Trump’s VP Pick — A Prediction

Via Reeko, who is pretty sure he knows who it’s going to be:

Mike Pence brings nothing to the Trump ticket. Virtually nobody outside of Indiana knows who he is. From all accounts he is a wonderful Governor and might’ve made in other circumstances, a wonderful dream ticket. but not 2016. Donald Trump already won the Indiana primary, so in business terms, Mike Pence doesn’t bring anything to the Art Of The Deal.

The rest of the field of VP candidates, that are being so-called “vetted” are not in my opinion, actually being vetted for VP. Maybe cabinet positions, but not VP. Trump knows what he has to do, and just like when he released his short-list of SCOTUS nominees, with some heavy-hitters on it, he received immediate cheers from conservatives and TEA Party types all over. Bravo! But remember how Trump did that. He is doing the same thing for building his future cabinet. AND most importantly, he already has told us who he wants…

Now as to Cruz’s hurt feelings and hesitance. that is natural, and again, IMO, Trump is trying to show Cruz that he is a very serious and conservative-oriented about his choices. (the term “conservative” may need to be refined in this new age of Trump – but that can be discussed later at more length)  here is the kicker though, and this is very, very important: Texas is in play this November. most people I tell that to are stunned and even ridicule me for it, but here are the facts…

Texas is currently listed even by RCP as only slightly pink, leaning Trump. but what the RCP averages don’t take into consideration is the real politics of the Texas electorate. although a slightly healthy divide between Dems and Republicans, those GOPers are divided into roughly three evenly distributed groups: 1 – pro-Cruz; 2 – middle road pro-Trump; and 3 – the Never-Trumpers. that last group is – again IMO – by far one of the most influential in the entire country. And they are extremely diehard anti-Trumpists. They will either not vote, vote Hillary, vote Gary Johnson, or even write in Obama (again!) and no, I’m not joking. without Cruz or even Perry as his VP, Trump can forget about taking Texas in November. yes, it is that serious.

And most importantly, Cruz knows it. right now, he is in what we call the Catbird’s Seat. In fact, he knows he marshals a very large contingent of not only supporters, but delegates for the convention. Cruz also knows that the GOPe Never-Trumpers will never, never, never allow him to finagle, schmooze, cajole, or outright steal the nomination away from Trump. and that is even if Cruz were so disposed to do so. I don’t think he is. I think he is an upright, honest, and forthright kind of guy. But his supporters and delegates are another story altogether….

And before anybody gets their knickers in a wad, yes, I did vote for Cruz in the primary. why? Because I called the primary results well over a year ago: Trump with a massive delegate count followed by ONLY one second place finishing strong – Ted Cruz. I voted for Cruz with that intent, to put him in a strong second place finish. Turns out that I was absolutely exact on that result.

The only guessing I can’t figure right now is, when is Trump going to announce? Actually, I think it already has been worked out between either Cruz or Perry and the Trump people. but the timing is everything, and I can’t figure out if it will be this week before the convention or immediately before or even during? Usually, I can also call the time of the VP announcement, but i can’t see it this time. It basically is up to Cruz to give the go ahead nod. And Cruz may be holding out hopes that there is some kind of delegate revolt or upset like the court case in Virginia that seems to be going ahead in favor of the Cruz delegate. It may be that Cruz is trying to eyeball what he thinks his delegates can scam or pull off. And yes, present company excepted of course *(would never accuse you of anything devious at all!) but Cruz operatives are some of the most extreme I’ve ever encountered. They literally will try anything to win. Of course, they think they are doing it for “the country” but i seriously doubt that.

A Trump-Cruz 2016 ticket would be a guaranteed blow-out in November of at least 45 states. (although i still say about 47)  and u know what else?

The Democrats know it.

The media know it.

Trump knows it.

Cruz knows it.

Even the Bernouts know it, and yes a good percentage of them will vote for a Trump-Cruz ticket.

The only people who are living in complete denial and an alternate reality are the Never-Trumpers. so they leave the GOP like George Will? good riddance. buh bye!

This election will be about the Mike Rowe’s of the country – not about the Mitt Romneys.

This election will be between the Robertsons of Duck Dynasty and Caitlyn Jenner and the Kardashians.

The choices this election will determine if we as a country go with VHS or Betamax – and we already know how that turned out.

I will leave you with a morsel for those Cruzers who are whining that they will go all Libertarian-retard and vote Gary Johnson. Here is a paraphrased quote from one of the Libertarian demi-gods, Ludwig Von Mises who said:

“If you offer a man a cup of milk or a cup of cyanide, you are not offering him a choice of beverages. You are offering him a choice between life and death.”  KA – BOOM!

—-

*No Cruz operatives here, (not that he isn’t vastly more qualified than the presumptive nominee.) It’s just hard to fathom how Trump could possibly justify to the electorate a choice for VP, a guy he spent six months slurring as “Lyin’ Ted.” Not to mention the absurd conspiracy theory about his dad being involved with the Kennedy assassination. I don’t know how Trump pulls that off. I don’t know how Cruz swallows his pride and goes along with it. 

That said, following a meeting with Trump, Cruz did tell reporters he has agreed to speak at the RNC in a show of “unity.”

Meanwhile….Never Trump Movement Gears Up For Final Play To Stop Trump At Convention:

CLEVELAND, Ohio—Republican National Committee delegates determined to stop Donald Trump at the GOP Convention next week are in the final planning stages of their mission.

Several groups are fine-tuning various convention floor strategies that would allow delegates to vote their conscience on the first round of balloting, rather than being required to vote for the candidate who won their state contest.

Composed of various alliances who talk to one another on conference calls, email lists and text messages virtually every day, groups like Save Our Party, Delegates Unbound and Free the Delegates find themselves in the final home stretch this week as key RNC delegate committee meetings (platform, rules, credentials) convene before the GOP picks its nominee at the convention.

I’m not saying I’m for it or agin it. Trump did win fair and square and has a large and enthusiastic following. On the other hand — he’s a terrible candidate and a nincompoop who is not getting better at campaigning as time goes on. 

I honestly don’t think he’s going to pick up many Bernie supporters. The good news is, millennials are appalled by Hillary. The bad news is, (most) millennials are even more appalled by Trump.  

A solid conservative Republican candidate would be roundly beating damaged-goods Hillary in the polls right now — not trailing like Trump is. 

I predicted a year ago that Hillary wouldn’t make it to the finish line. EmailGate was THAT serious and the MSM wasn’t in the mood to give her a pass. By all rights she should be toast, right now. Her corruption has been exposed for all to see, and yet she hobbles on. The only reason she still viable is because the GOP’s candidate is profoundly awful, too.

What a fine mess we’re in.

 

Advertisement

Sources: Formal Criminal Investigation of Clinton Coming Soon

According to an NPR (*not a typo) report, federal authorities may be getting ready to step up their “inquiry” into Hillary Clinton’s “unique email arrangement” (as Trey Gowdy habitually puts it.)

“I think that the FBI will be moving with all deliberate speed to determine whether there were serious breaches of national security here,” said Ron Hosko, who used to lead the FBI’s criminal investigative division.

He said agents will direct their questions not just at Clinton, but also her close associates at the State Department and beyond.

“I would want to know how did this occur to begin with, who knew, who approved,” Hosko said.

Authorities are asking whether Clinton or her aides mishandled secrets about the Benghazi attacks and other subjects by corresponding about them in emails.

***

Why is Clinton emphasizing the idea that none of those messages were marked? Because what she knew — her intent — matters a lot under the law. If the Justice Department and FBI inquiry turns into a formal criminal investigation.

Two lawyers familiar with the inquiry told NPR that a formal criminal investigation is under consideration and could happen soon — although they caution that Clinton herself may not be the target.

I think the better phrasing of this caveat would be; “Clinton herself may not be the ONLY target.”

Michael Mukasey, who served as attorney general in the George W. Bush administration, recently talked to Newsmax TV about the government’s burden of proof.

“They’d have to show that she was responsible for having the information on that server and essentially knew what was on there,” Mukasey said.

Whether or not the emails were labeled as secret, some other Republicans say Clinton should have known better.

Former NSA Director Michael Hayden told the MSNBC program Morning Joe: “Put legality aside for just a second, it’s stupid and dangerous.”

*Even the uber-lib NPR is getting in on this anti-Clinton pig-pile, I notice. This is a really pitiful state of affairs for the Democrat “frontrunner.”

Update:

Monica Crowley has come to the conclusion I came to over five months ago. The Obama White House has given the gatekeepers the signal to close the gates in Hillary’s face. The only question is why.

 Why Obama is torpedoing Hillary Clinton?:

If Mr. Obama does not want an investigation to go forward, it does not go forward. Witness the scandals involving the Internal Revenue Service, Benghazi, Veterans Administration and Operation Fast and Furious gunrunning. In each case, Mr. Obama claimed he learned about the scandal “from the news.” (That’s interesting coming from a guy who claims he only rarely watches or reads said “news.”)

He then expressed his “outrage” and vowed to “get to the bottom” of each scandal. (Of course, it’s tough to “get to the bottom” of something when you are the bottom of it.)

In those cases, he protesteth too much. His faux outrage was a “tell” that he had no intention of investigating. In Mrs. Clinton’s case, he’s been quiet. Too quiet. That’s a “tell” that he wants this investigation pursued, likely to the point of charging her.

For me the biggest “tell” was the media. The MSM knows how to ignore a story if it’s inconvenient to their chosen narrative. Witness what is going on with the Planned Parenthood videos – and before that – the Gosnell story. Consider how they denied oxygen to the myriad of Obama scandals that have broken over the years, turning major game-changing bombshells into tiny, non threatening flames that die out on their own as soon a more convenient story comes along.

Obama would never have been elected had they have done due diligence to numerous stories about Obama’s past that would have torpedoed his campaign.

Most of these stories are coming from the NYTs and WaPo.  The New York Times, as you know,  is the House Organ of the Obama White House.

Crowley has a theory about the game plan sounds pretty plausible.

Once Mr. Biden joins the race, he will enjoy the full backing of Mr. Obama. With Mrs. Clinton gone, however, Mr. Obama and Mr. Biden will have to make it up to Democratic women and the radical left, which is currently flirting with socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders.

There is only one person who kills both birds with one stone: Sen. Elizabeth Warren.

The Democratic ticket will be Joe Biden-Elizabeth Warren. That’s what Mr. Obama wants. And what Mr. Obama wants, Mr. Obama gets.

This is “Game of Thrones.” And Mr. Obama is winning.

As ‘ve been saying all along – Obama wants Lizzie Warren. He’ll settle for the dim bulb, Biden, who can be controlled for one term – and then he’s hoping two terms of Warren.

MORE:

 JammieWearingFool: “Hillary Clinton’s poll numbers are like a leaky faucet: drip…drip… drip”

Grandma will probably be the last one to know it’s all over for her.

Vice President Biden matches up as well or better than Hillary Clinton against top 2016 Republicans in three key swing states, according to a Quinnipiac poll released Thursday morning and certain to fuel speculation of the former six-term senator entering the White House race.

Former secretary of State Clinton is still the front-runner for Democratic primary voters in Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania, and real estate mogul Donald Trump leads among the GOP, the survey says, but they have the worst favorability ratings and trustworthiness scores of the featured candidates.

So the “leaders” from the two major parties have the highest unfavorable ratings. Yet we’re to believe they have any hope?

Clinton Camp Blocks Daily Mail Reporter From NH Events

A Daily Mail reporter with an eye for Clinton campaign plants was persona non-grata at some campaign events in New Hampshire, Monday.

David Martosko broke a story back in April exposing an “unscripted” Clinton campaign event in Iowa that turned out to be heavily choreographed with Democrat activists.

Martosko writes at the Daily Mail:

Driving through New Hampshire in the rain without knowing where you’re headed is an unnerving experience, but that’s where I found myself this morning after Hillary Clinton’s staff said I wouldn’t be allowed to do my job reporting on her campaign.

At the Clinton camp’s request, a group of journalists set up a traveling ‘pool’ so a single print reporter can be everyone’s eyes and ears at events where a room is too small to fit a crush of questions from a larger group.

Plus it saves more than a dozen news organizations the expense of having to be on the campaign trail every time Clinton decides to speak.

On Monday I was the designated ‘pooler,’ tasked by this informal group of my colleagues with going to two events in New Hampshire.

I landed at the Manchester, N.H. airport well after midnight, thanks to a lengthy flight delay in Washington. A message was waiting for me from one of the reporters who has the thankless task of coordinating the pool with the Clinton campaign.

There was a problem: Hillary’s press staff said DailyMail.com wasn’t welcome, and they decided it at the last minute.

The pool was asked to send a different reporter. It was too late to substitute someone else in the Live Free or Die state at that point, so I said I’d show up anyway.

Six hours earlier I had received emails from two different Clinton media liaisons – including the former secretary of state’s traveling press secretary, Nick Merrill – telling me where to show up and when.

So what happened? That’s the nagging question.

Monday morning I showed up at 7:45 in a parking lot where I was to hop on a Clinton campaign van for a drive to the town of Rochester, where the first event would be.

A very junior staffer told me I couldn’t climb aboard: I wasn’t ‘on the list.’

The Clinton Traveling Press Pool released a statement Monday evening to address the slight, saying, ‘Any Attempt By The Campaign To Dictate Who Is In The Pool is Unacceptable.’

“We would like to see all campaign events open to the public and the full press corps, but when that is not possible we have agreed to pool coverage,” McClatchy’s Anita Kumar wrote on behalf of the cited organizations below. “We haven’t yet had a clear explanation about why the pool reporter for today’s events was denied access. But any attempt by the campaign to dictate who is in the pool is unacceptable. The pool is open to any print organization willing to take part.”

AFP

Boston Globe

BuzzFeed

Daily Mail

Financial Times

Guardian

McClatchy

New York Daily News

New York Times

Politico

Time

Tribune Publishing

Wall Street Journal

Washington Post

Martosko appeared on the Kelly File with Megyn Kelly to discuss what happened:

Martkoso said that when the Clinton camp initially tried to bar him from being the pool reporter for the event, “to a man and woman” all the reporters from the news organizations said, “No. The Clinton campaign does not get to choose who covers them.”

He added, “this is the kind of thing you see in other countries we don’t want to emulate.”

SEE ALSO:

Twitchy: ‘You need to leave’: Hillary campaign’s reprisal against David Martosko continued into the evening:

As we reported earlier today, the Daily Mail’s editor for U.S. politics, David Martosko, was scheduled to be the pool reporter covering the Hillary Clinton campaign today. Team Hillary shut him out, just coincidentally a couple of days after Martkosko criticized some of the Clinton-covering media for their lapdog-ish behavior.

At an event Monday evening,  the Sec. Service agent wouldn’t let Martosko into the YMCA venue to go to the bathroom.  “Hit the woods,” he reportedly said.

State Dept. Whistleblower Scandal Coming Back To Haunt Hillary

….On conservative websites, anyway. The MSM never had much of an appetite for this one.

Via the Washington Free Beacon, The Washington Examiner continues its reporting on the Clinton State Department’s efforts to cover up alleged misconduct with new details about investigations thwarted by agency staff:

State Department officials blocked investigations into potentially embarrassing allegations of misconduct from agency investigators and even inspector general staff during Hillary Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state.

A former official in the State Department inspector general’s office who was involved with preparing the sanitized report said agency officials also interfered in probes originating in the Office of the Inspector General.

The suggestions of political interference into investigations conducted at the bureau of diplomatic security first appeared in an inspector general report published in February 2013, just as Clinton was leaving the State Department. A Washington Examiner review of earlier drafts of that reportsuggested potentially damaging passages were removed from the final document. But the State Department official suggests the intervention went further.

The official, who requested anonymity, said the Bureau of Diplomatic Security initially prevented inspectors from reviewing open case files when they began their probe in late 2012.

Read the full report for all the gory deets.

Longtime readers of this blog should not be strangers to this story. I covered these allegations, and the State Dept’s retaliation against whistleblowers extensively in 2013. I’ve been wondering why it hasn’t been brought up until now.

Like so many other Clinton scandals – this one cluster-F alone (in a healthy, sane country) would be enough to derail her pathetic candidacy.

If she makes it through the primary without getting indicted, US demographics are such that she’s a sure thing in 2016 said Hugh Hewitt on the Adam Carolla Show, 6/11/15

Hat tip: Ace

Previously:

State Dept Whistleblower’s Emails Hacked and Deleted

Monday Catch-Up: Obama’s State Department Continues To Appall

Whistle-blower And Kids Seek Protection From Congress After Being Bullied By State Dept

Another Whistleblower Comes Forward After Being Bullied By State Dept Employees

Pedophile Ambassador Protected By State Dept ID’d as Major Obama Bundler & Political Appointee

Video: Whistleblower Lawyer Victoria Toensing Demands Apology From Sec of State Kerry For State Dept. Smears

Howie Kurtz: Stephanopoulos Blunder “Severe”, “Unthinkable” (Video)

Megyn Kelly led off her show Thursday night with the George Stephanopoulos bombshell that the Washington Free Beacon (not Politico) broke.

As you surely know by now, Steppie neglected to disclose his Clinton Foundation donations even as he reported on the Clintons and their foundation/slushfund – a particularly egregious oversight –  considering  a hard-hitting interview he had with Peter Schweizer, who he aggressively grilled over “Clinton Cash” – the book Schweizer wrote about the Clinton Foundation.

Kelly and Marc Thiessen remarked upon the irony of Stephanopoulos (a Clinton insider who worked in the Clinton White House) questioning the partisan motivations of  former Bush speechwriter Peter Schweizer.

“George Stephanopoulos actually questioned whether Peter Schweixer had a partisan interest in his book because he had worked for four months in the Bush administration — when he was the communications director for the Clinton White House and the Communications Director for the 1992 Clinton Campaign, and is it fair to say maybe he has a partisan interest in defending Hillary Clinton?” Thiessen said.

Kelly cited Eric Wemple of the Washington Post media blog, who said; “A donation from Stephanopoulos to the Clinton Foundation in any amount constitutes a scandal and an immediate crisis for ABC News.”

Howard Kurtz remarked, “This blunder by Stephanopoulos is so severe that it really threatens to undo what he’s accomplished in his 18 years at ABC News.”

He added that for Steppie to given this money to the Clinton Foundation and not disclose the donations to his bosses or viewers is “unthinkable.”

Kelly asked why Stephanopoulos would be considered too partisan to moderate a debate, but not the entire 2016 campaign. ot so much conflict that he isn’t stepping out of 2016 coverage entirely.

Kurtz said he should have found “any other charity on earth to give it”

SEE ALSO:

WFB: ABC News Anchor George Stephanopoulos Donated $50,000 to Clinton Foundation

PJ Tatler: ABC News Should Be Ashamed
The underhanded way ABC rolled out a controversial news story about one of its anchors today is disgraceful.

While the contributions were publicly available information, the host had not disclosed the conflict of interest to ABC viewers – until he was caught by Andrew Stiles of the Washington Free Beacon.

Stiles asked ABC for a comment, and while they were waiting for a reply, ABC leaked the story to Dylan Byers of Politico, who titled his story “George Stephanopoulos discloses $50,000 contribution to Clinton Foundation” (as if the idea to disclose was all Stephanopoulos’s).

A half an hour after Politico’s story ran, ABC News sent a statement  to the Washington Free Beacon.

PJ Tatler: Republicans Revolt Over Stephanopoulos’s Conflict of Interest at ABC (Video)
Ed Driscoll: More Stephanopoulos Conflicts of Interest Emerge

Bill O’Reilly: Who Is Asking Jen Psaki To Stonewall? (Video)

The question of whether or not Hillary Clinton signed an exit statement saying she turned over all of her public information to the State Department when she departed, is now dogging Hillary Clinton when ventures out in public.

Fox News’ Ed Henry tried to pry an answer from her on Monday, but she rushed right past him, refusing to even acknowledge the question.

Bill O’Reilly said he was confused as to why she wouldn’t answer the question and the State Department is stonewalling.

Here’s another question, Bill said, “who is telling Miss Psaki to stonewall. Somebody is. John Kerry’s in charge, but he’s negotiating nukes with the Iranians. Why would he care about the exit document? I mean – this is so strange…everybody KNOWS the State Department is dodging. Why are they doing it?”

Excellent question. Not that we will ever be given an answer.

O’Reilly noted that the way they’re handling this issue is similar to the Bowe Bergdahl situation. “Everybody knows, the Army knows exactly what Bergdahl did in Afghanistan,” O’Reilly explained.  “So why delay the announcement? The fallout is going to be the same whether it’s now or in two months. Why embarrass a proud institution like the Army by playing games?”

“None of this makes any sense at all,” he continued.

“She either signed it or she didn’t! So say it, already!”

“All of this is insulting to we the people,” he added. “I’m teed off here – this game playing at our expense is horrendous!”