Goldman Sachs? #Hillary2016? @TedCruz? #MGSP??? – Today The World Ends If Sarah Palin Endorses @RealDonaldTrump!!!

Update: Here we go: Palin to endorse Trump. It’s the Apocalypse!!! Not since David Bowie won the Melody Maker poll for top artist has there been such glee and envy.

Jeb Bush gets Lindseed Lohan, er Lindseed Graham, er, Lindsey Graham from South Carolina to endorse him and bring his dozen supporters into the fold. Trump gets Palin. Sarah Palin. Mama Grizzly.

Think Sarah Palin in Iowa with Trump is not important? Get a grip. This is monumental. For a short while there Trump trailed Cruz in Iowa. Then Trump began his Cruz bruise. Cruz went down like a hooker in the park.

Today Trump does two things. Once again he demonstrates his campaign is smart, swift, and prepared – the best of all campaigns. For a while Trump said he had endorsements he would unroll, today Trump unrolled which proves this was well planned. Today Trump stomped on Cruz with Sarah Palin’s high heels.

Trump also proved, once again, in a humongous way, that he is a master Big Media manipulator able to make Big Media dance to his tune, not the other way around. Trump controls the narrative and not the Obama Party the Republican Party nor the Big Media party can wrest that power from him. Brilliant! Trumptastic!

There will be those that try to skunk this endorsement. But Sarah Palin still commands loyalty from many and her past endorsements have helped those she blessed. And please do notice that no other endorsement has garnered this much attention this election season. And what great timing!

Still think Sarah Palin’s endorsement is a blah? Still think that “yeah, this might secure Trump Iowa, but so what?” Well, think again.

If Sarah Palin today secures an Iowa victory for Donald J. Trump in effect today is the day Donald J. Trump becomes the de facto Republican nominee for president. Still not impressed?

If Donald J. Trump wins Iowa, he wins New Hampshire, and Nevada, and South Carolina, and Super Tuesday, and Florida and the nomination and with it the hostile takeover of the loser GOP is complete.

Still not impressed? If Donald J. Trump wins Iowa and the nomination Hillary still wins right? Wrong. Trump wins the nomination as fast and furious as we think, this does not bode well for Hillary2016. Why? Did you see the latest poll from New Hampshire with Bernie Sanders at 60% against Hillary at 33%?

Picture: Trump wins Iowa and all the early states and almost immediately wins the GOP nomination officially. Hillary manages to lose Iowa and New Hampshire and as the New York Times writes today, has a long slog to maybe eventually get the nomination that Barack Obama intends to deny her. Now do you see why today is a monumental day?

This might be the day that Trump won the White House.


Trump: Please join me tomorrow in Iowa for a major announcement featuring a special guest. Tomorrow is today and today the world ends!

Today we expected to write a smart little thing about the destruction of Ted Cruz via the DemDebate this past Sunday. Consider, at the Dem Debate Bernie Sanders attacked Hillary Clinton for the hundreds of thousands of dollars in speaking fees Hillary was paid by Goldman Sachs.

Before Sunday the Goldman Sachs attack spear was thrown against Ted Cruz at the GOP Debate. At the GOP Debate Donald Trump schlonged Cruz because of the million dollar loan obtained from Goldman Sachs by Mr. and Mrs. Cruz – so that Ted could fund his senate campaign. The additional crouton in this Goldman Sachs soup was the fact that Ted Cruz’s wife Heidi Cruz made her living strolling the halls of Goldman Sachs for pay. It didn’t take long before some nasty wags tongued out the epithet/cry “Heidi Ho”. For shame!

The very smart Heidi Cruz deserves respect even if she has, well, um, New York Values. She’s a smart woman, investment manager, but when did that stop anyone from smearing a talented smart woman?

Her background in finance has proved useful: Quite at ease asking for large sums of money, Mrs. Cruz makes as many as 10 calls a day seeking the maximum contribution couples can make to the campaign.

“The $10,800 contributions is my lane,” she said.

Inside the campaign, Mrs. Cruz has built a model that seems lifted from Wall Street, with donors labeled “investors” who are privy to “quarterly investor meetings” to discuss the “product.”

She also helped recruit an important fund-raiser, Lila Ontiveros, after Ms. Ontiveros left Goldman Sachs.

At times, the dual role of Goldman executive and political spouse has attracted attention, tugging the firm’s name into contentious political debates. For example, when Mr. Cruz helped cause a government shutdown over President Obama’s health care law, Mr. Cruz was pressed into acknowledging that he was covered by his wife’s Goldman plan, valued at more than $20,000 a year.

And this month, Mr. Cruz said his 2012 Senate campaign had failed to properly disclose large loans from Goldman and Citibank, muddying the couple’s tale of having poured their life savings into the race.

Last spring, Mrs. Cruz took an unpaid leave of absence from Goldman, immediately focusing on fund-raising for the campaign.

As Darth Vader once said, “impressive, most impressive.” An incredibly talented woman with the grandest of commercial New York Values.

Ours was to be an excruciatingly proper discussion of how Hillary Clinton’s Goldman Sachs connections both helped and hurt her and that Ted Cruz and Heidi Cruz were about to experience a proctology examination the likes of which Hillary Clinton has endured for many a day.

But Darn That Trump.

Our explorations of the designer halls of Goldman Sachs, the art collection of same, has now been eclipsed by the advanced firepower of the Donald Trump death-star. In other words, Donald Trump has once again seized control of the news cycle, with what might or might not be an earth shattering announcement or maybe just a run of the mill, for Trump, endorsement. It started innocently enough:

Join me on Tuesday, January 19th at the Iowa State University Hansen Agricultural Student Learning Center in Ames, Iowa! I will have a major announcement and a very special guest in attendance. You will not want to miss this rally!

M.Joseph Sheppard, a smart politics watcher, a master tweeter and website owner, as well as long time Sarah Palin supporter/observer got things a blazing:

Is Palin Trump’s Mystery Guest? What Is Known So Far

I would of course caution that all this is speculation but there are some major commentators who have given a degree of credence to the concept-we shall see. In the meantime;

FreeRepublic has a feature up which links to a private jet that left Anchorage Alaska at 11;14 a.m. Alaska time and arrived in Des Moines today.

There is a lot of speculation on the site that Governor Palin might have been on board.

Hells Bells, we assumed the mystery date was Mike Huckabee. It would be the smart move. Huck has no chance of winning. Dislikes Cruz. Wants to at least influence the selection of the GOP nominee. Is tired of the second string kiddie table debate. So Huckabee it is, we thought. But we were never any good at Mystery Date (which we have only played in our imagination anyway).

Open the door for your Mystery Date, sigh.

So who will it be? Huckabee? Falwell Jr.? who says great things about Trump but denies he is the Mystery Date?

Or Grizzly Mama? We don’t know, we would say we can hold our breath until it happens, but darn it, we wanna play. We wanna win, Mystery Date.

The clues came hot and heavy. First the private jet. The aircraft company. Clues from Tulsa to Ames. Obligatory pictures of Trump and Palin together at the pizza summit. Big Media Trump/Palin hater Mark Halperin with gasoline for the fire: Where is Sarah Palin???

Trump hater Guy Benson reached for the liquor bottle – bourbon, which proves you should never drink something stronger than you are. Hannity watchers weighed in. Maybe the Mystery Date is just “big” not “yuge”. The pro-Ted Cruz Steve Deace made some claims about the Mystery Date but when those claims fell through he declared Pretty much everybody I know now believes Trump’s special guest in Iowa tomorrow night is now going to be Sarah Palin. Expectations setting or preparation for a Vodka binge?

This could be Mama Grizzly Sarah Palin getting back at Cruz lover Glenn Beck who has insulted both her and Trump. Or it could be MGSP putting the Cruz back in the bottle which she helped uncork when she endorsed him and made him a star. Or it could be MGSP does not like Goldman Sachs. Or maybe MGSP wants to nuke Ted Cruz for other reasons cause her endorsement would nuke Teddy boy. Or it could be MGSP really really liked that pizza place Donald J. Trump took her to when he was her Mystery Date.

If Grizzly Mama Sarah Palin is Donald J. Trump’s Mystery Date, the world will end. Twitter will melt. The Sun will be blotted out from the sky.

We’ll know at 3:00 p.m. Goldman Sachs time; 5:00 p.m. Iowa time.


179 thoughts on “Goldman Sachs? #Hillary2016? @TedCruz? #MGSP??? – Today The World Ends If Sarah Palin Endorses @RealDonaldTrump!!!

  1. If Sarah Palin is the mystery guest, then that will certainly force the right wing nutjobs at Breitbart to decide whether to continue to support Cruz and go against Tea Party Mama Grizzly or to trust in her judgement about Trump.

  2. They’re beginning to get it, slowly, slowly:

    The base doesn’t need the “New York values” dog whistle Cruz is blowing in its direction. The base is politically and ideologically literate. Which means, maybe, Cruz and everybody else have had it entirely backwards. The Trump voter is a challenge to the Republican base as we’ve understood it since the Reagan era, not a member of it. Indeed, the Trump voter may represent a potentially new Republican base—and one that embraces Trump’s version of “New York values.”

    Those values aren’t the ones Woody Allen was teasing. Nor are they the values of 9/11. They are

    Donald Trump is the apotheosis of the caricature—he’s the zillionaire with the guts to say what the average Joe says, the guy in the $10,000 suit who prefers hot dogs to caviar and doesn’t like losers or cripples or captured soldiers, the world leader with the outerborough accent who loves a winner even if the winner is a monstrous dictator. Jeb Bush released a commercial openly calling Trump a jerk. Like Cruz, Bush seems to have misread the Trump appeal. An ad like that is an ad for Trump. A great many people in America in 2016 appear to think that an out-and-out, unapologetic jerk from the Big Apple is just what this country needs. After all, as the song says, if he can make it there, he’ll make it anywhere.

  3. Tony Stark, we can’t believe it is MGSP. Of course, it would be just like Trump to throw this nuke in Iowa against Cruz.

    If it is MGSP as the endorser, then Donald Trump will win Iowa without a doubt. We think the Goldman Sachs story and the holding company story as well as the natural born citizen stuff has hurt Cruz sufficiently for Trump to win Iowa. These combination blows have already secured Trump the win in Iowa.

    But if Sarah Palin campaigns in Iowa with Trump it could be a blowout win. Trump could go to the last debate before Iowa with the Mama Grizzly by his side and Goldman Sachs to schlong Cruz with.

  4. I wonder if guest star and announcement are the same thing (appearing with him would basically be an endorsement, anyway)…. or if there is a guest star and a totally different announcement….?

  5. I think it’s so funny how Trump is ridiculous, not a serious candidate, going to be crushed, has no idea what he is talking about, etc…. and yet all the haters can’t get enough of him, they’re hanging on his every word and move lol

  6. from last thread, because I am really curious how others see this

    January 19, 2016 at 1:44 am

    Betty, indigo – you both mentioned that you think Hillary is being threatened in some way to act this way, that 2008 was the real Hillary. I’m really curious what you think about what I am wondering in my comment at
    January 19, 2016 at 12:48 am

    In other words, if it is true (and I have wondered myself), why would it change once she is elected? (ie, why would she be allowed to become Hillary 2008 again?)

  7. Tony Stark, the ones to watch will be Mark Levin and Glenn Beck. Mark Levin will be a good weather vane as he has been supportive of Trump but very supportive of Cruz.

    Glenn Beck will be fun to watch because he will have to be hospitalized. Beck has been furious with Palin for some crazy reason and Beck also hates Trump even more than Hillary. If Palin endorses Trump the suicide hotline better expect calls from a frantic Beck. Beck will cry, scream, drink, inject opiates, denounce God, denounce all that is holy, chew carpets, drive the microphone into his ears to blow out his brains. Beck will not be happy.

  8. the world leader with the outerborough accent

    I know Brooklyn, Queens, etc are boroughs. And the Bronx, I know that has quite the accent for sure. Does outerborough mean upstate…? Similar to the midwestern accent most national newscasters seem to have?

  9. Beck will cry, scream, drink, inject opiates, denounce God, denounce all that is holy, chew carpets, drive the microphone into his ears to blow out his brains.

    lol good thing he no longer has a Fox tv show, but a radio show instead

    I used to watch him sometimes a long time ago because he pointed out things about Obama (not always easy to find in the early era of the Messiah). Then he became reborn or something and everything was religious and he went crazy I think, and I stopped watching long before he got kicked off Fox (or whatever happened).

  10. Lorac, many consider the borough of Manhattan to be New York City. The outer boroughs are Staten Island, Bronx, Brooklyn, Queens. They are all part of New York City but Manhattan is the place people think of as New York. Brooklyn is a world all its own and has its own worldwide brand (we hope to see the new film Brooklyn).

    Trump is a Queens native. Manhattanites can be quite snooty about the denizens of the outer boroughs. That has motivated Trump all his life. It’s the story of the little boy looking out his window at the big city and saying “someday I’m gonna make it there” only to be snubbed and mocked when he tries to make it.

  11. admin, I hope someday (even if a long time from now), you’ll share with us your opinion of what is up with Hillary.

  12. BTW, Hillary2016 can’t be happy about this either. The worst case scenario for Hillary2016 is a big Trump win in Iowa and New Hampshire and a Hillary2016 loss in both.

    To us this worst case scenario is what is likely going to happen. Trump will then march on to almost immediate run-the-table victory and Hillary2016 will have a drawn out battle in state after state with more and more candidates getting in the race (Biden, Warren).

  13. admin – oh, that makes sense, it puts a lot into perspective, thanks!

    I was born in Brooklyn (left when I was 3, so I don’t remember it). But my dad always said,”never forget where you came from”, “never forget you’re from Brooklyn”. Obviously since my parents were born and raised there (and eligible to run for president, Mr. Cruz) that meant more to them than to me. But my understanding is that it was a poor place, but people all worked, and they kept their little areas clean and neat (outside their brownstones). That was when my parents were there. Then I think it became a dangerous ghetto, and now it’s apparently an artsy, hip place.

    I saw all that because yes!, you should see Brooklyn. I took my mom, who has a lot of Irish in her. And since the film is set in the 50s, she was living there then. It’s a good movie. The young Irish woman who is the lead character has an Italian boyfriend. My mom told me after the movie that there were more Italian boys than Irish ones. I thought the boyfriend was really cute and sweet. That’s all I’ll say. You should see it 🙂 I have no idea if it will win any awards, but it was very enjoyable.

  14. I love that Trump wears cuff links. My father always wore them. I think they’re really classy.

    I bet after Trump wins, cuff links will become more popular. And there will be new work for clothing people, because they’ll need to make lots of shirts that take cuff links!

  15. I agree it will probably be Palin doing the endorsing. But with all the cross-over Democrat voter fear, horror and loathing going on about Trump a real “coupe da gracie” would be a well known Democrat endorsing him like a labor president or a big Blue Dog now retired. Palin will support whoever is eventually the Republican nominee but a moderate kicked out of the Democratic party would not. The “pure” conservative party of the highly credentialed, open borders, low wages, corporate welfare, bank bailouts, Goldman Saks, and John Roberts is under threat by a Jacksonian mob of the pissed off. Cruz the Pure can’t draw crossover voters and swing purple states. None of the others can either. That is part and parcel of the hostile takeover of the Republican Party.

  16. Reading about Jacksonians is interesting. “Virtually everything about progressive politics today is about liquidating the Jacksonian influence in American life. From immigration policy, touted as ending the era when American whites were the population of the United States, to gun policy and to regulatory policy, President Obama and his coalition aim to crush what Jacksonians love, empower what they fear, and exalt what they hate.”

  17. lorac – when I look back on 2008 the convention seemed to be a turning point. I think they BOTH had weapons of mass destruction on each other. I think this is when the SoS position was negotiated and secured. I think she was too clever by half to do that … she probably thought she could better set her self up for 2016. I dont think she saw it coming out that Barry / TPTB would destroy her chances WITH the SoS job and his machinations and terrible policies.
    I hope the thought of a Trump presidency is Barry’s worst nightmare. At this point I will vote for whomever will expose him for the treacherous traitorous scum that he is.
    Unfortunately – I know longer believe she is the one to do that. She will not expose him on anything. This is why IMHO she is singing his praises…. to prove her loyalty to those people … so she will get the nomination. For all we know – and I suspect anyways …. that we don’t have free elections and the fix is in for who ever gets the Dem nomination.
    IF by some chance Trump prevails and ibecomes President Trump I will be watching with a jaded cynical eye. The criminals have been holding their own in this administration…..maybe longer.
    He better come in knock heads and clean up the mess. Or he won’t. And I will see him as just as corrupt as them.

  18. This is a smoking hot post and off admin’s cuff to boot as another had been planned for.
    Cuff links?
    None of the above?

  19. holdem –

    but… but… if it’s “none of the above” – yegads, that means SLEEVELESS,and the sleeveless O-wife needs to go to to Saudi Arabia or wherever they just bought another mansion costing more than they have (legitimately) earned….

  20. indigo – so you’re thinking more that this was sort of her plan (but she didn’t realize how badly O could/would screw her) – but do you also think someone may be forcing her to do this….? I remembered that two people said that in the last thread and I thought you were one (but I could be mistaken).

    Because I’m just trying to think it through – that if she *is* being blackmailed in some way, it just doesn’t seem that it would necessarily end when she got elected…

  21. Yes- I did I think she is being forced somewhat… but that she actually does want the Presidency. I don’t think once you have had a dream/ambition for this long it just goes away. I just think they are completely fucking with her. I don’t know if their endgame is to deny her the nomination or the Presidency or both.

    Or worse – the Presidency on their terms.

    But no one can deny that at this point she is touting Obama III… and once in they would hold her to that.

  22. lorac
    January 19, 2016 at 3:47 am

    from last thread, because I am really curious how others see this

    I wouldn’t, couldn’t change, but I don’t think she will be allowed to get that far. I feel more and more that the someone who is holding the knife hates her only want her humiliated and Bill’s legacy destroyed.

    And a minute later, I think what I just wrote is all BS – who knows?

  23. Brilliant admin.

    My clairvoyant friend has never liked Ted, and has been telling me that he is a false flag of the globalists. How is it, she asks, that a Princeton/Harvard boy, with a wife who is a big shot at Goldman, and as we now know accepted their financing, but forgot to mention it, or his dual citizenship, be the real deal. Like Rubio, he rides the tea party wave, but others are pulling his strings. The fact that he received 15 million in contributions suggests that he is not at all what he seems, and what he asks us to believe. The New York Times has perverse motives in digging this up–they are the enemy of the American people, unless the word enemy has lost all meaning. We know who they are, what they are, and what they are doing. Our motive is very different. We want to know who will save the country from the predations of globalists, and for the same reason you are unlikely to find a virgin in a whore house, a man who takes his money from globalists privately, while disparaging them publicly, but manages to vote quietly for TPP is not someone who can be trusted.

  24. Betty
    January 19, 2016 at 9:44 am
    Lincoln said if you want to test a man’s character, give him power.

    The corollary would be this:

    They all look good on paper. But if you want to know who they really are, give them power.

    Woman4Power asked who do you trust?

    The gale force winds in politics can throw any landlubber from starboard to port, and from bow to stern, or even overboard.

    You cannot trust a politician who is thrust in all directions in response to those forces, because he or she will go overboard, and take you with them.

    You can, however, trust a politician who has a set of defined values, and does not bend when the gale winds hit. This is not stubborness. It is stability. It is someone who you can count on when the chips are down.

    If you believe Hillary meets that test, then you should trust her. But to conjure up the idea that some unnamed agent who is holding a knife at her throat is fiction. Try to benign explanation first.

    She is facing the possibility of an indictment, is not connecting with the progressive base, is playing the race card, and hoping it will all work out. In so doing, she is limiting the options she will have when it comes to governing, assuming she gets there.

  25. Mormaer
    January 19, 2016 at 5:41 am
    In my fantasy world, I would like it to be Jim Hoffa.

    But that is magic thinking on my part.

  26. Hillary’s problem, apart from the indictment, which will materialize within 60 days according to former US attorney Joseph DeGenoa , is the blue dogs have been kicked out of the party, and are wandering about in their own diaspora. What is left is a grievance obsessed black group and a group of white leftists who are also grievance obsessed. Jim Webb tried to appeal with a blue dog agenda to those groups and you can see where that got him. Nowhere. Therefore, she is forced to do what she is doing–which is selling her soul to two of the worst factions in society—the aggrieved America hating faction. And it does not smell good. But what option is there? To appeal to their better angels? Like I said, Webb tried that, so the proposition has been tested. She cannot compete with Bernie as a leftist. Her wall street connections belie that premise. Her best hope is to wrap herself around Obama, who is catnip to blacks, even though he is not one of them, and has given them a good fucking. That is why she is going Obama III, when the country does not want that. It gets back to that old irrational and insane paradigm. Obama is both. She is not. She is behaving rationally. But if she believes she can cast off that mantle when she wins the primary and run as a moderate in the general election, or will have the freedom to govern as a moderate if she wins, then she is most definitely insane. Our challenge as Hillary supporters past and/or present is to make sure we do not fall into the trap of believing that sort of transformation is possible.

  27. I misstated the situation as it relates to Joe DeGenoa.

    “What I meant to say” as Obama minions do when he says something stupid, and had no idea what he meant

    Joe is predicting that the FBI investigation will be completed within that time frame, and Obama’s robotic Attorney General will be forced to decide whether to refer the matter to a grand jury, or to give her a pass like they did with Lois Lerner. If Lynch the investigation finds just cause to indict for breach of security, or for the CGI connection, then career people in the FBI will resign in protest. Is he being partisan or factual? Is he speculating or does he know? In the hothouse of Washington and the dying days of the most corrupt and ineffectual administration in American history, and withe wild card of Donald Trump in the picture, it is too early to tell.

  28. Correction: if the investigation finds just cause to indict for breach of security, or for the CGI connection, AND LYNCH DOES NOT INDICT, then career people in the FBI will resign in protest.

  29. We’ll know at 3:00 p.m. Goldman Sachs time; 5:00 p.m. Iowa time.
    Admin. with all due respect, Goldie Sax marches to Greenwich Marine Time.

    When you are a globalist, and you preside over an empire on which the sun never sets, that is the clock you go by. To pin the passage of time to a given venue, like east coast time, would be nationalist, and could, in the right situation lead to riots in countries whose time frame was not considered. If that occurs, then with Sydney Blumenthall’s permission, we could blame it on a video, and many of those populations are known to be ignorant and uninformed, but I would not bet on it.

  30. In sum, what I am saying is when it comes to Hillary it is not a question of whether you like the Obama aganda, but whether you can live with the Obama agenda, and whether it is better than the alternative. I know where I stand on that issue, but others will decide for themselves.

  31. Admin: I do see your point. If Sara endorses Donald, after having previously supported Cruz, then that would cause Iowa voters who support Ted on account of her to abandon their own support and embrace Donald. Equally important would be how she explains her decision to switch. It will have to be something like Ted is great but Donald is better and here is why.

  32. Supreme Court and immigration. Lots of signals and all of them confusing. Combine the reports and we just have to wait because for all the talk we don’t know if the court will actually do what most people say, which is take the case in April. We’ll try to make some sense of all this so we will highlight what we think has to be considered most:

    Supreme Court to rule on Obama immigration orders

    The justices also added a question on whether Obama’s action violated the Constitutional provision that he ‘take care that the Laws be faithfully executed.’

    The Supreme Court announced Tuesday that it will take up a case challenging the legality of President Barack Obama’s executive actions aimed at granting quasi-legal status and work permits to up to five million people who entered the U.S. illegally as children or who have children who are American citizens.

    The high court’s widely-expected move gives Obama a chance to revive a key legacy item that has been in limbo for nearly a year, since a federal judge in Texas issued an order halting immigration moves the president announced just after the 2014 midterm elections.

    The justices are expected to hear arguments on the issue in April and to hand down a ruling by the end of June. Illegal immigration has already been a hot topic in the presidential contest, but the high-profile attention brought on by the Supreme Court fight could amp up the debate even further as the campaign plays out this spring and summer.

    If the court rules in Obama’s favor, his administration will have a relatively short, seven-month window to try to roll out the expanded Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program and the new initiative called Deferred Action for Parents of Americans. While advocacy groups are eager to have illegal immigrants apply for the programs, there are questions about how many will do so if they’re debuted or expanded so close to the end of Obama’s presidency.

    The calculation of whether to apply may depend, in part, on the state of the presidential race and whether whoever is atop the field seems likely to continue Obama’s policies. Since the moves are executive actions, they could be quickly rescinded and most of the major Republican candidates have pledged to do just that.

    The lawsuit the justices agreed to hear was brought by Texas and 25 other states claiming they would be harmed by Obama’s executive actions. [snip]

    The Supreme Court agreed Tuesday to entertain four legal questions raised by Obama’s immigration action.

    Three of the questions were laid out by the Justice Department in the petition asking the justices to take up the case: whether states create legal standing to challenge the deferred actions grants by providing benefits to such immigrants, whether the actions Obama ordered in 2014 were arbitrary and capricious under federal law, and whether the administration was obliged to go through a formal notice-and-comment period before proceeding with its plan.

    The fourth question, added by the justices in their Tuesday order, is whether Obama’s actions violated the Constitutional provision requiring him to “take care that the Laws be faithfully executed”—in essence, whether existing law bars the president from making the kinds of enforcement changes he sought to make.

    The 26 states backing the lawsuit the court will take up argue that Obama did breach his duty to “take care” that the laws are enforced and that his actions amounted to a power grab that violated “the Constitution’s separation of powers more generally.”

    While those states urged the Supreme Court not to take the case and to let the lower court rulings stand, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said the high court’s move reflected the important roles of the three branches of government.

    “In deciding to hear this case, the Supreme Court recognizes the importance of the separation of powers,” Paxton said in a statement. “As federal courts have already ruled three times, there are limits to the President’s authority, and those limits enacted by Congress were exceeded when the President unilaterally sought to grant ‘lawful presence’ to more than 4 million unauthorized aliens who are in this country unlawfully. The Court should affirm what President Obama said himself on more than 20 occasions: that he cannot unilaterally rewrite congressional laws and circumvent the people’s representatives.”

    That’s the first bite of information. We’ll have more in the next comment. But notice that the Justices added a question – we believe this is key.

  33. More to follow up on our previous comment on Supreme Court and immigration:

    Immigration policy: Review and decision this Term

    The Obama administration’s sweeping change of deportation policy for undocumented immigrants will get a thorough review by the Supreme Court, including the question of whether it violates the Constitution, the Court announced Tuesday. The case of United States v. Texas will be set for argument in April, making it almost certain that there will be a final ruling by the end of June — in the midst of a presidential election campaign in which immigration is a major issue. [snip]

    A rather unusual aspect of the case was that, although the lower courts had not decided a constitutional question the states had raised, the Justices added that question on their own. It is whether the policy violates the constitutional clause that requires the president to “take care” that the laws passed by Congress are faithfully executed.

    It is rare for the Court to take up an issue that was left undecided in lower courts. The question no doubt was added to assure that all aspects of the states’ challenge be reviewed together.

    In addition to that issue, the case involves whether the states had a legal right to sue, or are barred from doing so under Article III; whether the policy is “arbitrary” and beyond the president’s powers over immigration policy, and whether it is illegal because the government did not seek public reaction to it before adopting it as policy.

    The government got what it wanted with the Court’s agreement to set it for argument during the current Term, but did not get what it wanted in the scope of the Court’s review. Its appeal had raised the “standing” and statutory issues. The states, in replying to the appeal, urged the Court to add the “Take Care Clause” issue. The states believe that the policy contradicts existing laws on deportation, and amounted to the president acting as if he had legislative power. The government opposed expanding the case to include that issue, which, it argued, added nothing to the states’ statutory arguments.

    Before the Court gets to the other questions in the case, it will have to make up its mind on the Article III issue: did the states have a right to sue the president over the way he chose to enforce immigration laws. In order to get over that barrier, the states must convince the Court that at least one of them will suffer a legal injury if the policy goes into effect. Lower courts ruled that Texas would be injured, because of the cost of providing driver’s licenses for those individuals allowed to stay in the country.

    If the Court were to find that the states were barred from suing, that would be the end of the case. If the states prevail on that question, the legal fate of the policy would then be up to the Court. Although the case has not yet gone to a trial, it appeared that the Court was prepared to settle the validity of the program without waiting for further activity in lower courts. [snip]

    The date in April for the Court’s hearing on this case has not yet been set. At this point, the Court is balancing out what to argue in the months of March and April. Not all of the twelve cases granted review last week or Tuesday will necessarily be heard and decided this Term.

    So what do we think is happening? We believe that the conservative majority did not want to take this case this term because it is so politically hot, hot, hot, especially with the hot hot hot Donald Trump thrown in the mix in a presidential year. But, we believe the 4 liberal justices wanted to help Obama and their 4 votes were sufficient to grant review.

    But, the conservative justices countered with their 4 votes (we suspect it is 5 votes in this case) that if the case was forced onto the calendar they wanted a full review and therefore the constitutional question was added.

    This puts things into a quandary for both sides. For conservatives the Chief Justice has been a chickensh*t who wants to keep the court from high profile fights with Obama especially in election years – so they up the ante in order to warn the opposition that their are consequences to putting this on the calendar in an election year.

    For liberals the threat that even chickensh*t Roberts might have had enough of his own cowardice and they might lose really big on the constitutional question which might declare that Obama violated the Constitutional “take care that the laws be faithfully executed”. The liberals have to also be aware that this issue helps Trump Trump Trump.

    To us this suggests that the court might in the end decide to hold off on setting an April date and let things politically take their course outside the courts.

  34. The Wheel Has Come Full Circle

    After the boffo performance by John Harwood, whose suits look like straight jacket, and whole wig keeps slipping off, in the middle of left wing cheap shots at the last Republican debate, the RNC finally did something right and criticized the kangaroo court proceeding. Whereupon they threatened to pull the next debate from NBC. NBC promised to review the situation, and along with its affiliate telemundo to “work in good faith to resolve RNC concerns”. Good faith? NBC would not know good faith if it bit them in the ass. Harwood meanwhile went on babbling about how the questions were fair, and the right wing republicans cannot handle the truth. If you apply the irrational vs. insane test to Harwood, then like Obama, he is both. But then, just to show he is fair, he claimed that how his rich history of moderating these food fights gave him special insight into the challenge the drunken filandering Boehner faced in his tenure as butt boy to Obama. That caused one wag to write back to him all he–Harwood has done is enriched his reputation as a national laughing stock. Ouch that hurts. Must have been some deranged right wing gun toting bitter clinging racist republican who would say something thi nasty about a big media demigod like Harwood. But if that hurt what happened today must have hurt even worse. For the RNC decided by a unanimous vote that despite all this happy horseshit about working with someone to resolve the issue (which is meta talk by a weaker party seeking to convert an acrimous situation which they cannot handle into something they can handle) that NBC is OUT! of the next debate. It will be interesting to see what they say to Harwood about this. On the odds, it will not be an attaboy. Not when it will cost the parent network its reputation and tens of millions of dollars. If we are lucky, they will be excluded from the general election debates, unless they promise to bring a fair journalist to the moderator table like Andrea. The question is will those evil right wing bitter clingers nativists accept her. And that my friends is an imponderable.

  35. The other thing that occurs to me is if the USSC finds that Obama did not violate the Constitutional provision requiring him to “take care that the Laws be faithfully executed,” then the consequence is that they will make life easier for a President Trump to undo all the damage that Obama has wrought and institute his own decrees and executive actions which the left may not agree with. The fourth question is a double edged sword that the left wing judges may really regret in agreeing to take up this case.

  36. Bristol Palin is slamming Ted Cruz for being arrogant
    Bristol says she hopes her mom does endorse Trump
    Link at drudge, sending from my phone
    Maybe someone can post

  37. And because Harwood is irrational and insane (like Obama) he will go right on being defiant, and will learn nothing from this. And we should take note of this, because in the fulsomeness of time it may produce a rule similar to the one Carlo Gambino enacted with respect to heroin: you deal–you die. Only in this case the rule would be if your name is John Harwood, or if you comport yourself like John Harwood then you will get to moderate the next debate on the twelfth of never. This may mean that Harwood will be forced to crawl under a rock or retreat to a safer harbor like the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard which is a retirement home for has beens.

  38. Not to sound too ocd about this but I will always have in my mind a picture of Harwood at a moderating table wearing one of these three button suits with the top button just below the neck. Good style favors one button and a drape look, but with this kind of contraption you look like you are wearing an expensive gunny sack. But that is not the worst of it. The worst part is when you raise your hands like Harwood does to lampoon on of those right wing racist nativist bitter—you get the picture, the suit slide up t his neck and he looks like a sea gull preparing to take off. I only wish he would.

  39. Bristol Palin..who cares?

    I’m sorry, SP lost me when she stepped down from the Governors office in Alaska.

  40. Okay, one more along that line:

    Knock nock

    Whose there

    The president of NBC news

    Yes sir/madam

    Hello Harwood–how are they hanging

    Just fine sir/madam

    That good Harwood, because I have a question for you

    Does the name Brian Williams mean anything to you, and do you know where he is now?


    No. Worse. MSNBC.

  41. gonzotx
    January 19, 2016 at 1:35 pm
    Oh come now ye of little faith

    We all know we can trust John Roberts

  42. bstonesfan
    January 19, 2016 at 1:24 pm
    That Biden/Warren meeting seems to have a lot more significance now.
    Yes it does.

    They would get the left wing kooks with a song.

    But the blacks would be less than enthralled.

    The other name I am hearing is governor moonbeam.

    He has formed a presidential exploratory committee.

    I am referring to Jerry Brown.

    The aging son of Pat Brown.

    A long time stalwart who unlike Jolt’n Joe and Pokahanis has executive experience.

  43. I really haven’t had any doubt about Biden’s intention to run after seeing this headline at BBC a few weeks ago: Biden Regrets Not Decision Not to Run. Was this the plan, the set-up all along? Probably.

    More REALLY BAD news. Glenn Frey of The Eagles has passed away. RIP Glenn. A truly gifted musician. Apologies if this had already been posted. I didn’t see it anywhere.

    One of several songs Frey co-wrote with Don Henley:

  44. Bristol Palin is attacking Cruz for being arrogant? So that must mean that Trump is a humble pie kind of guy and Sarah is endorsing him for that reason. Well in that case, it’s all over…reason enough to vote for the mild and meek Trump. With a yuge endorsement by Bristol and Sarah, who could possibly do otherwise. 🙂

  45. Andrew Jackson, Revenant


    The biggest story in America today is the roaring return of Andrew Jackson’s spirit into the political debate.

    Not since he fought with Nicholas Biddle over the future of the Bank of the United States has Andrew Jackson been this controversial or this central in American political life. Jacksonian populism, the sense of honor-driven egalitarianism and fiery nationalism that drove American politics for many years, has never been hated and reviled as often as it is today, and many American academics and intellectuals (to say nothing of Hollywood icons) are close to demanding that Jacksonian sentiment be redefined as a hate crime.

    For President Barack Obama and his political allies in particular, Jacksonian America is the father of all evils. Jacksonians are who the then Senator had in mind when, in the campaign of 2008, he spoke of the ‘bitter clingers’ holding on to their guns and their Bibles. They are the source of the foreign policy instincts he most deplores, supporting Israel almost reflexively, demanding overwhelming response to terror attacks, agitating for tight immigration controls, resisting diplomacy with Iran and North Korea, supporting Guantanamo, cynical about the UN, skeptical of climate change, and willing to use ‘enhanced interrogation’ against terrorists in arms against the United States.

    He hates their instincts at home, too. It is Jacksonians who, as I wrote in Special Providence back in 2001, see the Second Amendment as the foundation of and security for American freedom. It is Jacksonians who most resent illegal immigration, don’t want to subsidize the urban poor, support aggressive policing and long prison sentences for violent offenders and who are the slowest to ‘evolve’ on issues like gay marriage and transgender rights.

    The hate and the disdain don’t spring from anything as trivial as pique. Historically, Jacksonian America has been the enemy of many of what President Obama, rightly, sees as some of America’s most important advances. Jacksonian sentiment embraces a concept of the United States as a folk community and, over time, that folk community was generally construed as whites only. Lynch law and Jim Crow were manifestations of Jacksonian communalism, and there are few examples of race, religious or ethnic prejudice in which Jacksonian America hasn’t indulged. Jacksonians have come a long way on race, but they will never move far enough and fast enough for liberal opinion; liberals are moving too, and are becoming angrier and more exacting regardless of Jacksonian progress.

    Just as bad, in the view of the President and his allies, Jacksonians don’t have much respect for the educated and the credentialed. Like William F. Buckley, they would rather be governed by the first 100 names in the phonebook than by the Harvard faculty. They loathe the interfering busybodies of the progressive state, believe that government (except for the police and the military) is a necessary evil, think most ‘experts’ and university professors are no smarter or wiser than other people. and feel only contempt for the gender theorists and the social justice warriors of the contemporary classroom.

    Virtually everything about progressive politics today is about liquidating the Jacksonian influence in American life. From immigration policy, touted as ending the era when American whites were the population of the United States, to gun policy and to regulatory policy, President Obama and his coalition aim to crush what Jacksonians love, empower what they fear, and exalt what they hate.
    Jacksonian America is many things; well organized isn’t one of them. Jacksonians are found in both political parties; most are habitually indifferent to national politics, seeing all politicians as equally corrupt, equally useless. Other than the NRA, there are not many national organizations organized around the promotion of a Jacksonian agenda. In the world of think tanks and elite media, the Jacksonian voice is seldom heard and never heeded.

    It is hard for Jacksonians to mobilize politically. Neither party really embraces a Jacksonian agenda. Combining a suspicion of Wall Street, a hatred of the cultural left, a love of middle class entitlement programs, and a fear of free trade, Jacksonian America has problems with both Republican and Democratic agendas. Any Jacksonian political movement will start as a party insurgency, and the Jacksonians will on the whole be less well funded, less experienced and less institutionally powerful than their party opponents. Jacksonians are neither liberal nor conservative in the ways that political elites use those terms; they are radically egalitarian, radically pro-middle class, radically patriotic, radically pro-Social Security. They are not, under normal circumstances, joiners in politics; they are individualists who organize in response to threats, and their individualism goes to their stands on what outsiders sometimes think are the social issues that unite them.

    Many Jacksonians, for example, are not evangelicals and not even Christian at all. While some are strongly anti-abortion, others believe that individual freedom makes abortion nobody’s business but their own. Some stand strongly behind the drug war; many indulge in recreational drugs and some Jacksonians grow or manufacture them, much like the moonshiners who have been evading ‘revenuers’ since the Washington administration.

    There’s another obstacle in the face of a Jacksonian rising: Jacksonians have been hard hit by the changes in the American economy. The secure working class wages that underpinned two generations of rising affluence for the white (and minority) industrial working class have disappeared. That isn’t just about money; the coherence of Jacksonian communities and family life has been seriously impaired. These are the points Charles Murray makes in his harrowing Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960-2010; they have been recently reinforced by studies documenting a holocaust of lower and lower middle class whites.

    These devastating changes, utterly ignored by an upper middle class intellectual and cultural establishment that not so secretly hopes for a demographic change in America that will finally marginalize uncredentialed white people once and for all, make Jacksonians angry and frustrated, but they also make it harder to develop an organized political strategy in response to some of the worst and most dangerous conditions faced by any major American demographic group today. Strong in numbers (though not a majority), awakening to a new sense of anger and endangerment, Jacksonians are still groping for a movement and a program.

    What we are seeing in American politics today is a Jacksonian surge. It is not yet a revolution on the scale of Old Hickory’s movement that transformed American politics for a generation. Such a revolution may not be possible in today’s America, and in any case the current wave of Jacksonian activism and consciousness is still in an early and somewhat incoherent phase. In the past, moderate leaders on the center left and center right alike have found ways to capture Jacksonian energy. FDR was able to steal the demagogic energy of Huey Long; Richard Nixon marginalized George Wallace even as he responded to some of Wallace’s concerns about bussing and crime. (He did not, however, give way to Wallace on the core issue of racial equality.)

    Donald Trump, for now, is serving as a kind of blank screen on which Jacksonians project their hopes. Proposing himself as a strong leader who ‘gets’ America but is above party, Trump appeals to Jacksonian ideas about leadership. Trump’s Jacksonian appeal has left the Republican Party in deep disarray, demonstrating the gulf between contemporary conservative ideology and Jacksonian nationalism. Indeed, one of the reasons that Trump hasn’t been hurt by attacks that highlight his lack of long term commitment to the boilerplate conservative agenda (either in the social or economic conservative variant) is that Jacksonian voters are less dogmatic and less conservative than some of their would-be political representatives care to acknowledge. Jacksonians like Social Security and Medicare much more than most Republican intellectuals, and they like immigration and free trade much less.

    Whatever happens to the Trump candidacy, it now seems clear that Jacksonian America is rousing itself to fight for its identity, its culture and its primacy in a country that it believes it should own. Its cultural values have been traduced, its economic interests disregarded, and its future as the center of gravity of American political life is under attack. Overseas, it sees traditional rivals like Russia, China, North Korea and Iran making headway against a President that it distrusts; more troubling still, in ISIS and jihadi terror it sees the rapid spread of a movement aiming at the mass murder of Americans. Jacksonian America has lost all confidence in the will or the ability of the political establishment to fight the threats it sees abroad and at home. It wants what it has always wanted: to take its future into its own hands.

    The biggest story in American politics today is this: Andrew Jackson is mad as hell, and he’s not going to take it anymore.

  46. The above article explains both the popularity of Trump and the fear/loathing of the left toward him, and their fellow citizens. The left are the ones guilty of hate crimes. Like the old IRA, the left lives on hate.

  47. Some background on Sarah Palin and the fight with Glenn Beck:

    Beck Site Attacks Sarah Palin Over Trig Article, Writer Calls Palin-Supporter ‘Whore’

    Beck’s fall from grace started when his site, The Blaze, falsely attacked James O’Keefe — to the delight of the very people who used to attack Beck. Then Beck, of all things, betrayed the Tea Party in the worst way any conservative could. I thought he’d hit bottom with that. After all, how much lower can you go than selling out to the mainstream media?

    Well, yesterday, what I thought had been a rhetorical question was answered when The Blaze went full Andrew Sullivan, full Politico,full Wonkette, and and attacked Sarah Palin over a situation involving her family.

    The Governor’s sin? Composing what amounts to a touching article about her family’s life with Trig — Todd and Sarah Palin’s youngest son with Down Syndrome.

    To understand how misleading the Blaze attack is, you first have to read what Beck’s writer, a piece of work named Eddie Scarry (more on him below), wrote:

    What’s the first thing that came to mind when you heard that Rick Santorum’s special needs child was in the hospital with pneumonia late last month? I bet all of Mitt Romney’s money it wasn’t Sarah Palin unless you are Sarah Palin. …

    Lots of links in the article from a few years back.

  48. Back to Videos
    Iowa Governor Terry Branstad: Yes, I Want Ted Cruz To Lose
    Posted on January 19, 2016

    IOWA GOVERNOR TERRY BRANSTED: Ted Cruz is ahead right now. What we’re trying to do is educate the people in the state of Iowa. He is the biggest opponent of renewable fuels. He actually introduced a bill in 2013 to immediately eliminate the Renewable Fuel Standard.

    He’s heavily financed by Big Oil.

    So we think once Iowans realize that fact, they might find other things attractive, but I think he could be very damaging to our state, and that is the reason why he hasn’t been invited to this, because he hasn’t supported renewable fuels, and I beleive it would be a big mistake for Iowans to support him.

    And I know he’s ahead in the polls but the only poll that matters is the one they take on caucus night, and I think this event an is important step to helping educate voters in this state.

  49. No surprise here. “Hillary Clinton Readies For A Long Slog Against Bernie Sanders”. How long ago did we say that would happen? And as we wrote last night, a Trump victory in the early states and a Hillary loss in Iowa and NH are the worst case scenario for Hillary2016. Trump will sew up the nomination early, then unite the GOP immediately against Hillary and launches his air war, as Hillary struggles for the nomination against the people behind the tapestries.

  50. More on the supreme court taking up the amnesty matter in the middle of an election.

    What assholes they are.

    I looked to see who agreed to take this one on.

    All it takes is three.

    You should assume it was the idiot self proclaimed wise latina amnesty activist, plus Breyer and Ginzberg.

    And they have gone a step further an added issues which the appellant did not raise.

    The supreme court, which has neither the power of the sword or the purse, but relies on the premise that it is above the political process, dives head long into that empty pool.

    Nothing good can come of it.

  51. Since they are not following the law or the constitution either these days what makes them think they can resolve the issue better than voters in a presidential election. What they are doing is moving to protect the political class in washington. In fact, that is all they are doing these days. It is the legacy of ther Roberts court–except for the honorable three: Scalia, Thomas and Alito.

  52. Admin
    To us this worst case scenario is what is likely going to happen. Trump will then march on to almost immediate run-the-table victory and Hillary2016 will have a drawn out battle in state after state with more and more candidates getting in the race (Biden, Warren)


    How could anyone jump into the primary race after the debates are over? Has anyone gotten away with this in the past, and won the primary?

    If the Dims try to pull off this bs, they will give the win to Trump and rip apart their party. It will be a big war.

  53. Update: Here we go: Palin to endorse Trump. It’s the Apocalypse!!! Not since David Bowie won the Melody Maker poll for top artist has there been such glee and envy.

    Jeb Bush gets Lindseed Lohan, er Lindseed Graham, er, Lindsey Graham from South Carolina to endorse him and bring his dozen supporters into the fold. Trump gets Palin. Sarah Palin. Mama Grizzly.

    Think Sarah Palin in Iowa with Trump is not important? Get a grip. This is monumental. For a short while there Trump trailed Cruz in Iowa. Then Trump began his Cruz bruise. Cruz went down like a hooker in the park.

    Today Trump does two things. Once again he demonstrates his campaign is smart, swift, and prepared – the best of all campaigns. For a while Trump said he had endorsements he would unroll, today Trump unrolled which proves this was well planned. Today Trump stomped on Cruz with Sarah Palin’s high heels.

    Trump also proved, once again, in a humongous way, that he is a master Big Media manipulator able to make Big Media dance to his tune, not the other way around. Trump controls the narrative and not the Obama Party the Republican Party nor the Big Media party can wrest that power from him. Brilliant! Trumptastic!

    There will be those that try to skunk this endorsement. But Sarah Palin still commands loyalty from many and her past endorsements have helped those she blessed. And please do notice that no other endorsement has garnered this much attention this election season. And what great timing!

    Still think Sarah Palin’s endorsement is a blah? Still think that “yeah, this might secure Trump Iowa, but so what?” Well, think again.

    If Sarah Palin today secures an Iowa victory for Donald J. Trump in effect today is the day Donald J. Trump becomes the de facto Republican nominee for president. Still not impressed?

    If Donald J. Trump wins Iowa, he wins New Hampshire, and Nevada, and South Carolina, and Super Tuesday, and Florida and the nomination and with it the hostile takeover of the loser GOP is complete.

    Still not impressed? If Donald J. Trump wins Iowa and the nomination Hillary still wins right? Wrong. Trump wins the nomination as fast and furious as we think, this does not bode well for Hillary2016. Why? Did you see the latest poll from New Hampshire with Bernie Sanders at 60% against Hillary at 33%?

    Picture: Trump wins Iowa and all the early states and almost immediately wins the GOP nomination officially. Hillary manages to lose Iowa and New Hampshire and as the New York Times writes today, has a long slog to maybe eventually get the nomination that Barack Obama intends to deny her. Now do you see why today is a monumental day?

    This might be the day that Trump won the White House.


  54. Shadowfax, you must have missed the Rules and Bylaws Committee story in 2008. Sorry for the snark but, really. Do you think the rules matter in the Obama Party? Do you think Obama will allow Hillary to be his successor? C’mon. Get real.

    NBC today:

    First Read: For Hillary Clinton, It All Comes Down to Iowa

    Take It Easy? Or Take It To The Limit? For Hillary, It All Comes Down To Iowa

    The New York Times writes that Hillary Clinton and her campaign are “preparing for a primary fight that could stretch into late April or early May and require a sprawling field operation in states and territories from Pennsylvania to Guam.” That’s one to way look at it. Here’s another way: If she wins Iowa, Clinton will be set up to separate herself from Bernie Sanders in South Carolina and the March 1 primaries — after which her campaign can start to focus on the general election. But if she loses Iowa, then, yes, a highly competitive Democratic race will extend into April and May. And that’s not all — panicky Democrats will become even more nervous, Joe Biden’s phone will ring, Michael Bloomberg’s phone will ring, too. Make no mistake, Bernie Sanders isn’t going away. But if you assume, one way or another, that Hillary Clinton wins the Democratic nomination, Iowa will determine whether she gets it the easy way or the hard way. So on the Democratic side, no contest will be more impactful than the Iowa caucuses, which are now less than two weeks away.

    Rules are made to be broken in the Obama Dimocrat Party. Once Obama gives the word the super delegates allied with the non-Hillary delegates will do what needs to be done to stop Hillary. We thought everyone knew that since 2008.

    The GOP would break their rules too if that’s what they needed to do to stop Trump. The difference here is that Trump intelligently understands that without him the GOP sinks. Hillary is too stupid to understand that without her the Obama Dimocrats sink so she chases after these kooks like an ugly schoolgirl chases the handsome hunk. It’s embarrassing.

    Rules don’t matter. The people that write the rules matter, sometimes. Hillary hasn’t learned any of this.

  55. To quote Lawrence from the movie “Office Space” (one of my favorite flicks by the way)

    “Fuckin’ A!”

  56. If Joe and or OneDrop jump into the race at this point, I will be among the millions that raise holy Hell.

    Enough is enough.

  57. Shadowfax, they will all be dropping in if Hillary loses Iowa. None of them will be the nominee though. They are pawns. The hand with the knife is still behind the tapestry waiting for the moment to strike. That moment will come at the convention, not earlier.

  58. Gonzotx and SoutherBorn…

    the thing about Bristol and Sarah is it is not about us…or if we like them, etc…it is about the brilliant Trump stategy rolling out in motion right before our eyes…and it is about what Sarah can do for The Donald and what she takes away from Cruz…especially in IOWA…

    and big thank you to Governor Terry Branstad…way to go!!!

    imho…this is just one step in the ‘rolling out’ of Donald’s plans/strategy as he comes in for the (metaphorical) kill…

    I like how this guy rolls…crafty, unpredicable…keeps everyone guessing and is leaps ahead of the pack…

  59. And if this happens to Hillary again, she will have no reason to further defend him on anything, Bill as well.

    This all makes me sick to my stomach.

  60. Watching Trump..throwing our protesters to chants of USA, USA…”get em out of here”. Palin coming up soon.

  61. Admin, please give more details. At the convention, the fraud will have someone that none of the voters voted for become the nominee? Someone like the sleeveless moose or Jarrett? ?

    It would almost be worth it to see voters burn down the Oval office.

  62. btw…for the record…Bristol Palin’s comments stopped Cruz in his tracks and he started walking back all the criticism he was peddeling this morning when he first commented on the possibility of Palin endorsing Trump…

    Bristol was packing and her shot was heard by Cruz and he turned into a pussycat that “loves Sarah Palin and will forever be indepted to her because he would not even have become a Senator without her help”


  63. Live coverage everywhere.

    WATCH LIVE: Palin endorses Trump at Iowa rally

    Former vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin will join Donald Trump at an Ames, Iowa, rally Tuesday to endorse the Republican presidential front-runner.

    “I’m proud to endorse Donald J. Trump for president,” Palin said in a campaign statement hours before the rally.

    Palin, a Tea Party favorite, is Trump’s highest-profile endorsement yet.

    The rally is set to start at 6 p.m. EST. Watch the event live in the video above.

  64. – January 19th, 2016 –
    Sarah Palin’s Endorsement

    Dear wbboei,

    I am proud to receive Sarah Palin’s endorsement. Sarah Palin’s support is a testament to my message to Make America Great Again and I am excited to share this news with you:

    Palin Praises Trump’s Leadership with Endorsement in Iowa

    Best Wishes,

    Donald J. Trump

  65. I have a feeling Obama is behind the dropping Hillary numbers
    absolutely correct…with Jarrett and MO controlling it all from WH.

  66. wbboei
    January 19, 2016 at 10:48 am

    January 19, 2016 at 9:44 am
    Lincoln said if you want to test a man’s character, give him power.

    Yes, I know. And thank you. I have supported Donald Trump, with more and more love and enthusiasm since he announced in June. I have watched every rally. My son and I drove down to Clear Lake Iowa to attend his rally there. We got there so early that we were among the first inside and in the front row. I gave my son one of Donald Trumps books for Christmas and we took it along and got it autographed – he is very generous about signing autographs. If you listened to the Ames rally all the way to the end you hear Donald Trump saying to Sarah – lets go sign some autographs. Right then my son, who came over to watch tonight’s exciting rally with me said – “we gotta go back to Iowa”. I hope they will schedule another one close to the MN border before Feb 1.

    I have convinced 3 neighbors to go caucus with me here in MN and I hope to get more. This election can not be left to chance and I believe it will be won or lost in the primaries. I already have yard signs up.

    But yes, I do regret what Hillary turned out to be and try to explain it away sometimes.

    I walked away from Hillary the day she faced the loved ones of our four fallen in Benghazi and lied. I had a lot invested in her back in 2008, I wanted her to be president then – not now, not ever.

    I guess sometimes I just try to figure out what happened to the person I gave such trust to. I guess I am just looking for an excuse for her. I wish she would just give up and go home and not put her family, and me too I guess, through this.

  67. Europe is erupting in violence about the rape epidemic. This guy wants to lock them all up and stop their immigration:

  68. I did not add that I have pages and pages of your comments in a file I call my ammo file. You have made some great ones !

    Fight them. Not forever. Just today.

    “Then outspake brave Horatius, captain of the gate. To every man upon this earth, death cometh soon or late. And what way for a man to die better, than facing fearful odds, for the ashes of his fathers, and temples of his gods.”

    wbboei –

  69. Shadowfax,

    Admin is right. These guys win by changing the rules. That was the lesson of 2008.

    Hillary is in trouble. That is why we need a Trump card. He may be nasty, but look at the game he is in.

    A lack of power is our dilemma. Every day I pray for the both of them.

    Sister Sarah still rocks!

  70. Seems there were “above classified” emails on Hillary’s server. Makes me wonder if those emails had information pertaining to aspects of the Benghazi that we all wonder about

    These :leaks: last week that FBI was investigating her (and they are) and this week we here about the upper eschelon emails

    It seems the long knifes are getting closer from behind that curtain

    Anyone who wonders why MO and BO and lizzy have been silent (as well as Biden) on Hillary should no longer be surprised

    The coup began a long time ago and Hillary wrapping herself around Obama has been an attempt to get on the good side. NOW they are going to humiliate her and probably send her to prison

  71. Mark Levin sounds bitter.

    Levin said that he doesn’t think Trump getting an endorsement from former Governor Sarah Palin (R-AK) will make much of a difference because voters seem to be “kind of dug in.”

    He then argued, “It’s [the Palin endorsement] being pumped up heavily on the Drudge Report and Breitbart, which have put their finger on the scales, I believe, for Trump. And they have every right to do that. People say I put the finger on the scales for Cruz.”

  72. Folks, the establishment of both parties are now at it with regards to polling. Sanders is suddenly 20% up in New Hampshire and Bush, who hasn’t polled above 5%, is now suddenly polling at 11.5 on Reuters.

    I guess we can now declare for both parties…..”Let the games begin.”

  73. I believe Hillary was set-up from the beginning regarding the personal server use. My guess is Obama gave her the OK knowing he would use it later to bring her down. You can see it all playing out. Obama will never let her ascend to the presidency.

    With the FBI involved and proof of SAP/SAR information transmitted outside a secure server could spell the end in an ugly way. Hillary may very well end up in an orange pantsuit at Martha Stewart’s former playground, Federal Prison Camp, Alderson. It ain’t no Cupcake.

    O is the devil incarnate. You play, you pay. How stupid can you be.

  74. Richard Fernandez and Roger Simon come at the email scandal from different perspectives.

    The scenario presented is that the FBI investigation concludes that serious crimes were committed, refers the matter to the Obama Administration, and the Obama Administration fails to indict—a pocket veto, as opposed to an open declaration not to do so, which would foment a rebellion.

    That is what I believe will happen, namely nothing. In that case, Andrea Mitchell’s assessment of the matter—not a no bill, a no action verdict is correct.

    Richard agrees. He believes that nothing will come of this, because people at Hillary’s level are immune from prosecution over matters of this nature. Such breaches of security, which would send others to federal prison are not pursued. He gives an example which occurred in world war II, where no action was taken but a promising political career was cut short.

    Roger tends to agree. But he believes the notion that elites cannot be prosecuted for crimes that would send ordinary people to jail–like Pollard who was spying for Israel, strike at the notion of equality before the law, which is a convenient fiction by the way, but may be the straw that breaks the camels back. It is one thing for the left to engage in civil disobedience, they do it all the time, and the damage can be absorbed because the center holds. But what if the center decides to throw in the towel–to not play the game any more. We are moving toward that denoument anyway, especially if Donald is denied the nomination or a deeply polarizing figure of one kind or another is installed by the elites. But in Rogers view this could easily become the catalyst, and then the center would not hold. The precedent would be the decline of the Roman empire.

  75. There is no precedent in American history that I can think of. The closest analogy is the Volstead Act, which outlawed liquor. In my town I can think of two old mansions which served as speakeasies during that tumultous era. People of all stripes, but especially the elites, rebelled en masse. And shortly thereafter the law was repealed. But is cases such as this, it is different. Reform movements are theoretically possible, but only if society trusts the reformer. And by the way, reformers can be sociopaths as well, and I can think of one of them in New York City who led the reform movement against police corruption at the turn of the nineteeth century—Goff was his name, and he worked with William Traver Jerome (Churchill’s cousin) to address the crimes of the men in blue, but in Goffs later years as a Supreme Court of New York Judge became the personification of evil. Social reformers have a tendency to go overboard, and to pursue the cause of reform to the point that it destroys other values. It become an obsession reminiscent of the spanish proverb may the cure be not worse than the disease. Maybe it is also the holier than thou aspect. I don’t know.

  76. This may be a political play in the court which comes back to bite them. Immigration is in the top issues of this election cycle and affects the number one, the economy, followed by national security, directly. ANYTHING regarding immigration helps Trump. Another border surge this summer with resultant crime wave and endless spending on them, the EU falling apart because of crazy Merkel setting off chain reactions of horrors, refusals by elites to enforce borders further destabilizing the world economies and more terrorism. Globalists have lost control of world events and some are starting to realize it as they hang on to the idiocy with their fingernails.

    As wbboei says the Supreme Court only needs three votes for a case to be reviewed. They have violated at least two of their internal informal rules to do it. One is there is no disagreement in the lower courts. Both lower courts agree Obama did not have authority to do what he did. There is nothing to review so this is political. Rule two is stay away from political issues especially during an election year. Trump can run on this all year. I think some progressive justices just stepped in it in a knee jerk reaction and did not game it out.

    The progressive DOJ got their court review, during an election year that may make it moot. The public may vote to make it a non-issue with a candidate who reverses Obama anyway. But some justices added the forth issue which is the policy violates the constitutional clause that requires the president to “take care” that the laws passed by Congress are faithfully executed. That is going to be a big stink that the progressive justices did not want to discuss. So they may have outsmarted (really stupid-ed) themselves. Anyway it drags illegal immigration, while Europe implodes, right back into the middle of a presidential campaign. I don’t think this was very smart. The media and most candidates had managed to push immigration to a back burner and now here it is on page one again with a upcoming argument that Obama is a constitution-buster and won’t follow the law.

  77. The Cruz schtick of native son of Texas, rural southern values of Jesus and the constitution, brilliant hick Atticus lawyer and rebel has been eviscerated by Trump. The “New York values” was an attempt to reclaim that schtick. Canadian birth, left for the east coast for college, law school, Bush administration, really good jobs, not to return until he wanted a political career, gets a high public office and gone again. Trump has peeled it back layer by layer and hit by hit. Now Cruz looks like an apparatchik of Wall St and big oil. And Trump got the popular governor of Iowa to say so. Then Palin, who may feel duped by Cruz, to turn on him. But first Trump had Cruz kissing his ass until he dropped a truck on him. Lucky Trump.

  78. All this back stage maneuvering is very much like an episode of “Game of Thrones.”

    Thinking out loud, so, just a thought. I don’t think it possible that the sleeveless wonder would be able to win. All the cheating in the world could not accomplish that. However, I do wonder if the plan would be to use her (or the Persian) to retain control of the DNC and finally wrest -once and for all- control from the Clintons. It would make no difference if she wins or loses. She would remain the defacto leader of the party.

    If that is the case then whether or not they go after an indictment against HRC is a moot point. HRC will be viewed as a pariah by the leftist kooks (already there, frankly) and the Obamas will have the stage set for them for years if not decades to come.

    None of this makes me happy. It makes me quite sad. We live in interesting times.

  79. I’m trying to do a flow chart of the possibilities. Obsess much? Yes. This will have to do here since I can’t upload the chart.

    Top tier
    H Clinton = eliminated prior to or at the convention
    B Clinton = cannot run again
    Bernie = eliminated prior to or at the convention
    The Hunk = eliminated during the primary
    Debbie Downer = every one hates her
    B Obama = cannot run again
    M Obama = possibility
    Jumping Jehosaphat Joe = pawn
    Lizzy Borden, aka Runs with Scissors = pawn
    The Persian = possibility

    Second tier
    Rawlings-Blake = no national exposure and huge incompetence = liability
    Donna Brazile = too many enemies
    Governor Boon-Meem = considering the current state of California, not electable
    Al Gore = one too many massages
    Kamala Harris = rising “star” but no national experience
    Castro = too young

    As Holmes was fond of saying to Watson, “When you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”

    Back to first tier
    choice #1 M Obama
    choice #2 The Persian

    With the above two in mind let us assume the convention is a disaster as was the original plan. How hard would it be to talk the delegates into supporting one (if not both) of the two beloved ladies above.

  80. I did not forget to take into consideration Kaine, Rendell and Dean. None of them seem a good fit for the machinations at play.

  81. S,
    l get it about Palin, she is still the Tea Party darling, but she is not my darling…she does have a great track record getting people elected, but she walked away from an elected job with a vague, blurred reason..really no reason at all. If you believe in something, fight for it. She calls herself The Grisly Mama..hmmm.
    No, she cashed in..period, then the drama of her daughter Bristol..please, why not go for Kim Kardash..oh, sorry, Hillary has her locked up.

  82. Felix – when admin first said there was a mystery contestant, my first thought was Deval Patrick.

    But part of me thinks they’re at least smart enough not to run another black person so soon after the horror of Obama…

  83. Lorac- Deval crossed my mind briefly. He’s definitely a good looking guy and has experience. But I don’t think they would go with a man. They need to fire people up people and I think a woman has a better chance of doing that.

    Also, and I know this may sound silly, but O being what he is, I don’t think our illustrious leader would want to share power or a stage with a man who is really handsome as opposed to the delusional “handsome” O has been operating under these past 8 years.

    Maybe its just me, but believe he’s too much of a narcissist to accept a really good looking, and REAL African-American male.

  84. BM0- I agree wholeheartedly. I don’t think the point is get one of them elected. I think the point is to not only retain control of DNC but to keep the power base in Chicago.

  85. Even if it is not one of those two whoever is behind the curtain will help O keep control of the DNC and the power base (money flowing in) to Chicago.

    I am certain of it. As Mrs. Slokum (“Are You Being Served?”) used to say, “And I am unanimous in that.”

  86. VotingHillary
    January 20, 2016 at 2:53 am
    Folks, the establishment of both parties are now at it with regards to polling. Sanders is suddenly 20% up in New Hampshire and Bush, who hasn’t polled above 5%, is now suddenly polling at 11.5 on Reuters.

    I guess we can now declare for both parties…..”Let the games begin.”


    Both parties have planned to rig the game from jump. The Dims got away with it in 2008. Hillary supporters raised hell, but with little media coverage their protests made no difference.

    Hillary is framed and set-up again. Meanwhile and endorsement Sarah Palin whose accomplishments include a little time as Gov of Alaska and a losing bid for VP – oh yeah and a reality TV show – is a big deal!?

    She’s personable and pleasant, and I hated the sexist attacks on her in 2008, just as I hated those against Hillary, but she’s was a lightweight then, and she’s still a lightweight. But hell, if George Clooney can influence election outcomes, why not Palin, I guess.

  87. ‘Palin,……she does [did] have a great track record getting people elected, but she walked away from an elected job with a vague, blurred reason..really no reason at all. If you believe in something, fight for it. She calls herself The Grisly Mama..hmmm. No, she cashed in..period, then the drama of her daughter Bristol..please, why not go for Kim Kardash…”

    “Meanwhile an endorsement by Sarah Palin whose accomplishments include a little time as Gov of Alaska and a losing bid for VP – oh yeah and a reality TV show – is a big deal!?”

    That’s exactly what I thought, too. Also, the RNC, FOX News, Republican websites have fought Trump tooth and nail and suddenly they seem to be all for him?? Strange. Guess they are going to try to use Trump to bring down Cruz and Rubio and then they will lower the boom and it will be clear sailing for their establishment candidate??

    Long knives are out everywhere in BOTH parties that’s for sure.

  88. Hillary coming to Boca for private reception. I was asked what level ($$$) I would like to attend. In 2008, Bill came to a home in one of the more prestigious country clubs and we went and had the photos taken. I am not committing to anything until I see how the primary plays out.

  89. All you Palin bashers who fault her for stepping down from the governorship of Alaska, just how much money did you donate to Sarah to use to fight our fellow democrats frivolous law suits against her.

    Law suits who’s only object was to bring financial ruin on Sarah and her small family? Ya stink.

  90. Southern Born
    January 20, 2016 at 12:35 pm
    You are right, the battle lines are drawn.

    However, a recitation of Sarah’s shortcomings as a candidate or as governor are immaterial.

    If she was running for public office it would be.

    But that is not what she is there for.

    She has a strong following in the Tea Party.

    The Tea Party is an important faction in the party.

    Cruz and Trump both lay claim to it.

    By throwing her weight from Cruz to Trump–

    She minimizes Cruz who has been relying on it up to now

    And she enhances Trump’s tea party support within that faction.

    The strategy vis a vis the evangelicals is more subtle.

    If Trumps attacks on Cruz’s credibility connect with that group

    They may not switch to him because he is the counterparty to Cruz

    Instead, they may support another evangelical—like Huckabee

  91. Betty January 20, 2016 at 1:39 pm
    Thanks for posting the reality of Sarah’s resignation.
    She remains a strong woman who loves her country.
    Can’t say I’m sure Donald did the right thing as less than 24 hours since their announcement, media has started on her family.
    Hopefully the two of them striking back will be enjoyable.

  92. Betty
    January 20, 2016 at 1:39 pm
    I agree.

    The real danger in all this, and we must never lose sight of it, is we are not privy to the truth. All we get is the talking points and the big media agenda. Therefore, we must be wary of subconsciously adopting the partisan self serving talking points of these so called opinion makers. The thing you can do is study the alternative media, watch the candidate in action, etc. Direct evidence, not hearsay. Fact, not opinion. Its hard to do however. And that because it is hard to do, the bad guys think we will take the easy way out and accept their bullshit as gospel. At the very least, we should be skeptical. At the extreme where I am at now, I believe nothing they tell us.

  93. I’m sure Donald did the right thing as less than 24 hours since their announcement, media has started on her family.
    Therein lies another failure on their part.

    The target group of Tea Party people love Sarah, and a big media attack on them will only strengthen their commitment to Donald.

    Furthermore, if Donald is smart enough to realize that whereas he cannot win the election with only the conservative base—as the Goldwater example proves, he cannot win it without them either.

    Yesterday, I posted two articles which go to the question of building the big tent–WITHOUT throwing conservatives under the bus, which is what the establishment is seeking to do.

    One was by Travis Smiley, pointing out that blacks have gained nothing from Obama but symbolism, and another article indicating that because of that a large number of blacks perhaps as large as the number who voted for Reagan may ultimately vote for him.

  94. Sister Sarah is a feisty, pretty woman. She didn’t finish her term as Gov. and that doesn’t sit well with me in politics as a leader.

    CNN reported this morning on satellite radio that Palin was not asked to attend Iowa rallies with Trump.

    Boatloads of Repubs I spoke to in 2008 refused to vote for the McPalin ticket, mainly because they didn’t like Sarah.

    Not sure why there’s a big hoopla over her endorsement.

  95. A former business associate of mine opined that what is happening now may well destroy the Republican Party. The other possibility which he fails to acknowledge is they may evolve into a party which is less responsive to the elites and more responsive to the people. Either way, it should be obvious that pretending to be conservative on the social issues, when the country is failing is a false prescription. When I said the game of the RINO is to destroy conservatives I meant it. The test case for this is not all the lies about standing for small government and practicing the opposite. It isn’t even cromulus. It is the naked aggression against a conservative candidate in Mississippi where the establishment tarred him in the media as a klansman to scare blacks, recruited black preachers money to vilify him, and paid black people walk around money to cross party lines and support the corrupt, senile adultrous lecherous RINO the establishment was pushing. That is the kind of thing that will split the party, if it fails to evolve. Donald is brilliant, and suffice it to say he has good advisers.

  96. henry
    January 20, 2016 at 11:45 am
    I fear it may be oprah. Black, female.
    Jerry Brown: as mayor of a black city, governor of the state with the most electoral votes, and a left wing agenda, he could unite the two major factions in the party, more effectively than St. Bernard did when confronting Black Lives Matter revolutionaries in Seattle. He is smarter than Jolt’n Joe, more substantial than Pokahamus, taller and better looking than that Harvard trained Obama clone Devil, and last but not least, he has formed an exploratory committee. Finally, lest we forget he has run for the job of president before.

  97. Oprah is better suited to the job of vice president, if what FDR’s running mate John Nance Garner said about the job is true: it ain’t worth a warm bucket of spit.

  98. The market is rebounding. Earlier it was down 500 points, whereas now it has climbed back to only 400 points down. This improvement must be the result of a fart by the big media beloved messiah which provided the much needed hot air to produce another recovery like the stimulus package of 2009 which saved the nation. With such a vast arsenal of weapons to attack the problem, from the pen to the cellphone to the executive order to taking over the Saudi oil fields to to drawing red lines to just showing up at the opening bell, grinning at the cameras for a white house staged photo shoot to be broadcast across the world and memorialized in the history books with that bouncy run to the platform and that big broad smile, and more gesticulating than anyone should every have to listen to—he forgoes all this. Yes, he sits there like a frozen fresco while the rest of the world goes by as if to say be patient this will all shake out in the long term. And stop worrying about me and Michelle while your lifes earnings are going up in smoke. You can sleep as soundly as I did on the night of the Benghazi attacks knowing that whatever happens me and Michelle will be just fine.

  99. Shadow and others who are not sure why there’s a big hoopla over her endorsement.
    Sarah did plenty as governor and it seems to me people here are unaware. Have you watched the documentary of her rise in Alaska? “The Undefeated”, so well documented. I’ll issue a scroll warning, for I intend to type in all the praise on the back cover of the DVD. It’s so old it has a Andrew Breitbart on video commenting.

    “Alaska in mid-decade was a land of vast natural resources fought over by the largest companies in the world and governed by a corrupt and compromised political class. Rampant crony-capitalism stood in the way of the people of Alaska reaping the benefits of their natural birthright.

    Enter a galvanizing reformer, a small town mayor who took on her own political party and brought on “sudden and relentless reform”. An epic 2 hour feature documentary film, this chronicles the rise from obscurity of one of America’s new generation of leaders: Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska.

    Starting during the Exxon Valdez disaster of 1989 when Palin worked a commercial fishing boat she owned with her blue-collar husband, the film shows the struggles, the victories and the setbacks during a controversial career.

    The film is structured in three Acts and cnronicles Palin’s early days in Wasilla; her achievements as Governor of Alaska, which yielded her an astonishing 80% approval rating; and her meteoric rise to the national stage as John McCain’s running mate.

    From award-winning director Stephen K. Bannon, a searing look into the US financial meltdown and the dawn of the Tea Party, and “Fire From the Heartland”, the first-ever film to tell the rise of the Conservative woman.

    “Courageous and unconventional” ABC News
    “Powerful story of an Amazing Woma”: Washington Examiner
    “Will stun the viewer” Townhall


    Early this AM, TV reported that even Hillary is fundraising against the SNL character which much of America believes Sarah is.
    I am devastated but not surprised at the witch hunt resumed.
    Now I will attempt to resist further comment on the subject.

  100. Like I say, Richard have given us the only two words that accurately describe this man, and they are merely descriptive of what he is but prescriptive of what he will do:

    1. irrational, i.e. doing things that make no sense

    2. insane, i.e. not in touch with reality

    And where big media is concerned there is also two words that apply

    1. corrupt

    2. liars

    And, last but not least, the public

    1. limited attention span

    2. motivated by fear and greed, never wisdom

    Which explains why the nation and the world are failing

  101. Early this AM, TV reported that even Hillary is fundraising against the SNL character which much of America believes Sarah is.
    I am devastated but not surprised at the witch hunt resumed.
    Don’t be.

    Grand strategy has already taken this into account.

    Donald’s campaign has been under attack by big media from the beginning.

    You think this is bad, wait until he starts bringing black people into his fold.

    Building a new, enduring, big tent coalition requires bringing together many different groups, and when you do that the elites feel the earth moving under their feet, and don’t like it.

  102. Politicians are after all just people.

    They all have their strengths and their weaknesses.

    And as some wag observed politics is show business–for ugly people.

    The better the actor the better the politician.

    Donald excels in that respect.

    But there is another respect where he also excels.

    He seems to love the fight as much as he does the prize.

    Hillary has been far less accessible than she was in 2008.

    This would suggest that in 2016 at least she wants the prize more than the fight.

    Drive-byes on Sarah and campaigning from a distance are not effective.

  103. Betty,

    It’s not my job to donate to Palin to fight lawsuits.

    They could be deferred till she was out of office. She had like a year and a few months left.
    She did it for the money.
    I get it, she is the unelected leader of the Tea party, it will get votes, maybe enough to win, Trump is a very smart man.

  104. Gonzo: this is in response to your concern about a decision to accept the appeal of the fifth circuit decision upholding the injunction. And my concern as to why they cannot let it sit until after the election. They are biting off far more than they can chew, and it is impossible for me to believe that the court as a whole is capable of rendering a decision which is good for the country, rather than for the elites in Washington. AGAIN, the Obamacare decision is the bellweather, plus the recent writings by Breyer confirming that he is a globalist, Sotameyer is a radical hispanic activist, Ginzerber believes the South African Constitution would be better than ours, Roberts is a coward who reminds one of Roger Taney without Taney’s credentials (appointed by Jackson), and Kennedy has completely lost his marbels. That the remaining justices, i.e. Scalia, Thomas and Alito, would protect the Constitution and the American people on such as issue as this is beside the point. With three against five the fix is in. Oh you can make it more complicate sift through the cases and go through all the mental gymnastics you want, and I would gladly do myself if someone was stupid enough to pay my bill. But the conclusion would come down to that, hence what is the point. I will tell you for a fact, they have bit off more than they can chew and it is a sad day when our fate is entrusted to a bevy of Platonic guardians whose interests are inimical to those of the nation. A review of court history going all the way back to the Lockner decision and the Holmes dissent confirms this analysis. You can call it a difference in judicial philosophy if you like, but at the end of the day it is politics by a different means.

    The Court on Tuesday granted certiorari, and rather than limiting the issue the way the federal government requested, the Court took up the states’ suggestion and requested briefing on: “whether the [DHS action] violates the Take Care Clause of the Constitution, Art. II, §3.”

    This is hugely important. This question was fully briefed at the district court level, but it was not a part of the preliminary injunction order that is on appeal. The Supreme Court now has two major issues it could decide this term on the president’s administrative immigration amnesty program.

    First, the APA questions all revolve around the notion of prosecutorial discretion. We know that the president has a constitutional duty — and right — to enforce the laws. This involves inevitable decisions about how to expend scarce resources. The Department of Justice routinely settles cases and declines to prosecute where they think the interests of the public are served by doing so, even where there might be adequate evidence to secure a conviction. But what if DOJ announces in advance that there is an entire class of persons exempt from the law?

    Doesn’t this go too far? Does prosecutorial discretion give the president a general license not to enforce a particular law? At the very least, if this changes the rights and obligations of individuals, isn’t this the type of decision that, according to DAPA, must be published in the Federal Register before becoming final, allowing for public comments and revision prior to appearing in its final form?

    This is an important and unsettled question in administrative law, and it does raise separation of powers issues. Nevertheless, invalidating the DHS action on this basis merely would require DHS to go through a few more hoops before reissuing a decision and going forward exactly as planned.

    More fundamental is the question the Supreme Court added when it granted certiorari: is prospectively announcing an entire class of persons exempt from an otherwise applicable statute a violation of president’s duty to faithfully execute the law? A ruling on this question could have sweeping consequences for how a president does business. A ruling by the Court would have to distinguish between ordinary uses of prosecutorial discretion, and unconstitutional abdication — no easy feat.

    Failing to adequately demarcate a line here would either turn Texas v. United States into a “for this case only” decision with no future consequences, or it could mean a sweeping decision that strongly limits executive discretion in a host of areas besides immigration enforcement.

    Whatever the result, this is a potential blockbuster case, and a decision before the Court’s term ends in June will undoubtedly color the presidential race.

  105. gonzotx
    January 20, 2016 at 3:23 pm
    Even if you did not did not pay for her defense, I am sure you realize that Sarah is not the enemy, and Trump would not have asked for her endorsement if it was not strategic to his campaign strategy. The enemy was, and is NYT who went to unprecedented lengths to destroy her (seven reporters to Alaska to dig up dirt, and one, a peeping Tom, who rented a house across from hers so he could keep her under surveillance) and the bitter partisans in the democratic party in Alaska who filed those suits because they were unable to stop her politically in their own venue. Some of them were big oil money, who now support that whore who flunked the bar three times, and is now their senator, Lisa.

  106. They may not switch to him because he is the counterparty to Cruz
    January 20, 2016 at 1:44 pm
    Instead, they may support another evangelical—like Huckabee

    Or split the vote which is almost as good. It would deny him enough votes and delegates for “momentum” out of Iowa. Cruz is doing badly everywhere but Iowa. He is an enormous dud throughout much of the south where I’m sure he planned on doing much better then Trump showed up. And Cruz got hit by a Democratic outfit in Texas with an FCC complaint over the insider loans from GK and Citibank. His wife got a YUGE promotion and raise at GK right after he got the Senate seat too. Something tells me that Trump (and Carl Icahn) already knew this stuff and were just waiting to drop it on his head if needed.

  107. I am losing my marbles.

    There is also the Harvard lesbian who never served as a judge.

    I always forget her name because there is no prior judicial record to remind me of it.

    My concern about her based on the fact that she had no judicial record and was appointed because she was a lesbian, over candidates who had a judicial record whether or not they were lesbians.

    Politics uber alles.

  108. Mormaer
    January 20, 2016 at 4:19 pm
    Yes. You completed the thought. The minute I sent it, I realized I failed to close the loop.

  109. Here’s a brain teaser:

    How do you judge a prospective judge if you have no judicial record to rely on? You cannot. Law review articles may be masterpieces of scholarship, but they fail to answer the pivotal question, i.e. what will you do when you have a real case or controversy in front of you, and eight colleagues with eight different position working on you day and night. Bear in mind, each of these justices are a law firm unto themselves, and depending on how well they manage this firm, they can falter. That is the best argument I can think of for avoiding the bevy of Platonic guardians who do the bidding of the elites in Washington and letting the major decisions of society be resolved through the political process. But the constitution must answer these questions, and the we are not final because we are infallible but infallible because we are final to quote Justice Jackson. And to that I say, yes, and that IS the problem. To put in O’Reilly speak you are not on our side, or the side of the constitution which over half of you believe is what your conscience tells you it is rather than what the framers intended. And that is why I take the maxim of Clauswitz that war is diplomacy of a different kind, savage, brutal yes, but still diplomacy, and say with no fear of regret that Supreme Court decisions as well are politics of a different kind, resting on the illusion that they emanate from a delphic oracle, which those who also believe in the tooth fairy actually believe.

  110. I continue to hold Palin in high regard. I will vote for Trump. Had she opted to endorse Cruz . I’d still vote Trump.

  111. Sorry, I cannot seem to get the quote straight: war is diplomacy BY A DIFFERENT MEANS. And judicial decisions are politics by a different means, because no one gets to be a judge without going through a decidedly political process, which involves chits and IOUs of a personal if not monetary nature.

  112. Wbb,

    No, SP is not the enemy, she just is not for me. Just like Benghazi did it for me with Hillary, SP stepping down did it for me with her. I also think her exaggerated accent is a bit over the top, it gets me. I’m from Wisconsin and I have never heard it like that, her own family of origin doesn’t sound like her.
    That sounds superficial I know, about her accent, but it really bothers me, the exaggerated corniness of it. What’s up with that?
    Like Hillary and the fraud trying to sound all southern black at times. Reminds me of when I was a kid and tried to have an English accent, lol.
    SP had a great story and is a fighter, until she quit and cut, I just don’t like that. It was an elected office, highest in Alaska, she owed the people more than that. If she had stuck it out, and fought, I am positive the money would have rolled in and what a role model for young girls she would have been in my eyes.

  113. A former McCain senior adviser blasted former Alaska governor Sarah Palin’s endorsement of GOP frontrunner Donald Trump as “just classless,” telling Politico’s Ben Schreckinger that McCain’s vice presidential running mate is “one of America’s most astounding morons.”
    a former?

    b. mcain??

    c. advisor???

    Thinks Palin is a moron?

    Big media is getting desperate.

    Scraping the bottom of the barrel, they are to find this guy.

    I guess his claim to fame rests with advising an angry old white man who was in bed with Obama how to lose elections.

    That is talent . . . of a different kind.

    But as you know Jb—in a court of law, a joker would never survive voir dire.

    Then again, we read this one way—to entice either defections from Cruz or migration to another candidate.

    But big media takes this as confirmation of their deepest fears that the long cocktail line will get a damnsite shorter (unless they decide to pay for it with their own money) and that Donald’s insurgent campaign has people like them who have been feasting at the public troth too long in its gun site.

    It reminds them of the problem of mortality, in particular, their own:

    “Live, I am coming”—Roman poet Virgil.

  114. One of the great things about Sarah is not only does she oppose the elites, call them out, vilify them, and give them that swift kick to the balls they deserve, but she grates on them, makes them wince, and like the child scared of the cookie monster, they will do anything to make her go away. She is their bette noir, and they hate it when she calls them on their game of boiling the frog, and preparing free people for the Orwellian future which is their blue print. Where their grand strategy is concerned this is a case of coitus interruptus.

  115. Mrs. Smith has now weighed in.

    She is sure Devil Patrick is the fall back candidate.

    He roomed with Obama, and has been living in the White House ever since.

    Plus he has Wall Street connections.

    That may be a way to win the primary but not the general election.

    The country will not elect another Harvard trained black leftist.

    That experiment was tried and 2/3 of the country believes it failed.

  116. I’ve been reading the comments at Breitbart following Sarah’s endorsement of Trump, and a lot of the nutjobs there are having heartburn over her endorsement.

  117. The capacity for self delusion is present in all of us. It is something we all have to watch for. But where the elites are concerned it is worse, because they believe in their own moral and intellectual superiority and they are insulated from the effects of poor decisions.

    Nowhere is this more obvious than in the European Union and its response to the refugee crisis. They turned on the faucet and have no idea how to shut if off. Yet, if you listen to the latest pronouncement from Soros, he acknowledges that this poses an existential threat to the foundational principles of that organization, i.e. the free movement of people, the debt crisis, and the assault it foreshadows on European culture, he concludes by saying it is up to the German People to decide the issue, not Merkel to decide whether it is worth it in order to be the dominant country in Europe.

    What do I mean by self delusion, by in this case Soros? I mean when a German citizen is robbed, raped, or cannot find a job, it is unlikely that the first thought on his or her mind will be this is worth it because it is more important for Germany to be the dominant player in Europe. Or, do they really want to repeat the experience of the fateful year of 1945? Soros should be the first to realize that. After all after he committed war crimes in Hungary in 1944, he road the rails to avoid prosecution.

    If you want to see more self delusion, consider the interview with the Finnish foreign minister which follows. In both cases, the narrative is more important than reality, because they do not have to live with the consequences. If other do, that is not their problem.

    Thou I am a stranger in this land
    And to the manor born
    It is a custom
    More honored in the breach
    Than in the observance

    –or words to that effect.

  118. Devil Patrick

    Admin thinks this will not happen before the primary convention. So, the convention is going on and Brutus steps out and announces Barry made an executive decision to put him down as the winner of the primary??

    Where are we, Nazi Germany, North Korea, Iran?

    All effing Hell will break loose. Where will the convention take place, I need to start saving for a ticket to go there again, and raise holy Hell.

  119. gonzotx
    January 20, 2016 at 5:45 pm
    McCain is an asshole…
    The people who know him, going back to his days at Annapolis, all tell me that there is nothing wrong with the “war hero”that a four year course in anger management would not solve–assuming he did the homework.

  120. Tony Stark
    January 20, 2016 at 7:00 pm
    They just hand a glimpse of the long knife behind Obama’s back.


    Jeeze, Hillary is really a big threat for things to go this far.

    She is one tough cookie to put up with this crap for so damn long. They want her to give up, to quit………I couldn’t take it.

    If she becomes President, she will have earned it more than anyone, IMO.

    She is trying not to get too dirty in politics, so they keep trying to blow her up. If she goes nasty, they will attack her even more because that’s not ladylike.

    Give them Hell Hillary!!!!!

  121. Tony Stark
    January 20, 2016 at 6:35 pm

    I’ve been reading the comments at Breitbart following Sarah’s endorsement of Trump, and a lot of the nutjobs there are having heartburn over her endorsement.

    Do their objections move the needle?

    Or do they convince Trump supporters?

    If we cannot always be liked by the right people.

    Then we can at least endeavor to be not liked by the wrong people.

    There is even an article by black Walter Hudson saying this is the end of the tea party.

    As in just when we thought they were dead, they’re back.

    This reaction stems from a fundamental misunderstanding of what is going on.

    And a fear of losing power and influence by these writers.

    This IS not really a battle between republicans and democrats.

    It is a battle between the establishment and the people.

    Walter Russell Meade put his finger on it in the article from RCP which I posted yesterday.

    This is the fierce rebuttal of Jacksonians to the overreaching of our corrupt elites.

    That is the common well in which Donald and Sarah both claim riparian rights.

    That is the reality which the establishment does not wish to confront.

    But again it is reality, and their failure to do so is wilful blindness.

  122. The reaction both here and across the pond to illegal immigration and the loss of democracy is the verdict which the hide bound, morally superior, insulated elites, do not wish to hear. The problem is it is getting louder, and when it does explode they will have a bigger problem on their hands. Their money and their position are at risk if events move in that direction. They could bleed off some of the pressure, but they haven’t the judgment to do so.

  123. Is this a bad thing or a good thing—this wilful blindness?

    It depends.

    If you want the elites to win, it is a bad thing.

    Why? Because reality will remove the decision from their incompetent hands.

    If you want the elites to lose, then it is a good thing.

    Why? Because as Bonaparte admonished, never interrupt an enemy in the middle of a mistake.

  124. The RINO is an anachronism.

    Failure theater done him in.

    What you are left with are two competing messages.

    Trump’s message: make America great again–so all boats rise with the tide.

    Dims message: get even with whitey, raid the treasury, and trust your government.

    No painting in pastels here.

    The choice seems pretty clear.

    The core message of a campaign can be outcome determinative.

  125. I am just guessing you understand.

    But I do think I know who is giving Donald insight and advice.

    He is smarter than anyone and his roots go back to Reagan.

    He is not one of the usual suspects.

    He is much smarter than Axlerod, who is the best the dims have.

    In addition, there is a higher level of discipline on the Trump team.

    These create strategic and tactical advantage for Trump

    Against the dims, the RINOs and their amen corner in big media.

  126. The way I feel about it now, Ted would be the right choice for Chief Justice. Replace a man who does not understand the constitution, is scared to follow its edicts, and is just another pretty face, with one who understands it and will not shrink the task of doing what is right. The one recollection which will never leave my mind as reported by law clerks was of Roberts wandering down the hall, asking people how he should rule on Obamacare, after having previously told them it was unconstitutional. Kennedy tried to talk him off the edge, but poor John was too frightened. It is a bad thing to be frightened. It gets in the way of doing the job.

Comments are closed.