« Where Are They Indeed? | Main | Sandbox - 25sep19 »

23 September 2019



Yes indeed, “it will be an enormous new bonanza for harvesting data on people’s propensities, inclinations, and fears.” and, sell those behaviors to the highest bidder. Our once revered high tech companies have all become surveillance capitalist. They collect our personal information, our preferences, actions, buying habits, social views, and politics. Then an AI engine compiles this collected data into a behavior profile, which is for sale. Your profile knows you are going to buy a green wool coat from Amazon before you do.

More on surveillance capitalism at The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power


Bill Tozer

Rep. Doug LaMalfa

From the day President Trump was elected by the American people in 2016, Democrats have pursued every avenue they can think of to remove him from office – and even their most imaginative efforts have come up empty. The facts simply don’t support their baseless accusations, but they aren’t concerned about that – they want to impeach the President by any means necessary. Speaker Pelosi and House Democrats chose to open an impeachment inquiry based on information they haven’t seen and a source they do not know. Just last week, they wanted to impeach Justice Kavanaugh, so this must be their latest ‘impeachment of the week.’ It’s partisan politics at its finest and the American people are tired of it – it’s time to move on, accept the results of the election, and actually get to work on finding solutions to real, tangible problems facing Americans.
Mark Levin

Why should Joe and Hunter Biden be above the law?

WASHINGTON, D.C.—Nancy Pelosi is reportedly starting impeachment proceedings against President Trump. It's not clear why but at least it will be fun for all involved, which is good because the news cycle has been a little slow over the summer. We all need a good public spectacle once in a while.


Bill Tozer



I liked 38, 41, 53, 54, 69, 76, and, of course, 84.

Don Bessee

Stating the obvious that its the same old same old -

Pelosi did not announce a formal impeachment vote on the House floor but simply said she will be looking into the president's actions, Hume said Tuesday on "Tucker Carlson Tonight."

"It strikes me that the Speaker and the other leaders are under pressure from the left wing of the party and the leftists in their caucus -- who are numerous -- to move ahead here," he said.

"The loathing of Donald Trump and the desire to get him out of office is very intense. They've got constituents back home that want to see action taken against Trump in a serious way so it comes down to this."

He called Pelosi's move a "clever" motion that protected the several dozen moderate members of her caucus in swing districts -- including those where Trump won in 2016.

Rep. Swalwell accuses President Trump of 'betrayal' over Ukraine phone call
"I think she thinking that she needs to be responsive to the needs of her caucus -- look at what she did today, it was really quite clever if you think about it," he said.

"Did she have a vote in the House to conduct an impeachment inquiry? No, she simply announced one. How is that substantively different from what her Judiciary chairman Jerrold Nadler did just a week or ten days ago?"

The Fox News political analyst considered whether Pelosi was skillfully trying to quell fears among her more liberal members that impeachment is being taken seriously, while balancing the needs of her moderate members whose constituents may not be as fired up about the prospect.

"So as a matter of law and constitutional activity the question tonight is has anything really changed? Is this really an action or is this merely a gesture?" he asked.

"My sense about it is that it is merely a gesture as she continues to protect vulnerable members of her caucus from having to vote to go forward on impeachment."



Don Bessee

Already not going as hoped for the socialist dem clown car -


Because of what she said and did, if the House doesn’t go all the way, it will be a political disaster. Either failing to take a vote on articles of impeachment, or failing to get enough votes among her majority to pass any articles, would be seen as a political exoneration for Trump, likely leading to his re-election.

If all that weren’t risky enough, consider another scenario. If House Dems do impeach Trump on grounds that much of the public sees as flimsy and concocted, they could win the battle and lose the war. Indeed, no matter what the House does, there is a next-to-zero chance the GOP controlled Senate would convict the president absent clear and convincing “high crimes and misdemeanors.”
Pelosi knew all that since January, when she became Speaker, which is why she kept resisting the impeachers. But her surrender proved again that her party can’t quit 2016. Like generals fighting the last war, she and they are now committed to taking their sore-loser grievances to 2020 voters.
Dems apparently assume the country hates Trump as much as they do. President Hillary Clinton had no comment on the strategy.

They also are demonstrating they didn’t learn the lessons of the Robert Mueller probe. They assumed for two years the special counsel would get the goods that would drive Trump from office. We know how that worked out, yet here they go again.

Although Pelosi stopped short of creating a select panel and reportedly has no plans to call for a formal House vote, the Speaker’s claims that Trump “seriously violated the Constitution” and “betrayed the oath of office” in a conversation with Ukraine’s president leave her no wiggle room. If she believes those charges, how can she not advocate for the president’s removal?
see also

And if she advocates for it, she must deliver it, or she can no longer be the leader.
We should know a lot more by Wednesday thanks to Trump’s promise to release an unredacted transcript of the phone call. It’s safe to assume he and his lawyers think he did nothing wrong, or they wouldn’t release it.

Dems might agree, which is why they have moved the goalposts and now also demand the complaint from a so-called whistleblower that initially set Washington’s hair on fire. Reports that the complainer had no direct access to the call raises questions of credibility.

Pelosi may think she went only halfway Tuesday and could eventually back down on impeachment if the Ukraine issue fizzles, but that’s wishful thinking. Anything less than a public flogging of Trump will not satisfy the far left of her own party, including the 150 or so House members who already demanded impeachment before the Ukraine issue appeared.

Meanwhile, Pelosi’s endorsement also pushes the presidential candidates toward the impeachment path, whether they like it or not. None of them can possibly be against it, nor can they be wishy-washy about it.

Bet that within days, there will be virtually unanimous support among the White House wannabes. Anything less will be disqualifying among the loud left.

In short, Pelosi just changed everything. The next election is now about impeachment.
If you think America is polarized today, you ain’t seen nothing yet.
see also

Pelosi caved in because of the mounting pressure within her party and because the New York Times, the Washington Post and a handful of television gasbags demanded that she act over what the president reportedly said in the July conversation with Ukraine’s new president, Volodymyr Zelensky. Trump admits he asked Zelensky to investigate Joe Biden and his son, Hunter, over whether the then-vice president took any action to protect his son from a corruption probe.
Hunter Biden was being paid $50,000 a month by an energy company that was at one time the focus of a corruption inquiry. Reports have said Biden used his VP position to demand that the inquiry be dropped and the prosector involved fired, or America would withhold aid.

Ironically, a full examination of the facts could make Biden the first casualty of the impeachment jihad. He is already a weak front-runner and even if he did nothing legally wrong in dealing with Ukraine, the fact that his son was enriching himself by free-riding on the coattails of his father’s job won’t sit well with progressive voters, many of whom already dislike and distrust Biden.

Put it this way: Would Hunter Biden have gotten that job if his father were not vice president? Ditto for a sweetheart investment deal Hunter Biden got from the Chinese government. On at least one occasion, he reportedly flew with his father on Air Force Two to China to seal a lucrative agreement there.

That doesn’t pass the smell test and Biden could get knocked down and even out as events unfold.
Count that possibility as another sign that, based on what we know, Pelosi is making a high-risk, low-reward bet.



Don Bessee

Impeach yourselves! -

Ironically, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) declared Tuesday that the mere possibility that President Trump had asked Ukraine to continue an investigation of former Vice President Joe Biden — even without a quid pro quo — was enough to trigger an impeachment inquiry. (Biden boasted in 2018 that he had forced Ukraine to remove its prosecutor by threatening to withhold $1 billion in U.S. aid; he did not tell his audience at the Council on Foreign Relations that the prosecutor was looking into a firm on whose board his son, Hunter Biden, was serving.)

It got almost no attention, but in May, CNN reported that Sens. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) and Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) wrote a letter to Ukraine’s prosecutor general, Yuriy Lutsenko, expressing concern at the closing of four investigations they said were critical to the Mueller probe. In the letter, they implied that their support for U.S. assistance to Ukraine was at stake. Describing themselves as “strong advocates for a robust and close relationship with Ukraine,” the Democratic senators declared, “We have supported [the] capacity-building process and are disappointed that some in Kyiv appear to have cast aside these [democratic] principles to avoid the ire of President Trump,” before demanding Lutsenko “reverse course and halt any efforts to impede cooperation with this important investigation.”

The Democrats’ letter is available online here. In it, Menendez, Durbin, and Leahy demanded that the Ukrainian government answer their questions about the Mueller probe, and issued an implied threat: “This reported refusal to cooperate with the Mueller probe also sends a worrying signal — to the Ukrainian people as well as the international community — about your government’s commitment more broadly to support justice and the rule of law.”


That sounds like check.


Bill Tozer

The transcript.


Bill Tozer

Impeachment is on, 24/7 year in and year out. Addicted to outrage.


How would you like to live in their heads?

Bill Tozer

Once again it's the seriousness of the charge that matters, not the facts. Byron York:


George Rebane

BillT 919am et al - Thank you Mr Tozer.

Bill Tozer

Dems asked Ukraine to investigate Trump in 2018


George Rebane

BillT 1206pm - Now we again don't wonder why the DNC's media organs - NYT, WaPo, MSNBC, ... - haven't picked up on that little tidbit in order to put some partisan balance into their 'news'?

 Bill Tozer

You crane?


Bill Tozer

Whistleblower revealed!


Bill Tozer

‘Well, Son of a Bitch’ : Ukraine Scandal Is About Biden


Bill Tozer

It’s all about the process. Guilty first, trail latter. It’s not an impeachment, it’s an inquiry wrought with traps.

“That’s another thing you could do. Or you could insist that the 2016 election was illegitimate, not because of any real procedural questions but because of its outcome. And that, more or less, is what Democrats did. It is worth keeping in mind that the effort to impeach Donald Trump began before he was even sworn in, with Senator Elizabeth Warren et al. beginning to lay the legal groundwork in December of 2016........

“There are many problems with this approach, one of which is this: Americans in possession of even a modest political memory must recall that not only did Democrats insist that the 2016 election was illegitimate, they also insisted that the last election that brought a Republican to the White House was illegitimate. There was talk of impeaching George W. Bush, too — talk that was endorsed by, among others, Donald Trump, who was a donor to Mrs. Clinton’s campaigns before he became her tormentor. For the Democrats, there is only one kind of legitimate presidential election: one where they win.”



No Collusion! No Collusion! No Collusion!



Posted by: Bill Tozer | 25 September 2019 at 12:06 PM

,,,Sorry Bill and others desperate to believe the right wing Federalist,,,that was our government applying political pressure to keep open a federal investigation into Russian interference,,,far different than Trumpski, Batman Rudi, and Billy Barr attempts to interfere in yet another presidential election.

,,,but keep those strong denials and excuses coming,,,


Keep that diaper changed Dougy.. It' smells like it's running over again.
Biden looks like he needs a lawyer.. And his little boy too.
Trump will likely extradite them both.

Bill Tozer

Posted by MmmGoopglobber @ 4:12 pm

Sorry Goopglobber, we have a difference of opinion. I see the Trump call as a request for assistance for the DOJ’s investigation into the origins of the Russian Collusion Delusion. It was, after all, the Obama Administration and State Department that requested the Ukrainians to dig up dirt on Trump and to help Hillary win the election by sliming Trump. Interesting that Bruce Orr's wife Nelly worked for Fusion GPS and fed rumors directly from the fired Chris Steele about Ukraine to her husband who passed it on to the FBI.

To find the origins of foreign governments interfering in our 2016 election, we need assistance from the Ukrainian Government. Unfortunately for the Dems and swamp, Ukraine has a new President as well as the USA. What was Trump asking the President of Ukraine about a server?? Was the Russian Hoax really about Ukraine? More will be revealed.


,,,Toes,,,you have athlete's foot and mouth disease,,,seek help

Bill Tozer

Sure, Goopglobber, anything you say.

Good read. Make that great read. VDH: “Why the Impeachment Frenzy May Only Strengthen Trump”

“Contrary to suggestions by some, most Trump supporters are not automatons or blind supporters. What bothers them, and should bother others, about the latest Ukraine hysterias is the familiar monotony of this latest scripted psychodrama.

The whistleblower admits to hearsay (“I was not a direct witness to most of the events described”). His term-paper report is laden with anonymously sourced rumors, e.g., “According to multiple White House officials I spoke with,” “I was told by White House officials,” “Based on my understanding,” “I learned from multiple officials,” “I do not know whether similar measures were taken,” “I do not know whether those officials spoke with or met with . . . ”

Between references to Internet news accounts and “I heard from” and “I learned from” and “I do not know” anonymous officials, there is nothing here to launch an impeachment of any president.

In the complaint are all the now-familiar tell-tale signs of pseudo-exactness, in the form of Mueller-report-like footnotes and page references to liberal media outlets such as Bloomberg, ABC, and the New York Times. There is the accustomed Steele-dossier scare bullet points. We see again Comey-memo-like disputes over classification status with capital letters UNCLASSIFIED stamped as headers and footers and TOP SECRET lined out.

Scary references abound to the supposed laws that the legal-eagle whistleblower believes were violated. In sum, there is all the usual evidence of an administrative-state bureaucrat, likely to be some third-tier Brennan or Clapper-like intelligence operative, who is canvassing disgruntled White House staffers, writing a report that imitates intelligence-department formats, combing the Internet, in “dream-team” and “all-star” footnote fashion, for scare quotes and anti-Trump stories, and then likely having it dressed up in legalese by an activist lawyer. Take all that away, and one is left with “I heard.”

After nearly three years of this, we know the delivery system that ensues. Along with the sensationalized initial media hype, the promised “smoking gun” leak usually follows. But when the “overwhelming” evidence or “walls are closing in” documents are released, there is no criminal act to be found other than occasional art-of-the-deal bluster from Trump. And then on to the next crude coup attempt, since the line of wannabe Glen Simpsons, Bruce Ohrs, Andrew McCabes, and John Brennans seems endless.”


George Rebane

The alert reader will notice how our local lefties parrot the national progressive narrative of the last several years. Namely, that 'Allegation = Evidence'. In all, they have yet to produce any evidence that would normally follow a meritorious allegation. And the only reason for that, which they cannot deny, is that none of their allegations past and present are meritorious - else produce the evidence.


Dougy gets scalped by Bill.. Bill wizzes on that open wound.

Jig Wiggly

Rebane 5:24

"The alert reader will notice how our local lefties parrot the national progressive narrative of the last several years."

The alert reader will notice how our local rabid conservatives parrot the national racist, misogynist, paranoid narrative of the last several years. Not simply parrot but cut and paste with a rabid fury.


Posted by: Jig Wiggly | 28 September 2019 at 09:13 AM

Yes.....the less psychotic more whiny “Day Shift” Jiggly.....!

Todd Juvinall

Jig Wiggly | 28 September 2019 at 09:13 AM
No George is correct and you are a troll without a brain. We have our own opinions while you lemmings on the left mouth the DNC Peolsi talking points at every tun. If you did not do that you might be taken more seriously you troll moron.

George Rebane

Jig 913am - A little tutorial. Had you a point, you would have countered my assertion with evidence to the contrary. Having none, you again did your best with an empty repartee.

Jig Wiggly

George your entire page is evidence to the contrary. I'll let you count the number of C&Ps made by Tozer just this week. Dozens, no doubt, of primarily right wing Republican, usually paranoid, narrative.


Posted by: Jig Wiggly | 28 September 2019 at 02:42 PM

So says the guy whose blog is 80% retailing other peoples work! Hey.....did you know the internet is changing the way we communicate?!

George Rebane

Jig 242pm - You still don't understand. C&P isn't the issue. It's the content of what is posted here. If Mr Tozer's C&Ps are in error, then by all means point them out, even if you have to do it with your own C&Ps. When someone makes an assertion that is supported by a set of factors, label them X, then a mature response demonstrating some level of intellect would be to deconstruct the assertion by demonstrating the falsity of X. But an imbecilic response is to just state, 'No your assertion is wrong (with an ad hominem thrown in).' or at best, 'No your assertion is wrong.' and counter with an opposing assertion with no supporting factors. Do you understand any of this?

Don Bessee

Well lookie here they got the band back together -


Creepy grampa joe gets called out -


More fakenews -



Don Bessee

Good one! -




Triggered jiggered is all in a tiff. His lame gripes have no substance. Showing facts just ain't in that DNA. (jiggered... a FACT is something already proven. Got that?) Proggys he believes in twist things to fit their needs.. "We know what he said,,, but THIS is what he "really means" ". Yet not even close to what was said. Like Proggys and the 2ND Amendment.
"We know the founder said "shall not be infringed",,, but they really meant we can restrict the shit out of that "right" to bare arms.

Don Bessee

What you have to fall back on when your gambit blows up in your face when unexpectedly there is full transparency. It still sounds a lot like wait, what, you are releasing the transcript, Aw crap its a nothing burger! Gotta keep those Clinton lawyers busy. -




Hey jiggered one... what more relevant to you? Which holds more water? The official record or the whistleblower's accusation?
Your elected Proggys are only interested in the accusation. the EVIDENCE to the contrary be damned.

You clowns bitch about Trump being so damaging to America.. Yet can't show a thimble of fact to support that claim.
And you wonder why your equal to a horse's ass?

Bill Tozer

I like to copy and paste. Easier than typing out all those pesky rebuttals. I know, Jiggy hates it when someone copies and pastes his comments and sends them out on the World Wide Web. That Pig Wiggles hates just about everything. His daddy, Trump, opposing views and thoughts, Right Wingers, and everything they read. And most of all, he hates anything he cannot Control.
The Federalist, The Federalist, The Federalist!! News Busters!

“CBS Host Can't Handle Trump Lawyer's Ridicule of Schiff's Fake Transcript”

“.....It included lines that sound like something out of a mobster movie. Schiff fabricated, “And I'm going to say this only seven times, so you better listen good. I want you to make up dirt on my political opponent? Understand?” Lots of it.” This Morning on Friday again skipped Schiff’s deception.

“As Dokoupil badgered him on Ukraine, Sekulow retorted, “Why didn't Adam Schiff just read the transcript instead of doing a parody when he started the event off as if it was a Saturday Night Live routine?” Not interested in the topic, Dokoupil sputtered back: “That's a question you can ask to Adam Schiff if you guys sit down together.”

“This is the ONLY time the fake transcript was mentioned on CBS, Friday.”


Hmmm, not interested in the topic says the CBS talking head, lol.


The Irish Mexican,(or is it the Mexican Irishman?)
Pushes for AR15 confiscation because of a shotgun killing.
Makes perfect sense Right LIBS?
Any one of you can explain the forward thinking logic of that.
"O’Rourke put a tweet from “Beto for South Carolina” at the top of his personal account. The tweet features a video of a survivor of the 2013 New River Community College attack in Christiansburg, Virginia, and focuses on the trauma associated with the attack. It also talks of how O’Rourke’s gun control plans are spot on.
The “Beto for South Carolina” video says, “We have to get these weapons, like the AR-15s and the AK-47s, out of hands that never should have been able to have them.”
The video also shows O’Rourke saying, “Hell yes, we’re going to take your AR-15.”

The problem with all of this is that the New River Community College attacker did not use an AR-15 or an AK-47. Rather, the Roanoke Times reported that he used a “pump-action shotgun.” ABC News reported that the attacker allegedly intimated his plans to use a shotgun in the attack “just minutes before” carrying out the evil act."

DAMN those pesky facts... No,, the jiggered one don't like those.

Bill Tozer

Impeachment? Why now, why the rush to judgement? Theories abound.

“[I]mpeachment is a political act, not a legal one, and the Democrats’ motives are entirely political. They think that impeaching President Trump will cast a pall of discredit over him and weaken his chances for re-election in 2020. I think that calculation is probably right.”


The comments to this entry are closed.