Daily Recap — June 27

There’s like, so much news. And so much of it is good.

Our liberal tear cups runneth over.


.

.

.

THE WINS KEEP COMING

.

.

It’s a good time to be a conservative in America.

The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 yesterday in Janus v. AFSCME that nonunion workers cannot be forced to pay fees to public sector unions.

The case, one of the most hotly anticipated of the term, is the second in two days to hand a major victory to conservatives, following Tuesday’s ruling that Muslims from terrorist countries need to stay the hell where they are. Now, we have the most significant court decision affecting collective bargaining in decades.


.

Mark Janus, an employee at the Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services, asked the court last summer to overrule a 40-year-old Supreme Court decision. It found that public sector unions could require employees affected by their negotiations to pay so-called agency fees, which have also been called “fair share fees.”

Those fees, approved by the court in the 1977 case Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, cover collective bargaining costs, such as contract negotiations, but are meant to exclude political advocacy.

Janus argued his $45 monthly fee to the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees was unconstitutional. He said that the fees infringed on his First Amendment rights, and that, in the case of public employees whose contract negotiations are with the government, the fees were a form of political advocacy.

And on Wednesday, the high court said hmmmm, y’know what, this fella makes a lot of sense.


“Compelling individuals to mouth support for views they find objectionable violates that cardinal constitutional command, and in most contexts, any such effort would be universally condemned,” wrote Justice Samuel Alito, who authored the court’s opinion in the case.

PDT hailed the ruling immediately after it was handed down, noting on Twitter that the decision was a “loss for the coffers of the Democrats.”

He’s absolutely correct. The truth is, these so-called “union fees” are often just direct donations to Democrat politicians. The Dims look out for the unions and the unions return the favor — financially. And who cares if the unreasonable demands of the unions drive businesses into the dirt. The Dims will stick up for them every time, so long as those donations keep rolling in.

Well Mark Janus said they can do without his particular monies. 


.

The court dismissed the union’s argument that agency fees prevented free-riding from employees who benefit from the union’s negotiations. AFSCME argued that, because it was obligated by law to represent the interests of both union and nonunion members, the fees were a way for employees to pay their fair share for contact negotiations from which they benefited.

Avoiding free-riders, Alito wrote, “is not a compelling interest.”

“Many private groups speak out with the objective of obtaining government action that will have the effect of benefiting nonmembers,” he wrote. “May all those who are thought to benefit from such efforts be compelled to subsidize this speech?”

A fine point indeed, Mr. Alito.


.

Labor activists and unions immediately sprang into action to preserve their Democrat plantation:

“Today’s Supreme Court Janus decision is yet another effort to put obstacles in front of working men and women to join collectively behind the power of a unified voice,” UAW President Gary Jones said in a statement Wednesday. “To be clear, labor will survive. But to be equally clear, our elections do matter, as the appointment of conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch by the Republican-led Senate left little doubt about the outcome of this decision. The Janus decision is just another barrier and another attack on working men and women.”

The case is the third in five years on the question of fair share fees to come before the Supreme Court. In 2014, the question came to the high court in Harris v. Quinn, but in a cowardly move, justices declined to answer the central question over agency fees’ constitutionality, and instead ruled 5-4 that the petitioners in the case were not public employees.

In 2016, the court showed its cowardice once again by issuing a one sentence opinion on Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association that left the question open. This time, they found the courage to make a definitive ruling.

In a harshly worded dissent, definite softball player Elena Kagan wrote that by overturning Abood, the court was improperly disrespecting established precedent. She wrote that the decision “prevents the American people, acting through their state and local officials, from making important choices about workplace governance.”

“And it does so by weaponizing the First Amendment, in a way that unleashes judges, now and in the future, to intervene in economic and regulatory policy,” Kagan wrote. Kagan’s dissent was joined by the court’s liberal justices, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, and Sonia Sotomayor.

Note that by “weaponizing the First Amendment,” she actually means that giving non-communists a say in things is bad for the collective. So in that sense, she’s absolutely right. Unfortunately, she’s lost on the moral side of the equation.


.

WILDCARD

.

While this is undoubtedly a victory for conservatives, we should caution ourselves about the political implications of this decision.

Remember, PDT is the first Republican president since, well, ever to court such a large percentage of the union Democrat vote. It was union members, if you’ll recall, that carried PDT to victory in the former Democrat stronghold known as the Rust Belt. Without those crossover votes, PDT is still just that rich guy from the TV show. 

Thus, the White House is going to have to be very shrewd in its messaging here. PDT was 100% correct to call out the union fees for what they were — coffers for the Democrat party — but he’ll have to be careful about attacking the union themselves.

He’s already going to have a hard enough time dealing with the loss of union membership due to this ruling.

On the bright side, collectivism is a horrible economic philosophy and the more unions are broken, the more individuals will reach prosperity. Definitely a good trade-off.

PDT just needs to play this correctly. And with his political instincts, I’ve no doubt he will.


.

BIG PICTURE:

.

The SCOTUS delivered a victory for every man and woman in America who want the right to work without being shaken down by union bosses to donate to politicians they don’t agree with.

It’s called freedom, and if union workers don’t like the results, they can put in extra hours to get a raise like everyone else. 

GO SCOTUS!

.


.

.

.

.

THE POLITICAL LANDSCAPE EMERGES

.

.

Seven states held primaries Tuesday night — South Carolina, Oklahoma, New York, Colorado, Maryland, Mississippi and Utah — and as usual, PDT loomed over top races for Republicans.

But the big news of the night was on the Democratic side, where the sane Dims are struggling to keep control of their rabid commie faction. Oh my, it’s delicious.

Let’s discuss Tuesday’s winners and losers.

.


.

LOSERS:

.

.

Rep. Joe Crowley (D-NY)

.

Crowley is one of the highest-ranking Dims in the House, and he just lost his job to a 28-year-old socialist. Allow me to type that out once more for dramatic effect: One of the most powerful Democrats on Capitol Hill just lost to an avowed socialist in her 20’s.

I’ve been trying to tell you, people. Democrats have a looming civil war on their hands. No one would friggin listen. 

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez unseated a congressman thought to be next in line to lead House Democrats who outraised her 10-to-1 in this Bronx and Queens district. Her extraordinary upset of a 20-year veteran of Congress will shake the Democratic Party establishment to its core, as they have to come up with some sort of unification strategy to take the House in November. As of now, it’s the Bernie bots vs. The Establishment and the winner is Donald J. Trump.

Woo-hoo!

.


.

Michael Grimm:

.

Former Republican congressman Michael Grimm was trying to become the first felon in 90 years to be elected to the House.  He resigned his seat in 2015 to go to jail for seven months for tax evasion. But his attempts to leverage his conviction for outsider street cred in a pro-Trump Staten Island district failed. Grimm lost his primary to the incumbent, Rep. Dan Donovan, who is a big time Trumper and received the full presidential endorsement.

Note to Mr. Grimm: the criminal record thing can be overcome if you’re facing a NeverTrumper. Outsider-ism doesn’t work against Trump loyalists.

.


.

The Republican Party in Oklahoma:

.

Democrats have actually been smart in Oklahoma, nominating a strong candidate in former Oklahoma attorney general Drew Edmondson for Oklahoma’s governor’s mansion.

And while Edmondson will be starting his campaign, Republicans will have to muddle through another two months of a runoff since none of the 10 Republican candidates for the open seat won a majority of the vote. The Republican winner of that August runoff will have to then work to shake the outgoing governor’s extreme unpopularity.

Yes, Oklahoma is a reliably red state, but Dims have had some surprising state legislative victories in Oklahoma this election cycle, so Republicans are making a big mistake to think they have this in the bag. #BelieveMe when I tell you they need to get their stuff together.

Oklahoman Trumpers, find your man (or woman) and stick with them!

.

.

WINNERS:

.

.

Socialists

.
 

Ocasio-Cortez wasn’t the only rabid commie and/or newcomer to politics to win big Tuesday. In Maryland, former NAACP president Ben Jealous, who had the backing of the #CrazyBernie coalition, won the Dim Party’s extremely competitive primary to challenge Gov. Larry Hogan (R), beating a politician with the backing of the state’s entire Democratic establishment.

In Syracuse, N.Y., liberal professor Dana Balter won the Democratic nomination to challenge GOP Rep. John Katko despite national Democrats’ efforts to boost the other candidate, Juanita Perez Williams.

In Colorado, Rep. Jared Polis (D), a liberal member of Congress trying to be the first openly gay man to be governor in America, won the Dim nomination for that state’s open governor’s race. And in New York, newcomer Adem Bunkeddeko came close to unseating veteran Dim congresswoman Yvette D. Clarke, an impressive feat.


Rep. Jared Polis with his life partner and their son. Wow.

.

 

 

THE DONALD:

.

Did you really think he wouldn’t make the winner category?

For the second time this month, Trump demonstrated he’s got sway over voters in the great state of South Carolina. In the June 12 SC primary, a tweet from the president helped end the career of GOP congressman and avid hiker Mark Sanford.

On Tuesday, PDT helped the state’s governor, Henry McMaster, win a runoff against businessman John Warren. (I told you, Dad). McMaster has struggled to shake the label as a corrupt establishment politician and personally lobbied for Trump to hold a South Carolina rally for him the night before the election. He begged for Trump’s help and, since he’s been loyal, received it. And any political analyst worth the title knows that rally was a difference-maker. McMaster had a hell of a fight with Warren leading up to it. But by the time Hair Force One had its wheels up and headed back to swampland, McMaster had sealed the deal.

Take note, Republicans. PDT is a good guy to have on your side.

PDT wasn’t done winning there, though. He was also clear winner across the country in Utah, of all places.

There, Mitt the Magic Mormon won the Republican nomination for an open Senate seat — which, in Utah, is often a bigger hurdle than the actual general election. But Romney got there only after toning down his criticism of Trump. He went from warning his party that a Trump presidency would “greatly” diminish America’s future, to writing an op-ed in the Salt Lake Tribune a few days ago that declared “the first year of [Trump’s] administration has exceeded my expectations.”

Boy, we’ve come a long way since 2016, when Mitt was giving speeches calling PDT a “fraud.” Politicians are the most self-serving scumbags on the planet.

Keep your kind words, Mitt. They’re far too late and much too disingenuous.

The good news, though, is that the GOP is squarely in the hands of Donald J. Trump. Look people, when it’s bad politics to bash PDT in friggin UTAH….we’re winning. #BigLeague.

.


.

POTHEADS

.

Voters in Oklahoma approved legalizing medical marijuana, despite widespread opposition from state Republicans and faith leaders. That could make Oklahoma the 30th state where medical marijuana is legal, though the ballot question could get sliced and diced by Oklahoma’s Republican politicians if the governor calls a special legislative session to do that, as she has warned.

So you Oklahomans wanting medical weed (which I support, btw), you had a good day, but are far from out of the woods. And let’s face it, as high as you are, you’ll probably never find your way out of there anyway. 


.

.

BIG PICTURE:

.

I told you, I told you, I friggin told you.

For months, I’ve been yelling to anyone who would listen that the most underreported political story of the last couple years is the brewing civil war on the Left.

It’s fashionable to point out the anti-Trump faction within the GOP, but no one dare mention that Bernie Sanders is threatening to rip the Dim party in half at a time when they’re supposed to be united against boogey man Trump.

It’s really simple, folks. You have the Dim Establishment, with big time fundraisers like Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer, then you have the new guard of outright socialists who are to the left of Che Guevera on nearly every issue.

Cryin’ Chuck and Botox Nancy better figure out how to deal with this problem because it’s not going away. Those “progressives” want their pound of flesh, and they want it from Democrats as much as Republicans.

The good news? Those remaining sane Democrats will be coming right on over to the Trump side, or at least a healthy chunk of them. That’s big time trouble for the Dims in Middle America, where elections are often won and lost.

Enjoy these times, Trumpers, We have so much to smile about. 

.


.

.

.

.

MR. STRZOK GOES TO THE HILL

.

.

By now, you’re all well familiar with the name Peter Strzok. He, along with his FBI lawyer mistress Lisa Page, became famous when IG Horowitz uncovered thousands upon thousands of shady texts involving their burning desire to see PDT go down. And the truly disturbing part is that they seemed all too willing to use their official capacity within the FBI to make it happen.

Make no mistake, it doesn’t get worse than that. And for that reason, the American people deserve answers.

Yeah…..good luck with that.

Before all was said and done, Strzok’s interview stretched more than 11 hours and included unclassified and classified sessions. And of course, once it was done, Republicans and Dims had dueling assessments of what’d just happened.  


.

Strzok predictably claimed that the anti-Trump text messages he exchanged with his mistress were part of an “intimate” conversation and he did not intend to act on any of the missives, according to Dims in the meeting.

You know, messages such as “We have an insurance policy to stop Trump” and “We’ll stop him from becoming POTUS” are just your everyday pillow talk. Sounds legit, right? 

.

Sane Republicans argued that Strzok’s claims about the messages after the fact were simply not credible, arguing that Strzok shouldn’t be taken at face value.

.

“Of course, he’s always said that,” Rep. Jim Jordan.
.
But Rep. Mark Meadows, the North Carolina Republican who leads the conservative House Freedom Caucus, disputed Strzok’s account, rejecting his explanation that the “we’ll stop” Trump text was just an “intimate exchange between intimate friends.”
.
“I would expect any witness to suggest they’ve looked at this impartially. … I don’t know how any reasonable person reads the texts and concludes there was not bias,” Meadows said. “If you have an intimate personal conversation between two people — that normally would show the intent.”
.
Meadows also said he learned new information, but he would not disclose what that was. He suggested the information was related to the Trump-Russia investigation and Mueller’s probe, which were not part of the IG report that was released earlier this month.
.
“The whole handoff between the FBI’s investigation and the special counsel’s investigation obviously has some concerns if you’re relying predominantly on Peter Strzok,” Meadows said.
.
COME ON MARK. I hate these damn teases.  
.

.
According to sources, Strzok told the House panels that King Bob Mueller didn’t press him about the texts when they came to light.
.
When asked how Mueller reacted to the alarming bias being shown by ONE OF HIS LEAD INVESTIGATORS IN THE RUSSIA PROBE, Strzok said Mueller did not press him on the texts or ask him whether that showed any bias in the probe. Seriously? Not one damn question? GEE, IT’S ALMOST AS IF BIAS AGAINST TRUMP IN THE MUELLER TEAM IS EXPECTED OR EVEN CONDONED. But hey, Mueller fired Strzok, so according to Democrats, nothing to see here. It couldn’t possibly be that Mueller had no choice. It was clearly because he’s a man of integrity who wanted to rid his probe of any unsavory characters, even though he couldn’t be bothered to even ask Strzok what the hell he was doing talking about taking down the president he was tasked to investigate.
.
Simply amazing.

.
.

SO WHAT’S NEXT?

.
As you can guess, Dims are going along with Strzok’s absurd defenses hook, line and sinker, though it should be noted that these commie fish actually want to be caught. 
.
“He said the context was there were private emails, and these were certainly not any intent to act on anything,” said Rep. Jerry Nadler of New York, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee. “They were private expressions of opinion to a woman he was having an affair with.”
.
Well no ****, Sherlock. It’s what’s contained within the messages that are the issue. But I’m sure you were able to glean that just from a cursory glance. 
.
So needless to say, it will be completely up to the Republicans to push this issue until we get answers, which they’ve been surprisingly dogged about accomplishing. But that will require some more trips up to the Hill for Mr. Strzok.
.
The good news is Strzok has indicated that he wants to testify and “tell his side of the story” now that the IG report has been released. Funny that he’s suddenly willing to be so open, considering that he just had a closed-door meeting and STILL hid behind his lawyer to avoid answering many questions.
.
“Pete is central to this story. We should let the American people see who he really is,” Strzok attorney Aitan Goelman said last week. “Pete has steadfastly played by the rules and respected the process, and yet he continues to be the target of unfounded personal attacks, political games and inappropriate information leaks.”
.
I’m so glad that your client is ready to bear his true nature, Mr. Goelman, because a whole lot of people sure are interested in seeing it! Numerous congressional committees have expressed an interest in speaking to Strzok, but yesterday’s hearing was the first before a congressional panel. That one, though, was behind closed doors, and the big dogs want that to change. They want him to stand before the People in open sessions and explain himself, and no one wants more for that open testimony to happen than the big man himself, PDT:
.
“The hearing of Peter Strzok and the other hating frauds at the FBI & DOJ should be shown to the public on live television, not a closed-door hearing that nobody will see,” Trump tweeted on Monday. “We should expose these people for what they are – there should be total transparency!”
.
I couldn’t agree more, Mr. President. And given your power to release all this information at will, I trust that you’ll do just that if push comes to shove. And boy, we’re getting really close to shoving.
.

.
.
.

BIG PICTURE:

.
Here is how this will go.
.
Strzok, when he finally does testify in open sessions, will make the argument that if he truly wanted to stop PDT, he would have leaked information about the investigation during the 2016 campaign.  
.
That defense, however, is lacking, considering the discreet nature of that probe could have easily been to protect shady dealings by the FBI rather than to protect PDT. In fact, if we have the choice of believing Strzok was protecting PDT vs protecting himself and his corrupt colleagues, I’m gonna go out on a limb and guess that Strzok and company stayed quiet in order to protect themselves.
.
The good news is House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte have made it clear that they’re nowhere close to being done with Strzok, as well they shouldn’t be. Several Republicans said on their way into the interview repeated that they wanted him back for a public hearing. This included Goodlatte, who said he will be in “soon” for a public hearing, suggesting it could occur before August.
.
We most certainly need that public hearing. Let me remind you of just who Peter Strzok is:
.
PETER STRZOK WAS THE MAN WHO DREW UP THE MEMO THAT LAUNCHED THE COUNTERINTEL INVESTIGATION INTO PDT. HE LITERALLY STARTED THE WHOLE THING. THE MAN WHO SAID HE WAS FORMULATING AN INSURANCE POLICY AGAINST THE PRESIDENT IS THE MAN WHO STARTED THE INVESTIGATION AGAINST HIM.
.
Are there anymore questions about just how corrupt this whole saga has become?
.
There better be, and they better be on national television.
.
.

.

.

.

.

TRUMP BREAKS UP WITH HARLEY

.

.

The relationship between the most American president ever and the most American motorcycle ever is on the rocks.

PDT criticized Harley-Davidson again yesterday for announcing it’s shifting some operations overseas in the wake of retaliatory EU tariffs against U.S. duties.

“Harley-Davidson should stay 100% in America, with the people that got you your success,” Trump said in a tweet. 

“I’ve done so much for you, and then this. Other companies are coming back where they belong! We won’t forget, and neither will your customers or your now very HAPPY competitors!” he added.

Wheeeeew lads, shots fired!


.

Things weren’t always like this, ya know.

Early last year, PDT publicly thanked Wisconsin-based Harley-Davidson for “building things in America” and criticized other companies for moving production outside the U.S.

But things done changed.

Harley said Monday that new EU tariffs implemented Friday would increase the average cost per motorcycle by about $2,200 and the company will shift some production overseas as a result. The EU imposed the tariffs in retaliation against the Trump administration’s duties on steel and aluminum imports, which PDT implemented to protect U.S. jobs.

However, no production will be moving to Europe as a result of the tariffs. Harley’s overseas manufacturing plants are in Brazil, India, Australia and Thailand. In the U.S., the company is shutting down a Kansas City factory and transferring operations to York, Pennsylvania.


.

Let’s get to the truth of the matter here, people. You know, facts.

Trump tweeted Monday and Tuesday that Harley was using the tariffs as an excuse to justify existing plans. He is absolutely correct. 

Yes, S&P Global Ratings did say yesterday that EU tariffs will add so much to Harley-Davidson’s existing challenges it is putting the company’s credit rating on negative watch. The word “existing” is italicized for a reason. Harley’s problems didn’t begin with PDT or any stupid European tariffs. 

“The CreditWatch placement reflects our belief that near-term cost increases due to retaliatory tariffs recently imposed by the EU, combined with other significant headwinds, could cause margin deterioration and increase business risks over the next several years,” S&P analysts said in their report. “We could lower our rating on Harley as a result.”

As of Wednesday, S&P had an “A-” corporate credit rating on Harley, and virtually none of it had anything to do with tariffs. 

So what does it have to do with? Here is the actual information. It was really easy to find, media:

“The CreditWatch placement follows our outlook revision to negative in January 2018 due to persistent sales declines, elevated marketing costs, and our expectation that EBITDA margin would decline over the next two years while Harley consolidates some assembly plants to achieve longer-term cost savings,” S&P’s Pianki said.

Harley has been reorganizing and relocating in order to improve their profit margins for quite a while now. This is just the latest step in that direction. It has jack squat to do with Donald Trump. 

 

.


.

BIG PICTURE:

.

Harley Davidson is making very stupid business moves, even though they were pre-planned. PDT has lowered tax rates across the board and slashed regulations left and right. I find it hard to believe that Harley can’t turn a profit right here in the good ole USA.

And #BelieveMe, PDT will be happy to remind them of that fact at every turn.

Remember, PDT has working class Democrats to hold onto in order to keep his electoral base together. Bashing companies that leave our country is a good way to do that. I know many conservatives don’t like it, as the federal government should typically stay out of the affairs of the private sector, as is a staple of conservative ideology.

However, PDT isn’t a conservative. He’s a very shrewd politician who defeats both conservatives and liberals at every turn, and things like this are how he gets it done.

But conservatives can take solace in the fact that, at least in terms of domestic business policy, Trump has been the most conservative president of our lifetimes. Not even Reagan was this business-friendly.

Harley Davidson would do well to get back into the president’s good graces. Who are you more likely to see on a Harley: a Trumper, or a coochie-capper?

It’s pretty simple math.

Come on back home, Harley. 

.


There it is, homeskillet. You know the drill: questions, comments, concerns, memes, insults, compliments, stickers, jokes, emojis and, if we have time, complaints.


Donations

Hi everyone, if you enjoyed this article and feel that I’ve earned a tip, I would greatly appreciate any help you can give. If you would like to give more than $3, simply change the number in the box to multiply the donation. If not, I still love you and keep up the good fight!

$3.00

Categories Uncategorized

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this:
search previous next tag category expand menu location phone mail time cart zoom edit close