Connect with us

Politics

Ben Shapiro Is Wrong about the North Korea Summit

If you think that national pride is more important than millions dying in nuclear war, then Ben Shapiro’s analysis of the North Korea summit will make sense to you.

Published

on

He claims the North Korea summit was a disaster unless it happens to end in world peace.

If you think that national pride is more important than millions dying in nuclear war, then Ben Shapiro’s analysis of the North Korea summit will make sense to you.

Shapiro’s comments on this video are perverse. His  concession that he might be wrong and Trump might be right is fake humility. Shapiro is positioning himself so he will get credit for making the admission if Trump succeeds, but if Trump fails he will condemn the President for trying.

On the U.S. flag being an object of such purity that is should never be soiled by proximity to a communist flag….

And here’s some news. If a Brit flag had flown next to a Nazi flag at the right time, the holocaust could have been prevented, Poland would have never been invaded, millions of Eastern European lives would have been spared, the Cold War would never have started, the Iron Curtain never divided Europe, and the Third Reich would still be in the trash heap of history by now. Yes, the Nazis were evil and they deserved what happened to them, but they were a footnote in the body count that resulted from turning on a dime from concessionism to declaring war and demanding unconditional surrender.

Shapiro’s headline on his post about this contains the same offense that he committed on Fox & Friends: “Trump’s Big North Korean Moment Is Either A Masterstroke Or A Horrible Debacle. There’s No In-Between.” Again, he is posturing to make a grudging concession if Trump pulls it off but to condemn the President for trying if it doesn’t work out.

On Monday evening, President Trump met with North Korean dictator Kim Jung Un, the tyrannical overlord of a slave state with 25 million prisoners and a gulag system containing hundreds of thousands of human beings, a radical threat to world peace who has tested nuclear weapons and long-range missiles. Trump gave Kim the thumbs up; the American flag, the symbol of freedom in the world, was placed alongside the flag of North Korea, the closest thing to the Nazi swastika in the world today. Then President Trump praised Kim fulsomely, using verbiage to describe him that he would never use about our G-7 allies.

And the right celebrated.

There’s nothing to celebrate yet. Nothing. Here’s why.

1. Trump Got No Serious Concessions From Kim. According to Trump, Kim said he’ll denuclearize. Sure he will. Just as the Kim family has promised verbally to denuclearize for decades. The actual signed agreement between the United States and North Korea is pathetically weak.

Paper concessions wouldn’t prove anything and Trump knows it. Trump has already made the point that he has a “big button” on his desk. He walked away from the summit and made Kim beg for him to come back. Donald Trump can increase sanctions at will and resume the war games any time. Kim knows that.

Shapiro makes other inane comments but toward the end he gets downright stupid.

Trump signaled that America’s military options are off the table – he explained that in a war, “I think you could have lost 20 million people or 30 million people. This is really an honor for me to do this. I think potentially you could have lost 30 million or 40 million people.” So much for the threat of force bringing Kim to the table.

Kim heard Donald Trump casually mention that, when Kim was being aggressive, he was ready as President to unleash mass death on forty million people. Do you think that sounded to him like a signal to Kim that “military options are off the table”? Do you think it sounded like anything other than a dire threat of what would happen if Kim betrayed us?

Read the full post.

Don't forget to Like The Washington Sentinel on Facebook and Twitter, and visit our friends at The Republican Legion.

Become an insider!

Sign up for the free Washington Sentinel email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.

Advertisement

Politics

As Swamp Drains, Clinton Foundation Sees 16-Year Low for Donations

The American people are growing too smart to humor the Clintons’ shady charade.

Published

on

The American people have shown a propensity of late for cutting through the gibberish of Washington DC.

This sharpening of their political wit has arisen during a time of great turmoil in our nation.  President Donald Trump has swept into the nation’s capital on the premise that he would be shaking it up, draining the swamp, or whichever metaphor best suits the process.  This new sheriff in town attitude has trickled down to the people as well, and we find ourselves as skeptical as ever about the state of the union.

As such, we have looked deep within ourselves and our not-so-distant past to find evidence of wrongdoing just years or months behind us.  After all, this fits into the timeline in which our nation found themselves so bereft of corruption they saw fit to bring in a Trumpian solution.

Right in the middle of all of this swampiness sits former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, whose Clinton Foundation has suffered greatly during this political awakening.

The Clinton Foundation’s revenue has nosedived following Hillary Clinton’s loss to then-candidate Donald Trump in 2016. According to its recently released public report, the organization took in just $30.7 million in 2018 – over seven million less than the $38.4 million it reported in 2017 and roughly $218 million less than the $249 million the charity raised in 2009, when Clinton served as the secretary of state in the Obama administration.

The charity spent millions more than it took in last year, spending $47.5 million on “payroll, grants and promotion, among other items,” according to Open Secrets.

Thanks to the work of whistleblower outfit Wikileaks, the American people learned that Hillary Clinton was operating a pay-to-play scheme during her time as Secretary of State, in which she solicited donations to the Clinton Foundation in exchange for face time at the State Department.

This, along with her rigging of the 2016 primary elections, has reduced Hillary Clinton’s political legacy to little more than proverbial rubble, likely affecting the ability of her foundation to raise funds.

Continue Reading

Politics

Trump Responds to Sondland Testimony with Notes of Call on White House Lawn

Sondland’s CYA opening statement has been eviscerated by his own transcribed phone call with the President.

Published

on

Today’s impeachment hearing has been a tale of two parties, once again, but this time under the highly polarizing spell of a panicked Congress.

Gordon Sondland stunned the Republicans this morning during his opening statement, in which he stated quite clearly that a “quid pro quo” was present in the case of Ukraine, while also seemingly throwing a number of high-ranking government officials under the proverbial bus.

Apparently, Sondland got the mainstream media memo about the need for a little more “pizzazz” in these proceedings.

That opening statement hit the press ahead of his testimony, to get a head start on the news’ spin for the day, and appeared to take Ranking Republican Devin Nunes by surprise.

But, as Sondland trudged through the friendly questions of the Democrats and into the suddenly bitter then of the GOP, a new reality emerged.  In fact, the President had told Sondland explicitly and specifically that no such quid pro quo was to be had.

The President, on his way to Marine One, reminded the nation of this in his signature style.

Of course, these words come directly from a phone call whose transcript has already been read into evidence, and clearly shows the President assuring Sondland that nothing untoward should occur in Ukraine.

So do we believe the opening statement of a man who has already committed to refiguring this previous testimony in order to stay out of jail, or do we believe the transcript of a phone call emanating from the White House itself?

 

Continue Reading

Politics

Walter Reed Conspiracy Theories Spooked Melania Trump, According to POTUS

There has been no evidence provided that would suggest the President is unhealthy or that he had a medical emergency over the weekend. 

Published

on

A strange side story has emerged in Washington DC this week after the President made an unexpected visit to Walter Reed Hospital.

Impeachment has certainly been the focal point of the mainstream media over the course of last few weeks, much to the chagrin of the Democratic Party.  They are viewing these hearings as an opportunity to demean President Trump ahead of the 2020 election, understanding full well that there is no chance of a conviction in the Republican-controlled Senate.

But another, just plain weirder subject seemed to take over social media in the last few days, and it involves the President’s health.

Predictably, the mainstream media has taken a bit of a biased stance in the matter including AP News.

A lack of notice. Past failures to level with the American people. A tough week for the White House as public impeachment hearings got under way.

Add it all up, and President Donald Trump’s unscheduled weekend visit to Walter Reed National Military Medical Center raised suspicions about his health, despite White House officials’ insistence that the president was merely getting a head start on his annual physical.

For any president, a sudden trip to the hospital would raise questions. But such scrutiny was magnified with a president who has a history of exaggeration and playing loose with the facts, giving skeptics room to run with their own theories.

“The one thing you can be absolutely sure of is this was not routine and he didn’t go up there for half his physical,” tweeted Joe Lockhart, a press secretary under President Bill Clinton, who was himself impeached for perjury and obstruction. “What does it mean? It means that we just won’t know what the medical issue was.”

The inexcusable speculation even frightened the First Lady – something that the President addressed from the White House on Tuesday.

“I went for a physical. and I came back and my wife said, ‘Darling are you OK? … Oh they’re reporting you may have had a heart attack,’” Trump explained. “I said ‘Why did I have a heart attack?’ ‘Because you went to Walter Reed Medical Center’ — that’s where we go when we get the physicals.”

“I was only there for a very short period of time, I went, did a very routine, just a piece of it, the rest takes place in January,” he continued, noting that afterward he took a tour of the hospital and met with an injured soldier and their family. “I got back home and I get greeted with the news that ‘We understand you had a heart attack!’”

There has been no evidence provided that would suggest the President is unhealthy or that he had a medical emergency over the weekend.

 

Continue Reading

Politics

Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman Scolds GOP Rep. Devin Nunes Over How He’ll Be Addressed

The impartiality argument is growing thinner by the minute.

Published

on

The Democrats are walking quite the tightrope in their “formal impeachment inquiry”, incessantly attempting to paint many of their witnesses as non-partisan to counter accusations being made both by the President and the Republicans who are participating in the process.

This has led to a particularly contentious debate over the real, true purpose of impeachment itself, which Republicans have characterized as an attempt to nullify the will of the American people during the 2016 election.

Today, during the testimony of Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, a bit of that contention boiled over.

The testimony of National Security Council official Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman grew tense Tuesday under questioning from Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif. — as the impeachment hearing witness eventually scolded the top intelligence committee Republican for not addressing him by his military title.

The moment came amid a back-and-forth over the identity of the anonymous whistleblower whose complaint about President Trump’s July 25 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky led to the impeachment proceedings.

“Mr. Vindman, you testified in your deposition that you did not know the whistleblower,” Nunes stated.

“Ranking member, it’s Lieutenant Colonel Vindman, please,” the witness responded.

Nunes corrected himself and repeated the statement, which followed questions regarding who Vindman had spoken with about Trump’s phone call. More than once, Committee Chairman Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., interjected to advise Vindman that the purpose of the hearing was not to expose the identity of the whistleblower, who is afforded legal protection.

The moment quickly went viral online, with a great many “resistance”-minded social media users cheering on what they say as a snide attack on Nunes, furthering the partisan hyperbole that these proceedings have already been mired in.

 

Continue Reading

Politics

Jeff Sessions Tells Nancy Pelosi to ‘Wrap it Up’ in Regard to Impeachment

Is this yet another example of Sessions attempting to receive the blessing of the President during his campaign for the Senate?

Published

on

For many Americans, including Jeff Sessions, this impeachment fiasco has gone on long enough.

President Trump has repeatedly chastised the Democrats for their singular and unending focus on impeachment, which has led the nation down a path of stagnation.  A great many legislative projects have been put on hold in recent weeks thanks to the impeachment obsession, including work on the US Mexico Canada Trade Agreement, healthcare reform, and immigration enhancement – all subjects that prospective voters have been clamoring for.

Furthermore, the impeachment “inquiry” itself has completely dominated the news cycle, disallowing the American people whatever other information that they would normally be educating themselves with when they tune in to the “news”.

All in all, the process has handcuffed America and Americans to the spectacle unfolding before us in the chambers of Congress, former Attorney General Jeff Sessions is sick of it.

In a Monday interview with “Fox & Friends,” former U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions called on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) to bring the impeachment inquiry to a “conclusion.”

Sessions, a candidate for his old U.S. Senate seat in Alabama, said the impeachment probe is “not well-founded,” adding Pelosi is “wrong” to threaten President Donald Trump if he criticizes the Ukraine whistleblower’s identity remaining a secret.

“I think [Pelosi] needs to bring this thing to a conclusion,” Sessions stated. “It’s not well-founded to begin with, but just to pick fights with the president and try to make those kind of threats I think is wrong at this time for sure.”

Sessions, who was once at odds with President Trump, has repeatedly tried to bring the Commander in Chief back into his camp as he vies for his old Senate seat.

Trump and Sessions have been in a tumultuous relationship ever since Sessions recused himself from the RussiaGate probe while still in the position of Attorney General.

Continue Reading

Politics

Schiff Workin’ for The Weekend with Saturday Testimony from Budget Office

The Democrats are persistent, we’ll give ’em that.

Published

on

The Democrats and their “resistance” are running hot this week, after fireworks erupted in the House Intelligence Committee chambers during public impeachment hearings against Donald Trump.

At the center of this mess has been Democratic Representative Adam Schiff, chairman of the aforementioned intel committee.  His selective enforcement of the Democrats’ own rules on impeachment has irked the Republican Party to no end, after already finding themselves befuddled by Schiff’s secret and clandestine hearings weeks ago.

Now, Schiff’s got ’em working on the weekend.

House impeachment investigators met in private Saturday with a White House budget official as the historic inquiry produces new testimony offering direct insight of President Donald Trump’s actions toward Ukraine.

After a week of dramatic public hearings, investigators heard late Friday in closed session from State Department official David Holmes, who delivered a firsthand account that puts the president at the forefront of events.

What exactly did Holmes allege to have heard?

Holmes, the political counselor at the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv, testified that he overheard Trump in a phone call with his European Union ambassador, Gordon Sondland, saying he wanted Ukraine to conduct investigations. Sondland later explained the investigations pertained to “Bidens” — a reference to former Vice President Joe Biden and Biden’s son Hunter, who served on the board of a gas company in Ukraine. No wrongdoing by either Biden has been substantiated.

And about that Budget Office testimony?

The latest witness was Mark Sandy, a White House budget officer, as Democrats scrutinize the administration’s decision to withhold military aid from Ukraine while Trump pushed the country’s new president for the political investigations.

Sandy was the first official from the Office of Management and Budget to defy Trump’s instructions not to testify. Like others, he received a subpoena to appear.

Republicans have been making the case that, since the aide money was not ultimately withheld, and since the Ukraine didn’t even know about the holdup, there was no possible way that the President’s negotiations on a July 25th phone call could amount to an incriminating act.

Continue Reading

Politics

Nancy Pelosi Says Trump is ‘Imposter’ After POTUS Torches Yovanovitch

Pelosi is losing her grip on civility.

Published

on

Nancy Pelosi was doing fairly well at biting her tongue during this otherwise divisive impeachment process, attempting, at 79 years of age, to be the adult in the room.

Madam Speaker is losing her patience, however, and has begun to lash out, directing her ire at Republicans, the press, and even the President.

Her latest tirade against Trump saw the longtime Democrat insult the Commander in Chief as an “imposter”.

From a recent CBS interview:

Pelosi answered, “What the president, and perhaps some at the White House have to know, that the words of the president weigh a ton. They are very significant, and he should not frivolously throw out insults, but that’s what he does. I think part of it is his own insecurity as an impostor. I think he knows full well that he’s in that office way over his head. And so, he has to diminish everyone else.”

Just days ago, Pelosi had a similar lapse in civility during a Q&A with the press, in which she belittled one of the gathered reporters as “Mr. Republican Talking Points”.

Pelosi herself was reluctant to engage in this “formal impeachment inquiry” for months, only finally join her fellow Democrats in calling for such a maneuver after an anonymous whistleblower with second and third-hand knowledge of possible improprieties attributed to the President.

 

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Become an insider

Sign up for the free Washington Sentinel email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.

Best of the Month

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!

Pin It on Pinterest