clashdaily--2020-09-29--Biden’s Ads Blasting Trump’s Taxes Are Really A Swipe At Himself — Here’s The 411

In what was clearly a coordinated hit between Biden and the Media ( D ) , Biden ’ s anti-Trump ad was released almost immediately after the Times hit piece .
We figure that ’ s most likely the secret that had Pelosi so giddy when she did her unnatural ‘ good Sunday morning ’ glitch on the Sunday shows .
They probably think they struck gold by putting the ad out there the way they did , framing Trump as some sort of a tax cheat ( although not a soul has alleged any specific wrongdoing ) in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ working stiffs .
Meanwhile , others allege those same documents provide evidence that he ’ s a poor businessman .
Yes , they ’ re trying to have it both ways .
Trending : Why Did The New York Times Bury THIS Detail In Their ‘ Trump Taxes ’ Hit Piece ?
On the other hand , some people I know would gladly give their eye teeth for an hour alone with his accountant to see if there are any relevant tax strategies that they may have been overlooking in their own businesses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for his taxes .
Is this angle of attack a strong one for Joe to make against Trump ?
Sure , it might be red meat for the Rachael-Maddow conspiracy set and the Left-of-Lenin Bernie bros among his base , but it ’ s a dangerous play .
It could boomerang on him like the watermelon did to the poor woman in this clip : There are two key reasons it could boomerang .
For one , Biden has been using the tax code to shield himself from paying as much taxes as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of taxes .
Back in August , the Wall Street Journal ’ s Chris Jacobs exposed how the Biden family structured what is called an “ S-Corp ” to avoid paying hundreds of thousands of dollars in taxes .
“ How the Bidens Dodged the Payroll Tax , ” was Jacobs ’ headline on Aug. 10 .
In it , the Journal details how the Bidens set up an S-Corporation to avoid paying more than half a million dollars in taxes they would have otherwise owed .
“ Joe Biden responded to President @ @ @ @ @ @ @ collections with a statement calling it the ‘ first shot in a new , reckless war on Social Security , ’ ” Jacobs wrote .
He continued : “ ‘ Our seniors and millions of Americans with disabilities are under enough stress without Trump putting their hard-earned Social Security benefits in doubt.
’ Mr. Biden ’ s objections might be more persuasive had he and his wife , Jill , not gone out of their way to avoid funding seniors ’ entitlement benefits .
According to their tax returns , in 2017 and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ avoided payroll taxes on nearly $ 13.3 million in income from book royalties and speaking fees .
They did so by classifying the income as S-corporation profits rather than taxable wages.
” Jacobs continued in his expose by noting the corporation the Bidens established to avoid paying the payroll taxes on millions of dollars in income amounts to more than half a million dollars in taxes that Joe and Jill Biden did not pay .
—Breitbart Which is it , Joe ?
Is working the angles of the tax code to minimize your @ @ @ @ @ @ @ BAD thing ?
You seem to have two sets of standards .
One for Republicans , and another for your team .
But Joe ’ s hypocrisy isn ’ t the ONLY reason .
The other reason is far more amusing .
Quoting from an openly hostile piece in the Orlando Sentinal : Interesting .
‘ Great Recession bailout ’ , they said , wasn ’ t it ?
Allows 5-year deferral , followed by being spread evenly over the following five .
If the rules are in any way unfair , then @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was in the White House when those rules were changed .
Oh , THAT ’ s right !
That ’ s back when Joe Biden was serving with Obama in the White House , isn ’ t it ?
In other words , Joe is angry at Trump for making use of tax provisions his own government had put in place .

In what was clearly a coordinated hit between Biden and the Media(D), Biden’s anti-Trump ad was released almost immediately after the Times hit piece.
We figure that’s most likely the secret that had Pelosi so giddy when she did her unnatural ‘good Sunday morning’ glitch on the Sunday shows.
They probably think they struck gold by putting the ad out there the way they did, framing Trump as some sort of a tax cheat (although not a soul has alleged any specific wrongdoing) in the commercial paying far less tax than ordinary working stiffs. Meanwhile, others allege those same documents provide evidence that he’s a poor businessman.
Yes, they’re trying to have it both ways.
On the other hand, some people I know would gladly give their eye teeth for an hour alone with his accountant to see if there are any relevant tax strategies that they may have been overlooking in their own businesses.
They’re going after him for his taxes. Is this angle of attack a strong one for Joe to make against Trump? Sure, it might be red meat for the Rachael-Maddow conspiracy set and the Left-of-Lenin Bernie bros among his base, but it’s a dangerous play.
It could boomerang on him like the watermelon did to the poor woman in this clip:
There are two key reasons it could boomerang.
For one, Biden has been using the tax code to shield himself from paying as much taxes as he might otherwise pay. A LOT of taxes.
Back in August, the Wall Street Journal’s Chris Jacobs exposed how the Biden family structured what is called an “S-Corp” to avoid paying hundreds of thousands of dollars in taxes. “How the Bidens Dodged the Payroll Tax,” was Jacobs’ headline on Aug. 10. In it, the Journal details how the Bidens set up an S-Corporation to avoid paying more than half a million dollars in taxes they would have otherwise owed. “Joe Biden responded to President Trump’s partial suspension of payroll-tax collections with a statement calling it the ‘first shot in a new, reckless war on Social Security,’” Jacobs wrote. He continued: “‘Our seniors and millions of Americans with disabilities are under enough stress without Trump putting their hard-earned Social Security benefits in doubt.’ Mr. Biden’s objections might be more persuasive had he and his wife, Jill, not gone out of their way to avoid funding seniors’ entitlement benefits. According to their tax returns, in 2017 and 2018 the Bidens and his wife Jill avoided payroll taxes on nearly $13.3 million in income from book royalties and speaking fees. They did so by classifying the income as S-corporation profits rather than taxable wages.” Jacobs continued in his expose by noting the corporation the Bidens established to avoid paying the payroll taxes on millions of dollars in income amounts to more than half a million dollars in taxes that Joe and Jill Biden did not pay. —Breitbart
Which is it, Joe? Is working the angles of the tax code to minimize your tax exposure a GOOD thing or a BAD thing? You seem to have two sets of standards. One for Republicans, and another for your team.
But Joe’s hypocrisy isn’t the ONLY reason.
The other reason is far more amusing.
Quoting from an openly hostile piece in the Orlando Sentinal:
…he took advantage of a provision of the Great Recession bailout that allowed income from canceled debt to be completely deferred for five years, then spread out evenly over the next five. He declared the first $28.2 million in 2014. Once again, his business losses mostly absolved his tax responsibilities. He paid no federal income taxes for 2014.
Interesting. ‘Great Recession bailout’, they said, wasn’t it?
Allows 5-year deferral, followed by being spread evenly over the following five.
If the rules are in any way unfair, then Biden should take it up with whoever was in the White House when those rules were changed.
Oh, THAT’s right! That’s back when Joe Biden was serving with Obama in the White House, isn’t it?
In other words, Joe is angry at Trump for making use of tax provisions his own government had put in place.
Your outrage is weak, Joe.


clashdaily--2020-09-29--Dems Already Weaponizing Tax Story Against Trump…But Silent About Revelations About Hunter

Pelosi and De Blasio assuming the worst about criminality or foreign influence from NYT hit piece , but strangely disinterested in new evidence of Hunter ’ s corrupt use of political influence .
Pelosi is clearly sharpening the knives for a second run at Schiff-peachment — or at least trying to scare voters with another round of OrangeManBad by making it sound as if evil foreigners have leverage against the president .
The paper reports Trump is personally on the hook for $ 300 million in debts coming due in the next four years .
His loans and other debts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ calculated after obtaining years worth of his returns .
‘ This president appears to have over $ 400 million in debt .
To whom ?
Different countries ?
What is the leverage they have ?
So for me , this is a national security question , ’ Pelosi told NBC .
— DailyMail Trending : Why Did The New York Times Bury THIS Detail In Their ‘ Trump Taxes ’ Hit Piece ?
She ’ s be grasping at straws to be sure , but mark our words , Pelosi will look for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a means of blocking that ACB nomination .
Do not underestimate the duplicitous rage of # TeamResistance .
There is no low to which they will not stoop .
De Blasio , in turn , is sharpening his own knives .
He sees an opportunity to take a run at Trump claiming New York has been shafted out of money that they ‘ deserve ’ .
He skips right past the investigation phase and has pronounced ‘ guilt ’ for… something or other .
‘ I think we can guarantee based on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he hasn ’ t paid his city taxes the way he should have , ’ the mayor said , speaking on NY1 .
‘ Our city finance department will get to work right away to determine if in fact the president of the United States cheated New York City on his taxes .
‘ I think it ’ s a foregone conclusion at this point , given everything we ’ ve seen from this guy.
’ —DailyMail Pronouncing guilt without even having bothered with the formality of an investigation ?
The left seems @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has the natural rights of an American — including the presumption of innocence .
Slander suits have a high bar to pass where public figures are involved , but accusations of guilt just might meet that test .
While the left comes looking to nab their pound of flesh , there is a far more plausible story involving money , corruption and foreign influence .
One that is backed up by a public boasting by a former Vice President over the small matter of a billion dollars and an ultimatum… and some new @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in that story .
That ’ s right — Burisma and Hunter are back in the news .
And it ’ s not even October yet !
Hunter Biden and representatives of Burisma Holdings secured at least six high-level meetings with senior Obama administration officials in the weeks just before Vice President Joe Biden forced the firing of the Ukrainian prosecutor investigating the gas company , according to newly disclosed memos and testimony .
During some of the meetings , a Democratic firm called Blue Star Strategies that was representing Burisma repeatedly pressed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that long had dogged the Ukrainian gas firm , which appointed Hunter Biden to its board in 2014 .
In one previously undisclosed contact in December 2015 , Blue Star secured a meeting with then-U.S .
Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt in which the Burisma lobbyists made a case that the gas firm should not be prosecuted any longer .
The meeting came at a sensitive time .
Pyatt just a few months earlier had given a speech demanding that Burisma and its owner Mykola Zlochevsky be prosecuted for corruption , and Ukrainian @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the case , including sending evidence to the National Anti-Corruption Bureau for further investigation and eventually securing a new asset forfeiture against Zlochevsky .
The New York Times also had just reported a story saying Hunter Biden ’ s presence on Burisma ’ s board during the investigation was undercutting U.S. credibility in the fight against Ukrainian corruption .
State Department officials divulged Joe Biden also made the first effort to fire the lead prosecutor in the Burisma case that same month .
Amos Hochstein , a senior energy policy official at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden , told Senate investigators he took meetings with Blue Star in late 2015 and again in March 2016 .
He also met once with Hunter Bidem during the same time frame to discuss Burisma .
In the latter of its meetings with Hochstein , Blue Star argued there was no longer a reason to pursue the gas firm or its founder Mykola Zolchevsky , Hochstein testified .
– Read the full story at JustTheNews

Pelosi and De Blasio assuming the worst about criminality or foreign influence from NYT hit piece, but strangely disinterested in new evidence of Hunter’s corrupt use of political influence.
Pelosi is clearly sharpening the knives for a second run at Schiff-peachment — or at least trying to scare voters with another round of OrangeManBad by making it sound as if evil foreigners have leverage against the president.
The paper reports Trump is personally on the hook for $300 million in debts coming due in the next four years. His loans and other debts total $421 million, the paper calculated after obtaining years worth of his returns. ‘This president appears to have over $400 million in debt. To whom? Different countries? What is the leverage they have? So for me, this is a national security question,’ Pelosi told NBC. — DailyMail
She’s be grasping at straws to be sure, but mark our words, Pelosi will look for some way to leverage this accusation into a means of blocking that ACB nomination. Do not underestimate the duplicitous rage of #TeamResistance. There is no low to which they will not stoop.
De Blasio, in turn, is sharpening his own knives. He sees an opportunity to take a run at Trump claiming New York has been shafted out of money that they ‘deserve’. He skips right past the investigation phase and has pronounced ‘guilt’ for… something or other.
‘I think we can guarantee based on the information in the New York Times that he hasn’t paid his city taxes the way he should have,’ the mayor said, speaking on NY1. ‘Our city finance department will get to work right away to determine if in fact the president of the United States cheated New York City on his taxes. ‘I think it’s a foregone conclusion at this point, given everything we’ve seen from this guy.’ —DailyMail
Pronouncing guilt without even having bothered with the formality of an investigation?
The left seems to have conveniently forgotten that even OrangeManBad has the natural rights of an American — including the presumption of innocence.
Slander suits have a high bar to pass where public figures are involved, but accusations of guilt just might meet that test.
While the left comes looking to nab their pound of flesh, there is a far more plausible story involving money, corruption and foreign influence.
One that is backed up by a public boasting by a former Vice President over the small matter of a billion dollars and an ultimatum… and some new evidence of high-level meetings by key players in that story.
That’s right — Burisma and Hunter are back in the news.
Surprise!
And it’s not even October yet!
John Solomon writes:


clashdaily--2020-09-29--CLASH POLL: Would You Keep Your Kindergartener In Class If This Was The Teacher?

A primary school teacher is no longer allowed to teach Kindergarten because of his extreme tattoos .
Imagine that .
Sylvain Helaine , 35 , is a substitute school teacher in the suburbs of Paris , France .
He also has tattoos all over his body including his face and tongue .
Helaine even had the whites of his eyes surgically turned black .
He says that he began getting tattoos when he was 27 and had an “ existential crisis ” when he was teaching at a private school in London .
Now getting tattoos is his “ passion.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ props in the tattoo world where he goes by the name “ Freaky Hoodie ” and has opened up some doors for performing in clubs and modeling , it ’ s a bit more career-limiting regarding his day job .
Trending : Why Did The New York Times Bury THIS Detail In Their ‘ Trump Taxes ’ Hit Piece ?
Last year , Helaine was told that he would no longer be able to teach kindergarten anymore because his appearance may frighten children .
A schoolteacher whose body , face and tongue are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the whites of his eyes surgically turned black said he was prevented from teaching at a French kindergarten after a parent complained he scared their child… … [ Helaine ] said last year he was teaching kindergarten at the Docteur Morere Elementary School in Palaiseau , a suburb of Paris , when the parents of a three-year-old child complained to educational authorities .
They said their son , who was not taught by Helaine , had nightmares after seeing him .
A couple of months later the school authorities informed him he would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said .
“ I think the decision they took was quite sad , ” said Helaine .
A spokesman for the local education authority said an agreement was reached with Helaine to move him away from teaching kindergarten .
Pupils under six “ could be frightened by his appearance ” , the spokesman said .
Helaine says that he is disappointed in the decision because he only frightens people when they see him at a distance .
He says that once parents and students get to know him they quickly realize that he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and a “ regular guy.
” What would you do if this was your son or daughter ’ s kindergarten teacher ?
Would you yank them out of school or let them stay because it ’ s just some ink ?

A primary school teacher is no longer allowed to teach Kindergarten because of his extreme tattoos. Imagine that.
Sylvain Helaine, 35, is a substitute school teacher in the suburbs of Paris, France. He also has tattoos all over his body including his face and tongue. Helaine even had the whites of his eyes surgically turned black.
He says that he began getting tattoos when he was 27 and had an “existential crisis” when he was teaching at a private school in London. Now getting tattoos is his “passion.”
While the ink is getting some props in the tattoo world where he goes by the name “Freaky Hoodie” and has opened up some doors for performing in clubs and modeling, it’s a bit more career-limiting regarding his day job.
Last year, Helaine was told that he would no longer be able to teach kindergarten anymore because his appearance may frighten children.
A schoolteacher whose body, face and tongue are covered in tattoos and who has had the whites of his eyes surgically turned black said he was prevented from teaching at a French kindergarten after a parent complained he scared their child… …[Helaine] said last year he was teaching kindergarten at the Docteur Morere Elementary School in Palaiseau, a suburb of Paris, when the parents of a three-year-old child complained to educational authorities. They said their son, who was not taught by Helaine, had nightmares after seeing him. A couple of months later the school authorities informed him he would no longer teach kindergarten children, he said. “I think the decision they took was quite sad,” said Helaine. A spokesman for the local education authority said an agreement was reached with Helaine to move him away from teaching kindergarten. Pupils under six “could be frightened by his appearance”, the spokesman said. Source: Reuters
Helaine says that he is disappointed in the decision because he only frightens people when they see him at a distance. He says that once parents and students get to know him they quickly realize that he’s a “proper teacher” and a “regular guy.”
What would you do if this was your son or daughter’s kindergarten teacher?
Would you yank them out of school or let them stay because it’s just some ink?


clashdaily--2020-09-29--Leftwing Law Prof Defends President Trump’s Nomination Of Amy Coney Barrett

Showing there is still some shred of decency in the Ivy League system , one prof who disagrees with nearly every right-of-center policy of jurisprudence stands by ACB ’ s nomination .
This oped will make it harder for the Left to claim her nomination is an abuse of power , as some have claimed , or in some other sense , inappropriate .
We thank Noah Feldman for putting partisanship ( somewhat ) aside for the purposes of this piece .
It means that much more , considering his role in Harvard involved specialization in Constitutional Studies .
This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ opportunity to take a swipe at the party — and McConnell — alleging hypocrisy over how he handled Merrick Garland .
But he weighed this issue independently of any other complicating factors .
Trending : Why Did The New York Times Bury THIS Detail In Their ‘ Trump Taxes ’ Hit Piece ?
This may prove a helpful check on the unbridled stream of negative rhetoric we have been hearing from the aggrieved-that-they-will-no-longer-have-the-SCOTUS-as-a-defacto-legislative-body Democrats .
After all , he must have some clout with the Left .
He was called upon to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fiasco .
What does Professor Feldman say about the nominee herself ?
Simply put , he heaped praise upon her .
Because his points were designed to be understood in light of each other , we will cite him at length : Yet these political judgments need to be distinguished from a separate question : what to think about Judge Amy Coney Barrett , whom Trump has told associates he plans to nominate .
And here I want to be extremely clear .
Regardless of what you or I may think of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ highly qualified to serve on the Supreme Court .
I disagree with much of her judicial philosophy and expect to disagree with many , maybe even most of her future votes and opinions .
Yet despite this disagreement , I know her to be a brilliant and conscientious lawyer who will analyze and decide cases in good faith , applying the jurisprudential principles to which she is committed .
Those are the basic criteria for being a good justice .
Barrett meets and exceeds them .
I got to know Barrett more than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Supreme Court during the 1998-99 term .
Of the thirty-some clerks that year , all of whom had graduated at the top of their law school classes and done prestigious appellate clerkships before coming to work at the court , Barrett stood out .
Measured subjectively and unscientifically by pure legal acumen , she was one of the two strongest lawyers .
The other was Jenny Martinez , now dean of the Stanford Law School .
When assigned to work on an extremely complex , difficult case , especially one involving a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ go to Barrett to explain it to me .
Then I would go to Martinez to tell me what I should think about it .
Barrett , a textualist who was working for a textualist , Justice Antonin Scalia , had the ability to bring logic and order to disorder and complexity .
You can ’ t be a good textualist without that , since textualism insists that the law can be understood without reference to legislative history or the aims and context of the statute .
In a world where merit counts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recognized as worthy of serving on the Supreme Court .
If a Democratic president with the support of a Democratic Senate asked me to recommend a current law professor for the bench , Martinez would be on my short list .
But a Republican is president , and the Senate is Republican .
Elections have consequences , and so do justices ’ decisions about when or whether to retire .
Trump is almost certainly going to get his pick confirmed .
Given that reality , it is better for the republic to have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bench than a weaker candidate .
That ’ s Barrett .
To add to her merits , Barrett is a sincere , lovely person .
I never heard her utter a word that wasn ’ t thoughtful and kind — including in the heat of real disagreement about important subjects .
She will be an ideal colleague .
I don ’ t really believe in “ judicial temperament , ” because some of the greatest justices were irascible , difficult and mercurial .
But if you do believe in an ideal judicial temperament @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Barrett has it .
This combination of smart and nice will be scary for liberals .
Her old boss , Scalia , did not have the ideal judicial temperament ( too much personality , a wicked sense of humor ) and managed over the years to alienate Justice Sandra Day O ’ Connor , which may conceivably have helped produce more liberal outcomes as she moved to the left .
Barrett is also a profoundly conservative thinker and a deeply committed Catholic .
What of it ?
Constitutional interpretation draws on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ These beliefs should not be treated as disqualifying .
Some might argue that you should want your probable intellectual opponent on the court to be the weakest possible , to help you win .
But the Supreme Court is not and should not be a battlefield of winner-take-all political or ideological division .
…We have a Supreme Court nominee who is a brilliant lawyer , a genuine and good person — and someone who holds views about how to interpret the law that I think are wrong and , in certain respects , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her hearing treat her with respect .
And when she is confirmed , I am going to accept it as the consequence of the constitutional rules we have and the choices we collectively and individually have made .
And I ’ m going to be confident that Barrett is going to be a good justice , maybe even a great one — even if I disagree with her all the way .
— Bloomberg This is the kind of intellectual honesty that allowed Senators like Lindsey Graham to stand up in the Kavanaugh @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Cory Bookers , and Diane Feinsteins , with that now-infamous firebrand speech about their wanting power .
In that speech , he reminded his colleagues that he had confirmed two Obama-appointed SCOTUS nominees and didn ’ t resort to the kind of scorched-earth tactics and Borking that has come to characterize the other party .
Perhaps Professor Feldman will be an early indicator of the pendulum swinging back toward America ’ s historical center of civility and rational — if passionate — disagreement about policies .
It ’ s a lot to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t snap back to center , the only other option is rupture .
And that scenario gets really ugly in a hurry .
It is one in which there really are no winners .

Showing there is still some shred of decency in the Ivy League system, one prof who disagrees with nearly every right-of-center policy of jurisprudence stands by ACB’s nomination.
This oped will make it harder for the Left to claim her nomination is an abuse of power, as some have claimed, or in some other sense, inappropriate.
We thank Noah Feldman for putting partisanship (somewhat) aside for the purposes of this piece. It means that much more, considering his role in Harvard involved specialization in Constitutional Studies.
This is not to say he wasted an opportunity to take a swipe at the party — and McConnell — alleging hypocrisy over how he handled Merrick Garland. But he weighed this issue independently of any other complicating factors.
This may prove a helpful check on the unbridled stream of negative rhetoric we have been hearing from the aggrieved-that-they-will-no-longer-have-the-SCOTUS-as-a-defacto-legislative-body Democrats. After all, he must have some clout with the Left. He was called upon to be one of the witnesses in the Schiff-peachment fiasco.
What does Professor Feldman say about the nominee herself? Simply put, he heaped praise upon her. Because his points were designed to be understood in light of each other, we will cite him at length:
Yet these political judgments need to be distinguished from a separate question: what to think about Judge Amy Coney Barrett, whom Trump has told associates he plans to nominate. And here I want to be extremely clear. Regardless of what you or I may think of the circumstances of this nomination, Barrett is highly qualified to serve on the Supreme Court. I disagree with much of her judicial philosophy and expect to disagree with many, maybe even most of her future votes and opinions. Yet despite this disagreement, I know her to be a brilliant and conscientious lawyer who will analyze and decide cases in good faith, applying the jurisprudential principles to which she is committed. Those are the basic criteria for being a good justice. Barrett meets and exceeds them. I got to know Barrett more than 20 years ago when we clerked at the Supreme Court during the 1998-99 term. Of the thirty-some clerks that year, all of whom had graduated at the top of their law school classes and done prestigious appellate clerkships before coming to work at the court, Barrett stood out. Measured subjectively and unscientifically by pure legal acumen, she was one of the two strongest lawyers. The other was Jenny Martinez, now dean of the Stanford Law School. When assigned to work on an extremely complex, difficult case, especially one involving a hard-to-comprehend statutory scheme, I would first go to Barrett to explain it to me. Then I would go to Martinez to tell me what I should think about it. Barrett, a textualist who was working for a textualist, Justice Antonin Scalia, had the ability to bring logic and order to disorder and complexity. You can’t be a good textualist without that, since textualism insists that the law can be understood without reference to legislative history or the aims and context of the statute. In a world where merit counts, Barrett and Martinez would both be recognized as worthy of serving on the Supreme Court. If a Democratic president with the support of a Democratic Senate asked me to recommend a current law professor for the bench, Martinez would be on my short list. But a Republican is president, and the Senate is Republican. Elections have consequences, and so do justices’ decisions about when or whether to retire. Trump is almost certainly going to get his pick confirmed. Given that reality, it is better for the republic to have a principled, brilliant lawyer on the bench than a weaker candidate. That’s Barrett. To add to her merits, Barrett is a sincere, lovely person. I never heard her utter a word that wasn’t thoughtful and kind — including in the heat of real disagreement about important subjects. She will be an ideal colleague. I don’t really believe in “judicial temperament,” because some of the greatest justices were irascible, difficult and mercurial. But if you do believe in an ideal judicial temperament of calm and decorum, rest assured that Barrett has it. This combination of smart and nice will be scary for liberals. Her old boss, Scalia, did not have the ideal judicial temperament (too much personality, a wicked sense of humor) and managed over the years to alienate Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, which may conceivably have helped produce more liberal outcomes as she moved to the left. Barrett is also a profoundly conservative thinker and a deeply committed Catholic. What of it? Constitutional interpretation draws on the full resources of the human mind. These beliefs should not be treated as disqualifying. Some might argue that you should want your probable intellectual opponent on the court to be the weakest possible, to help you win. But the Supreme Court is not and should not be a battlefield of winner-take-all political or ideological division. …We have a Supreme Court nominee who is a brilliant lawyer, a genuine and good person — and someone who holds views about how to interpret the law that I think are wrong and, in certain respects, misguided. I hope the senators at her hearing treat her with respect. And when she is confirmed, I am going to accept it as the consequence of the constitutional rules we have and the choices we collectively and individually have made. And I’m going to be confident that Barrett is going to be a good justice, maybe even a great one — even if I disagree with her all the way. — Bloomberg
This is the kind of intellectual honesty that allowed Senators like Lindsey Graham to stand up in the Kavanaugh case and dress down the Kamala Harrises, Cory Bookers, and Diane Feinsteins, with that now-infamous firebrand speech about their wanting power.
In that speech, he reminded his colleagues that he had confirmed two Obama-appointed SCOTUS nominees and didn’t resort to the kind of scorched-earth tactics and Borking that has come to characterize the other party.
Perhaps Professor Feldman will be an early indicator of the pendulum swinging back toward America’s historical center of civility and rational — if passionate — disagreement about policies.
It’s a lot to hope for… but if the elastic doesn’t snap back to center, the only other option is rupture.
And that scenario gets really ugly in a hurry.
It is one in which there really are no winners.


clashdaily--2020-09-30--BOMBSHELL REPORT: Trump-Russia Collusion Was A STRATEGY By Hillary To Distract From Email Scandal

The Great Russian Collusion Hoax that has been pushed by the Media ( D ) for four years was the brainchild of the Hillary camp and Obama , Biden , John Brennan , and James Comey all knew about it .
According to declassified information on Thursday from Attorney General William Barr , the primary source for the Steele Dossier — which was the premise for the FISA warrants to begin surveillance of the Trump campaign — was actually a Russian national who was under investigation for suspected contact with Russian intelligence officers .
The Federalist covers that here : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ William Barr to Sen. Lindsey Graham , R-S.C. , declassified Thursday , a previously redacted but now-unveiled footnote in Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz ’ s December report shows the primary sub-source “ was the subject of an FBI counterintelligence investigation from 2009 to 2011 that assessed his/her documented contacts with suspected Russian intelligence officers.
” Trending : Why Did The New York Times Bury THIS Detail In Their ‘ Trump Taxes ’ Hit Piece ?
In other words , the primary sub-source , now known to be Igor Danchenko , who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ past , was investigated for being a Russian agent .
The documents further show that those running the Crossfire Hurricane investigation , which relied on the fake Steele dossier deriving its information from the sub-source , knew that Danchenko had been under a counterintelligence investigation .
Federal officials pushed forward with their deep-state operations anyway as part of the conspiracy theory that the president was serving as an undercover agent for the Russian government .
Late in the day on Tuesday , just hours before the first Presidential debate , Senator Lindsey Graham @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he received from the Director of National Intelligence ( DNI ) John Ratcliffe regarding the FBI investigation into Crossfire Hurricane .
What the letter says is absolutely explosive .
The Director of National Intelligence ( DNI ) declassified information indicating that former President Obama ’ s administration knew of Russian allegations that former Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton was attempting to tie Trump to the Russia and distract from her email scandal before the 2016 presidential election .
DNI John Ratcliffe informed the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday that the prior administration obtained @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but cautioned that the intelligence community ( IC ) “ does not know the accuracy of this allegation or the extent to which the Russian intelligence analysis may reflect exaggeration or fabrication.
” The declassified information doesn ’ t offer specifics on the intelligence but does reveal that former CIA Director John Brennan ’ s handwritten notes show that he briefed Obama on the information .
According to DNI John Ratcliffe ’ s letter , it included the “ alleged approval by Hillary Clinton on July 26 , 2016 of a proposal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by Russian security services.
” The letter reads as follows : In response to your request for Intelligence Community ( IC ) information related to the Federal Bureau of Investigation ’ s ( FBI ) Crossfire Hurricane Investigation , I have declassified the following : • In late July 2016 , U.S. intelligence agencies obtained insight into Russian intelligence analysis alleging that U.S. Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton had approved a campaign plan to stir up a scandal against U.S. Presidential candidate Donald @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Russians ’ hacking of the Democratic National Committee .
The IC does not know the accuracy of this allegation or the extent to which the Russian intelligence analysis may reflect exaggeration or fabrication .
• According to his handwritten notes , former Central Intelligence Agency Director Brennan subsequently briefed President Obama and other national security officials on the intelligence , including the “ alleged approval by Hillary Clinton on July 26 , 2016 of a proposal from one of her foreign policy advisors to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ • On 07 September 2016 , U.S. intelligence officials forwarded an investigative referral to FBI Director James Comey and Deputy Assistant Director of COunterintelligence Peter Strzok regarding “ U.S .
Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton ’ s approval of a plan concerning U.S. Presidential candidate Donald Trump and Russian hackers hampering U.S. elections as a means of distracting the public from her use of a private mail server.
” As referenced in his 24 September 2020 letter to your Committee , Attorney General Barr has advised that the disclosure of this information will not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Additional declassification and public disclosure of related intelligence remains under consideration ; however , the IC welcomes the opportunity to provide a classified briefing with further detail at your convenience .
Here is the letter : Don Jr. picked up on the letter right away .
Several members of the Partisan Presstitutes and Democrats — but I repeat myself — were dismissing this as “ Russian disinformation ” laundered by the DNI and peddled by the Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee .
Which is truly astounding since they were the ones @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — with the claims of Russian prostitutes peeing on a hotel bed — as the absolute Gospel Truth .
Here is the Communications Director for Senator Mark Warner ( D-VA ) retweeting the skeptical tweet of the Congressional correspondent for POLITICO .
The DNI fired back .
Chuck Ross from The Daily Caller reported on the new statement .
Besides , this seems to be consistent with the Democratic Party ’ s commitment to “ projection ” — accusing Republicans of what they themselves are .
It would seem that the entire Russiagate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the Deep State .
In a WikiLeaks dump of emails , Jennifer Palmieri asked who was in charge of the “ Trump Swift Boat Project.
” The Hillary team was calling it “ swiftboating ” Trump .
An archive of Hillary ’ s campaign website dated August 8 , 2016 pushes a Trump-Russia conspiracy with “ 5 Questions Every Voter Should Ask About Donald Trump ’ s Bizarre Relationship With Russia.
” Here are the questions : • Why does Trump surround himself with advisers with links to the Kremlin ?
• @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ideas read like a Putin wish list ?
• Why is Trump encouraging Russia to interfere in our election ?
These questions are really awkward in light of the latest revelations .
Hillary used this same Russian disinformation during the 2016 Presidential debates and accused Trump of encouraging espionage against Americans which she claimed was “ designed to influence the election.
” The unbelievable gall of that woman !
When Trump called her “ Crooked Hillary ” he had no idea how right he was .
The Media ( D ) is going @ @ @ @ @ @ @ complicit in the biggest political scandal in American history .
And they wonder why Trump calls them “ Fake News .
”

The Great Russian Collusion Hoax that has been pushed by the Media (D) for four years was the brainchild of the Hillary camp and Obama, Biden, John Brennan, and James Comey all knew about it.
According to declassified information on Thursday from Attorney General William Barr, the primary source for the Steele Dossier — which was the premise for the FISA warrants to begin surveillance of the Trump campaign — was actually a Russian national who was under investigation for suspected contact with Russian intelligence officers.
The Federalist covers that here:
According to documents released by Attorney General William Barr to Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., declassified Thursday, a previously redacted but now-unveiled footnote in Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s December report shows the primary sub-source “was the subject of an FBI counterintelligence investigation from 2009 to 2011 that assessed his/her documented contacts with suspected Russian intelligence officers.” In other words, the primary sub-source, now known to be Igor Danchenko, who is a Russian national with a checkered past, was investigated for being a Russian agent. The documents further show that those running the Crossfire Hurricane investigation, which relied on the fake Steele dossier deriving its information from the sub-source, knew that Danchenko had been under a counterintelligence investigation. Federal officials pushed forward with their deep-state operations anyway as part of the conspiracy theory that the president was serving as an undercover agent for the Russian government. Source: The Federalist
Late in the day on Tuesday, just hours before the first Presidential debate, Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) released a declassified letter he received from the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) John Ratcliffe regarding the FBI investigation into Crossfire Hurricane.
What the letter says is absolutely explosive.
The Director of National Intelligence (DNI) declassified information indicating that former President Obama’s administration knew of Russian allegations that former Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton was attempting to tie Trump to the Russia and distract from her email scandal before the 2016 presidential election. DNI John Ratcliffe informed the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday that the prior administration obtained the Russian intelligence in July of 2016, but cautioned that the intelligence community (IC) “does not know the accuracy of this allegation or the extent to which the Russian intelligence analysis may reflect exaggeration or fabrication.” The declassified information doesn’t offer specifics on the intelligence but does reveal that former CIA Director John Brennan’s handwritten notes show that he briefed Obama on the information. According to DNI John Ratcliffe’s letter, it included the “alleged approval by Hillary Clinton on July 26, 2016 of a proposal from one of her foreign policy advisors to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by Russian security services.” Source: Fox News
The letter reads as follows:
Chairman Graham,
In response to your request for Intelligence Community (IC) information related to the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) Crossfire Hurricane Investigation, I have declassified the following:
In late July 2016, U.S. intelligence agencies obtained insight into Russian intelligence analysis alleging that U.S. Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton had approved a campaign plan to stir up a scandal against U.S. Presidential candidate Donald Trump by tying him to Putin and the Russians’ hacking of the Democratic National Committee. The IC does not know the accuracy of this allegation or the extent to which the Russian intelligence analysis may reflect exaggeration or fabrication.
According to his handwritten notes, former Central Intelligence Agency Director Brennan subsequently briefed President Obama and other national security officials on the intelligence, including the “alleged approval by Hillary Clinton on July 26, 2016 of a proposal from one of her foreign policy advisors to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by Russian security services.”
On 07 September 2016, U.S. intelligence officials forwarded an investigative referral to FBI Director James Comey and Deputy Assistant Director of COunterintelligence Peter Strzok regarding “U.S. Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s approval of a plan concerning U.S. Presidential candidate Donald Trump and Russian hackers hampering U.S. elections as a means of distracting the public from her use of a private mail server.”
As referenced in his 24 September 2020 letter to your Committee, Attorney General Barr has advised that the disclosure of this information will not interfere with ongoing Department of Justice investigations. Additional declassification and public disclosure of related intelligence remains under consideration; however, the IC welcomes the opportunity to provide a classified briefing with further detail at your convenience.
Respectfully,
John Ratcliffe
Here is the letter:
Don Jr. picked up on the letter right away.
OMG???JUST DECLASSIFIED: The Russia hoax was Hillary’s plan, and the Obama-Biden White House was briefed on it. pic.twitter.com/ytquclKKg1 — Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) September 29, 2020
On September 7, 2016, U.S. intel officials sent an investigative referral to James Comey and Peter Strzok about Clinton's election interference plan–and Russia's knowledge of it. We now know the Steele dossier was entirely a product of Russian agents and intel officials. — Sean Davis (@seanmdav) September 29, 2020
Today's declassification confirms that from the beginning, the FBI knew its anti-Trump investigation was based entirely on Russian disinformation. Brennan and Comey were personally warned. They responded by fabricating evidence and defrauding the courts. https://t.co/WduEKYOAPg — Sean Davis (@seanmdav) September 29, 2020
Several members of the Partisan Presstitutes and Democrats — but I repeat myself — were dismissing this as “Russian disinformation” laundered by the DNI and peddled by the Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Which is truly astounding since they were the ones quick to believe the infamous Steele Dossier — with the claims of Russian prostitutes peeing on a hotel bed — as the absolute Gospel Truth.
Here is the Communications Director for Senator Mark Warner (D-VA) retweeting the skeptical tweet of the Congressional correspondent for POLITICO.
This is Russian disinformation. Laundered by the Director Of National Intelligence and Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. This is extraordinary. https://t.co/vP1kAgfIYq — rachel cohen (@rcohen) September 29, 2020
The DNI fired back. Chuck Ross from The Daily Caller reported on the new statement. It reads, “To be clear, this is not Russian disinformation and has not been assessed as such by the Intelligence Community. I’ll be briefing Congress on the sensitive sources and methods by which it was obtained in the coming days.”
FBI statement: “The FBI has been, and will continue to be, fully cooperative with all congressional inquiries, and Department of Justice reviews, into the Crossfire Hurricane investigation.” — Chuck Ross (@ChuckRossDC) September 29, 2020
Besides, this seems to be consistent with the Democratic Party’s commitment to “projection” — accusing Republicans of what they themselves are.
It would seem that the entire Russiagate probe was merely a political smear perpetrated by the Deep State.
In a WikiLeaks dump of emails, Jennifer Palmieri asked who was in charge of the “Trump Swift Boat Project.”
The Hillary team was calling it “swiftboating” Trump.
Here is the clip of Robby Mook pushing it on July 24, 2016:
Here's the moment on July 24th, 2016, when Robby Mook planted the Russia collusion hoax. This is what started it all. As we just learned from @DNI_Ratcliffe, this was immediately followed by Hillary pushing the fabricated scandal that Trump was working with Russia. pic.twitter.com/mRlLtk2CJ4 — Hans Mahncke (@HansMahncke) September 29, 2020
An archive of Hillary’s campaign website dated August 8, 2016 pushes a Trump-Russia conspiracy with “5 Questions Every Voter Should Ask About Donald Trump’s Bizarre Relationship With Russia.”
Here are the questions:
What’s behind Trump’s fascination with Vladimir Putin? Why does Trump surround himself with advisers with links to the Kremlin? Why do Trump’s foreign policy ideas read like a Putin wish list? Do Trump’s still-secret tax returns show ties to Russian oligarchs? Why is Trump encouraging Russia to interfere in our election?
These questions are really awkward in light of the latest revelations.
Hillary used this same Russian disinformation during the 2016 Presidential debates and accused Trump of encouraging espionage against Americans which she claimed was “designed to influence the election.”
The unbelievable gall of that woman!
When Trump called her “Crooked Hillary” he had no idea how right he was.
They were all in on the big lie together This isn't news to anyone paying attention. Hillary paid for the Russian disinformation, Obama-Biden used it to spy on President Trump, and Hillary used her bogus dossier DURING the debatespic.twitter.com/5EhEUD81SX — Elizabeth Harrington (@LizRNC) September 29, 2020
The Media (D) is going to bury this because they’re complicit in the biggest political scandal in American history. And they wonder why Trump calls them “Fake News.”


clashdaily--2020-09-29--New Yorkers FURIOUS As Bungled Ballots Arrive Due To ‘Vendor Error’ — Here’s The 411

Democrats keep telling Americans that there are no risks to large-scale voting by mail .
Really ?
Then what the hell is happening in New York ?
The New York Post reported that absentee ballots sent out to voters in Queens were labeled “ for military use only ” even if the recipient had never served in the military .
The issue could have simply been cleared up if they had used a forward slash on the envelope ie .
“ Official Absentee/Military ballot ” since the same ballot is used for both absentee and military absentee voting .
Voters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ballots for the 2020 presidential election marked for military use despite never having served in the armed forces — causing confusion and concerns over whether the ballots can or should be used .
The misprint makes it appear that the voters received a “ Official Military Absentee Ballot ” instead of a “ Military/Absentee Ballot , ” leaving several borough residents who received the documents — including two Post journalists — worried that their votes might not be properly tallied .
Trending : Why Did The New York Times Bury THIS Detail In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
“ I believe that ’ s just the tip of the iceberg , ” said City Councilman Jimmy Van Bramer , referring to the constituents in his Sunnyside district who have reached out to him about receiving the ballots .
“ It appears that everyone has gotten this particular ballot.
” Experts from both sides of the political aisle said the typo ultimately wouldn ’ t matter because the city Board of Elections uses the same ballots for both military voters and traditional absentee voters who live in the same district .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ but it ’ s not the only problem .
Some voters despite requesting absentee ballots weeks ago still haven ’ t received them .
But that ’ s still not the biggest problem .
The Gothamist is reporting that voters in Brooklyn are receiving ballots that have a much worse problem — the name and address on the return envelope were both wrong , which would make the ballot inside that return envelope void .
It ’ s being called a “ vendor error ” but it ’ s a helluva thing to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ month to go before E-Day and a pandemic raging forcing those at high risk and the hyperventilating fearful sheeple who don ’ t realize that they are at low risk to vote by mail .
The New York City Board of Elections has mailed out nearly half a million absentee ballots ahead of Election Day this November , as many New Yorkers are opting to vote by mail during the pandemic .
Yet some voters are already reporting problems with their ballots that could invalidate someone ’ s vote if they aren ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Brooklyn told Gothamist / WNYC that they have received a mislabeled “ official absentee ballot envelope.
” Normally , the voter inserts their completed ballot into the envelope and signs the outside .
But in these cases , their ballot envelopes bear the wrong name and address .
If a person signs their own name to this faulty ballot envelope , the ballot would be voided .
So far , voters in Park Slope , Prospect Heights , Carroll Gardens , Crown Heights , Clinton Hill , Bushwick , Flatbush , Brooklyn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reported the issue .
More than 140,000 absentee ballots have gone out across the borough .
Voters bombarded the NYC Board of Elections Twitter post with complaints : The complaints keep piling on and then… Why would they want to actually take some responsibility for this truly exceptional failure ?
NYC Board of Elections is trying to get info out , but… the problem seems to be massive .
It looks like they ’ re doing the same bang-up job with the election that they did with the coronavirus .

Democrats keep telling Americans that there are no risks to large-scale voting by mail. Really? Then what the hell is happening in New York?
The New York Post reported that absentee ballots sent out to voters in Queens were labeled “for military use only” even if the recipient had never served in the military. The issue could have simply been cleared up if they had used a forward slash on the envelope ie. “Official Absentee/Military ballot” since the same ballot is used for both absentee and military absentee voting.
Voters in New York City have received mail-in ballots for the 2020 presidential election marked for military use despite never having served in the armed forces — causing confusion and concerns over whether the ballots can or should be used. The misprint makes it appear that the voters received a “Official Military Absentee Ballot” instead of a “Military/Absentee Ballot,” leaving several borough residents who received the documents — including two Post journalists — worried that their votes might not be properly tallied. “I believe that’s just the tip of the iceberg,” said City Councilman Jimmy Van Bramer, referring to the constituents in his Sunnyside district who have reached out to him about receiving the ballots. “It appears that everyone has gotten this particular ballot.” Experts from both sides of the political aisle said the typo ultimately wouldn’t matter because the city Board of Elections uses the same ballots for both military voters and traditional absentee voters who live in the same district. Source: New York Post
That seems like a minor problem, but it’s not the only problem.
Some voters despite requesting absentee ballots weeks ago still haven’t received them.
But that’s still not the biggest problem.
The Gothamist is reporting that voters in Brooklyn are receiving ballots that have a much worse problem — the name and address on the return envelope were both wrong, which would make the ballot inside that return envelope void.
It’s being called a “vendor error” but it’s a helluva thing to happen with just a little over a month to go before E-Day and a pandemic raging forcing those at high risk and the hyperventilating fearful sheeple who don’t realize that they are at low risk to vote by mail.
The New York City Board of Elections has mailed out nearly half a million absentee ballots ahead of Election Day this November, as many New Yorkers are opting to vote by mail during the pandemic. Yet some voters are already reporting problems with their ballots that could invalidate someone’s vote if they aren’t caught in time. Multiple voters in Brooklyn told Gothamist / WNYC that they have received a mislabeled “official absentee ballot envelope.” Normally, the voter inserts their completed ballot into the envelope and signs the outside. But in these cases, their ballot envelopes bear the wrong name and address. If a person signs their own name to this faulty ballot envelope, the ballot would be voided. So far, voters in Park Slope, Prospect Heights, Carroll Gardens, Crown Heights, Clinton Hill, Bushwick, Flatbush, Brooklyn Heights, and Sunset Park have already reported the issue. More than 140,000 absentee ballots have gone out across the borough. Source: The Gothamist
Well, I was going to tweet about how the ballot that I just received is so poorly designed they must not want you to actually vote, but then I noticed that @BOENYC sent me someone else's ballot. What am I supposed to do now? (Actual question) — Dan Levitan (@DanLevitan) September 28, 2020
also if you are alexander d green and this is how we’re supposed to meet bc we’re soul mates, my DM’s are open — allie #insulin4all (she/her) (@autoimmuneallie) September 28, 2020
Called the BOE, they’re sending a replacement ballot, but, uh, had me in their system with the wrong birthdate. (It’s always been fine before!) I’m absolutely going to vote in person now. — Barry Petchesky (@barry) September 28, 2020
?Today, I received a DM from a neighbor that I haven’t met before, and I am completely aghast. He told me that his wife received my absentee ballot, which had me so confused…because I just received my ballot in the mail. How could he have my ballot when mine just arrived?? 1/ pic.twitter.com/c504c4BDE1 — Crystal Hudson (@crystalrhudson) September 28, 2020
So let’s recap—my neighbor’s wife has my absentee ballot; he has his wife’s ballot; and his is missing, along with @ahujie’s. These neighbors also shared that they are immigrants & are very excited to vote in their first presidential election as citizens. ? What to do next? 3/ — Crystal Hudson (@crystalrhudson) September 28, 2020
Voters bombarded the NYC Board of Elections Twitter post with complaints:
My partner and I are in Prospect Heights and we both received ballots with inner envelopes that are addressed to completely different people at a different address. — Joana Kelly (@joanawithonen) September 29, 2020
Also, the ballot says Absentee Military Ballot — I am not military! And my wife and daughter have exactly the same situation with their absentee ballots. — Paul "Anarchist Jurisdiction" Witcover (@PaulWitcover) September 28, 2020
I also received the envelope with someone else's name from a few blocks away! What do you suggest we do @BOENYC ?? — Jessie Rogowski (@jessierogowski) September 29, 2020
Received my ballot yesterday. The privacy envelope has a return address for a completely different voter, someone on an adjacent street. Also voter's address has the street number & street name, but just has the apt number stuck on the end. Does @BOENYC even care about accuracy? — Christopher Gabbert (@gabbertoons) September 29, 2020
My lovely neighbor who I've never met just dropped off my ballot to me by hand since the outside envelope was addressed to him. This election is too important for this nonsense. Please get your shit together. — Nadine Baldasare (@nbaldasare) September 29, 2020
And don’t forget to check to make sure you received YOUR OWN absentee ballot. MULTIPLE people in my building recieved other people’s ballots! Unacceptable!! — kate (@ihatesponges) September 28, 2020
Wrong name on 2 of 3 ballots send to our house. How will you remedy this incompetence? — jtfarley (@jtfarley) September 29, 2020
Got my absentee ballot today with the wrong name and address on the inside envelope that I would sign. — the nine lives of nena (@PoisonOrchardNY) September 28, 2020
I also received someone else OFFICIAL ABSENTEE BALLOT ENVELOPE. Which means someone has MY envelope and will vote instead of me. — Matthew Kirby (@Matthew_Kirby) September 28, 2020
I also received ballots with the wrong name on it. Please advise what to do — Lindsey Grossman (@lindseyberg) September 28, 2020
My roommate and I got our absentee ballots but neither one had the correct person on the inner envelope. I had my roommate and they had someone who lives down the block from us. — Alyssa Sthay (@Alyssaurus_rex_) September 29, 2020
I received my ballot today, and the ballot envelope had someone else's name, address and election district on it. I'm not sure how to fix this. — Andrew @ ? (@Acal) September 28, 2020
I got an incorrect ballot too. Contacted the person that the ballot belongs to, she got someone else’s — Flawed Logic Parent (@F_dLogicParent) September 29, 2020
The complaints keep piling on and then…
THIS HAPPENED TO ME. YOUR PHONE NUMBER IS OUT OF SERVICE!!!!!!!! — matthew edelstein (@mredelstein) September 29, 2020
Why would they want to actually take some responsibility for this truly exceptional failure?
NYC Board of Elections is trying to get info out, but… the problem seems to be massive.
This happened to me, most disappointing. DM'd but would rather just go vote early in person. This feels too much like a setup to make sure my vote is not counted. There better be a full investigation and some very serious consequences. — Craigiscool dot com (@craigiscoolcom) September 29, 2020
My absentee ballot has mismatching names. pic.twitter.com/Byu85VhQig — Michael Beach Nichols (@michaelbnichols) September 29, 2020
This happened to me. — kim (@designer_kim) September 29, 2020
I just received someone else's ballot, as did a concerning number of people in my area of Brooklyn. I sent an email and hope you will take immediate steps to rectify this. — Jasmin Rosemberg (@JasminRosemberg) September 29, 2020
Agree, you MUST resend them all. EVERYONE in Brooklyn I know have received wrong ballots, including my district AD53. You have to recall those and automatically resend new ones ASAP. @BOENYC @NYGovCuomo -DL AD53 — Samy Nemir-Olivares (@Samynemir) September 29, 2020
It would be really helpful to include what sort of information you need to send over email to make processing faster and feel more reliable, particularly since emails weren't involved in even the online ballot request process. — Liz Denys (@lizdenys) September 29, 2020
Jay is not wrong.
It looks like they’re doing the same bang-up job with the election that they did with the coronavirus.


clashdaily--2020-09-29--WATCH: Senator Ted Cruz Triggers ‘The View’ Coven When He Criticizes Blue State COVID Response

Texas Senator Ted Cruz went right into the Heart of Darkness™ on Monday and his hosts probably regretted allowing him on the show .
Senator Ted Cruz ( R-TX ) is promoting his new — and very timely — new book on the Supreme Court , One Vote Away : How A Single Seat Supreme Court Seat Can Change History .
It ’ s taking him all sorts of places , including being “ grilled ” by the leftist harpies on The View .
Of course , they couldn ’ t have a Republican Senator on and not try to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fellow Republicans , right ?
The women on the daytime talk show began to discuss one of the Only Approved Topics that is affecting all of us these days — the virus from China , COVID-19 .
Trending : Why Did The New York Times Bury THIS Detail In Their ‘ Trump Taxes ’ Hit Piece ?
One of the harpiest of the harpies , Joy ( less ) Behar , took an interesting tactic by trying to get Ted Cruz to either defend or criticize Florida Governor Ron DeSantis on his decision @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CRUZ : New York , in particular , has led the country in death rate , and I think it had a lot to do with the Democratic Governor there — Governor Cuomo sending people who had COVID into nursing homes .
CRUZ : Well , the death rate is three times as high as the death rate in Texas or Florida .
BEHAR : I asked you about DeSantis .
Answer me about DeSantis , please .
BEHAR : I ’ m talking about Florida right now , not New York .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ and a lot of people were coming in without any kind of sanctions on it .
CRUZ : But the government policy was different and the policy made a difference — BEHAR : Tell me about Florida .
Let ’ s get what you think about DeSantis .
CRUZ : The government policy was different and the policy made a difference .
The policy of the Governors of New York and New Jersey of sending people who were COVID-positive into nursing homes — CRUZ : …was catastrophic , and it resulted in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
I ’ m saying we should actually listen to sound science and protect people and keep them safe .
BEHAR : You are deflecting the question !
Just look at their faces .
They don ’ t even want to share a screen with Ted Cruz .
Florida has done exceptionally well keeping the death rate down , but New York has been a model on what not to do .
Despite this , the media and the left ( but I repeat myself ) are quick to use Gov .
DeSantis @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Cuomo .
• MEDIA BIAS : New York ’ s Cuomo Has Been Lauded While Florida ’ s DeSantis Has Been Vilified • New York Nursing Home Deaths Are ‘ A Significant Undercount ’ But Gov .
Cuomo Doesn ’ t Want An Independent Investigation Whoopi Goldberg jumped in and criticized Trump for his response , even though he shut down travel from China and then from Europe , didn ’ t want to create nationwide panic , and reluctantly shut down in the early days when there was still much that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Days To Slow The Spread ” thing that has been extended by some states almost indefinitely .
That ’ s all Trump ’ s fault and worthy of criticism , apparently .
Would Whoopi care to take a run at criticizing another leader who didn ’ t shut down the borders , still doesn ’ t have enough tests to meet demand , even though the government was “ fully briefed ” on the COVID-19 pandemic “ in late December , early January ” and knew the “ risk it posed to human @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ watching it very carefully ” ?
The beloved leftist , blackfaced Canuck , Justin Trudeau did just that — not a damned thing — until after President Trump ’ s response .
I ’ m thinking she won ’ t because he ’ s a ( sometimes ) white version of Obama and the Great Leftist Hope in the Great White North .
Beyond that , however , it ’ s utterly ridiculous when anyone to the political right of Karl Marx shows up on The View to be questioned by a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ flat-out stupid people who cater to their leftwing audience of trained seals rather than have any sort of serious discussion .
Watching The View some days makes me question the wisdom of the 19th Amendment — ok , not really , but at the very least demand that a basic Civics test and a quiz on the issues be given to people before they are permitted to cast their ballot .
These harpies on The View are unserious people who are , unfortunately , taken seriously because of their gender .
It just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have about women .
The women on Outnumbered on Fox News — even the lefties that literally just read the talking points — are more serious than The View Coven .
When someone as brilliant as Ted Cruz comes on the show , it ’ s pretty clear that they ’ re way out of their league .

Texas Senator Ted Cruz went right into the Heart of Darkness™ on Monday and his hosts probably regretted allowing him on the show.
Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) is promoting his new — and very timely — new book on the Supreme Court, One Vote Away: How A Single Seat Supreme Court Seat Can Change History. It’s taking him all sorts of places, including being “grilled” by the leftist harpies on The View.
Of course, they couldn’t have a Republican Senator on and not try to make him pull out the knives on fellow Republicans, right?
The women on the daytime talk show began to discuss one of the Only Approved Topics that is affecting all of us these days — the virus from China, COVID-19.
One of the harpiest of the harpies, Joy(less) Behar, took an interesting tactic by trying to get Ted Cruz to either defend or criticize Florida Governor Ron DeSantis on his decision to fully reopen the state.
Cruz didn’t fall for it.
TED CRUZ: New York, in particular, has led the country in death rate, and I think it had a lot to do with the Democratic Governor there — Governor Cuomo sending people who had COVID into nursing homes.
JOY BEHAR: That’s not true.
CRUZ: Well, the death rate is three times as high as the death rate in Texas or Florida.
BEHAR: I asked you about DeSantis. Answer me about DeSantis, please.
CRUZ: I’m sorry?
BEHAR: I’m talking about Florida right now, not New York. New York got hit very early, and a lot of people were coming in without any kind of sanctions on it.
CRUZ: But the government policy was different and the policy made a difference —
BEHAR: Tell me about Florida. Let’s get what you think about DeSantis.
CRUZ: The government policy was different and the policy made a difference. The policy of the Governors of New York and New Jersey of sending people who were COVID-positive into nursing homes —
BEHAR: Deflection.
CRUZ: …was catastrophic, and it resulted in a horrific death rate.
BEHAR: You are deflecting, sir.
CRUZ: No. I’m saying we should actually listen to sound science and protect people and keep them safe.
BEHAR: You are deflecting the question!
Just look at their faces. They don’t even want to share a screen with Ted Cruz.
Florida has done exceptionally well keeping the death rate down, but New York has been a model on what not to do. Despite this, the media and the left (but I repeat myself) are quick to use Gov. DeSantis as a punching bag while lauding Gov. Cuomo.
Whoopi Goldberg jumped in and criticized Trump for his response, even though he shut down travel from China and then from Europe, didn’t want to create nationwide panic, and reluctantly shut down in the early days when there was still much that was unknown. That whole “15 Days To Slow The Spread” thing that has been extended by some states almost indefinitely.
That’s all Trump’s fault and worthy of criticism, apparently.
Would Whoopi care to take a run at criticizing another leader who didn’t shut down the borders, still doesn’t have enough tests to meet demand, even though the government was “fully briefed” on the COVID-19 pandemic “in late December, early January” and knew the “risk it posed to human health” and was, therefore, “watching it very carefully”?
The beloved leftist, blackfaced Canuck, Justin Trudeau did just that — not a damned thing — until after President Trump’s response.
I’m thinking she won’t because he’s a (sometimes) white version of Obama and the Great Leftist Hope in the Great White North.
Beyond that, however, it’s utterly ridiculous when anyone to the political right of Karl Marx shows up on The View to be questioned by a group of vapid, ignorant, and flat-out stupid people who cater to their leftwing audience of trained seals rather than have any sort of serious discussion.
Watching The View some days makes me question the wisdom of the 19th Amendment — ok, not really, but at the very least demand that a basic Civics test and a quiz on the issues be given to people before they are permitted to cast their ballot.
These harpies on The View are unserious people who are, unfortunately, taken seriously because of their gender.
It just shows the low expectations that people still have about women. The women on Outnumbered on Fox News — even the lefties that literally just read the talking points — are more serious than The View Coven.
When someone as brilliant as Ted Cruz comes on the show, it’s pretty clear that they’re way out of their league.


clashdaily--2020-09-29--WATCH: Kamala Harris Refuses To Answer A Direct Question About Packing The Supreme Court

You know what that means , right ?
You bet your patootie they ’ re planning on packing the Court with leftists if they win .
On Monday night , Vice Presidential candidate , Senator Kamala Harris ( D-CA ) appeared on MSNBC and spoke with Lawrence O ’ Donnell .
He asked her a question that she should have expected — but clearly didn ’ t — about a possible expansion of the Supreme Court if Joe Biden wins the election .
It ’ s a threat that several Democrats have made almost immediately after the death of Ruth @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , “ If Judge Barrett is confirmed and the Democrats have control of the Senate next year , and the White House and the House of Representatives , should the Supreme Court be expanded ?
” Trending : Why Did The New York Times Bury THIS Detail In Their ‘ Trump Taxes ’ Hit Piece ?
“ You know , let ’ s .
I think that — first of all — Joe has been very clear that he is going to pay attention to the fact , and I ’ m with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ attention to the fact that right now , Lawrence , people are voting , ” she said .
Harris reiterated comments by the former vice president that whoever is elected president in November should get to name a replacement for Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg , who died on Sept. 18 , because people are already voting by mail .
“ This is not some kind of debate about election year , should a sitting president be allowed or able to nominate someone to the United States Supreme Court for a lifetime appointment .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
This is like we ’ re actually in the election , ” Harris said .
She just skated right past that question… It ’ s a big deal because when Harris was running to be at the top of the ticket , she had said that she wasn ’ t opposed to the idea of packing the Supreme Court .
“ We are on the verge of a crisis of confidence in the Supreme Court , ” Harris said last March , according to Politico .
“ We have to take this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the table to do that.
” Harris also reportedly shared similar sentiments with the New York Times , saying she was “ absolutely open to ” packing the court .
The California Democrat was not the only member of her party ’ s presidential hopefuls to commit to a court-packing strategy if Trump continued to see success in reshaping the high court .
Some even offered proposals to add up to 10 more members .
Last week she completely ignored Peter Doocy ’ s question about packing SCOTUS… twice .
The Biden campaign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ d do .
Joe had been against it in the past , but , well , we ’ ve seen that his position can shift pretty dramatically on a dime .
If only the rest of us could do that to her .
Well , you know how to make that happen , right ?
It ’ ll be work , but you ’ ve got to convince the undecideds and reluctant Biden-voters that despite the atrocious coverage by the Media ( D ) , President Trump has actually been doing a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .

You know what that means, right? You bet your patootie they’re planning on packing the Court with leftists if they win.
On Monday night, Vice Presidential candidate, Senator Kamala Harris (D-CA) appeared on MSNBC and spoke with Lawrence O’Donnell. He asked her a question that she should have expected — but clearly didn’t — about a possible expansion of the Supreme Court if Joe Biden wins the election.
It’s a threat that several Democrats have made almost immediately after the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
O’Donnell asked, “If Judge Barrett is confirmed and the Democrats have control of the Senate next year, and the White House and the House of Representatives, should the Supreme Court be expanded?”
After an awkward pause, Senator Harris responds.
“You know, let’s. I think that — first of all — Joe has been very clear that he is going to pay attention to the fact, and I’m with him on this 1,000 percent, pay attention to the fact that right now, Lawrence, people are voting,” she said. Harris reiterated comments by the former vice president that whoever is elected president in November should get to name a replacement for Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who died on Sept. 18, because people are already voting by mail. “This is not some kind of debate about election year, should a sitting president be allowed or able to nominate someone to the United States Supreme Court for a lifetime appointment. This is not even an election year. This is like we’re actually in the election,” Harris said. Source: New York Post
She just skated right past that question…
…with zero push-back from O’Donnell.
It’s a big deal because when Harris was running to be at the top of the ticket, she had said that she wasn’t opposed to the idea of packing the Supreme Court.
“We are on the verge of a crisis of confidence in the Supreme Court,” Harris said last March, according to Politico. “We have to take this challenge head-on, and everything is on the table to do that.” Harris also reportedly shared similar sentiments with the New York Times, saying she was “absolutely open to” packing the court. The California Democrat was not the only member of her party’s presidential hopefuls to commit to a court-packing strategy if Trump continued to see success in reshaping the high court. Some even offered proposals to add up to 10 more members. Source: Fox News
Last week she completely ignored Peter Doocy’s question about packing SCOTUS… twice.
The Biden campaign has been completely unclear on what they’d do. Joe had been against it in the past, but, well, we’ve seen that his position can shift pretty dramatically on a dime.
Harris could teach a Master Class in evasion.
If only the rest of us could do that to her.
Doesn’t that sound great?
Well, you know how to make that happen, right? It’ll be work, but you’ve got to convince the undecideds and reluctant Biden-voters that despite the atrocious coverage by the Media (D), President Trump has actually been doing a great job and deserves to be reelected.


clashdaily--2020-09-29--PANDERING FAIL: Kamala Harris’s Rapper Problem–Snoop Dogg, Tupac, And The Notorious B.I.G.

Does Senator Kamala Harris think we ’ re still living in the 90s ?
!
From the moment she decided to run for President , Senator Kamala Harris ( D-CA ) has been trying desperately to push her “ street cred ” as a culturally savvy black woman–but she keeps failing spectacularly .
Harris dropped out of the race to become the Democratic nominee because she was unable to gain more than 3 % support with the crowded primary field .
The New York Post reported that Harris was polling poorly .
It was so bad that even though she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ most populous state which also leans left , she was behind Mayor “ Preachy ” Pete Buttigieg of South Bend , Indiana .
How embarrassing !
Newsweek published an article in August showing that Harris was struggling to get support from black voters , even trailing behind noted cultural appropriator , Senator Elizabeth “ Pocahontas ” Warren ( D-MA ) .
YIKES !
On Friday , Senator Harris was taking part in a virtual NAACP Conference with CNN commentator Angela Rye when she was asked who the best rapper alive is .
Harris @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a 1996 Las Vegas drive-by shooting .
Rye then gave Harris an out for her ridiculous mistake of naming a rapper who has been dead for 24 years .
She says that to “ West Coast girls , Tupac lives on !
” Harris says , “ I keep doing that !
” but then can ’ t name a single live rapper she considers the best .
She does attempt a swipe at ( presumably ) Kanye West when she says that “ there are some that I would not mention right @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lane.
” Unless she meant Cardi B. who is now conducting “ serious interviews ” with leftwing politicians , the most recent was with Joe Biden for Elle magazine , but that seems unlikely .
Celebrities weighing in on politics is fine when they agree with the left .
Look , I ’ m not a fan of rap , but I ’ m apparently in the minority .
It ’ s literally everywhere , and even I can name a half-dozen popular rappers from the past 5 years .
Harris could have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ named Cardi B. as the “ best rapper alive ” since she ’ s already said in several interviews that she was a fan .
I ’ ll believe that when she can recite the lyrics to a single Cardi B. song .
Senator Harris must have 90s rappers on her mind because just yesterday during prepared remarks opposing President Trump ’ s nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett she mixed up the pop-culture nickname for Ruth Bader Ginsburg with another 90s rapper , Biggie Smalls .
Christopher George Latore Wallace was known @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Biggie Smalls , or simply Biggie , and he was also killed in a drive-by shooting , but this was in 1997 in Los Angeles .
Still , Harris said that leftists proudly wear their “ Notorious B.I.G .
t-shirts ” when she meant to say “ Notorious R.B.G.
” shirts .
Harris has been doing this kind of thing for quite some time .
Let ’ s not forget that Harris told The Breakfast Club that she smoked pot in college in 1986 while listening to Tupac and Snoop Dogg who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1993 respectively .
Perhaps being a time-traveling weed-smoker has messed up her ability to keep track of any rappers except a handful of the single most popular ones from the 1990s .
It ’ s either that or she ’ s even worse at pandering to black voters than Hillary with her hot sauce in her purse and “ feelin ’ no ways tired ” or Joe Biden ’ s “ you ain ’ t black ” comment .
Do you think that the Partisan Presstitutes will call her on it ?
If @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Rye is any indication , the answer is “ Hell , no !
” They ’ ll probably cover for her .
But we ’ ll never actually know what the Media ( D ) would do because it isn ’ t just Joe Biden that the Democrats are hiding in the basement–Kamala hasn ’ t been out there , either .
Although , she ’ s out there telling voters otherwise .
You can ’ t blame the Democrats with their strategy of hiding their awful Presidential and Veep candidates as much @ @ @ @ @ @ @ put out there in front of everyone , it ’ ll be clear that Joe is a prop and they ’ re just trying to slide in Kamala as the first half-black , half-Asian , female President who votes further left than Bernie Sanders .
Would Democrats really rally behind the woman who is so unlikeable that she was only able to get 3.3 % of the Democrat vote ?
Who would vote for this woman with the witchy cackle every time she lies and/or is uncomfortable ?
Imagine four years of that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And yet , millions of people will vote for the “ Harris/Biden ” ticket because…Orange Man Bad .
Pussification : The Effeminization Of The American Male Doug Giles , best-selling author of Raising Righteous And Rowdy Girls and Editor-In-Chief of the mega-blog , ClashDaily.com , has just penned a book he guarantees will kick hipster males into the rarefied air of masculinity .
That is , if the man-child will put down his frappuccino ; shut the hell up and listen and obey everything he instructs them to do in his timely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pussification : The Effeminization Of The American Male

Does Senator Kamala Harris think we’re still living in the 90s?!
From the moment she decided to run for President, Senator Kamala Harris (D-CA) has been trying desperately to push her “street cred” as a culturally savvy black woman–but she keeps failing spectacularly.
Harris dropped out of the race to become the Democratic nominee because she was unable to gain more than 3% support with the crowded primary field.
The New York Post reported that Harris was polling poorly. It was so bad that even though she was the sitting Senator from the single most populous state which also leans left, she was behind Mayor “Preachy” Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Indiana. How embarrassing!
The RealClearPolitics average of Iowa polls put [Harris] at 3.3 percent, behind South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg at 24 percent, Sen. Bernie Sanders at 18.3 percent, Sen. Elizabeth Warren at 17.7 percent, Joe Biden at 16.3 percent and Sen. Amy Klobuchar at 5.3 percent.
Newsweek published an article in August showing that Harris was struggling to get support from black voters, even trailing behind noted cultural appropriator, Senator Elizabeth “Pocahontas” Warren (D-MA). YIKES!
[Harris] also trailed behind Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and in more recent polls, behind Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, with one November Quinnipiac University poll showing Harris flagging with 6 percent of support from Black voters, compared with Biden’s 44 percent, Sanders’ 10 percent and Warren’s 8 percent.
On Friday, Senator Harris was taking part in a virtual NAACP Conference with CNN commentator Angela Rye when she was asked who the best rapper alive is. Harris answered Tupac Shakur who was killed in a 1996 Las Vegas drive-by shooting.
Rye then gave Harris an out for her ridiculous mistake of naming a rapper who has been dead for 24 years. She says that to “West Coast girls, Tupac lives on!”
Harris says, “I keep doing that!” but then can’t name a single live rapper she considers the best. She does attempt a swipe at (presumably) Kanye West when she says that “there are some that I would not mention right now because they should stay in their lane.” Unless she meant Cardi B. who is now conducting “serious interviews” with leftwing politicians, the most recent was with Joe Biden for Elle magazine, but that seems unlikely. Celebrities weighing in on politics is fine when they agree with the left.
“Listen, West Coast girls think Tupac lives on — I’m with you,” Rye said as Harris laughed. “Not alive, I know, I keep doing that,” Harris said. She then tried to think of another living rapper that she deemed the best. “I mean, there’s so many,” Harris said, before taking an apparent swipe at some unnamed rappers: “There are some that I — I would not mention right now because they should stay in their lane.” Source: Washington Examiner
Here’s the clip:
Kamala Harris asked, who’s the best rapper alive? She answers @2PAC Then says “Not alive, I know, I keep doing that.” Tries to think of another living rapper. “There’s some I would not mention right now because they should stay in their lane.” pic.twitter.com/MZJ5FZC4qP — Emily Larsen (@emilyelarsen) September 25, 2020
Look, I’m not a fan of rap, but I’m apparently in the minority. It’s literally everywhere, and even I can name a half-dozen popular rappers from the past 5 years. Harris could have taken the easy out and just freaking named Cardi B. as the “best rapper alive” since she’s already said in several interviews that she was a fan.
I’ll believe that when she can recite the lyrics to a single Cardi B. song.
Senator Harris must have 90s rappers on her mind because just yesterday during prepared remarks opposing President Trump’s nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett she mixed up the pop-culture nickname for Ruth Bader Ginsburg with another 90s rapper, Biggie Smalls. Christopher George Latore Wallace was known by the stage names The Notorious B.I.G., Biggie Smalls, or simply Biggie, and he was also killed in a drive-by shooting, but this was in 1997 in Los Angeles.
Still, Harris said that leftists proudly wear their “Notorious B.I.G. t-shirts” when she meant to say “Notorious R.B.G.” shirts.
Kamala Harris as she speaks about Ruth Bader Ginsburg: “Yes, we wear those Notorious B.I.G. t-shirts with a lot of pride.” Total phony! pic.twitter.com/iWj4Sr8s1K — Trump War Room – Text TRUMP to 88022 (@TrumpWarRoom) September 28, 2020
Harris has been doing this kind of thing for quite some time.
Let’s not forget that Harris told The Breakfast Club that she smoked pot in college in 1986 while listening to Tupac and Snoop Dogg who released their first albums in 1991 and 1993 respectively.
Perhaps being a time-traveling weed-smoker has messed up her ability to keep track of any rappers except a handful of the single most popular ones from the 1990s.
It’s either that or she’s even worse at pandering to black voters than Hillary with her hot sauce in her purse and “feelin’ no ways tired” or Joe Biden’s “you ain’t black” comment.
Do you think that the Partisan Presstitutes will call her on it?
If the little banter between Harris and Angela Rye is any indication, the answer is “Hell, no!” They’ll probably cover for her. But we’ll never actually know what the Media (D) would do because it isn’t just Joe Biden that the Democrats are hiding in the basement–Kamala hasn’t been out there, either.
Although, she’s out there telling voters otherwise.
Kamala Harris claims she “does national news press conferences.” She hasn’t taken a single question at a “press conference” since she was announced as Joe Biden’s VP nominee on August 11. pic.twitter.com/4hF50nsIpx — Trump War Room – Text TRUMP to 88022 (@TrumpWarRoom) September 28, 2020
Typical Kamala. She just can’t stop lying.
You can’t blame the Democrats with their strategy of hiding their awful Presidential and Veep candidates as much as possible. If they’re put out there in front of everyone, it’ll be clear that Joe is a prop and they’re just trying to slide in Kamala as the first half-black, half-Asian, female President who votes further left than Bernie Sanders.
Would Democrats really rally behind the woman who is so unlikeable that she was only able to get 3.3% of the Democrat vote?
Who would vote for this woman with the witchy cackle every time she lies and/or is uncomfortable?
Imagine four years of that.
That right there is nightmare fuel.
And yet, millions of people will vote for the “Harris/Biden” ticket because…Orange Man Bad.
Unreal.
Pussification: The Effeminization Of The American Male
by Doug Giles
Doug Giles, best-selling author of Raising Righteous And Rowdy Girls and Editor-In-Chief of the mega-blog, ClashDaily.com, has just penned a book he guarantees will kick hipster males into the rarefied air of masculinity. That is, if the man-child will put down his frappuccino; shut the hell up and listen and obey everything he instructs them to do in his timely and tornadic tome. Buy Now: Pussification: The Effeminization Of The American Male


clashdaily--2020-09-30--LOW BLOW JOE: Cheap Shot BS-er Claims That TRUMP Is The Unpresidential One

At least this time he didn ’ t say anything about a fistfight behind the gym .
But it wasn ’ t much better than that .
Debates are supposed to be about ideas and records .
That is NOT what Biden came here to talk about .
He came looking for an opportunity to demonize Trump , to score emotional points with the audience , and to throw incendiary lies in the President ’ s direction while claiming that his OPPONENT is the one responsible for political division .
Biden deliberately ‘ misunderstood ’ things , using those opportunities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lies .
Trending : Why Did The New York Times Bury THIS Detail In Their ‘ Trump Taxes ’ Hit Piece ?
Trump mentioned the $ 3.5 Million dollar check that Hunter got from the widow of a Moscow Mayor , Biden pretended that was an attack on his GOOD son , and pretended to be outraged about how Trump called the military losers ( he did not ) while ignoring the fact that we have Joe on video calling them ‘ stupid bastards ’ and a ‘ dull bunch ’ right to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ here : MILITARY : How Come Joe ’ s ‘ Help ’ For Veterans Kept Hurting Them Instead ? ]
When Trump held him to account for dodging Chris Wallace ’ s question about court-packing , Joe snapped at him .
This is not exactly the smartest time to bring up Russia , Joe .
Not just because of the potential pay-for-play implications of your son getting a $ 3.5Million payout from the wife of Moscow ’ s mayor while you were in office , either .
But there ’ s a bigger @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a scandal that just blew open tonight .
It implicates top-level Obama cabinet members directly , and the infamous January 2017 Oval Office meeting puts you there by name .
BOMBSHELL REPORT : Trump-Russia Collusion Was A STRATEGY By Hillary To Distract From Email Scandal

At least this time he didn’t say anything about a fistfight behind the gym. But it wasn’t much better than that.
Debates are supposed to be about ideas and records. That is NOT what Biden came here to talk about.
He came looking for an opportunity to demonize Trump, to score emotional points with the audience, and to throw incendiary lies in the President’s direction while claiming that his OPPONENT is the one responsible for political division.
Biden deliberately ‘misunderstood’ things, using those opportunities to attack Trump with deceptive and inflammatory lies.
Trump mentioned the $3.5 Million dollar check that Hunter got from the widow of a Moscow Mayor, Biden pretended that was an attack on his GOOD son, and pretended to be outraged about how Trump called the military losers (he did not) while ignoring the fact that we have Joe on video calling them ‘stupid bastards’ and a ‘dull bunch’ right to their faces. [We covered that here: MILITARY: How Come Joe’s ‘Help’ For Veterans Kept Hurting Them Instead?]
Joe Biden said "I am the Democratic Party right now." But when he was asked whether he lifted a finger to tell Democrat mayors to stop letting far-left rioters destroy their cities, he lamely said, "I don't hold public office now." pic.twitter.com/EIbIR49J0n — Trump War Room – Text TRUMP to 88022 (@TrumpWarRoom) September 30, 2020
The leftist media that adores Biden lost any fake argument about Trump not acting “presidential.” Their candidate: "You're a clown." "Just shut up, man." "You're a liar." "You're a racist." You're such a clown." To a sitting president. ??♀ — Jenna Ellis (@JennaEllisEsq) September 30, 2020
When Trump held him to account for dodging Chris Wallace’s question about court-packing, Joe snapped at him.
Biden: ‘He’s Putin’s puppy. He still refuses to even say anything to Putin about the bounty on the heads of American soldiers’ pic.twitter.com/Rn6gT8RZAZ — NowThis (@nowthisnews) September 30, 2020
This is not exactly the smartest time to bring up Russia, Joe.
Not just because of the potential pay-for-play implications of your son getting a $3.5Million payout from the wife of Moscow’s mayor while you were in office, either.
But there’s a bigger reason: The Obama/Biden administration is neck-deep in a scandal that just blew open tonight. It implicates top-level Obama cabinet members directly, and the infamous January 2017 Oval Office meeting puts you there by name. BOMBSHELL REPORT: Trump-Russia Collusion Was A STRATEGY By Hillary To Distract From Email Scandal