Tag Archives: Minion Media

The Democrat Party’s Win-Win COVID-19 Strategy

Posted on by
Reply

Sadly, while Americans lose their lives to COVID-19, Democrats are disgracefully playing politics with the pandemic.  What makes matters even worse is that this is an election year and the American people will go to the polls in November to elect our next president. Instead of coming together and fighting for the American people, the bulk of the Democrat party is engaged in partisan politics led by Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer and the Democrat Party’s minion media. Normally, I would lead with the presumptive Democrat Party presidential nominee, but Joe Biden can’t function, let alone lead, beyond creating embarrassing videos shot from his basement bunker.

Democrat Party radicals have long professed that they should never let a good crisis go to waste, echoing Marxist dogma. Unfortunately, COVID-19 is no exception. They are posturing themselves for a November win-win strategy to defeat Donald Trump, keep the House and win back the Senate.

The first part of the strategy applies if there are high mortality rates and significant American COVID-19 deaths. The Democrat strategy will be to attack President Trump and Republicans for failing to protect the American people. We’ve seen this line of Democrat/Media attack for several weeks, centered on “the President was slow to act and Americans died” mantra. It’s a totally vapid charge, but so was Trump/Russia, and the sham-peachment.

The second line of attack in their win-win scenario, kicks in if death rates are low. In this case the Democrat Party will attack Donald Trump and Republicans for hyping the coronavirus, whipping the American people into a frenzy in fear, destroying the US economy by locking down people in their homes via an authoritarian power grab. I know what you are thinking, that this isn’t possible given the “slow to act” charges being leveled today. Make no mistake, Democrats have no shame, and their Minion Media totally cover for them up. They are more than capable of turning on a dime, knowing the a lying media has their backs.

We’ve already heard some Democrat pundits crying with fear that Donald Trump’s dream is to become a dictator and the COVID-19 is his opportunity.

Both of these scenarios come with the added bonus that should Donald Trump overcome their vicious partisan attacks and win election for a second term that they could come back and impeach him for either mortality outcome. In fact, Democrats would scream that they have no choice, investigations are demanded, and inevitably impeachment would follow. This is a scenario that’s made ever more possible by the challenge Republicans have holding the Senate. Republicans must defend 23 seats this November while democrats only need defend 12.

It’s incumbent upon President Trump and the Republicans to lay the foundation for defeating each of these strategies.

They shouldn’t have to, but the reality is that Democrats are so blindly hateful and partisan that these counter strategies must be formed. Let us pray for the low death scenario, and that our national response will be so spectacular that we will all look back with wonder and amazement at how few Americans were taken by COVID-19.

NOTE: Nancy Pelosi is already shifting gears to attacking President Trump for destroying the US economy.

5 Questions The “Minion Media” Won’t Ask About “Russian Election Meddling”

Posted on by
Reply

In the latest progressive meme, the “Minion Media”, The White House, and Democrat politicians around every corner are crying that the Russian Government hacked the Democrats to change the 8 November election in Donald Trumps favor. Note: democrats are blaming the Russian Government, Putin himself, not some random unsponsored Russian hacker.

The Minion Media ignores the real questions, while running full speed creating another Mountain out of a Mole Hill. The questions that they should be asking are:

Why would Putin want Trump elected over Hillary? Bill Clinton traveled to Russia and got paid a massive speaking fee. The Clintons helped broker a deal where the Russians bought 20% of US uranium mines. The Clinton Foundation received over $100M from wealthy donors involved with the deal.

Why harm an ideologically aligned globalist like Hillary over an anti-globalist like Trump? Democrats are known for loving communists and Marxists, and socialists, which is well documented in Trevor Loudon’s book The Enemies Within.

FBI Director Comey stated that it was extremely likely that Hillary’s illicit home-brew server was hacked by at least 5 foreign governments. If we can assume, as democrats are, that Russia hacked Podesta’s Gmail account, its a safe bet they hacked Hillary’s home-brew server, and have copies of all of her 33,000+ destroyed emails. If they have those emails, which would very likely contain damming information, why would the Russians not also use them to trash Hillary’s campaign?

Could the Russians have been led to John Podesta’s Gmail account from Hillary’s hacked home-brew server? Perhaps Podesta was hacked only because they had information from her unprotected, unsanctioned, and illegal server, and brought this on herself? This is, after all, why government employees must use protected government computers to conduct Americas business?

Why did Wikileaks publish Podesta’s emails yet nothing from Trump? Because Podesta’swere EARTH SHATTERING!

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange said WikiLeaks has ‘some information’ about Trump’s campaign but he can’t compete with what the candidate himself says”. In other words, I can’t harm Donald Trump anymore than he appears to harm himself, so why bother.

These questions, all very simple and basic for any true journalist, wont get asked let alone answered by the Minion Media or the progressives egging them on because they are devastating to Hillary Clinton and the Democrat Party. They will continue the Snipe Hunt instead, in a clear effort to delegitimize Trump’s election, and to destabilize America.

Trump’s Victory and the Principles of War, Part I

Posted on by
2
Heavy Artillery Located at the Battle of Yorktown

Heavy Artillery Located at the Battle of Yorktown

Analysts are touting Donald Trump’s 8 November 2016 victory as the greatest political upset in American history. No doubt countless volumes will be written over the coming years on what happened in this race and how an outsider overcame the most vaunted democrat political machine any candidate ever had backing them, while also defeating an entrenched republican establishment, overwhelming “Minion Media” and Hollywood support, and double the campaign funding.

Hillary Clinton: $1.19 Billion vs Donald Trump: $646.8 Million

In the end, the one thing that Donald Trump did have was the American people’s support.

Over the next three blogs I will assess the race from a singularly unique perspective. My 29 Sep, 2013 Blog “Applying The Principles of War to American Politics” discussed the US Military’s Principals of War, and how the Republican Party needed to learn from these principles, peacefully apply them to defeat progressives and the Democrat Party, and use them as a critical strategic component to return Constitutional freedoms to the American people. Donald Trump’s Campaign Manager, and recently selected chief strategist Stephen K. Bannon, recently said that “politics is war”.

Trump’s Victory And The Principles of War: Part II

Trump’s Victory And The Principles of War: Part III

Saul Alinsky’s Version Of The Principles of War

President Elect Donald Trumps campaign, knowingly or instinctively applied the Principles of War to enable his victory over Hillary Clinton. The lessons are clear for republicans going forward: consciously apply these principles and win.

  • Mass: Donald Trump perfected the Principle of Mass. He massed his supporters at rallies across the country. Pundits argued that the size and energy of his crowds didn’t matter. They were wrong! Trump massed his small campaign staff, a fraction of the size and cost of Jeb Bush’s, or Hillary Clinton’s, to great effect. He massed his campaign funding, getting far out spent by Bush and Hillary. Trump’s campaign also held most of their add spending until the last two weeks of the campaign, unleashing the adds and outspending Hillary down the stretch. This might have made the difference in the election. Finally, and most importantly, Trump massed his voters setting the record for the most votes any candidate ever got in the GOP Primary process, and soundly beating Hillary in the electoral college. Democrats are touting Hillary’s popular vote numbers as evidence of her greater support. In fact, it doesn’t matter. She massed voters in the wrong places, concentrated in California and New York, and not in critical states like Wisconsin, North Carolina, Florida, Michigan and Pennsylvania. The popular vote is debatable as well. If Hillary massed illegal voters, as some are claiming, then she may well have been beaten here as well.
  • Objective: Both Trump and Clinton shared the objective of winning the Presidency. Trump however spelled out his overarching objective in four words: Make America Great Again. That was his campaign’s objective, clear and concise. Winning the presidency was only a means to Making America Great Again. In contrast, Hillary’s objective was purely winning the presidency. Her campaign slogans, like Stronger Together, or I’m With Her were mere window dressing enabling her election. The American people were more likely to support Trump’s objective, which elevated them, vs. Hillary’s which elevated Hillary. According to Vice President Joe Biden in a CNN interview:

     

    “Hillary Clinton felt compelled to run for president despite lacking a clear campaign vision”…”I don’t think she ever really figured it out”

     

  • Offensive: Donald Trump set himself apart from other GOP candidates by going on, and maintaining the offensive. Although he was criticized for defending himself too much, he never stopped going on the attack. In contrast with how John McCain and Mitt Romney treated Barack Obama, Trump went straight after Hillary, refusing to ease up, and maintaining the offensive. If anything, Trump was criticized for attacking too often, too harshly, and for attacking not just Hillary, but the corrupt media, Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan, President Obama, and others. In the end, America wanted a fighter, and they believe that they got one. In contrast David Brock, democrat strategist savant, lamented that Hillary wasn’t more like Donald Trump in going on the offensive against the media saying

“Clinton’s biggest problem was simply not being more like Trump, at least when it came to dealing with the press.”

  • Economy of Force: Donald Trump wrote the book on The Art of the Deal, and during this campaign he wrote the book on political Economy of Force. No Principle of War was better put into practice than this one. Trump’s campaign was run largely from his own money or small donors, and it was wisely spent. His staff was only a fraction of the size of Hillary’s. Trump maximized the use of volunteers throughout the country, tying into local and state Republican Party volunteers. Support from the RNC and its get out the vote effort defeated the vaunted Democrat GOTV machine, even though it was outspent. Trump was also heralded for his skill at dominating news cycles. Although much of the “Minion Media” coverage was grossly pro-Hillary, Trump was still effective at getting his message out for free.
    • Significantly, Donald Trump used social media to go over the heads of the “Minion Media”. His 36 million followers between Twitter, Facebook and Instagram heard directly from Trump and they spread the word, at next to no cost to his campaign. The Trump campaign spent only $160,00 for example producing and posting short policy videos and got 74 million views.
    • Trump’s Social Media Director, Dan Scavino, described the slim nature of the campaign to Breitbart News:

“…there was not some boardroom of political consultants pre-testing talking points for tweets and Facebook and Instagram posts before they went out. It was him, Trump and his iPhone, that led the way in making this happen.”

The Anaconda Strategy

Posted on by
2

AnacondaI coined the term “Anaconda Strategy” to describe the leftist progressive strategy for fundamentally changing the United States from a society based upon Constitutional freedoms into a socialist, intrusive government “nanny state” run by leftist politicians. Whether intentional, or accidental, their strategy has been in place for decades, and consists of two distinct phases.

Power Phase: When Progressives control the Federal Government, they are ruthless in advancing their agenda. Like an Anaconda tightening its coils around its prey whenever the prey exhales, squeezing ever tighter to prevent it from inhaling, progressives expand the power of government, growing it and in the process crushing the liberties of Americans and undermining Constitutional firewalls, legal precedent and rewriting American history to hide their tracks. During this “Power Phase”, they ignore opposing views, claiming that they speak for the people; enacting their mandate. A short list of tools and tactics commonly employed to force their agenda include:

      • Denigrating Christians and Christianity
      • Message amplification via “Minion Media” and pop-culture
      • Demonizing opposition
      • Race-bating
      • Revising history
      • Court challenges, use of activist judges
      • Personal attacks
      • Thuggery and intimidation
      • Boycotts
      • Trucked in union led/paid “AstroTurf” demonstrations
      • International leverage (United Nations mandates, dictates and treaties), Calling it an Accord to end run Congress
      • Pseudoscience to prop up positions
      • Class warfare
      • Political sleight of hand
      • Eliminating institutions and symbols (breaking the connection to the past, history, and society’s legacy)

No better example exist than the way Obama care was railroaded into law, highlighted byHarry Reid’s throwing out 215 years of tradition with the nuclear option.

When progressives lose elections, and voters throw them out of power, they enter the “Holding Phase”.

Anaconda Strategy.

Holding Phase: The Anaconda maintains the crushing force of constriction, while its prey tries to inhale, but it allows no reduction in force as it waits for the next chance to tighten. Likewise, progressives go into hold mode when beaten in elections, and ejected from power. They never accept defeat, no matter how often it happens on a given issue. The left keeps failing in the gun control debate, but it’s only a matter of time before they come after the 2nd Amendment again. During the “Holding Phase” they bide their time.

They cry for an end to partisanship, all the while stalling any attempts to unwind the progressive agenda as they work to entrench Power Phase gains. They use any means possible, see list above, to prevent giving up ground, from courts to childish tactics such as when Wisconsin democrats literally fled Wisconsin in efforts to stall Republican Governor Scott Walker’s campaign agenda. Their relentless movement towards a socialist, authoritarian form of government, with them at the table of power is temporarily on hold until the tide swings back to the “Power Phase”, and their agenda’s constricting march can resume.

What is the counter strategy to oppose this Anaconda Strategy?

Conservative Americans, like TEA Party members, must lead the charge to unwind the coils of the progressive agenda at every turn, and with equal vigor. Stall when not in power, bring the American People into the cause and use their support to reverse bad legislation wherever possible, prevent and highlight bad legislation when proposed, fight for Constitutionalist judges, and strive to gain and maintain governing majorities. Once done, stay true to, and teach the Constitution, conservative ideals and apply the “last in -first out” principle to unwind the progressive agenda, returning liberty and power back in the hands of the American People, where the Constitution puts it.

The strategy must be long term, determined and relentless in order to unwind the coils of progressivism.