‘Not debates at all but rather commercialized reality television meant to entertain, not inform or enlighten’

Let’s leave it to others, for now, to detail the progress of of the Nancy Pelosi/Adam Schiff “not-quite-a-real-impeachment-because-we-can’t-get-a-majority-vote” scam, their pathetic fallback attempt to use their new “no-due-process” rules to impeach Orange Man Bad after their three-year “muh-Russia” insurance-policy hoax crashed and burned.

Call it “So-called Foreign Collusion Coup 2.0,” authored by the same gang who recruited the Intelligence services of England, Australia, Italy, Ukraine, and who-knows-how-many other foreign spies and potentates to try and stop Donald Trump way back in 2016 (except it turned out there WAS NO ACTUAL DIRT TO DIG UP) . . .

. . . now all hanging on the anonymous, second-hand allegations of a CIA domestic White House spy who turns out to have been working longtime for and with the Democrats, and his second-hand rumors about a phone call for which Donald Trump has ALREADY RELEASED A FULL TRANSCRIPT.

(By definition, it’s virtually impossible for an American President to “break the law” while talking to foreign leaders, the Constitution giving him wide and exclusive leeway to handle foreign affairs. Except for attempting to unilaterally declare war — and the bribed-up Deep Staters hate Trump for wanting to pull us OUT of dead-end foreign wars — whatever a President says pretty much IS the law.)

Why hasn’t mobbed-up Nancy ( https://thefederalistpapers.org/us/revealed-jfk-worried-pelosis-dad-associated-organized-crime ) just called on her majority to vote “impeach,” thus avoiding this whole tap-dance of posturing and misinformation about how Adam Schiff’s demand letters are actually legally binding “subpoenas”? (They’re not.)

Because all those Democrat caucus members from red states and swing districts start shrieking like little girls dancing the heebie-jeebie after having a bug dropped down their dress when anyone suggests making them vote out loud, by name, to impeach the most popular and successful president in recent history, LESS THAN 13 MONTHS BEFORE THEY FACE ANOTHER ELECTION.

But, again, for a fuller-to-date account of why this latest “impeachment” scam — cobbled together in a desperate rush to try and upstage the REAL revelations due to start unreeling with the expected Oct. 18 release of DOJ Inspector General Horowitz’s report on the Democrat/Deep State abuse of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to spy on and sabotage the Trump campaign — and how it increasingly resembles the scene from one of those old Laurel & Hardy shorts where the doors and wheels start falling off the hapless duo’s Model T flivver, take your own gander at:

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/10/10/if-accurate-the-impeachment-game-is-over-fake-whistleblower-lawyers-now-retreat-from-testimonial-appearance/ , or

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/10/impeachment-sideshow-turns-into-clown-show-trump-hating-cia-whistleblower-who-traveled-with-joe-biden-to-ukraine-doesnt-want-to-testify-democrat-lawyers-say-he-will-submit-written-answers/ , or

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/10/10/report-joe-biden-had-working-relationship-with-whistle-blower/ , or

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/10/stunning-two-aides-for-adam-schiff-worked-with-anti-trump-cia-whistleblower-at-the-trump-white-house/ , or

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/10/revealed-clapper-associate-charles-mccollough-assisted-anti-trump-cia-whistleblower-with-his-complaint/ .

Instead, for now let’s examine the wisdom of another aspect of the Democrat Party’s brilliant strategy to win back the White House in 2020, one that hasn’t gotten nearly as close an analysis -– their decision to start their presidential campaign 16 months out.

Mind you, laying the GROUNDWORK for a White House challenge that early would make sense, especially if the Dems had settled on a consensus candidate, the way party leaders were pretty sure they were going to run the old warhorse, Adlai Stevenson, again in 1956.


But no, here they opted for just the OPPOSITE: Start with a field of 24 candidates — most with no national name recognition at all (“Amy Klobuchar”?) — so many they couldn’t even get them all on the stage at once.

“Diversity”? Oh, there are black candidates, Asian candidates, women, homosexuals, Irishmen pretending to be Hispanic candidates (is that a two-fer?) . . . yet curiously, this field seems to offer little or no opportunity for voters to discern any difference between the suitors on specific controversial issues of the day, let alone any overriding political philosophy (especially one that might share anything in common with that of the Founding Fathers who wrote the Constitution which presidents have to swear to “protect and defend.”)

So far as can be determined, the candidates ALL favor some form of additional civilian victim disarmament (gun seizures, “buy-backs,” “universal background checks” — today’s standard leftist euphemism for national gun registration, always a precursor to confiscation.) They’ve ALL raised their hands for free health care for illegal aliens ($66 billion a year — see
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/06/28/free-health-care-for-illegal-aliens-could-cost-american-taxpayers-decade/ ) as well as shutting down America’s energy industry to fight non-existent “catastrophic man-made global warming.”



(And by the way, about those “buy-backs”: Do you think I’d get to set my selling price for my collectible 1907 Winchester? I don’t think so. And you know they melt them all down, right? How would you feel if they declared you now had to “sell back” your church or synagogue, knowing it would be promptly burnt down, that you wouldn’t be allowed to build a new one . . . and that THEY’D tell YOU the one-size-fits-all price your congregation was going to be paid? Sound OK to you?)

In a “debate,” wouldn’t you think there’d be a bit of sarcasm and disagreement, that at least ONE of them would say “I’d have to look at the costs, and make sure that wouldn’t take away rights or services from existing U.S. citizens. With open borders, how many ‘migrant guest workers’ could we end up with? Sixty million? A hundred million?”


Yet this field of wannabes — including a homosexual college-town mayor who’d like to take with him to the White House America’s first “gay first husband” — are proudly paraded out, all with the apparent goal of generating interest, even excitement, in the Democrat selection process by staging TELEVISED DEBATES starting in the summer of 2019 — SIXTEEN MONTHS OUT.

They really believe average Middle-American voters out in flyover country — from Raleigh to Reno, from Albany to Albuquerque — are going to embrace this clown car full of raving, freakish extremists? That a too-long-patient majority may not have already decided, in the era of “puberty blockers” and “sex change for 11 year-olds,” of “Drag Queen Story Hour” and locking newborns in a room to die after a “full-term abortion” and painting over “offensive” murals of George Washington, that urban and college-campus Marxists who claim “America was never that great to begin with” have already gone too far, that the pendulum may not already be swinging back, big time?

They really think the average American WANTS police and jailers in his or her community to hand “Get-Out-Of-Jail-Free” cards to illegal-alien rapists and murderers as in the scofflaw “Sanctuary Cities” of California, where homeless “migrants” and others now sleep and defecate and strew their infected syringes on the public sidewalks en masse, while foreigners impose “sharia law” and “halal” slaughter and demonic collectivists confiscate and melt down our guns and the memorial statues of those who gave their lives to build the greatest, freest nation on earth — the hope of mankind — are pulled down in the night?



And the television networks award the private Democrat Party with free air time? They don’t charge advertising rates to air this politically pointless song-and-dance? Have they ever offered a free prime-time hour to carry a Libertarian debate? Other than Fox news, have any of them ever offered free air time to cover a single entire Donald Trump rally, start to finish?

If the Democrats are good at anything, it’s throwing sensible, conservative tradition to the wind — see “every public school should have at least five different kinds of bathrooms, one for each ‘gender,'” or “Ban fossil fuels — no one will freeze in the dark; we’ll get PLENTY of energy from heavily subsidized bird-slicing windmills, gerbils on treadmills, and elves in hollow trees! We’ll just plug in our electric cars when we go to bed at night; plenty of electricity to charge them up will come from, you know . . . the wall.”

Frightening as it sounds, I’ve now been following presidential elections, with varying degrees of intensity, for more than 50 years. Based on observation, not theory, let me tell you how typical Americans perceive and follow the presidential election season:

Americans love Thanksgiving. It’s a FOUR-day holiday weekend. They get to eat a big meal, watch several football games (a good one, and one featuring the Detroit Lions), put up Christmas decorations (or not), and go shopping. Politics tend to be blissfully absent.

Then immediately ensues the Christmas season, which they also enjoy — moreso as we beat back this ridiculous campaign to make it “less Christian” (Get a grip: Hauling an evergreen and some mistletoe indoors was part of the pagan Solstice holiday of “Yule.” The church just appropriated it, offering no evidence whatsoever that Jesus was born at midwinter, or anywhere near Bethlehem.)

As the Christmas season advances, however, typical Americans realize that — except for the holiday “bowl games,” some of which can get a little goofy (Yes, there is actually an Idaho Potato Bowl) — the high-school and college football seasons are over. The NFL tries to fill in with some Saturday match-ups (Jets vs. Bengals? Can’t miss that one!), but to say today’s over-expanded National Felons’ League has a Public Relations problem would be an understatement. The evening newscasts seem to find less and less “hard news” to cover as government functionaries spend less time in the office, giving them less chance to stir up trouble. December newscasts on the slow-news evenings of Friday, Saturday and Sunday thus start to fill time with “human interest” stories and cute features about baby animals born at the zoo, and . . .

The camera shows us four old-timers, chatting, eating breakfast in a booth at a diner somewhere in northern New England. The bell above the door jingles and a gust of cold air blows in, bearing with it a smiling politician and -– in his or her wake — a gang of bundled-up reporters and a couple of guys with TV cameras, brushing off the snow. The candidate walks up to the table, introduces him/her/itself, and expresses the hope that he/she/it can count on the vote of these hayseeds in the upcoming New Hampshire primary.

Here with us in the living room, watching, Fred turns to Ethel and says “Hey, that’s right, it’s gonna be a presidential election year! I wonder if that dipshit Mitt Romney is running again.”

“He’s dead, Fred.”

“No way.”

“I saw it on the news.”

“I thought that was John McCain.”

“Oh yeah, that’s the one.”

THAT’S when the presidential election year begins. In February (it used to be March), Americans want to know how the town of Dixville Notch voted, who won the New Hampshire primary, and who came in second. As winter turns to spring, they take note in passing of who’s dropping out of the race for lack of support. They MAY watch the two major party nominees give speeches as they accept their parties’ nominations at the summer conventions — though the party bosses’ abhorrence for the drama (read: uncertainty) of contested conventions have made them far less interesting affairs then they used to be. And then the real, higher-visibility, 60-day contest launches . . . on Labor Day.


What have the Democrats accomplished by trying to get a head-start on that process, apparently figuring their guy or gal will need more than a mere 11 months to build up a head of steam to defeat incumbent Donald Trump, running for re-election to “finish the job he started” — especially appropriate given the fact that Democrats — and a lot of Republicans (why does the Republican Senate never go into recess?) — have done literally nothing but try to obstruct him for three years, now?

Let’s see: The decision to focus “Doomed Impeachment Effort 2.0” on a Trump phone call to the president of Ukraine managed to draw LOTS of unwelcome attention to the millions of dollars in thinly-disguised bribes Joe and son Hunter Biden have received, as Obama’s vice president in effect “sold his office” to corrupt oligarchs in Ukraine and Red China with the apparent full complicity of Chicago grifter Barry Obama Soetoro — adding to the difficulties of a 76-year-old perceived Democrat “front-runner” who was already showing signs of forgetfulness (early dementia?) on the campaign trail – already paring back to bankers’ hours after his staff realized the problem got worse in evening appearances.

(Joe admits he withheld $1 billion in U.S. loan guarantees for Ukraine till they fired the prosecutor who was after his son: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXA–dj2-CY

Eye turning red? Dentures coming loose during debates? Can’t remember Barack Obama’s name? Told reporters he was happy to be in Vermont during a campaign stop in New Hampshire? Twice referred to Theresa May as “Margaret Thatcher”? Gotta rush home tonight in time to Watch “Family Ties” and “Miami Vice,” Joe?

But it was perhaps Biden’s RESPONSE to the new focus on the big payoffs to his ne’er-do-well son that has hurt him most — issuing letters that virtually commanded the press to stop giving air time to Rudy Giuliani, who’s recently made a study of Biden Family Corruption; then firing off a tirade to the New York Times (The New York TIMES?) asking how they dare offer space on their Opinion page to rigorous and bipartisan muckraker Peter Schweizer (published by mainstream HarperCollins, Schweizer has also gone after Turtle Mitch McConnell and wife Elaine Chao.) Biden thinks he can tell the press what to cover? And they call TRUMP arrogant?

(Incredibly enough, many of the most infamous media whores are actually following orders, cutting off anyone who tries to bring up the millions of dollars in foreign payoffs gleefully accepted by the Biden family for no-show $50,000-a-month jobs in countries where it’s not clear son Hunter even speaks the language:
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/10/12/the-last-desperate-effort-to-protect-the-chosen-one-will-likely-fail-perhaps-by-design/ .)

You think when a foreign power that’s slipped a few million to a sitting vice president calls and says “We need a little help with this troublesome trade negotiator of yours, he’s threatening to turn us in to the World Trade folks,” they’re going to hear anything but “Sure, I can take care of that for you”?

So the “early out of the gate” scheme may already have cost Democrats Joe Biden, the two-time loser (1988, 2008) who’s the closest thing they had to a safe, consensus, middle-of-the-road “front-runner.”

Better to find out now than a year from now, I suppose. But unless it’s all a scheme to bring in a savior on a white horse come December (Michelle Obama? Oprah Winfrey? Michael Bloomberg? HILLARY? —
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/10/steve-bannon-warns-old-battle-horse-hillary-clinton-is-likely-to-jump-in-the-dnc-race-video/ ) — for which it’s already getting pretty late -– is this “process of elimination” really supposed to reassure voters? Sort of like the “nationwide search” for someone to play Scarlett O’Hara?

Remember how well George McGovern fared after he had to call everyone in his Rolodex to try and replace VP nominee Tom Eagleton in 1972?


How about Bernie Sanders? How has the “early start” affected him?

Bernie, who’s 78, has essentially been running for president — a pretty strenuous undertaking — non-stop since 2015. How has it helped him to be in essence forced back onto the campaign trail, full-time, since July?

On Oct. 1, Bernie Sanders the Brooklyn socialist (yes, he represents Vermont on the rare occasions he’s actually in the U.S. Senate, but his accent still gives him away) had a heart attack.

He was hospitalized after complaining about chest pains during a campaign stop in Las Vegas. “Doctors inserted two stents in one of Sanders’ blocked arteries, but he, his campaign and his wife at first refused to say whether he’d experienced a myocardial infarction — the death of heart-muscle cells that we laymen call a heart attack,” Politico reports. “After three days of stonewalling from his campaign, Sanders publicly disclosed the fact he’d had a heart attack — something an urgent-care clinic diagnosed before he even entered the hospital.”

Should that rule him out as a candidate? We’ll leave “should” to the philosophy majors. Franklin Roosevelt was re-elected in 1944 despite poor health, but in 1944 there was a war on, and the “patriotic” American press wasn’t doing its most fundamental job — few members of the voting public had any idea how bad FDR’s health was. (For that matter, when he was first elected, the American press made sure most Americans weren’t even aware Roosevelt’s damage from polio was so severe that he couldn’t walk -– press photographers VOLUNTARILY avoided ever showing him on crutches or in a wheelchair.)

Dwight Eisenhower completed two terms despite some heart problems. But both he and Roosevelt were INCUMBENTS. The fact is, a 78-year-old man’s chances of surviving and remaining active for five more years after a heart attack are largely dependent on his following doctors’ advice to slow down. And taking up the presidency of the most powerful nation on earth is not “slowing down.”

I wish the senator well (on a personal level — not in advancing his hideous state-socialist agenda, which resulted in the murder of millions in the past century.) He will likely “remain active” enough to speak at the convention and try to insert some of his schemes into the platform. But in real life, Sanders at this point can’t afford to so much as take a day off for indigestion. The stress imposed by his party’s “Let’s campaign for 16 months” stroke of brilliance will almost certainly have knocked Sanders out of the race, along with Biden.


Kamala Harris? Many had early hopes for the former prosecutor -– daughter of a Jamaican father and a (subcontinent) Indian mother, who landed her first big-paying job by spreading her legs for then-California-Assembly-Speaker Willie Brown, a man twice her age who was at the time married to the mother of his children . . . ( https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/kamala-harris-launched-political-career-with-120k-patronage-job-from-boyfriend-willie-brown .) But the woman who made a career of throwing Californians in jail for pot now says weed brings “good vibrations.” . . .

( https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2019/10/08/kamala-harris-weed-brings-good-vibes/ ), and the drop in the polls of this confused and confusing candidate has been precipitous. After they’ve gotten a good look at her, Heels-Up Harris is at 7 percent among DEMOCRATS? What does she do for an encore — shave her head and eat raw chickens?

That would appear to leave the somewhat shrill Liz Warren of Massachusetts -– “Fauxcahontas,” who lied about her (fake) Native American ancestry in order to land a job teaching -– wait for it . . . bankruptcy law, at oh-so-liberal Harvard.

Yes, John F. Kennedy was from Massachusetts. But he was a handsome young (sort of) war hero, and that was 60 years ago. After the world basically made fun of far-left, far-from-macho Michael Dukakis, who managed to outperform Joe Biden (yes, THAT Joe Biden) in the primaries THIRTY YEARS AGO but lost to George “Papa” Bush in the 1988 general, Democrats appeared to have learned to steer clear of candidates from such ultra-liberal enclaves as Boston and San Francisco, instead running “moderate Southern Democrats” Al Gore and Boy Clinton, and then Chicago grifter “Barry the Stoner” Obama-Soetoro.

The fact they appear to have forgotten that lesson, as they now feverishly woo the support of Greenwich Village, Fire Island, The Castro, and the Mission District, shows that a captive television media can have its disadvantages — there appears to be no one left to pop their bubble, to tell them how all this is playing out in “flyover country.”

Far from allowing a leading challenger to Donald Trump to “build up a big head of steam,” it begins to look like the Democrat decision to stretch the campaign by five extra months means they will simply be stuck nominating whoever’s still standing — a presidential nominating process that could only have been dreamed up by Agatha Christie. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_Then_There_Were_None .)

At this point, voters in Iowa and New Hampshire “have expressed to me how frustrated you are that the DNC and corporate media are essentially trying to usurp your role as voters in choosing who our Democratic nominee will be,” said Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard — who’s not been getting exactly a fair shake from the debate organizers — on Thursday, Oct. 10.

( https://thefederalistpapers.org/opinion/tulsi-gabbard-threatens-boycott-next-debate-says-democrats-rigged-primary .)

“The 2016 Democratic Primary election was rigged by the DNC and their partners in the corporate media against Bernie Sanders,” Gabbard said. “In this 2020 election, the DNC and corporate media are rigging the election again, but this time against the American people in the early voting states of Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada.”

“They are attempting to replace the roles of voters in the early states, using polling and other arbitrary methods which are not transparent or democratic, and holding so-called debates which are not debates at all but rather commercialized reality television meant to entertain, not inform or enlighten,” Gabbard insisted.

“In short, the DNC and corporate media are trying to hijack the entire election process.”

3 Comments to “‘Not debates at all but rather commercialized reality television meant to entertain, not inform or enlighten’”

  1. Kingsnake Says:

    Not to mention the “town halls”, which never occur in actual town hall, with actual citizens, asking their own questions, rather than hand-picked political operatives asking scripted questions in a TV studio.

  2. Kingsnake Says:

    And now we find out that Katie Hill (D-CA), high ranking member of oversight & intelligence committees, has been been banging multiple members of her staff. I was just a simple soldier, but even I know that is a huge blackmail security risk, da?

  3. Vin Says:

    Hi, Kingsnake — Far from being widely condemned, Congresslut Katie Hill will become an even more prominent champion/trophy of “Democrat Diversity” and will likely be offered $1 million to do a sexy photo-spread for a prominent left-leaning magazine.

    Nevada U.S. Senator John Ensign didn’t go to Washington expecting to become a millionaire and live the high life; a veterinarian, he shared a rooming house with several bachelors or other men whose families opted to stay in their home states. Then he foolishly had an affair with the wife of a staffer. He and his parents felt badly enough about it that they provided some resources, trying to help the fellow find another job. This was treated as a “payoff” and such a huge scandal that Ensign was forced to resign under pressure.

    Meantime, it was discovered that the live-in boyfriend (that is to say, salaried male prostitute) of Massachusetts Congressman Barney Frank was operating a homosexual bordello — FOR PAY — out of Frank’s Washington townhouse. Per Time magazine, the House Ethics Committee ruled Frank had no idea what was going on in his home (!) but that he should be reprimanded for use of House privilege in waiving 33 of male prostitute Steve Gobie’s parking tickets and for writing a memo that attempted to end Gobie’s probation for a prior infraction.

    The affair had no deleterious effect on Frank’s continuing political career. In fact, anyone who criticized poor victim Barney Frank was condemned as a homophobe! ( http://content.time.com/time/specials/2007/article/0,28804,1721111_1721210_1883878,00.html .)

    As Joe diGenova says, if Democrats didn’t have double standards, they’d have no standards at all.

    — Vin