Talk:Main Page

From Conservapedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by VargasMilan (Talk | contribs) at 05:18, 22 March 2018. It may differ significantly from current revision.

Jump to: navigation, search

This page is for discussion only of Main Page content and feature items. For discussion of other issues relating to the Conservapedia community please see: Conservapedia:Community Portal

Archive Index

Birth of an American Red Guard

Randi Weingarten, head of the American Federation of Teachers, was a frequent visitor to the Obama White House. Now it seems clear why. Obama liked to talk about the "citizen army" he was organizing. Post-Parkland, U.S. students have starting marching like those in Beijing in the spring of 1966. See "Obama's 'civilian army': It was the students all along." People forget that Mao was not China'a leader when the Red Guard protests began. Like Obama today, he was a former leader lingering around to undermine his successor (Liu Shaoqi). PeterKa (talk) 23:04, 16 March 2018 (EDT)

Impeach Judge Contreras

As if authorizing surveillance on the Trump campaign wasn't reason enough to impeach him, it now appears that FISA Judge Rudolph Contreras was in cahoots with FBI election manipulator Peter Strzok: "Bombshell: New Text Messages Suggest FBI Agents Colluded To “Cover” Secret Meeting." How is it possible that over a year into the Trump administration Strzok is still the No. 2 administrator at the FBI's Counterintelligence Division? PeterKa (talk) 00:00, 17 March 2018 (EDT)

McCabe fired, Mueller next?

The FBI, once a paragon of law enforcement, was politicized into a "secret society" under Director Comey and President Obama. Right after Trump fired Comey in May, Acting Director Andrew McCabe told Congress that, "Director Comey enjoyed broad support within the FBI and still does to this day." Since the FBI has 36,000 employees located all over the United States, it is safe to assume that McCabe was projecting. It was an act of defiance, and he should have been fired at that time.
Comey was everything an FBI director shouldn't be. He dramatically intervened twice in the 2016 presidential election, both times to exonerate Hillary of negligently handling of her classified email, something she was clearly guilty of. While Comey examined Trump's Russia connections in quest of who knows what, Hillary's involvement in the Uranium One affair received no scrutiny. The FBI leaked the results of its investigation, including the now forgotten "pinging" story, just before the election. Even worse, Comey promoted sleazeballs like Peter Stzrok to positions of responsibility.
Civil service rules have protected McCabe until now, creating a "deep state" beyond the control of our either the president or Congress. Now he has been fired for leaking classified material based on the inspector general's investigation.
I certainly hope Robert Mueller is next. The man has been the headlines day after day for the last year. That suggests that he has one or more people on his staff who strategically leak to the press as their full time job. When he was FBI director, Mueller directly managed the anthrax case and pursued Steven Hatfill, an innocent man, for five years. New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof told the FBI to pursue that dangerous right-winger Hatfill, and Mueller obeyed. That's the kind of FBI agent the media appreciates. Mueller has never apologized or even bothered to explain his behavior, so there is no reason to trust his judgement. So far, Mueller's special counsel investigation has been a fishing expedition with little regard for the rules of proper investigation outlined in the DOJ's U.S. Attorney's Manual. See Andrew McCarthy's "Mueller’s Investigation Flouts Justice Department Standards." PeterKa (talk) 21:52, 17 March 2018 (EDT)

McCabe has issued a statement on his firing. I find it rather dishonest. He blames the IG, but fails to mention the current IG is an Obama appointee. McCabe also fails to mention that the FBI's own Office of Professional Responsibility recommended that he be fired. OPR is currently run by a Mueller appointee.
McCabe describes the FBI as being "at war" with the administration, as if this is a mitigating circumstance. Does he realize that he works for Trump, who was elected by the American people? If the FBI thinks of itself as being at war with him, Trump is more than justified in taking action to bring the organization under his control. This reminds me of the 2016 debate in which Hillary claimed that Trump could not prosecute her because she's a "political opponent." There is quite a list of Clinton scandals that the FBI needs to address at this point. Hopefully, Director Wray can now find a deputy who is willing to take action. PeterKa (talk) 01:47, 18 March 2018 (EDT)
The Mueller probe is likely to continue. Strzok, Priestap, Lisa Page and few other remain in the DOJ. Brennan is next on the hot seat for lying to Congress about his knowledge of the origins of the Steele dossier, which he then used in Obama's daily briefing. Comey likewise faces perjury charges for lying to Congress on several matters. McCabe, Strzok and others all can be used as useful pawns to rat out their bosses. Flynn's conviction will likely be reversed (McCabe altered Strzok interview report to say Flynn lied, whereas Strzok originally reported Flynn did not lie). As Acting Director, McCabe illegally obtained evidence for Mueller by seizing a transcript of Manafort's confidential Congressional testimony given under an immunity deal. These are the basic elements that will undermine the Mueller witch-hunt in coming months.
Susan Rice & Samantha Powers also have legal problems in the making. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 04:00, 18 March 2018 (EDT)
It should further be noted, Pompeao's replacement at CIA, Hastrap, worked under Brennan's torture program. Evidently a bipartisan consensus has been reached to bury the Torture program. The question becomes solely Brennan's involvement in the Deep state coup, which all fingers point to him as the Mastermind, overshadowing any criminal allegations against Brennan and Hastrap for human rights violations. Trump evidently has reached a compromise with CIA, seeing that the agency no longer has any direct oversight by a Trump appointee.
Pompeao's job now is to clean up the corruption and coup plotters at State as he did at CIA, and Sessions is doing in the DOJ. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 12:21, 18 March 2018 (EDT)
And to finally connect the dots, hundreds of unmasking requests where made in the name of Samantha Powers throughout 2016. However Powers has testified to Congress she did not make the requests, people in the State Dept. did in her name. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 12:36, 18 March 2018 (EDT)
While the MSM pulls out the handkerchiefs for McCabe, he is getting a substantial pension after being fired...at age 50. See "No, Andrew McCabe Isn't "Losing His Pension"" in Forbes. PeterKa (talk) 02:56, 19 March 2018 (EDT)
His full pension is worth $1.8 million, as I under it - enough to hire a lawyer and fight for. It's just as well, cause one of the two is lying - James Comey or Andrew McCabe. Comey faces perjury charges for saying he did not authorize leaks and McCabe claims he leaked with Comey's knowledge. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 21:04, 19 March 2018 (EDT)
Remember when the Dems used to lecture us on the need to respect the FBI? Now they are playing politics with McCabe's pension, stepping over each other in their eagerness to help him evade the OPR's discipline: "Ousted FBI official McCabe offered jobs by Dem lawmakers so he can get full pension." PeterKa (talk) 03:50, 20 March 2018 (EDT)
While Sessions was in the process of being confirmed by the Senate, McCabe was investigating him as a criminal suspect: "EXCLUSIVE: Fired FBI official authorized criminal probe of Sessions, sources say." By investigating his future boss, McCabe can now claim that anything that Sessions did was a conflict of interest. With this guy, it's one layer of scam on top of another. PeterKa (talk) 03:47, 22 March 2018 (EDT)

A new chapter

Trump approval hits 50%.jpg

Rasmussen Polls reported that Trump had reached 50% approval rating. Then it dropped down to 45%. But soon it climbed back up to 50%. This repeated itself several times. I don't want to encourage the type of "emotional gambling" Andy refers to when he uses the NFL as an example, but I think Rasmussen is deliberately letting Trump's numbers slide so everybody can enjoy Trump's approval rating reaching 50%!

I also think Trump, with his enthusiastic team of expert leaders (it's written on their faces!), will make his mark in delivering national security to the United States in his signature style, the likes of which has not been seen for a long time. VargasMilan (talk) 03:25, 18 March 2018 (EDT)

There is no reason to focus on the fifty percent number. Trump's net approval was at negative 21 percent when he won the 2016 election, according to RCP.[1] Now it's at negative 17 percent. The numbers have been pretty stable since Trump's post-Charlottesville recovery in September.
Judging from the recent special elections, the Dems do better when they focus on the economy. An economy-based election strategy won't be easy to pull off as long the the base remains fixated on Mueller, impeachment, and Trump bashing. Republican weakness in this area may be because they have sold the tax cut by citing the bonuses various companies have paid out to their employees. These bonuses represent a tiny portion of the money involved. It insults the intelligence of the voters to focus on this rationale. A bigger portion of the money will go to stock buybacks. Such buybacks lift the market, which is the engine of the economy. PeterKa (talk) 07:10, 18 March 2018 (EDT)
Yes, but among likely voters, Rasmussen has "The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday shows that 47% of Likely U.S. Voters approve of President Trump’s job performance. Fifty-two percent (52%) disapprove." And what may be a useful trend to incorporate as the indictments come in is the "gloom factor": @JBurtonXP: "Nothing shattered the mystique of the 'intelligence community' for me like watching Comey, Brennan, McMullin, et al. get on here and start tweeting like a bunch of overwrought teenage girls. Embarrassing stuff." VargasMilan (talk) 00:15, 19 March 2018 (EDT)
The tax cuts and federal deregulation could cause U.S. GNP to grow at 3% or more in 2018. In addition, the step up in sanctions on North Korea and Trump's use of Sun Tzu's strategy of being unpredictable to the North Koreans may cause the North Koreans to surrender or greatly temper their nuclear ambitions. “The whole secret lies in confusing the enemy, so that he cannot fathom our real intent.” - Sun Tzu
The combined effect of the above could cause Trump's popularity to rise further. Conservative (talk) 01:28, 19 March 2018 (EDT)

Hooker stings from Mueller to Cambridge Analytica

We may be experiencing the dawning of a new age of Puritanism in which it is no longer OK to use sex workers to entrap politicians: "Cambridge Analytica CEO Caught on Tape Bragging About Entrapping Politicians With Sex Workers." Whatever the new rules are, somebody needs to explain them to Robert Mueller, who has so far escaped scrutiny for his role in entrapping New York Governor Elliot Spitzer. See "Eliot Spitzer ruined by leaks and FBI director has nothing to say" (LAT, 2008). PeterKa (talk) 21:41, 19 March 2018 (EDT)

Cambridge Analytica is also being attacked for using private data from Facebook for political data mining. This was never a problem when Obama's campaign did it: "Ex-Obama Campaign Director: It's 'Unfair' Facebook Let Us 'Ingest Entire Social Network of US'" PeterKa (talk) 23:42, 19 March 2018 (EDthe
Neither was Google criticized for foreign election interference in May 2016 when it boasted it could swing elections anywhere in the world by as much as 25% by manipulating algorithms and search results. They also claimed they gave Hillary a dream team and "all the tools she needs". We have links in the Hillary article and 2016 election article to original sources. The Google article may have it, too. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 01:04, 20 March 2018 (EDT)

Public school values

Two high school students were suspended by their school because they went to a gun range -- it turns out that the school banned the possession of weapons.[2] This is yet another incident of public schools displaying their left-wing values. One school district (also in NJ, I think) photoshopped away pro-Trump attire from students' school pictures, and at my former high school, a student was suspended for wearing the Confederate flag while a gigantic homosexual rainbow flag hangs proudly in the school. These incidents also illustrate that leftists are the real intolerant ones -- they can't stand interacting with conservative/Christian viewpoints. --1990'sguy (talk) 23:21, 19 March 2018 (EDT)

Why are there so many vacancies in the Trump administration?

Trump gets a lot of flack for not nominating more people. But there isn't be much point in nominating more people as long as the Senate confirmation process is so slow. At the current rate, it would take eleven years for Trump's nominees to be confirmed. What's holding things up? Democratic leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) is demanding numerous cloture votes. There was an unprecedented 79 such votes in the first fourteen months of the Trump administration. In the first fourteen months of the previous four administrations, there was a combined total of 17 cloture votes of this type.[3] PeterKa (talk) 09:05, 20 March 2018 (EDT)

When Republicans tried this strategy with Obama's judicial nominees, Harry Reid responded with the "nuclear option." Doing this with executive branch nominees strikes me as harder to justify. They are supposed to be the president's men. Up until 1975, filibustering meant that a senator had to speak continuously for a long period. It was an exhausting and uncommon procedure. Most senators who voted for the 1975 "reform" thought they were voting to reduce the scope of the filibuster. For many years, Senator Robert Byrd wielded enormous influence as one of the few people who understood the new rules. In the last twenty years, use of the filibuster has expanded dramatically. I watched Schumer in an interview after Gorsuch was nominated. Schumer said, "He'll need 60 votes" and no one challenged him -- as if filibustering a Supreme Court nominee was perfectly routine. PeterKa (talk) 11:29, 20 March 2018 (EDT)