Hanging in the Balance

While no one in the media will ever admit this, it is becoming ever more evident that President Donald Trump is practically unbeatable within the U.S. electorate. Sure, there are pockets within the electorate- coastal elitists, aggrieved identity groups, socialists, open-border advocates and politicians of both parties who despise the President. These make up that part of the electorate vehemently opposed to Donald Trump and his presidency.

Yet taken together, they cannot begin to counter the pro-Trump voters within that same electorate who are more loyal to Trump, as a percent of the Republican voters, than any other Republican President, ever. Not that this fact is reflected in the representatives and senators who presently comprise the legislative caucuses in both houses, for there are scores of Republicans who tacitly or actively oppose the President at every opportunity to do so.

The most vociferous amongst these anti-Trump Republicans are those who are not seeking re-election in the fall, which says much albeit unintentionally, about the actual power Trump holds over members of his own caucus who are running for re-election. “Oppose Trump at your own peril” is not only a warning…it’s a stark reality, and for Republicans to deny that this is the age of Trump, is to ignore the fact that the G.O.P. will live or die based upon the degree to which they embrace, support and back the current President of the United States.

To be precise, this fall’s election is a referendum on Donald Trump, plain and simple.

If Democrats take over the House, their first order of business will be to impeach the President- reason to be determined. Much like the opponents to the President’s selection for Justice Kennedy’s seat on the Supreme Court being at the ready, armed with pre-printed protest signs, in need only of a name to fill in the blank, they’ll figure out some excuse to charge the President with a fabrication of a supposed crime, because they know they can’t impeach a sitting president just because they hate the man. The fact that there will not be enough votes in the Senate to ultimately convict the President is irrelevant to Democrats, because they only need to approve articles of impeachment to bottle up the Congress until 2020, when then they can have a shot at the White House, itself.

On the other hand, if Republicans can retain their majority in the House, then impeachment of the President will be averted and the issue will be to what degree the House is willing to work with the President on the key issues of health care, spending, taxation, border security and immigration reform. The pending departure of House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI) has already set up a run-off between his heir apparent, Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), and a member of the House Freedom Caucus, Jim Jordan (R-OH). This contest will say much regarding the future of Republicans in the House of Representatives.

Given the strength of the economy, international developments ranging from North Korea to NATO to the Middle East, the defeat of ISIS and in keeping the promises made during his campaign in 2016, the case for voting against Trump has become exclusively partisan- opposing the President for its own sake, rather than for tangible reasons.

Anyone who believes that a majority of this country is actually for open borders, for guaranteed basic income and for “free” education, health care and housing- as are becoming the primary issues upon which Democrats are increasingly advocating- is delusional to believe that this is even remotely approaching a winning platform. Here’s a prediction: scores of Democrat voters will either stay home or abandon the excesses of their own party, and oppose their most leftward-leaning incumbents and candidates running for office. Yes, it’s true that many incumbent Democrats are being pushed aside by socialist upstarts in Democrat primaries, but this will only serve to lessen the support that these new Democrats will ultimately receive at the polls this fall.

Taken together, it appears that Trump’s party is not only well-positioned to prevail this fall, but it is Trump who is in the driver’s seat to win re-election in 2020, so “Plan A” of the Democrats to rid the country of one Donald Trump by voting him out of office is becoming increasingly unlikely.

Never fear though. Democrats who often find themselves unable to secure the policies they promote are well-versed and well-trained to seek from the courts that which they can’t achieve through the legislative process. That’s why we have activist judges who write the laws from the bench that Democrats are unable to pass, legislatively.

So “Plan B” will be to oppose Trump in the courts and then hope that somehow the Mueller probe can come up with something…anything…to get Trump in the hot water they so desperately seek. Any Republican “rat” they can find to support this effort will be all the more welcomed to join in the fray, but many of them won’t be around next year, so Democrats seeking Trump’s removal will have to rely on their compatriots in the “deep state” and their allies in the mainstream media to do their bidding, instead.

Otherwise, President Donald Trump will be around until January of 2025, which will drive the likes of Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and company out of their ever-loving minds and further deteriorate the Democrat Party, as we’ve come to know it…that’s the good news.

The bad news?

Well, if you think that the country is polarized today, then just imagine this country with Donald Trump’s re-election in 2020…it will be war in the streets, sorry to say, and the one chance this nation has to correct the errors of its ways in following a globalist agenda for almost a century, will hang in the balance under a President elected to do quite the opposite.

-Drew Nickell, 29 July 2018

© 2018 by Drew Nickell, all rights reserved.

author of “Bending Your Ear- a Collection of Essays on the Issues of Our Times”

now available at Amazon

https://www.amazon.com/Bending-Your-Ear-Collection-Essays/dp/1633932907?ie=UTF8&ref_=asap_bc

Signed and personalized editions now available at my website:

http://www.drewnickell.com

Follow my postings on the RSS feed: http://www.drewnickell.com/?feed=rss2

Trump Meets with Putin in Finland and then all Helsinki Breaks Loose

President Donald Trump met with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Monday, July 16^th and, as a result of the press conference which took place immediately afterward, all Helsinki broke loose.

It wasn’t as if the stern reaction by the media, Democrats and anti-Trump/NeverTrump Republicans to Trump’s words wasn’t planned in advance. In fact, given the curious timing of Robert Mueller’s indictments of twelve Russian generals delivered by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein on the Friday before, one might say all of the tempests in a veritable teapot were already set to boil over well in advance.

For instance, following Rosenstein’s announcement at the end of last week, Senator Mark Warner (D-VA) once again proved to be the south end of a northbound horse when he stated that the President “should not be allowed to meet with Putin in private, without three of four Americans in the room to witness the conversation.”  In other words, the Virginia Democrat basically indicated that a duly-elected U.S. President (namely, one Donald Trump) cannot and should not be trusted to meet privately with a Russian President, and therefore such a meeting should not be allowed to take place.

Then, following the press conference, it was none other than Representative Steve Cohen (D-TN)- the same Steve Cohen who said that disgraced FBI Agent Peter Strzok merited a Purple Heart for the supposed grilling he underwent by House Judiciary and Oversight Committees earlier last week- called for a military coup d’état to take place prior to Trump’s return to the White House, because “the Commander-in-Chief is in the hands of our enemy.”

Not to be outdone, the former CIA Director under President Barack Obama, John O. Brennan, had the temerity to accuse the current President of “high crimes and misdemeanors worthy of impeachment,” calling on House Republicans to initiate impeachment proceedings, upon the President’s return to Washington, D.C. Once a card-carrying member of the Communist Party USA who voted for communist party nominees for President in the 1970s, and a born and raised Catholic son of Irish immigrants who renounced his Christian faith and changed his religion to Islam, long before he was tapped by Obama to head the CIA, Brennan was the one who went around Washington peddling copies of dossiers, paid for by Hillary Clinton, that were used to obtain FISA warrants against Carter Page and others associated with the Trump campaign.

Speaking of dossiers, it was Senator John McCain (R-AZ) who first delivered the Clinton-funded dossier to FBI Director James Comey, which prompted the illegally obtained FISA warrants against Trump and his campaign, and ultimately led to the Mueller probe. The supposedly ailing senator had enough chutzpah to release a statement excoriating the Republican President, saying that Trump’s comments made at the Helsinki press conference were “the most disgraceful comments ever made by a U.S. President before a Russian,” basically charging the president with treason- a sentiment shared by former President Bill Clinton’s press secretary, Joe Lockhart.

Despite universal Democrat condemnation, there were enough anti-Trump/NeverTrump Republicans, including the usual cast of Trump-haters like Senators Ben Sasse (R-NE), Jeff Flake (R-AZ) and Bob Corker (R-TN) and others who routinely bash the President, to jump on the pile of disdainful reaction to the press conference and make the outrage a truly bi-partisan affair, leaving the President to fend for himself, yet again.

With help from most all of the mainstream media, Trump’s enemies immediately twisted the President’s comments into taking Putin’s denials as undeniable fact in the face of U.S. intelligence findings that Russian government attempted to disrupt the 2016 presidential election when Hillary Clinton’s e-mails, her server and the DNC servers were hacked in the winter and spring prior to that year’s election. Notably absent from the reporting was the fact that the RNC servers were also attacked, but yet not compromised due to better protection. Also missing from the reporting was the seldom-stated fact that the Clinton server, and the DNC servers remain “missing,” an important point which is only and repeatedly mentioned by the President, as Trump did during the press conference. Trump stressed that he had “great confidence” in the U.S. intelligence services, but also noted that “…Putin was extremely strong and powerful in his denial…” This discrepancy was quickly turned by the media into a supposed repudiation of our own intelligence services at the behest of Putin, as if both claims cannot possibly be true.

The fact is that both statements by the president are most likely true. After all, it can be true that the President has great confidence in our intelligence, while at the same moment saying that Putin was strong and powerful in his denial- not that an extremely biased media, along with his own political adversaries are going to give our President any such degree of slack.  No, they were looking for a reason to pounce on Trump in advance, and the President apparently gave them ample space to do so.

Most egregiously, the post-conference reporting by the media has universally ignored the fact that it was Putin himself who stated that Russian interests provided over $400 million to help Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign (an obvious reference to pay-for-play contributions to the Clinton Foundation in exchange for the transfer of 20% of the domestic uranium stockpiles to Russian control in 2010). Once again, leave it to the media to give Hillary Clinton a pass for her own very real criminal activity, while at the same time creating yet another brouhaha as a supposed justification for a possible Trump impeachment.

It is an undeniable certainty that Trump was going to incur the wrath of his political opponents across the spectrum, regardless of the degree to which he presented the findings of domestic intelligence to Putin- something the President quite rightly said should be done in person- that the Russians attempted to interfere in the 2016 elections. Considering the fact that Russians have been doing this to the United States and other countries since the late 1920s and considering the fact that President Barack Obama used taxpayers’ money ($349,276.00) to interfere with Israeli President Benjamin Netanyahu’s reelection in 2015, it is curious and altogether telling that Putin’s alleged “tampering” is all of the sudden being termed as “an act of war” perpetrated against the United States… an act of war between the two countries who hold 90% of the world’s nuclear weapons… and they seek to blame Trump for being irresponsible, all the while accusing him of being treasonous?!?

Ironically, avoiding thermo-nuclear war between Russia and the United States, at a time when Russian/U.S. relations are at an all-time-low, was the very reason why President Trump sat down with Putin, in order to begin a dialogue aimed at reducing the risk of such a war. To listen to Trump’s political enemies and detractors, it was accusing Putin of interference in our elections that really mattered, when all Helsinki broke loose on Monday, July 16^th.

-Drew Nickell, 17 July 2018

© 2018 by Drew Nickell, all rights reserved.

author of “Bending Your Ear- a Collection of Essays on the Issues of Our Times”

now available at Amazon

https://www.amazon.com/Bending-Your-Ear-Collection-Essays/dp/1633932907?ie=UTF8&ref_=asap_bc

Signed and personalized editions now available at my website:

http://www.drewnickell.com

Follow my postings on the RSS feed: http://www.drewnickell.com/?feed=rss2

A Persistent “Deep State” in the Age of Trump

When FBI Agent Peter Strzok testified before a joint session of the House Judiciary and Oversight Committees on Wednesday, July 12^th, what became apparent was evidence of a well-entrenched “deep state,” explicitly personified in the demeanor, bearing and testimony of the witness being questioned. While no significant revelations resulted from the day-long hearing, what did manage to surface was the fact that Strzok was inordinately biased in his handling of the Clinton e-mail, Trump/Russia, and the Mueller investigations- three separate investigations in which he was conveniently placed in charge.

The very fact that the same man was placed in charge of all three investigations was telling, in and of itself, especially given the fact that Robert Mueller initially placed him in charge of the latter investigation, knowing full well that Strzok’s credibility had already been besmirched in the two prior investigations of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. Worse, when his texts became public and Mueller had no choice but to remove him from his own investigation, it was only for the “appearance of a conflict of interest” as opposed to an obvious conflict of interest as evidenced by the texts he exchanged with Lisa Page, a Justice Department lawyer also assigned to the three investigations, with whom he was having an extra-marital affair.

During the combative hearing, Strzok was surly, defensive and contemptuous towards Republican House members questioning him regarding his text messages, while insisting that his personal feelings about Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump had no bearing on the actions he took in handling the investigations, despite mounting evidence to the contrary. It also became apparent that Strzok revealed his intent to sabotage the Trump campaign, just as the investigation into Trump/Russia collusion began during the 2016 presidential election. Then, when former FBI Director James Comey was fired, and immediately after Robert Mueller was appointed to investigate allegations that Trump had obstructed justice in Comey’s dismissal, Strzok envisioned the possibility of impeachment even before he was named to head up the Mueller probe in the months that followed. Such inclinations on his part show an overt amount of bias to a level that cannot possibly allow anyone to pursue official duties without the ill-effect that it would have on any official undertakings. This also explains why he was so intent on absolving Hillary Clinton of the multiple crimes she committed, most notably by changing the phrase “gross negligence,” (which is a crime) to “extreme carelessness” (which is not a crime), in Clinton’s exoneration- penned two months before Clinton and thirty-one others had even been interviewed.

His infamous texts and his subsequent actions and testimony before Congress reveal a “deep state” of career Washington apparatchiks who sought to hijack a presidential election in favor of Hillary Clinton and against Donald Trump. Other players, including Lisa Page, James Comey, Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Former Attorney General Loretta Lynch, Former Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe, Former CIA Director John Brennan, Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, Former National Security Advisor Susan Rice, Former Senior Advisor Valerie Jarrett, Former U.N. Ambassador Samantha Power, Former Acting Attorney General Sally Yates and Former Acting Attorney General Dana Boente all took part in this “deep state” corruption, but it is Strzok who has become the very face of the deep state under Obama, given the animus he displayed and continues to display against the current President.

If Strzok is indeed the face of the “deep state” that existed during the Obama administration, then it is becoming quite clear that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein has become the face of the “deep state” in the age of Trump, doing everything he can to obstruct Congressional oversight into the Justice Department’s handling of these investigations, and in his obvious attempt to undermine the President he now serves. It is Rosenstein who signed off on subsequent FISA warrants against members of the Trump campaign, it is Rosenstein who wrote to President Trump advising him to fire Comey (which launched the Mueller probe), and it is Rosenstein who has continuously blocked the release of documents subpoenaed by Congress.

Upon President Trump’s nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court, it is Rod Rosenstein who has now directed federal prosecutors from around the country to comb through Kavanaugh’s rulings and documents to find anything they can to thwart his nomination- something that has never been done by the Justice Department for any other Supreme Court nominee, ever.

Then, on the very Friday before President Trump was scheduled to sit down with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Helsinki, Finland on Monday, July 16th, Rod Rosenstein called a press conference to announce his indictment of twelve Russian generals for their part in hacking Hillary Clinton’s emails, along with e-mails by Clinton campaign manager John Podesta and other members of the Democrat National Committee. The timing of these indictments, which could have been brought anytime during the last six months, is an obvious attempt by Rosenstein to throw a wrench into Trump’s meeting with Putin. These indictments have also prompted both Democrats and anti-Trump/neverTrump Republicans to demand that Trump postpone any meeting with the Russian leader until these Russian generals are extradited to the United States to face charges- something they all know is never going to happen.

The media- ALL of the media, constantly reminds us that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein is a Republican, who was appointed by Trump to his position as Deputy Attorney General in the wake of Attorney General Jeff Session’s recusal from all matters related to the 2016 campaign. What the media never says, however, is the fact that Rod Rosenstein’s wife, Lisa Barsoomian, is a lawyer who once was the protégé of both Comey and Mueller, and who once represented former HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, as well as Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, and has even done work for the Clinton Foundation…quite a cozy relationship that Rosenstein enjoys with Trump’s political opponents.

Meanwhile it is President Trump who has the sense of purpose to pursue the domestic and international changes he seeks to implement in both the status quo ante, and in the face of all of this “deep state” corruption so intent on his demise. So far, the President has been adroit in allowing his political adversaries from both parties to unwittingly reveal their treachery and corruption for all to see, without any interference on his own part. In the past he has often reiterated his intent to maintain a “hands-off” approach with regards to the Justice Department, indicating at some point he might have to “step in”. A good start would be for the President to fire Attorney General Jeff Sessions, fire Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, and fire FBI Director Christopher Wray. At the same time, he should subsequently order the FBI and Justice Department to release all of the documents relating to the Clinton-email investigation and pay-for-play corruption relating to the UraniumOne acquisition of our nation’s uranium stockpile, as well as all of the documents relating to the launch of the Mueller probe…

In doing this, it’s the timing that presents the biggest challenge to President Trump, and there would be no better time to do all of this, than on the day after the mid-term elections, November 8, 2018.

-Drew Nickell, 15 July 2018

© 2018 by Drew Nickell, all rights reserved.

author of “Bending Your Ear- a Collection of Essays on the Issues of Our Times”

now available at Amazon

https://www.amazon.com/Bending-Your-Ear-Collection-Essays/dp/1633932907?ie=UTF8&ref_=asap_bc

Signed and personalized editions now available at my website:

http://www.drewnickell.com

Follow my postings on the RSS feed: http://www.drewnickell.com/?feed=rss2

Unhinged- the Response to Trump’s Supreme Court Nomination of Brett Kavanaugh

It’s a story that was written long before Judge Brett Kavanaugh became President Donald Trump’s selection to fill the seat of Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy on Monday, July 9^th.  In fact, all that was really needed was to fill in the actual name of the person the President selected to fill that vacancy, by those who were set to pounce on the selection regardless of who he or she might have been.

There was a time in the not-too-distant past when Supreme Court nominees were judged solely on their core competencies in jurisprudence, as opposed to suspicions of their political leanings, as is the case today. For instance, Justice Kennedy was approved on a bipartisan, 97-0 vote when President Reagan nominated him in 1987. Justice Ruth Bader-Ginsberg, nominated by President Clinton, was approved on a 96-3 vote. Even more recently-appointed Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan- both appointed by President Obama, were approved by filibuster-proof, bipartisan majorities in the U.S. Senate. This all changed however when in 2013. then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) introduced the “nuclear option,” negating the filibuster-proof 60-vote threshold to approve Obama-appointed federal judgeships. That precedent, created by the Democrat Majority Leader was then used by his successor, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), to prevent the unreasonable and interminable stalling by Democrats who attempted to sabotage Justice Neil Gorsuch’s nomination, by President Trump in 2017.

With once and future nominations to the nation’s high court thus dependent upon the particular party in power, the days of Senate bipartisanship in approving Supreme Court nominees is now a thing of the past. So, it was not surprising that Democrats decided, well before the fact, that their opposition to Trump’s second appointment was set in stone, name to be added later. Their opposition, regardless of the qualifications attendant to the particular nominee, was and is based solely upon the fact that it is Donald Trump who is selecting his nominee, and nothing else. Oh, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and his merry band of Trump obstructionists will pine about Roe vs Wade (1973) being immediately overturned, if and when Judge Kavanaugh joins the Supreme Court for the fall term. They will postulate about women dying from “coat-hanger abortions in back alleys,” as the direct result of Trump’s selection. They will say that Kavanaugh’s addition to the high court will bring about an end to LGBTQ rights, and other such nonsense, based upon nothing more than the fact that it is Donald Trump, and not Hillary Clinton, making the decision- and that is what is really behind all of the hoopla surrounding Kavanaugh’s nomination. The same thing happens each and every time that a Republican President makes such appointment, and the warning about overturning Roe vs Wade has been a staple of Democrat opposition going back to the Reagan administration in the 1980s, so there is no news there…

…except for the fact that Democrats and Republicans both know that the chances of Roe vs Wade being revisited are about as likely as Brown vs Board of Education (1954), the landmark ruling which outlawed racial segregation in public schools, being revisited. Even if the controversial Roe vs Wade decision is overturned at some point in the future, it would only return to the states regulatory power concerning abortion- hardly the recipe for mass deaths of women seeking to terminate pregnancies. The national guarantee of abortion rights, being the central issue of Roe vs Wade, is conveniently couched as “Women’s Health” endangerment by Democrats, when it is actually the health of unborn babies that is endangered by abortion-on-demand, but that is a separate discussion for another day.

Suffice to say that upcoming hearings concerning Judge Kavanaugh’s appointment to the Supreme Court will present a circus of unprecedented postulations and prevarications as Senate Democrats will do everything possible to trash the lifetime career of a United States Circuit Court of Appeals judge whose writings on jurisprudence have been widely hailed as benchmarks of opinion that have been embraced by jurists across the political spectrum. Kavanaugh’s rulings have even been widely endorsed by and incorporated into Supreme Court rulings during his tenure since his arrival in 2003. But, as Schumer would have us believe, what is a little thing like trashing the career and reputation of a dedicated jurist, when what is really at issue is the man who nominated him? Schumer even had the chutzpah to recommend to the President that he instead nominate Merrick Garland, Obama’s choice for the high court, in “the interests of national unity.” This coming from a Senate Minority Leader whose stock-in-trade is anything but national unity.

Yet, there are even objections to Kavanaugh coming from so-called Trump-supporters, who have moronically expressed their displeasure in Trump’s selection. Never mind the fact that it was Kavanaugh, along with two dozen other possible Supreme Court nominees, whose names were published on a pre-election list by then-candidate Donald Trump, for all the world to see- a first ever for a presidential candidate. Now, suddenly, so-called “purists” claiming to support this president are taking issue with Kavanaugh’s appointment, just because their particular preferences were not selected this time around. Perhaps they would do well to examine Kavanaugh’s record and the rest of Trump’s list, before opening their mouths with their eyes wide shut unless, of course, they would have preferred Hillary Clinton’s choice, instead.

Once Judge Kavanaugh has endured the salacious slander and infectious innuendo thrust upon him and his family, he will inevitably join the Supreme Court, likely before October 1^st, when the court’s fall term begins. His rulings during the subsequent decades will prove to be the only mark that really matters when it comes to whether or not President Trump made a good decision by nominating him in the first place…

…and no amount of demagogy, perpetrated by the left or the right, can change that fact, despite the multitude of talking heads who think they know better than a man duly elected by his country to make this decision.

-Drew Nickell, 11 July 2018

© 2018 by Drew Nickell, all rights reserved.

author of “Bending Your Ear- a Collection of Essays on the Issues of Our Times”

now available at Amazon

https://www.amazon.com/Bending-Your-Ear-Collection-Essays/dp/1633932907?ie=UTF8&ref_=asap_bc

Signed and personalized editions now available at my website:

http://www.drewnickell.com

Follow my postings on the RSS feed: http://www.drewnickell.com/?feed=rss2

Voices and Choices- the #WalkAway Movement and What it Means

It erupted upon the scene so quickly that we almost failed to take note of it.

The #WalkAway movement, the visionary brainchild of one Brandon Straka, has given voice to thousands who, like Straka, have grown weary of the empty promises of liberalism, and who have become disillusioned by the extreme excesses of political correctness. Having voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016, Straka has since launched a Facebook-based movement which, in a short month’s time since its inception, has attracted more than 85,000 members and has more than 350-member posts each and every day- not too shabby for a movement which did not exist two months ago.

In short, Straka and his followers have vowed to abandon the Democrat party for good, and this spells disaster to a political party in disarray- one that has become fractured by the excesses of its own creation.

On the one hand you have the aging relics of a party once headed by the likes of John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson, Hubert H. Humphrey and Henry “Scoop” Jackson- liberals for their time, to be certain, but virulent anti-communists, all the same. Amongst these relics are the Democrat leadership in both houses- Nancy Pelosi and Diane Feinstein of California, Jerry Nadler and Chuck Schumer of New York, as well as a host of aging Democrats between the two coasts. It is fairly easy to identify them- they are the Democrats in Congress and the Senate who are well into their seventies and who tenuously hang onto their seats in the face of passing years and philosophical circumstances.

On the other hand, you have radical socialists who are incrementally hijacking the soul of the Democrat party, like 28-year old Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, who wrested her party’s nomination for the House of Representatives away from Joe Crowley- a ten-term Congressman who had never before faced internal opposition since arriving in Congress at the end of the last century. Of her surprise victory over the powerful incumbent, DNC Chairman Tom Perez said that Ocasio-Cortez was “the future of our party.”

The steady takeover of the Democrat Party by avowed socialists has spread to Virginia- once a bastion of Democrat conservativism, which included the late Senator Harry F. Byrd who, while governor, led the Commonwealth’s massive resistance to Brown vs Board of Education, that landmark 1954 Supreme Court ruling which desegregated the nation’s public schools. In Virginia, Democrat Socialist Lee Carter, a self-described “activist and community organizer (sound familiar?)” defeated that state’s Republican House of Delegates Majority Whip, Jackson Miller, in last year’s off-year state election. In 2016, a transgender heavy-metal singer, one Danica Roem, another Democrat Socialist, defeated long time conservative Republican Bob Marshall for his Congressional seat- another sign that radical changes are taking place within the Democrat Party.

This trend towards political radicalism, the ever-increasing litany of liberal lunacy, as evidenced by Maxine Waters (D-CA) and her call for vehement confrontation against all of President Trump’s cabinet members, and the violent excesses of the #Antifa and #BlackLivesMatter movements have only served to push thousands of one-time Democrat loyalists away from the Democrat party.

The only problem is that the mainstream media is not talking about this massive exodus, as it goes against their agenda to rid the country of one Donald J. Trump, while instead musing about how many seats in the House and Senate Republicans are going to lose in the 2018 mid-term election…

…wonder what they will say on the morning of November 7^th, 2018, when America wakes up to find that the predicted “blue wave” was barely a ripple, thanks to the #WalkAway movement and many others who have abandoned a political party that no longer represents them.

-Drew Nickell, 8 July 2018

© 2018 by Drew Nickell, all rights reserved.

author of “Bending Your Ear- a Collection of Essays on the Issues of Our Times”

now available at Amazon

https://www.amazon.com/Bending-Your-Ear-Collection-Essays/dp/1633932907?ie=UTF8&ref_=asap_bc

Signed and personalized editions now available at my website:

http://www.drewnickell.com

Follow my postings on the RSS feed: http://www.drewnickell.com/?feed=rss2

Drew Nickell was Back on the Radio Today, Thursday, July 5th at 1:00 PM, EDT

I was back on the radio today, sitting in for Nora Firestone on her show on WKQA-AM, Freedom 1110 in Hampton Roads, VA. On the show, I was discussing the intolerance coming from those who feign tolerance, the possibility of a second American Civil War,  Donald Trump’s upcoming Supreme Court selection and the need for a new and revitalized Independence Day.

This was also presented also as a Facebook live broadcast.

Here is the link to the video replay of that broadcast

https://www.facebook.com/drew.nickell.7/videos/10209689260108291/

Hoping that you enjoyed the broadcast, one way or  another.

-Drew Nickell, 5 July 2018

© 2018 by Drew Nickell, all rights reserved.

author of “Bending Your Ear- a Collection of Essays on the Issues of Our Times”

now available at Amazon

https://www.amazon.com/Bending-Your-Ear-Collection-Essays/dp/1633932907?ie=UTF8&ref_=asap_bc

Signed and personalized editions now available at my website:

http://www.drewnickell.com

Follow my postings on the RSS feed: http://www.drewnickell.com/?feed=rss2