HILLARY AND HOLT THE PRESSES

It is curious how everyone's opinion regarding the first presidential debate differed as to who won, especially when the deck was stacked and the questions appeared to be more about theater, rather than important issues. It was a canned performance by Hillary and a somewhat uptight debate by Trump.  

Trump didn't lose but neither did he win. Hillary did not lose, in the sense, that she was able to spoon her political pablum without having a medical meltdown, but neither did she win. Either both won, or neither lost or it was a tie. Instead many voters scratched their heads and wondered who approved these questions? When does  the media manipulation ever stop, and is anyone in media capable of being a fair moderator of politics?  

How does the birth issue get airtime? Isn't that a DNC talking point packaged to the press in order to label Trump a racist? How is the birther issue a legitimate debate question while the multiple Clinton lies are kept out of the debate spotlight? If the media claims the birther question was asked to probe Trump's character then why was Clinton's character shielded by never asking her any tough questions about her questionable conduct in office? There is no doubt the birther question was used to unravel Trump, toward Hillary's benefit, period. Sorry, Hillary and Lester Holt, it did not work. Trump call out that lie.

When did Trump saying he was against the Iraq war become refuted because of another comment made public? When did Trump's opinion of the war become a lie, and a lie so great, it overshadows, Hillary Clinton's history of criminal lying? Her Benghazi lying, her e-mail lying and all her lies dating back to Watergate? Why wasn't her character explored by Lester the left's jester. Clinton's lies speak directly to her character, or should I say, Hillary's lack thereof, with respect to integrity.  Once again, Holt made sure Hillary was not embarrassed while he tried to paint Trump's face red. Once again, it didn't work. 

When did Trump's tax return being public rise in importance above Hillary's 250 thousand dollar speeches to Wall Street, or her thousands of deleted (yoga-cough) e-mails or her pay to play Foundation corruption? Once again, Hillary and Holt, believes the public is as dumb as rocks and treats the American voter like Jonathan Gruber treated them with Obamacare. Their political parlor tricks were obvious and laughable especially if they think they can equate, Hillary's criminal deceitful lies, by harping on Trump's business miscues. 

The first debate had three takeaways. One, that Candy Crowley's ghostly media will continue to shadow box their bias in Hillary's corner, and Trump needs to know when to punch and when to smile and laugh off their absurd charade. 

Two, voters on both sides want to see a little blood in the water but not in the way that makes either candidate seem a bully or desperate. Trump should have shown less defensiveness toward Clinton's red herring issue over his business bankruptcies, and instead redirect to Hillary's many scandals while she held the public's money and trust in such a selfish and self-serving way. When Hillary brings up character, temperament or the issue of a conflict of interest, then Trump needs to remind the public of Clinton's duplicity with the public on many issues. 

Three, at the end of the day, a debate win or loss means nothing if it doesn't sway voters to mark a ballot in your favor. The candidates are really trying to sell themselves to the late deciders and frankly in this election it is hard to imagine many voters still on the fence. 

Clinton may have won the pre-programmed, robot delivered, policy that promises everything, and means nothing, nothing more than more failing progressive delusions, while Trump did not lose, because he kept his composure and did not come across as bullying Clinton. He came across far more genuine, like him or not. Hillary seemed proud of her deviously delivered spat of generalizations, she called plans but the public should see as pander puff.

Some  criticize Trump for not going for the kill shot, or for allowing Clinton to bait him into agreeing with her, rather than excoriating her socialistic viewpoint. However, this is the first debate, and Trump must learn the rules, you know, the media bias rules; that ask attack questions of conservatives and support the lying answers of the Democrats. In the future debates, Trump needs to learn how to ignore the media traps and deftly lead Clinton to be on the defensive even though she will be protected by the media's moat, around her castle.  

Trump needs to remember that truth, doesn't need protest, and that lies are better addressed with a smile, and a wink to the public, when he coolly recounts that Hillary is incapable of being honest, transparent and trustworthy on any issue. He must remember to let her give him the rope and then smile as he wraps it around her shoulders.

Not surprised by this first debate, after all, one of these candidates is a consummate lawyerly politician with the media in her back pocket, while the other is an outsider and business man that thinks logically. Welcome to the debate deck, Donald! It is stacked, hacked and filled with the sound of quack. Hillary and the media will attack, but you need to ignore them, stay on message and speak to the audience.

 Oh, and I guess Trump, is the winner of the debate, only by the fact, that he didn't say or gesture anything that the baiting media, could catch by misconstruction, and then wrap up in newspapers, sending a foul order over his campaign by dangling odious headlines. Holt the presses, Trump didn't bite.

WE ARE DEPORTING YOU,... OH WAIT,... WELCOME TO AMERICA!

Government does one thing well, it always screws up, and when it screws up, it does it so, abysmally. The latest muff, involves a list of 8oo foreigners deemed deportable, that were instead given naturalization papers. Americans can't help but think that, even a moron should have caught that mistake. Instead, we once again show our enemies weakness, a weakness caused by big government bureaucratic stupidity. 

What a sad state of affairs our Immigration and Naturalization Department has been for generations. This is not the first and less likely the last, boneheaded mistake, made by a highly politicized agency that has never been modernize or managed to meet today's life threatening demands. 

The fact that Obama's government fails to update this agency, utilizing the technological advances now available, to reduce both human error and favoritism in this highly politicized department, that is vital to our national interests, is "deplorable". 

However, to blame only Obama and the Democrats would be unfair and ignorant of a long history of congressional fault, along with previous presidents, that equally allowed this vital agency to our national interest to be operating with such inefficiency. In fact, some blame George Bush's creation of Homeland Security as gumming up the already slow and low functioning agency. History shows however, that this agency, the INS, has been inept, corrupt and lacking the tools necessary to bring into the modern age of efficiency.  

Who can forget Homeland Security secretary, Janet Napolitano's testimony about the system "pinging" when one of the Boston Marathon bombers had re-entered the country after visiting a terrorist training facility? The pinging sound was followed later by the sound of bombs exploding, on a famous marathon route, planted by two asylum seekers allowed to live among us, and deemed harmless by DHS.

No, the time is past due for the experiment with Homeland Security as a watchdog over all home security interests. This agency has not kept us safe. This agency has not stopped the stove piping by other agencies, indeed it remains a problem. This agency has not been apolitical and this agency is in charge of so many agencies, it stalls efficiency rather than promotes it.

Unlike bloated corporations that realized in the 1990's that they needed to downsize in order to run more efficiently, our government went in the completely opposite direction by creating another layer to an already multilayered, top heavy, bureaucratic hegemony. 

There are only two things that get accomplished by creating more and more departments in government, one, is to appear to the public that you are responsive to their frustrations at your ineptitude and two, to create another buck passing scapegoat, to further insulate politicians from scrutiny.

The Department of Homeland Security is another bureaucratic layer created to supposedly make Americans feel safer after 911. The DHS has control over our Coast Guard, Customs and Border Protection, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Immigration Customs Enforcement (ICE), Transportation Security Administration (TSA), United States Secret Service (USSS), Directorate for Management, National Protection Programs Directorate Management, Domestic Nuclear Detection Office, Office of Health Affairs (OHA), Science and Technology Directorate, Office of Intelligence and Analysis, Office of Operations Coordination, Office of Policy, Federal Law Enforcement Training Center and of course (INS) Immigration and Naturalization. That's right, sixteen agencies, that now have a new boss and a new finger of blame to avoid accountability.

Is it any wonder why Americans see government as so untrustworthy and inept? Isn't it amazing that government thinks growing more bureaucracy will result in greater effectiveness? Instead of "leaner and meaner" government thinks "bulky and bumbling" will allay the public's distaste for unaccountable waste and fraud. 

 Isn't it time to downsize our government and demand that it hire less department heads and put more boots on the ground, at our border and ports, along with more deportation magistrates?

Americans want simple straightforward immigration laws, that cannot be politicized by either party. They expect our security agencies to avail themselves with the latest technology equipment such as, smart green cards, invisible fencing and sophisticated tracking devices. They want sanity brought to the number of immigrants allowed into the country legally, especially during slow economic times for citizens. They want immigration laws enforced and they expect a required assimilation by immigrants that seek to become citizens of our country. They want swift deportation to those here illegally or shown to be in violations of their green card status requirements.

Can Americans have confidence in a big bloated, multilayered, constantly expanding, bulky and bumbling, bureaucratic American government? Well, if "too big to fail" is not tolerated in the private sector, after the mortgage meltdown, and "too big to jail" reflects Hillary's escape from prosecution that has created a belief in elitist's inequality under the law, then the public should rightfully be looking at our super sized government ship of state, as "too big to sail".

Freedom starts with respect for those that laid down their lives for our Constitution and kept us a nation of laws, and our allegiance is only toward a government that respects and adheres to our Constitution.    Sadly today, we see a growing disrespect for our Constitution and our country's honored history by overpaid athletes, pampered activists, pretentious professors, terrible teachers, pompous politicians, an imperious President and a government filled with obfuscating officeholders.

It is time for the country to decide its fate. More sliding down the slippery slope into the mouth of big government failure and tyranny or dump it, bump it and Trump it. Wall Street and the Beltway, will just have to lump it, because it is well past the time that main street, gets heard, loud, clear and standing as it sings, the National Anthem.    

I DON'T RECALL... BUT WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?

The latest information coming from the FBI's release of Hillary Clinton's interview is disgusting. Her innocence is glaringly missing, and her excuses defy any reaction save, nauseating disbelief.

The gag responses are numerous when one learns more of the details behind the evidence that led to Comey's conclusion that Clinton should not prosecuted. Even though Loretta Lynch did not need the FBI to recommend charges, the Attorney General used Comey's fanciful argument of "intent" and ducked quickly under that transparent sheer veil of corruption.

 After reading through the report one can only feel that Clinton "intended" to shield her correspondence, defy FOIA requirements, destroy public records, use the Secretary of State office as the power opportunity to make millions of tax free dollars for her phony charity foundation, flaunt the rules of classified security and pretend that both she and all her cackling cronies did not know anything.   

There has not been one public statement about her e-mails that has been found to be truthful. Not one! Yet we are told by the FBI director that there was no criminal intent. In fact, Clinton answered either "I don't recall, ...or I don't remember" to just under 40 questions in her FBI interview regarding her e-mail server. When she did have an answer, it has proven to be false, fudged and or just plainly untrue. 

Ask any detective in any major crime investigation about a witness lying to them. Ask if it raises suspicion. Ask if it shows a consciousness of guilt. Ask if people can be both ignorant and deceitful. We all know the answer. We all know that you can't have it both ways. Either you are truthful and ignorant or deeply involved and lying. Hillary played the snakes game of one side of her tongue proclaimed she did not know or understand while the other side of her tongue spit out sly lies to the public.

Hillary didn't fool the public, and Comey can't convince us that Hillary did not intend to secret her correspondence from the scrutiny of the public record because she was selling favors left and right. The evidence of her underhanded illegal misuse of public office is voluminous and continues to mock judicial fairness. 

Yet Washington and the press want us to believe that Clinton was a dumb, dufus Grandma, that even though she had been in government most all of her adult life, she didn't know (C) meant classified. She didn't know that public records meant, that she did not own those records. She didn't know public records were not hers to sort through and decide two years after leaving office what to save and or delete. Neither she nor her camp of legal lackeys, had any right to defile public records. 

Loretta Lynch and James Comey have made a mockery of their official positions to uphold the law. Clinton is either a serial mobster or a completely mad birdbrain that should be institutionalized. Prison or mental institution, take your pick, because Hillary has run out of excuses and any amount of credibility. 

I suspect that if the media found that Clinton's e-mails were on tape, and 18 minutes were erased, (Nixon) they still would be calling it a mishap rather than a scandal. It should show the nation the true savagery of a media only interested in outing the wrongdoing of conservatives while excusing the treachery of all things done under liberalism, Clinton and the Obama White House. 

Clinton claimed to have no knowledge regarding her lawyers deletions of so-called personal e-mails and what criterion was used to make those deletions. She also claims ignorance to knowing that Monica Hanley created an archive of her e-mails beginning in the spring of 2013. An archival laptop and thumb drive that conveniently got lost in the mail right after Clinton's private server was publically exposed. Damn those incompetent mailmen, they are making Hillary look bad, very bad.

 

Perhaps as bad as when it was revealed that Clinton publically claimed she wanted the server so she could just use one device rather than multiple devices, and then "oh snap" the truth oozed out that Clinton used as many as 13 devices. Worse, Hillary's staff used hammers to smash old Blackberry devices no longer in use. All innocent and forthright people destroy their devices with hammers, don't they?

She claims to have no knowledge of her server being wiped. Even though, it was wiped years after she left office, and only directly after the New York Times revealed that she had a private server. Well isn't that just some more dunderheaded bad luck? Or is it the slippery snake slithering off into the tall grass, and escaping justice yet again? Seriously Comey, no intent?

 Americans can't believe a single word that comes out of our corrupt government and that includes all our Senators and Representatives in Congress that should be passing, as I speak, an independent counsel law to lay out the facts in front of a grand jury. They should be excoriating Loretta Lynch for not prosecuting Clinton, with all the "There that is there."Instead, they grovel at the feet of Queen Hillary and ignore their constituents, while they hold hearings to feign outrage. This pretend Congress is no longer fooling the masses.

 

Justice has taken a huge stab into the jugular vein and if Hillary is elected the stabbing will continue into the heart of our constitutional Republic. 

When did it become acceptable for people in public office to become multimillionaires? When did justice become so short sighted? When did the prerequisite resume for the presidency fall so low as to allow this level of deviancy near the inside of the people's house?    

This woman should be wearing orange and instead of fending off press conferences, she should be fending off big burley women seeking know what it is like to be a Clinton connected insider. Justice must chase this women to the grave or it will be the death of our belief in the law, and our Constitution that governs Americans, not the blowhards in Washington.