Electing ANY Democrat-POTUS Empowers ObamaGate Grifters – Part I

Today, former acting Attorney General Rod Rosenstein—whose childhood was spent in a township abutting mine, in suburban Philly—is providing Congressional testimony regarding his role in the initiation of the Mueller probe.

Undoubtedly, it will fuel aspirations to “investigate the investigators.”

Initially, to provide context, I have isolated the fifteen blogs published on this site during the past month that exclusively addressed American presidential politics; sadly, the overwhelming majority thereof aggressively condemned President Donald J. Trump and, therefore, have been tersely refuted.

The overtly anti-Trump postings are easily rejected noting, in particular, that none addressed the effort to effect a modern-day coup.

I discounted one related to Iran (here,  here and here).

A second accusing Trump of having “racialized the Coronavirus” by calling it the “Chinese virus” (despite the tradition of identifying the causes of prior endemics by their geographic origins).

A third attacked allegedly corrupt Trump-supporting Republicans (composed by a self-identified Israeli progressive).

A fourth advocated for Joe Biden despite Trump’s admittedly pro-Israel achievements (ignoring the Democrats’ increasing abandonment of Zionism and Biden’s overt mental deficiencies).

A fifth accused Trump of abandoning Jewish values (composed by the co-founder and chair of “Jews 4 Joe”).

A sixth characterized Trump’s “Deal of the Century” as being hawkish and short-sighted, threatening the future possibility of a two-state solution (constituting a vain effort to rehabilitate what increasing numbers of Israelis have grown to perceive as a moribund formulation, again composed by the “Jews 4 Joe” chair).

A seventh lamented that Trump couldn’t be prosecuted (amnesic to the impeachment hearings).

An eighth recapitulated the trite accusation that Trump communicates in racist dog whistles (ignoring the consensus view that his comments should be taken figuratively rather than literally).

A ninth attacked Trump-supporting anti-lockdown protestors (composed by the director of ADL Israel and properly refuted as ignoring thugs behind the “resistance” by two commenters).

And a tenth accused Trump of being dictatorial (despite his meticulous adherence to federalism regarding both Covid-19 and the riots, assiduously empowering the governors).

Those entries that spared The Donald were revelatory, not necessarily as their authors had anticipated. One advocated that the public blindly trust experts (notwithstanding how those such as Dr. Fauci have “evolved”); one predicted Hillary Clinton (not Biden) will be the Dem Nominee in 2020 (a gross absurdity); and one framed the 2020 Presidential election as paradoxical (the most “fair and balanced” blog of them all).

Finally, two focused on former President Obama, one praising his sage input regarding myriad issues and the other condemning him for criticizing the decision by the Department of Justice (DoJ) to drop charges against General Michael Flynn as being against the “rule of law” without identifying which law the DoJ had allegedly violated.

Thus, both news articles and opinion pieces illustrate ongoing fascination with this case in Israel; having summarized the context of how Trump has been (unjustly) criticized, it is now possible to probe the pathogenesis of this shanda by careerists embedded within America’s federal government.

In an upcoming op-ed, a proposal will be elucidated that is intended to bridge the ideological gap between those who still adhere to the “Russian Collusion Delusion” and those—such as myself—who aspire to “investigate the investigators.”

The novel insight that will be promulgated focuses upon how Judge Emmet Sullivan’s brief filed with the Appellate Court in defense of his intent to prolong the prosecution of Lieutenant General Michael T. Flynn Case may flawed but may provide a unique opportunity to expose deficiencies in the Mueller investigation.

Thus, corrupting a well-known euphemism, the outcome of this judicial digression could and should apply “lipstick” upon lotsa pigs, to benefit the commonweal. 

About the Author
Robert B. Sklaroff MD is a physician-activist who is a radical, liberal, moderate, conservative, reactionary [depending upon the topic] who has developed many political stances that scrupulously attempt to identify the "nut" of "hot" issues; although predictions are notoriously deficient [as assiduously chronicled by my son], my insights are durable. I have also written about medical politics [particularly Vaping and ObamaDon'tCare] and have attempted to articulate the action-item [that I have often pursued absent support]. Aggressively followed is the discipline of capturing and then addressing all reputable perspectives; the reader is thereby maximally "armed" to critique the output.
Related Topics
Related Posts
Comments