week, regime officials said that he had been in a coma for nearly 15 months, and blamed a case of botulism. In reality, Warmbier was almost certainly tortured to death by the regime.
“What happened to Otto Warmbier is what has been happening to North Korean citizens for more than 70 years, since Kim Il-sung transformed the new country into what it is today: a hermetically sealed prison state operated by a hereditary dictatorship that some scholars estimate has murdered around 1.5 million people in its network of concentration camps. Those not executed by the regime have fared little better: The country is beset by malnourishment and starvation (a famine in the mid 1990s killed half a million people); its GDP per capita is somewhere south of $1,000, putting North Korea behind Rwanda, Haiti, and Sierra Leone globally; and its shoddy infrastructure causes fires that can be seen from space. . . .
“The fact that North Korea is now a nuclear-armed state is in no small part a consequence of nearly three decades of ill-conceived American and international policy. . .”
Gordon Chang, Daily Beast: “State-Sanctioned Murder: North Korea Killed Otto Warmbier”
“The Art of the Deal”?
“The Kim regime likely released the American student so he wouldn’t die on North Korean soil. Now they need to pay for killing an American—and be convinced they can’t kill more.
“The 22-year-old American student, who arrived in Cincinnati on a medevac flight June 13 after being held captive in North Korea since January 2016, died Monday afternoon. He had been in a coma for 15 months.
“The North Koreans claimed they released Warmbier on “humanitarian grounds.” That, like most everything they have said on the matter, was deceptive. They let him go, in all probability, because they did not want him to die on North Korean soil.
“It’s unlikely their last-minute maneuver will make much difference, however. The student’s death, so soon after his release, is bound to affect American policy toward the Kim regime, just as the beheading of James Foley by ISIS in August 2014 affected the Obama administration’s Middle East policy.
“At the moment, President Trump’s attempts to disarm North Korea seem to be in abeyance, as the White House waits for Beijing to help. Whatever one thinks of that approach, Warmbier’s death will add pressure on the president to act now. . .”
AP: “US SENDS SUPERSONIC BOMBERS IN SHOW OF FORCE AGAINST N.KOREA”
SEOUL, South Korea (AP) — The United States flew two supersonic bombers over the Korean Peninsula on Tuesday in a show of force against North Korea, South Korean officials said.
“The U.S. often sends powerful warplanes in times of heightened animosities with North Korea, and flew B-1B bombers several times this year as the North conducted a series of banned ballistic missile tests.
“Tuesday’s flights by B-1Bs came shortly after the death of a U.S. college student who was recently released by North Korea in a coma following more than 17 months of captivity.
“Seoul’s Defense Ministry said the bombers engaged in routine exercises with South Korean fighter jets aimed at showing deterrence against North Korea.
“The U.S. military said the bombers conducted two separate drills with the Japanese and South Korean air forces. It said the flights demonstrated solidarity among South Korea, Japan and the United States “to defend against provocative and destabilizing actions in the Pacific theater.”
“The United States stations tens of thousands of troops in South Korea and Japan. . .”
Rowan Scarborough, Washington Times:” Study supports Trump: 5.7 million noncitizens may have cast illegal votes”
“A research group in New Jersey has taken a fresh look at postelection polling data and concluded that the number of noncitizens voting illegally in U.S. elections is likely far greater than previous estimates.
“As many as 5.7 million noncitizens may have voted in the 2008 election, which put Barack Obama in the White House. . .”
Kurt Schlichter, TownHall: “If the Left Wins Their Soft Coup, Everyone Loses – But Mostly Them”
“You have to wonder how liberals think this works. So, a manifestly conflicted special counsel leading a pack of maxed-out Democrat donors decides Donald Trump has to be kicked out of office for “obstructing justice” regarding a cynical lie about him cavorting with the Kremlin and…then what? President Pence, until they do the same thing to him? Or do we just skip right to President Felonia von Pantsuit, shrug our shoulders, and give up on our foolish dream of having a say in our own governance?
“Straightforward from here is…chaos.
“Because normal Americans are woke to the scam. No, the affidavits of a zillion DC/NY establishment types attesting to Robert Mueller’s impeccable integrity – ever notice how the guy trying to hose us always has the establishment’s “impeccable integrity” merit badge – are not going to make us unsee the fact that he’s carrying water for an establishment that thinks we need to just shut up and obey.
“Now, pulling off the soft coup is going to be harder than they think. The establishment has not thought this out. They sort of assume that if they squelch Trump then everything somehow just goes back to them being in unchallenged control. Wrong.
Mueller can’t indict Trump – that stupid Constitution, always getting in the way! No, the goal is for Mueller and his crack team of committed liberal activist lawyers to generate some head-shaking, tsk-tsk, more-in-sorrow-than-in-anger, report claiming Trump “obstructed” the probe into Hillary’s Trump/Russia collusion lie that even the liberals reluctantly acknowledge never happened.
“But their problem is that impeachment is a purely political act – this isn’t going to get tried before some leftist DC judge and a 96% Democrat DC jury. No, they have to convince the Republican members of the House of Representatives to impeach and, well, have you taken a look at a political map of the US lately? It’s as red as a baseball field full of conservatives after a Bernie Bro shows up with a rifle.
“Now, in the circle of jerks that is DC, congressmen are bombarded with the Trump obstruction narrative. Many neutered professional conservatives, eager to return to the old status quo where they sort-of mattered, are helping our enemies. Some of these congressmen are themselves Fredocons, weak and stupid, and are listening. Some might be swayed – except in a couple weeks they have to go home and be around normal people, and they’re going to hear something completely different.
“Normal people aren’t falling for it. . .”
Rich Lowry, NRO: “Yes, Hate Speech Is Free Speech”
“The Supreme Court protected free speech with their decision in Matal v. Tam.
“With the Left feverishly attempting to squash unwelcome speech on college campuses, with the president of the United States musing about tightening libel laws, with prominent liberals asserting that so-called hate speech is not protected by the First Amendment, free speech in America at least has one reliable friend — the Supreme Court of the United States.
“In a firm 8-0 decision, the court slapped down the Patent and Trademark Office for denying a band federal trademark registration for the name ‘The Slants,’ a derogatory term for Asian-Americans. The case involves a very small corner of federal law, but implicates the broader logic of political correctness, which is that speech should be silenced for the greater good if there is a chance that someone, somewhere might be offended by it.
As it happens, The Slants is an Asian-American band that seeks to “reclaim” and “take ownership” of anti-Asian stereotypes (it has released albums called The Yellow Album and Slanted Eyes, Slanted Hearts). This didn’t matter to the trademark office any more than it presumably would to the dean of students at the average liberal-arts college. The Slants appealed the initial rejection to the trademark office, got rebuffed again and then rightly made a federal case of it. The litigation hinged on a provision of federal trademark law referred to as the “disparagement clause.” This clause forbids registration for any trademark “which may disparage … persons, living or dead, institutions, beliefs, or national symbols, or bring them into contempt or disrepute.” Taken literally, this provision would forbid the disparagement of the KKK, an institution; or Benito Mussolini, a person who is dead; or Vladimir Putin, a person who is living. The trademark office interprets the clause with all the wisdom you’d expect of a federal bureaucracy.
“As it happens, The Slants is an Asian-American band that seeks to “reclaim” and “take ownership” of anti-Asian stereotypes (it has released albums called The Yellow Album and Slanted Eyes, Slanted Hearts). This didn’t matter to the trademark office any more than it presumably would to the dean of students at the average liberal-arts college. The Slants appealed the initial rejection to the trademark office, got rebuffed again and then rightly made a federal case of it. The litigation hinged on a provision of federal trademark law referred to as the ‘disparagement clause.’ This clause forbids registration for any trademark “which may disparage … persons, living or dead, institutions, beliefs, or national symbols, or bring them into contempt or disrepute.” Taken literally, this provision would forbid the disparagement of the KKK, an institution; or Benito Mussolini, a person who is dead; or Vladimir Putin, a person who is living.
“The trademark office interprets the clause with all the wisdom you’d expect of a federal bureaucracy. . . ”
Mark Levin (06-20- 17)
“On Tuesday’s Mark Levin show, Bernie Sanders is a radical Marxist who believes in violence. Sanders fancies himself a revolutionary and touts an old form of centralized tyranny, but what he preaches is a form of societal perversion and requires a powerful centralized police state. Has Sanders spoke out against his own base for creating violence? No. He is the most irresponsible politician in America and is the most aggressive politician when it comes to overturning the society.
“In addition, capitalism is the best system of wealth creation which socialists and Marxists like Sanders continue to attack. In order to be economically “equal”, you have to destroy the human spirit, private property rights and other things. You would think Sanders would really talk about Venezuela, but he doesn’t’. In Venezuela you have very few rich and many poor. You have the complete destruction of the civil society and economy, because socialism and Sander’s propaganda doesn’t work. Also, Sanders claims that what the Republicans are doing to Obamacare will kill thousands of people. Claims like this push people to the edge. To add, when Republicans buy into socialism they give it aid and comfort. They were given control of Congress yet nothing they said they would do has been done.
“Later, Sen Ted Cruz calls in to talk about free speech on college campuses. Free speech used to be an accepted proposition at colleges and universities. Now faculty and administrators at so many colleges are afraid of disagreement and debate. Now they use their power to eliminate dissent.
Jonathan Last, Weekly Standard: “CAMILLE PAGLIA: On Trump, Democrats, Transgenderism, and Islamist Terror”
She was also interviewed by Hannity last nite – startling! I think I’m in love!
“. . . Like many others, I initially did not take Donald Trump’s candidacy seriously. I dismissed him as a ‘carnival barker’ in my Salon column and assumed his entire political operation was a publicity stunt that he would soon tire of. However, Trump steadily gained momentum because of the startling incompetence and mediocrity of his GOP opponents. What seems forgotten is that everyone, including the Hillary Clinton campaign, thought that Marco Rubio would be the Republican nominee. The moment was ideal for a Latino candidate with national appeal who could challenge the Democratic hold on Florida.
Thus Rubio’s primary-run flame-out was a spectacular embarrassment. Under TV’s unsparing camera eye, he looked like a shallow, dithery adolescent, utterly unprepared to be commander-in-chief in an era of terrorism. Trump’s frankly arrogant self-confidence spooked and crushed Rubio—it was a total fiasco. Ben Carson, meanwhile, with his professorial deep-think and spiritualistic eye-closing, often seemed to be beaming himself to another galaxy. With every debate, Ted Cruz, despite his avid national following, accumulated more and more detractors, repelled by his brittle self-dramatizations and lugubrious megalomania.
There were two genial, moderate Mid-Western governors who could have wrested the nomination from Trump and performed strongly versus Hillary in the general—Ohio’s John Kasich and Wisconsin’s Scott Walker. But they blew it because of their personal limitations: On television, Kasich came across as a clumsy, lumbering blowhard while Walker shrank into a nervous, timid mouse with a frozen Pee-wee Herman smile.
The point here is that Donald Trump won the nomination fair and square against a host of serious, experienced opponents who simply failed to connect with a majority of GOP primary voters. However, there were too many unknowns about Trump, who had never held elective office and whose randy history in the shadowy demimonde of casinos and beauty pageants laid him open to a cascade of feverish accusations and innuendos from the ever-churning gnomes of the cash-propelled Clinton propaganda machine. In actuality, the sexism allegations about Trump were relatively few and minor, compared to the long list of lurid claims about the predatory Bill Clinton.
My position continues to be that Hillary, with her supercilious, Marie Antoinette-style entitlement, was a disastrously wrong candidate for 2016 and that she secured the nomination only through overt chicanery by the Democratic National Committee, assisted by a corrupt national media who, for over a year, imposed a virtual blackout on potential primary rivals. Bernie Sanders had the populist passion, economic message, government record, and personal warmth to counter Trump. It was Sanders, for example, who addressed the crisis of crippling student debt, an issue that other candidates (including Hillary) then took up. Despite his history of embarrassing gaffes, the affable, plain-spoken Joe Biden, in my view, could also have defeated Trump, but he was blocked from running at literally the last moment by President Barack Obama, for reasons that the major media refused to explore.
After Trump’s victory (for which there were abundant signs in the preceding months), both the Democratic party and the big-city media urgently needed to do a scathingly honest self-analysis, because the election results plainly demonstrated that Trump was speaking to vital concerns (jobs, immigration, and terrorism among them) for which the Democrats had few concrete solutions. Indeed, throughout the campaign, too many leading Democratic politicians were preoccupied with domestic issues and acted strangely uninterested in international affairs. Among the electorate, the most fervid Hillary acolytes (especially young and middle-aged women and assorted show biz celebs) seemed obtusely indifferent to her tepid performance as Secretary of State, during which she doggedly piled up air miles while accomplishing virtually nothing except the destabilization of North Africa.
“Had Hillary won, everyone would have expected disappointed Trump voters to show a modicum of respect for the electoral results as well as for the historic ceremony of the inauguration, during which former combatants momentarily unite to pay homage to the peaceful transition of power in our democracy. But that was not the reaction of a vast cadre of Democrats shocked by Trump’s win. In an abject failure of leadership that may be one of the most disgraceful episodes in the history of the modern Democratic party, Chuck Schumer, who had risen to become the Senate Democratic leader after the retirement of Harry Reid, asserted absolutely no moral authority as the party spun out of control in a nationwide orgy of rage and spite. Nor were there statesmanlike words of caution and restraint from two seasoned politicians whom I have admired for decades and believe should have run for president long ago—Senator Dianne Feinstein and Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi. How do Democrats imagine they can ever expand their electoral support if they go on and on in this self-destructive way, impugning half the nation as vile racists and homophobes? . . .”