Share This Article with a Friend!


Transition to Trump: Liberals see Russia as last hope of turning the Electoral College

The left’s point-of-view is so well represented in the regular reporting of the mainstream news media on a daily basis that I don’t feel a need to cover it very often, but with the all-important vote of the Electoral College fast approaching on Monday, I couldn’t resist delving into the liberals’ last desperate attempts to sway the electors away from Donald Trump.

Obama’s ‘Russian hackers stole the election’ controversy has proven to be all the impetus liberals require to fly off on some wild flights of fancy. Now they’re begging state electors to defy their own constituencies and Electoral College Mapdecline to cast their votes for Trump.

The always good for a quizzical chuckle liberal E.J. Dionne wrote at the Washington Post, “Memo to the electoral college that votes next Monday: Our tradition — for good reason — tells you that your job is to ratify the state-by-state outcome of the election. The question is whether Trump, Vladimir Putin and, perhaps, Clinton’s popular-vote advantage give you sufficient reason to blow up the system.

“I don’t raise this lightly. The costs of breaking with 188 years of tradition would be very high. Alexander Hamilton’s Federalist 68 explaining the electoral college is widely cited by those who want electors to stage an anti-Trump revolt. But we shouldn’t pretend that the electoral college as described by Hamilton bears any resemblance to the system we have used since the 1828 election, when statewide election of its members became almost universal.”

Sure, according to liberals we’re supposed to believe Trump conspired with the Russians to steal this year’s election just as Reagan worked with the Iranians to delay the release of the American hostages until after his inauguration in 1981. You know, that’s the case of the “seriousness of the charge” as opposed to the evidence of wrongdoing that Rush Limbaugh always talks about.

Ah, what it must be like to be a liberal in the media, where you can write or say practically anything and there’s a big chunk of the American public that will not only not censure you, you’ll be hailed as a hero for standing up for the downtrodden and delusional.

And then likely be awarded with a high-paying position on the editorial staff of a major newspaper.

Instead of saying out loud what everyone is thinking but too afraid to speak up, liberal writers are spouting off about what no one thinks but still may be etched on the walls of the nearest insane asylum. Or the DNC … same thing.

Sadly enough, the lunacy concerning Russia isn’t confined to the left either.

Jennifer Rubin, also of the Washington Post, reports on the views of none other than Evan McMullin Remember him?  “McMullin ridicules the notion that we should give Trump the benefit of the doubt or suspend judgment when the evidence is overwhelming of some sort of ‘special relationship’ with the Kremlin, including a flock of pro-Russian campaign advisers and the appointment of at least two voices sympathetic to Russia…

“McMullin does not intend to sit idly by while Trump runs roughshod over democratic principles and lawmakers of both parties twiddle their thumbs. ‘We need to be diligent and vigilant,’ he says. ‘In the immediate term, it’s very important Americans be organized in defense of liberty and our [fundamental] rights.’ He says he will be starting a new organization within the month ‘to stand up for liberty and equality.’”

That’s right. We need Evan McMullin to stand up for liberty and equality. There’s no one else to do it, right?

After losing last month, I doubt McMullin seeks to be a liberal columnist, but he must hope to be remembered for something other than being the laughing stock ‘independent’ candidate for president who championed the pathetic #NeverTrump cause but otherwise is little more than a grain of sand on the 100-foot-wide beach of history.

As long as there are reporters like Rubin who care about what losers like McMullin thinks, he’ll have an outlet for his views.

The Electoral College will meet on Monday, cast their votes for Donald Trump and then we can all forget about the squeaky wheels that are E.J. Dionne, Jennifer Rubin and Evan McMullin.

And also this nonsense about the Russians influencing this year’s historic election.

Ain’t America grand?

Ryan Zinke tapped for Interior, but what happened to McMorris Rodgers?

In looking back over the somewhat abbreviated history of the Donald Trump transition, one thing’s for sure – there have been a lot of rumors swirling around who’s being considered for what cabinet posts, but once someone was announced, there have been few public reversals.

In other words, Trump and his team have done an excellent job of keeping people guessing, but there haven’t been many big bombshells.

One such surprise (but probably not a bombshell) was revealed on Thursday when Trump formally revealed freshman Montana Congressman Ryan Zinke is to head the Interior Department.

Timothy Cama of The Hill reports, “The official announcement came two days after sources close to Trump’s transition team said the Montana freshman congressman had been offered the job…

“’He has built one of the strongest track records on championing regulatory relief, forest management, responsible energy development and public land issues,’ Trump said in a statement.

“’As a former Navy SEAL, he has incredible leadership skills and an attitude of doing whatever it takes to win,’ he continued.”

There’s the “winning” part of Trump’s character again. I personally think Trump has an ingrained predisposition towards members of the military, a sure sign of his respect for the men and women in uniform. The fact Zinke, as a SEAL, was one of the best of the best fighting men was certainly a notch in his favor.

According to Cama’s article, Zinke is quite the outdoorsman so there’s an appreciation for conservation as well as intelligent use of federal land assets in his temperament. And there’s a big job ahead of him. “As head of the 70,000-employee Interior Department, Zinke would oversee most of the United States’ federal land, along with wildlife, parks, offshore drilling, American Indian tribal relations and more.”

Those of us here in the east are somewhat insulated from the federal land use issues of the west. Some states have well over half their territory owned by the federal government. This has been a major bone of contention with the citizenry when the decision-makers are heavily under the influence of the leftist environmental preservation-at-all-costs lobby as well as thousands of miles away in Washington DC.

Zinke sounds like he will attempt to strike an appropriate balance.

As alluded to above, Trump’s nod towards Zinke is only “surprising” in the sense it had been leaked last weekend that House Republican leadership member Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (from Washington) was in line for the Interior post. Several media outlets ran with the news, basically stating unequivocally that McMorris Rodgers, a well-known party establishmentarian, was slated for the position.

Apparently it wasn’t to be.

Seeing as Zinke has only served a couple years in Congress it’s hard to tell exactly where he stands on a lot of issues – or even if he’s a principled conservative – but there are those who say the switch from McMorris Rodgers to Zinke would change things a lot, at least where Montana politics are concerned.

The highly respected John Gizzi writes at Newsmax, “A special election would have to be held to fill the seat Zinke would relinquish after two years to take the Cabinet post.

“Moreover, with Zinke long expected to take on Democratic Sen. Jon Testor in 2018, Montana Republicans might be forced to scramble to find a new Senate candidate if the former Navy SEAL and House Member becomes Interior secretary. “

Meanwhile, Gizzi makes it sound like McMorris Rodgers was the one who opted out of the appointment, suggesting she decided to remain in the House rather than move to the executive branch. McMorris Rodgers tweeted on Tuesday, “It was an honor to be invited to spend time with the President-elect and I'm energized more than ever to continue leading in Congress as we think big, reimagine this government and put people back at the center of it.”

McMorris Rodgers’ tweet sounds like establishment-speak for “I got cold feet.” Or maybe someone on the inside of Trump’s transition team wasn’t keen on the idea of welcoming a House leadership insider into the cabinet.

The end result as Gizzi hints is a very winnable Montana Senate seat up for grabs in 2018 will most likely be contested by an unknown Republican. Time will tell if that makes a difference.

Trump’s cabinet will give American voters what they really desire – a change

When the election was called for Donald Trump in the early morning hours of November 9, one of the first thoughts that had to be going through the minds of many Americans was, ‘What’s going to change…and how drastically?’

As perhaps the country’s first true “outsider” to ever be elected president, Trump campaigned on a platform of immigration enforcement, fiercely combatting terrorism, repealing Obamacare, rebuilding our infrastructure, restructuring America’s trade agreements, helping businesses create jobs and more broadly, “Making America Great Again.”

That meant a lot of change would be taking place, most of it welcome even to those who might not have voted for him.

In assembling his cabinet, Trump is making good on a promise to cast out the insiders. Niall Stanage of The Hill reports, “In the wake of the election, speculation had focused on whether Trump’s personnel choices would be drawn from the GOP establishment or from people antagonistic toward it.

“But he seems to have found a middle ground of sorts. While his picks are not anti-establishment in any real sense, it’s also hard to imagine many of them being nominated for similar positions by Mitt Romney or John McCain, had they won the White House.”

Stanage’s article talks about how even Trump’s more potentially controversial picks – such as Attorney General-to-be Jeff Sessions or Scott Pruitt for EPA Director – still enjoy widespread grassroots support. The fact that perhaps none of these appointees would have been elevated had McCain or Romney won in their respective years is a big bonus in most peoples’ minds.

For years the Republican Party had been unable to fully articulate how the government would improve under its lead in the White House. McCain essentially campaigned on his military expertise in promising he would win the Iraq War.

Romney was a similarly resume-based candidate who argued he would make the government run more efficiently. But if Mitt had been elected, who would have led his agencies? Chances are his people would have come from a list mostly compiled by Karl Rove and the Republican consultant class. Sure enough, the government would have changed – some -- but we’d still be mired in stagnation.

In contrast, Trump’s team of outsiders will surely shake things up. Expectations are high but I believe Trump can maintain popular support simply by achieving a few of the more critical items in his “Contract With the American Voter” that he announced during a late October speech in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania.

In part, Trump promised to call for a constitutional amendment for federal term limits, renegotiate NAFTA, lift the Obama-Clinton roadblocks on energy development, cancel unconstitutional executive actions and begin removing the estimated 2 million criminal illegal aliens in the country.

Any critic who claims Trump lacks an agenda for his first 100 days should review the Contract. There’s plenty there to start off the administration, especially with a cooperative Congress.

Ensuring popular support for Trump’s agenda will also be critically important. In order to do that, the “public face” of the administration is crucial.

After weeks of rumors as to who might assume the role of White House Press Secretary, a new name has emerged.

Anna Giaritelli of the Washington Examiner reports, “A Wednesday night press report said Fox News host Kimberly Guilfoyle is a top contender for press secretary in President-elect Trump's White House, and will meet with the transition team for a third time this week.

“A source on the Trump transition team dismissed that report, and said there's nothing to it and the Guilfoyle isn't being considered at all for the post. Guilfoyle currently cohosts ‘The Five’ on Fox News and previously worked as an assistant district attorney in San Francisco.”

The press report Giaritelli referred to was straight from the rumor mill at Politico which also conveyed that McMorris Rodgers was the choice at Interior a few days ago. So take it with a grain of salt. Of course the bulk of the media speculation surrounding Guilfoyle is that she’s a Hispanic woman and would therefore be more effective in selling controversial policies to the public because she isn’t white and male.

As if the leftist contingent within the Democrat party will be more compliant hearing about deporting illegal aliens from the mouth of a female Latina. Stupid.

But perhaps more importantly in her favor is the Republican base’s familiarity with Guilfoyle. Like the others who have been rumored to be considered for the position – Kellyanne Conway and Laura Ingraham among them – Guilfoyle is sharp, attractive and well spoken.

And most decidedly a “change” from what we’re used to from the White House press briefings. All in all, a good thing.

Share this