Friday, September 25, 2020


Yeah, Aretha's is better I guess,
but I like the street-corner drums and the generally swing.

•  Another exciting week in the Death of the Republic! To celebrate I have unlocked two recent issues of my classy and au courant Substack newsletter (now celebrating its two-year anniversary, eat shit Andrew Sullivan) Roy Edroso Breaks It Down. First, there's the transcript of a high-level discussion with the President about which pretty lady should be on the Supreme Court, with all the sophisticated politesse you have come to expect from this administration; second, a scene from early American village life in which the Witchfinder General lets the sinners know who the real bigots are. Enjoy! 

•  As previously mentioned, the President has made it abundantly clear that he won't accept any election result that doesn't have him winning. The Wall Street Journal sees the real issue -- Democratic overreaction:

The media and intelligentsia have worked themselves into a frenzy over imaginary fears that Mr. Trump will somehow remain in office by force if he loses the 2020 election. 

Chortle, chortle, and look at the innocent statement that led them to this ridiculous conclusion:

“Well we’re going to have to see what happens,” [Trump] said when asked to disavow this fantasy. “I’ve been complaining very strongly about the ballots, and the ballots are a disaster.”

Some nervous nellies think that's a threat, but you just have to know how seriously-but-not-literally listen: 

...Mr. Trump’s real point is that he wants to reserve the right to contest dubious election practices, such as post-election litigation to count disputed or late or unsigned ballots.

See, when our drooling monster goes GRRRAH KILL, he's only talking about a proportionate response to a theoretical clear provocation. Why do you liberals keep missing this? We keep explaining his incoherent roars to you, but you people just don't catch on!

WSJ leaves out Trump's "There won’t be a transfer, frankly. There will be a continuation" statement -- maybe because they figure it would further overexcite their Democratic readers -- but eventually they have to acknowledge Trump demands a new Supreme Court Justice pronto to help him steal the election, and this the Journal bemoans as yet another unfortunate opportunity for the Democrats to make mischief:

This answer hands Democrats a ready-made line of attack in Supreme Court confirmation hearings. Senate Democrats will charge that Mr. Trump’s nominee is being installed to help him steal the election. They’ll also demand that she recuse herself from election-related cases.

All the damage to our sacred institutions Democrats will do, and all because our poor, drooling monster made an "oopsie." The editorial is longer than it might be because the author is obliged to talk at length about the Democrats' shameless voting-by-mail, not to mention their "thirst to be vindicated" for their paranoia with a "Reichstag fire." And plus which, I know you are but what am I:

As for a peaceful transition, last month the New York Times reported that Hillary Clinton’s campaign chair, John Podesta, participated in an election “war game” in which states threatened secession after a Trump electoral victory. No less an authority on defeat than Mrs. Clinton said recently that Joe Biden “should not concede under any circumstances,” in expectation of a drawn-out fight. Mr. Biden has predicted that Mr. Trump might try to steal the election. Who’s really plotting the coup?

Anticipating a coup and telling one's candidate not to concede if the head of government attempts one is, you see, the real coup. You can almost hear this poor editorial factotum wincing and wondering why they won't give her better material. At least Vince Foster was actually dead

No comments:

Post a Comment