AMERICA'S SECOND DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE

SPECIAL POST

Our first Declaration of Independence was on July 4, 1776.  The thirteen American colonies were livid over the oppressive and condescending British rule and taxes.  The second Declaration of Independence is likely to occur on November 8, 2016 when Americans go to the election polls to select a president, Congressional Representatives and United States Senators.  We also are sick and tired of condescending attitudes, oppressive rule and unconscionable taxes.  

We're ticked off with wide-open borders that allow criminals, terrorists and illegals easy access to our country.  We're ticked off with a president who gives mere lip service to the war on terrorism, who incessantly lies about everything and who violates our rights and our Constitution.  We're sick and tired of a Congress that allows him to run roughshod over our country and we're sick and tired of being told to sit down and shut up.  

The day of our second Declaration of Independence is coming.  

That's MY AMERICAN OPINION, respectfully submitted.   

OBAMA, CLINTON ON BENGHAZI: UP YOURS, AMERICA!

SPECIAL POST

Barack Hussein Obama's attorney has been quick to say that Obama will not answer any questions about the Benghazi findings because he doesn't have to.  Deputy press secretary Eric Schultz said photographs of Obama receiving a press briefing the night of the attack is proof enough the president did all he could. Schultz accused Republicans of conducting a tireless effort based on “conspiracy theories.  Republicans have been investigating this exhaustively, and with each turn of the crank, they are unable to prove to the wild conspiracy theories they have been proffering for years.”

For her part, Hillary refused to answer any questions and told the press to forget it, it's history and to get out of here.  The press and media were quick to downplay Clinton's involvement, insisting that Obama and his administration were responsible.  Although Clinton was in on the phony blaming of the attack on a You Tube video, although she has been caught in lying about when she knew it wasn't the video, and although she was complicit in denying adequate security to the Benghazi compound, the press and the media glossed over those details.  

I wonder how those four dead men feel about how this has all been dealt with.  

Are you still voting for Hillary?  

That's MY AMERICAN OPINION, respectfully submitted.  

PARDONGATE: JUST HOW CLEAN IS COMEY?

SPECIAL POST

This is the sixth in a series of revelations about how the Clintons have failed Americans time after time over the years.  In this case, Bill is said to have issued presidential pardons by the handful in exchange for political donations.  

At the outset, I have to address F.B.I. Director James Comey and the assertions by countless members of the Washington establishment that he is beyond reproach and the "best man" for the job of investigating Clinton's Emails and the Clinton Foundation   For what it is worth, Comey was assigned to investigate "Pardongate" in the aftermath of Bill Clinton's final day in office when he pardoned dozens of people.  Comey found "no illegality" on Clinton's part.  Is that what we are looking forward to again?  

Here's the skinny on "Pardongate:"  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Clinton_pardon_controversy

How much more of this kind of conduct does America really want to sanction?  

That's MY AMERICAN OPINION, respectfully submitted.  
 

CLINTON'S BIGGEST SCANDAL EVER

SPECIAL POST

This is the fifth in a series on  the Clinton scandals.  This one is growing bigger by the moment.  

1. The Benghazi Massacre led to investigations by Congress, as well as a cursory examination by the Department of Justice which concluded there was no wrong doing.  In the course of its investigations, it became well-known that Hillary had steadfastly refused to use Department of State internet communications channels when she was Secretary of State and had, in fact, shoved all such communications through her privately owned and lightly-secured server.  The question was: why would she spend her own money to do that and why did she not want to use approved D.O.S. channels?  The only logical answer was that she had something to hide.  

2.  When caught, Hillary denied using the private server for any official communications, saying that it was used only for "personal" communications.  Accordingly, she flatly denied any access to her server by any and all investigators.   

3.  When legal decisions forced her to open up access to her server and when it was discovered that she did indeed have official government emails on her server, she refused to allow anyone to see them.  She then said she personally went through each and every email and determined which ones were personal and which ones were official and that she deleted all of her personal ones.  Around the same time, the State Department revealed that internal copies of official emails sent to and from Clinton had mysteriously disappeared.  

4.  Copies of emails sent back and forth were eventually "discovered."  The government grabbed her server and started investigating not only what was on it, but what had been erased.  Someone suggested that a lot of her official emails had to be classified and that her use of her personal server was therefore a violation of national security regulations.  She was quick to retort that there were not... were NOT... any classified emails on her server.   

5.  Investigators found classified emails on her server and she amended her statement to say that she never sent or received any emails that were "marked" classified.  It turns out that some were marked classified and that some others had had their classification removed.  Others were classified on their face because of the nature of their content.  Right now, they don't know who did that.  

6.  The lid then blew off the Clinton Foundation, established by Bill and Hillary ostensibly to take in donations and help the poor and disadvantaged around the world.  It became apparent that Bill was making speeches in return for ludicrous sums of money that were paid into the Foundation totaling "hundreds of millions" of dollars. of which only 11-12% has ever been spent helping the poor or disadvantaged.  The rest has been eaten up in "administrative costs," including Bill and Hillary's travel expenses.  

7.  Someone asked the inevitable question: what are these governments, these corporations and individuals who are contributing to the Foundation going to get in return?  Certainly, a 30-minute speech by Bill isn't worth $500,000, is it?  Could it be, someone had to audacity to suggest, that Hillary was using her position at the State Department to grant these "donors" some big-time favors? 

8.  So, they started to look into that and while they were doing so,  allegations surfaced that Hillary's email wasn't all that secure and that the Russians, Chinese and Romanians probably had acquired every tidbit of information or emails that had ever gone through her server.  Hillary suggested that her server was more secure than the government servers at State.  Well, dammit... security on her site was totally shut off for weeks while they investigated "software conflicts."  Was she deliberately allowing the Russians, Chinese and others to acquire information on her server?  Was that the "payback" or one of the "paybacks?"  

9.  There were many stories, one about how the Russians donated huge amounts to the Foundation and that Hillary subsequently approved the acquisition of hoards of uranium stockpiles in the U.S. by... the Russians.  Could it be that the real purpose of the private server was to allow for and hide communications about speeches, donations and Clinton favors?  

10.  One might assume that some of these "donors" would like direct access to Hillary herself.  Would her calendar of State Department meetings tie in to any of those "donations?"  Alas, it turns out that someone... we don't have the slightest idea who... scrubbed the calendar almost clean.  All of the sudden, no one knows who she met with, about what, when or even what decisions might have been made.  

Could it really be that she was selling national secrets and granting political and governmental favors in return for money?  Is that the reason for the server?  

The sad part is that we might never know the answers.  Obama has endorsed her for president.  The F.B.I. has yet to come forth with any findings and insists that it won't until it is damned good and ready.  That could be after the election when, if she wins, she could legally pardon herself.  

Stay tuned.  This one is nasty and getting nastier by the minute.  

That's MY AMERICAN OPINION, respectfully submitted. 

OBAMA, CLINTON & DEMOCRATS LOVE TERRORISM

The House Democrats demonstrated earlier this week that when it comes to terrorism in this country, they have their heads up their buns; they staged a sandbox sit-down over the issue of gun control.   In other words, their answer to terrorism in this country is to disarm the citizens and to do so in such a way that there is no right to the "offender" for due process.  

We all know what the cause of Fort Hood was, and the same for San Bernardino, Boston and Orlando.  It wasn't guns, it was terrorism.  But, Obama and the Democrats immediately downplayed the root cause... radical Islamic terrorism... and lashed out at law-abiding gun owners in the country.   In California, the Democrats have decided that citizens will no longer be able to have concealed weapons permits unless they can prove they are in imminent danger and they are bound and determined to make a law out of that; yet, not one concealed permit holder in the state has ever committed a crime using a gun.  

They're not afraid of terrorists, but they are afraid of law-abiding citizens?  

It's this kind of bullshit thinking that has the country very angry with politicians and why the November elections are destined to be a jolt to progressive left-wing politics in this country.  When it comes to political correctness, elitism, condescension and politicians in general, we're sick and tired of dumb.  

We're at our wit's end over terrorism in this country and we want it stopped.  Anyone who gets in the way of this movement is going to get run over and pounded into the pavement.  

Why in hell are they not protesting in the halls of Congress about that?  The only logical conclusion is that they're okay with these terrorist attacks.  

That's MY AMERICAN OPINION, respectfully submitted. 

THIS IS NOT HILLARY'S FIRST RODEO WITH THE FBI

Back in 1996, things got pretty interesting at the White House when it was discovered that Bill and Hillary had about 400 thick FBI files in their possession... files pertaining to those on the Clinton Enemies List.  

This is the fourth in a series on Clinton scandals of the past.   

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House_FBI_files_controversy

CLINTON: WHO WAS VINCE FOSTER?

This is the third of a series of posts regarding Hillary Clinton and her deep, dark secrets of the past.  This one could involve... murder:  

http://www.wnd.com/2016/02/vince-foster-suicide-shocker-2nd-wound-documented/#!

WHITEWATER, THE CLINTONS AND "SERIOUS CRIMES"

This is the second in a series on the Clinton past:  

https://www.yahoo.com/news/first-whitewater-prosecutor-says--serious-crimes--were-uncovered-in-probe-220111087.html?ref=gs

HILLARY'S PAST: TRAVELGATE

Memo Places Hillary Clinton At Core of Travel Office Case

By DAVID JOHNSTON - NEW YORK TIMES

Published: January 5, 1996

WASHINGTON, Jan. 4— A memorandum by a former Presidential aide depicts Hillary Rodham Clinton as the central figure in the 1993 travel office dismissals, a politically damaging episode that the aide said had resulted from a climate of fear in which officials did not dare question Mrs. Clinton's wishes. 

The newly released draft memorandum, written by David Watkins, the former top administrative aide at the White House, also sharply contradicts the White House's official account of Mrs. Clinton as merely an interested observer in the events that led to the dismissal of the White House travel staff and their replacement with Clinton associates from Arkansas. 

In the memorandum, apparently intended for Thomas F. McLarty, who was the White House chief of staff, Mr. Watkins wrote that "we both know that there would be hell to pay" if "we failed to take swift and decisive action in conformity with the First Lady's wishes." 

Mr. Watkins, a close Clinton associate from Arkansas, wrote the memorandum to respond to criticism of his role in the dismissal of all seven employees of the travel office in May 1993. He was dismissed himself in 1994 after using a Government helicopter for a golf outing, and White House officials said today that his description of Mrs. Clinton's role was inaccurate. 

In the memorandum, Mr. Watkins gives a detailed account that says the pressure for action came directly from Mrs. Clinton and indirectly through two close Clinton friends: Harry Thomason, a Hollywood producer and part-owner of an air-charter consulting firm, and Vincent W. Foster Jr., the deputy White House counsel who committed suicide in July 1993. 

"Once this made it onto the First Lady's agenda," Mr. Watkins wrote, "Vince Foster became involved, and he and Harry Thomason regularly informed me of her attention to the travel office situation -- as well as her insistence that the situation be resolved immediately by replacing the travel office staff.

"Foster regularly informed me that the First Lady was concerned and desired action -- the action desired was the firing of the travel office staff. On Friday, when I was in Memphis, Foster told me that it was important that I speak directly with the First Lady that day." 

He wrote that he had called Mrs. Clinton that evening and that she had conveyed "her desire for swift and clear action to resolve the situation." 

A White House report on the affair, issued in July 1993, said Mrs. Clinton had been informed of problems at the travel office and had asked questions but had done little more.

By contrast, in Mr. Watkins's account, written in fall 1993, the dismissals were precipitously pushed through almost entirely at Mrs. Clinton's insistence, despite his preference for a gradual reorganization. 

He would have resisted, he said, but he was afraid of dismissal. 

In explaining that fear, Mr. Watkins referred to an earlier incident in which he said Mrs. Clinton had become furious over his failure to transfer Secret Service agents whom she blamed for disclosing an unflattering story to a news magazine. 

"If I thought I could have resisted those pressures, undertaken more considered action, and remained in the White House, I certainly would have done so," he wrote. "But after the Secret Service incident, it was made clear that I must more forcefully and immediately follow the direction of the First Family." 

Mr. Watkins said he had spoken directly with Mrs. Clinton about the matter once, five days before the travel office dismissals, after Mr. Foster told him he should speak directly with her. During that conversation, according to the memorandum, Mrs. Clinton told him that "she thought immediate action was in order" because the company that had handled the Clinton campaign's charters could pick up the work. 

In a statement issued on Wednesday evening, Mr. Watkins said he had talked directly to Mrs. Clinton about the travel office only once. 

Mr. Watkins also hinted in the draft memorandum that he might not have told the full story to investigators who reviewed the dismissals. He referred to his memorandum as a "soul cleansing" and "a first attempt to set the record straight, something I have not done in previous conversations with investigators -- where I have been as protective and vague as possible." 

The memorandum was released by the White House to The Associated Press on Wednesday night after Administration officials turned it over to the Republican-led Congressional committee that has been investigating the travel office affair. White House officials said the document was found on Friday in the stored files of Patsy Thomasson, an aide to Mr. Watkins. 

This afternoon, the Whitewater independent counsel, Kenneth W. Starr, who has also examined the the travel office incident, criticized the White House for failing to give the memorandum to prosecutors promptly. In a letter to the White House counsel, John Quinn, Mr. Starr complained that he had got the document after reporters had. 

White House officials tried to play down the significance of the memorandum today, saying that it dealt with events that had been fully investigated and that it added little.

"We have always said that the First Lady was concerned about financial mismanagement in the travel office and that she told people that they should look into it and, if necessary, deal with it," said Mark Fabiani, a White House spokesman. 

Mr. Fabiani said Mrs. Clinton had left with subordinates the issue of how to correct any problems.

For their part, Republicans seized on the memorandum to renew charges of impropriety.

"There was a cover-up here," Representative William F. Clinger, the Pennsylvania Republican who heads the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee, said at a news conference today. While no crime was committed, Mr. Clinger said, "there seems to be a convenient lapse of memory" by Mrs. Clinton and White House aides. 

Mr. Clinger said his panel would hold hearings on the affair and send written questions to the First Lady, subpoena documents from Mr. Thomason and Mr. Watkins, and seek to question Mr. Watkins.

Aides to Mr. Clinger also released other documents today that they said showed a fear among White House staff members that their report might be seen as a cover-up. 

Those documents are notes written by Todd Stern, a White House aide who worked on the initial review of the affair. They refer obliquely to potential problems that might be raised if the report failed to answer the question of who had pushed for the dismissals and who had approved them.

Mr. Stern wrote: "The problem is that if we do any kind of report & fail to address these Qs, press jumps on you wanting to know answers; while if you give answers that that aren't fully honest (e.g. nothing re Hillary) you risk hugely compounding the problem by getting caught in half-truths. You run risk of turning this into 'cover-up.' " 

Tonight, Mr. Fabiani, the White House spokesman, said Mr. Stern's notes were preliminary jottings, written on May 27, as the work on the White House report was getting under way. He said they were meant to guide the authors on how they should prepare the review to avoid the appearance of a cover-up. 

Mr. Watkins's undated memorandum is stamped as a "DRAFT" and as "confidential," and it does not indicate to whom it was sent. But White House officials said today that its language suggested that the intended recipient had been Mr. McClarty, Mr. Watkins's superior. 

Mr. McLarty issued a statement tonight disputing the memorandum's veracity and saying he had never received it. 

After the travel office dismissals, White House officials acknowledged that they had acted rashly, and they rehired some employees. 

The Federal Bureau of Investigation inquiry on the travel office resulted in the indictment of Billy R. Dale, the office's director, in December 1994, on charges of embezzling $68,000 paid by news organizations for Presidential trips. In November, a jury acquitted Mr. Dale. 

TERRORISM: TELL OBAMA TO SIT DOWN AND SHUT UP

SPECIAL POST

I heard Loretta Lynch on FOX NEWS SUNDAY over the weekend tell Chris Wallace that Americans are too reactionary. She suggested that an event like Orlando instills fear in the hearts of mankind and we cry out for the authorities to do stupid things in order to stop acts of terror.  Well, we've been relying on our government since 9/11 15 years ago to protect us from acts of terror; the first eight years went by without a hitch, but look at what has been happening ever since.  

Why shouldn't we have fear in our hearts?  How can we rely on a president who claims that the most serious threat to our national security is global warming?  How can we rely on a president whose own reaction to acts of terror is to call on everyday Americans to disarm themselves?  "Trust me," he says?  

In the meantime, just what has he done to stop terror attacks on U.S. soil?  If he had taken every gun owned by a law-abiding citizen in this country, how many of these attacks would not have occurred?  

Until he answers those two questions, he needs to sit down and shut the hell up.  

That's MY AMERICAN OPINION, respectfully submitted.  

JUST THE FACTS, BARACK

Deaths by:

• Poisoning            48,545
• Suicide                42,723
• Autos                  33,804
• Gun Violence      11,994

Homicides per 1 million firearms, U.S. ranks 34th out of 177 countries, where Taiwan is at the top at 177.  

Sources of firearms used by federal inmates:

• Family or friend, 35%
• Drug Dealer, 15%
• Retail store, 15%
• Theft or burglary, 9%
• Fence or black market, 9%
• Pawnshop, 4%
• Flea market, 2%
• Gun show, 2% 
• Other, 6%

The number of non-suicide gun deaths has decreased steadily since 1993 as the number of guns owned has increased.  

The number of deaths by acts of terror has been steadily and rapidly increasing throughout the U.S. and the rest of the world. 


Stick that in your self-righteous, indignant rhetoric, Barack... and sit on it. 

That's MY AMERICAN OPINION, respectfully submitted.  

C.I.A.: B.O. VS. I.S.I.S. IS B.S.

SPECIAL POST

Central Intelligence Agency boss John Brennan testified before a Congressional Oversight Committee yesterday that Barack Obama's handling of terrorism in the Middle-East and I.S.I.S. in particular is not working.  In fact, he suggests that we are continuing to get worse off.  Militants disguised as refugees are in fact streaming into the United States and I.S.I.S. is poised to intensify its attacks.  While conceding that I.S.I.S. is losing physical ground in Syria and Iraq, Brennan says that they are increasing their abilities to attack around the globe. 

This is in direct contract to what Barack Hussein Obama is telling the American people.  

Who do you choose to believe?  

And Clinton says she's going to build upon Obama's track record of excellence?  

That's MY AMERICAN OPINION, respectfully submitted. 

CAN YOU HANDLE THE TRUTH?

BAN EVERYBODY FROM EVERYWHERE FROM COMING HERE

SPECIAL POST

Not all of the potential wrongdoers coming to this country intend to bomb a subway or shoot up a public venue.  Not all of them are Muslims, either.  

Some come to this country from Russia, China, North Korea, Iran, Mexico or elsewhere.  Some come here because they are an international fugitive; some come to evaluate, describe and list potential targets; some come to judge law enforcement and military response to events; some come to steal our government or industrial secrets; and some do come here to do business, visit relatives or to tour the countryside.  

The point is, when our government tells us there is no way they can vet Syrian refugees, they're telling us that they don't know anything about anybody who is coming into the country.  That's why students drop out of school and we can't find them, and why visitors on visas overstay their time constraints and disappear from sight. 

In today's world, we have no business letting anyone into the country unless we know who they are, why they are coming, where they are going and what they are going to do while they are here.  Until we develop a system for getting these answers we have no business allowing anybody into our country, Muslim or not.  

That's MY AMERICAN OPINION, respectfully submitted.  

SICK AND TIRED OF THE OBAMA BULLSHIT

SPECIAL POST

This has to be said, because it is the truth.  I hope you can handle the truth.  

This stuff about Obama going after terrorism is a flat out lie.  His words are just as hollow as the words he gave us regarding doing something about jobs in this country.  He did something about it, all right... he changed the method of computing the unemployment percentage.  That's why unemployment is down to 4.7% and at the same time we have the highest number of people not participating in the labor force in the history of the nation.  

His cost of living index used to determine COLAs no longer includes food, but $100 worth of food in 1990 costs $200 today.  The actual COLA used in 2016, in not allowing for food costs, caused Social Security recipients and military retirees to take an effective pay cut over the last seven years.   

Just as he kept promising to create or find jobs, (his policies are actually forcing jobs to go overseas and many of the rest are being filled by illegal immigrants), he keeps promising to do something about terrorism.  In the same breath, whenever there is an act of terrorism in this country, he refuses to place the blame on terrorism; in Orlando, he blamed gun ownership and hatred of the LGBT community.  

His speech yesterday about terrorism falls hopelessly and despairingly flat.  

I'm sick and tired of his bullshit and the people who support him... including his protege, Hillary Rodham Clinton.  

That's MY AMERICAN OPINION, respectfully submitted. 

TERRORISM: QUIT THE PUSSY-FOOTING AROUND!

SPECIAL POST

At the time of writing this post, I understand there are approximately 50 dead and 50 more injured in the terroristic attack at Phase, an Orlando LGBT night club. A few months ago, it was San Bernardino.  In between, as always, our damned president has been pussy-footing around with his "political correctness," downplaying any semblance of urgency to the situation at hand.  

I can only assume that, since the president and Hillary Clinton flatly refuse utter the words, "radical Islam," they would have us believe that either radical Islamics do not exist, or all Muslims are to blame.  

This pussy-footing is not limited to the lamebrains in the White House; Congress refuses to come to grips with the problem as well.  This laissez-faire, disinterested attitude only allows the problem to fest and grow.  Indeed, the president's position that these attacks are to become the "new normal" in America is beyond acceptable and an outright abrogation of duty to protect and defend the people of the United States.  

It is way past the time when we can let these idiots indulge themselves at our expense.  Their answer to these attacks is to disarm the innocent? 

This event has to be the nail in the coffin of  "progressive liberalism" in our country.  The only three people on the horizon who appear to have the courage and guts to deal with the situation are you, me and Donald J. Trump.  

That's MY AMERICAN OPINION, respectfully submitted.  

WHO IS TO BLAME IN ORLANDO?

UP YOURS, AMERICA

CLINTON THE SPY?

Any person in this country who has ever been in the military knows from the very get-go that there are levels of classification of information and that, depending on your need to know in order to accomplish your mission, you may be given a security clearance commensurate with the information you will need to encounter in the course of doing that job.  After a thorough background check to determine your suitability to have such a security clearance level, you are given a thorough lesson in what you can and cannot see and how you must take various steps to ensure the secrecy you are going to be dealing with.  

You learn, for example, that you cannot disclose such information to your friend, spouse, parent, brother, sister or anyone else, and that you must be prepared to die in order to protect that secrecy.  Hundreds, if not thousands, of members of the military have been subjected to various degrees of torture over centuries of service to their country by enemies seeking to obtain our secrets.  I got out of the service over 50 years ago and there are still things that I saw that I cannot disclose.  

Civilians in service to the government who have a need to know go through the same investigation and sign the same non-disclosure agreements... as did Hillary Rodham Clinton.  The requirements you agree to go to the very heart of every communication you see, every document you read and every piece of equipment or secure site that you encounter: you are constantly... constantly... aware of your duty to conceal our nation's secrets.  

For Clinton to claim she did not know things were classified, or that "other people did it," is so flagrantly opposed to everything to do with "security" that it makes me very angry.  To learn that information sent over her private, unsecured, non-authorized server was classified is an affront to me and everyone who has ever served their government.  To learn she sent the names of covert intelligence operatives over that server makes me very angry.  To learn that she sent information about the use of drones in Pakistan or troop engagement policy... or even details about the whereabouts and schedule of an Ambassador to Libya... is outrageous.  

She named Rajiv K. Fernando, born in Denmark, to a highly sensitive government intelligence advisory board simply because he donated to the Clinton Foundation; he has absolutely no qualifications for the position and was forced to resign when an ABC news reporter started to investigate.  Just what Top Secret information did he have access to and what did he do with it?  

The Russians hacked that server, the Romanian hacked that server and the Chinese are said to have hacked that server.  Knowing the rules and knowing the potential consequences, she not only created a wide-open venue through which to send classified material, she then proceeded make our most sensitive material readily available for the taking. The plain simple fact of the matter is that no one... no one... with any level of security clearance would ever even think of doing what Clinton has done unless... they were a spy.  

If that is so, and it appears by every conceivable measure to be true, she makes the Rosenbergs look like amateurs.  It's no wonder that the Russians and the Chinese are contributing so heavily to the Clinton Foundation. 


That's MY AMERICAN OPINION, respectfully submitted.  

CAN BARACK AND BILL BEAT TRUMP?

SPECIAL POST

While Hillary Clinton has been quick to gloat that she is the first American woman to head the presidential ticket for a major political party, while she exhorts the women of the country to vote for her because she is a woman and while she claims it is because of her superior qualifications that she should become the first woman president of the country... in the same breath she turns to the two men in her life, Barack and Bill, to pull her fat out of the political fire.  

One has to ask himself, which one of those two... Barack or Bill... is going to end up being the de facto president for the next four years?  

It's easy to see what role each will play in the campaign.  In addition to being on the campaign trail, Barack will be in charge of damage control: making sure the press doesn't investigate any of Hillary's scams or scandals and that she doesn't get indicted for anything.  Bill, on the other hand, will also campaign and will be in charge of hiring interns and smoking cigars.    

Michelle will also undoubtedly contribute to the general good of the overall effort; she'll busy herself planning for the move from the White House to their new mansion down the street, owned by a longtime Clinton associate, ironically named Lockhart.  

So, that's the stage setting and the only remaining question is whether or not Barack and Bill can beat The Donald while Hillary basks in the sunlight of her so-richly-deserved and newly-found American feminism and all of its illustrious glory. 

That's MY AMERICAN OPINION, respectfully submitted.  
 

SCRUB-A-DUB

SPECIAL POST

Now that Hillary Rodham Clinton has officially captured the Democrat nomination for president, I suspect that the loyalists will be out in force scrubbing every negative fact about her history from the Internet, just like they did for Barack Hussein Obama.  

That's MY AMERICAN OPINION, respectfully submitted.  
 

CAN AMERICA TRUST TRUMP?

SPECIAL POST

You certainly can't trust Hillary.  

We can't afford Sanders.  

That's MY AMERICAN OPINION, respectfully submitted.  

BILL KRISTOL EATS CROW

SPECIAL POST

Bill Kristol announced over the Memorial Day weekend that he had found someone to run for president on a third party ticket, someone who could take Trump out of contention.  Kristol, as you undoubtedly know, has been leading the charge against Trump since before Columbus discovered America.  He's been quite vociferous about his hatred for Trump. 

So, it was with great fanfare that he announced that David French was about to jump in as a third party candidate after several others had turned the prospect down.  Most of us had the same question: "Who in the hell is David French?" 

Well, I still don't know who David French is, but whoever he is, he has far more intelligence than Bill Kristol; French unceremoniously turned Kristol down.  

And now, Bill Kristol and his National Review truly look like the fools that they are.  Maybe he should change the name of his magazine to the "National Baboon."  

That's MY AMERICAN OPINION, respectfully submitted.  

IT'S OUR POLTCAL SYSTEM: GET OVER IT

SPECIAL POST

I've heard a lot of people bellyaching about the fact that Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders are all in the running for president of the United States.  They are quick to point out the numerous faults of each candidate and, by and large, their concerns do have some validity.  

The fact of the matter, thank God, is that we live in a democratic republic where voters do have a say-so.  I can bitch and moan and wonder why Hillary is even on the ticket, given her background.  I can wonder why our citizens would cast so many votes for a devoted socialist like Bernie.  I can even agree that Trump is too coarse, too blunt, too reactionary to be our next president.  But, when you ask people if they'd rather give Obama a third term or to invite Vladimir Putin to be our next president, they give you that "deer in the headlights" look. 

The plain, simple fact is that our system has churned out George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Harry Truman, Ronald Reagan... Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama.  

I do hear about how our party systems are tilted and corrupt with their "super delegates," and with that I totally agree.  But, aside from that, the majority of Americans have historically voted for the candidates of their choice, right, wrong or neutral.   Those of us who disagree must ask ourselves if we'd rather live in Russia, Venezuela or China.  

This is our system.  If you don't like it, move.  

That's MY AMERICAN OPINION, respectfully submitted.

TRUMP: IT'S TIME TO PONY UP

Trump has said repeatedly that he doesn't want to take big corporate money on his way to the White House.  In fact, he self-funded his primary run,something that no other candidate has ever done in history to my knowledge. 

Now, however, the real rubber hits the real road.  Estimates are that it's going to cost at least $1 billion to fund Trump's run to the presidency from July through November.  That's a lot of money, even for Trump.  

Trump has already produced over 10 million votes in the primaries.  If every singly one of those voters would put in just $50 right now, that's $500 million... or half of what is needed.  

If we're really serious about this, and it appears to me that we are, I think we owe it to ourselves and our country to jump on the bandwagon.  

https://secure.donaldjtrump.com/donate/

That's MY AMERICAN OPINION, respectfully submitted. 

OBAMA ADMINISTRATION ULTIMATE INSULT TO VETERANS

SPECIAL POST

Back in 2014 when it was discovered that the Phoenix V.A. Hospital was covering up patient waiting times and that vets were actually dying as a result, they fired the administrator in charge, Sharon Helman.  She sued the government, but a judge upheld the firing.  Now, Attorney General Loretta Lynch is saying that she will not defend the firing during an appeal.  

“When Congress passed the Veterans Choice Act, a key provision allowed for incompetent and indifferent executives whose inaction allowed veterans to die to be more easily fired. Now, even after the President signed this provision into law, his administration is refusing to defend this measure of accountability," Kevin McCarthy told CNN Wednesday.  

It is looking like Helman will get her old job back, probably with back pay and costs.  

This Obama fiefdom makes me sick.  

That's MY AMERICAN OPINION, respectfully submitted. 

FRIENDLY ADVICE TO DAVID FRENCH

SPECIAL POST

Smug Bill Kristol is as happy as a clam; he's well on his way to being the spoiler, the "shit disturber" if you will, in a national presidential election.  He's proving himself to be like an Iranian Ayatollah or a Russian President; if he doesn't like who the populace chooses, he feels he has the power and the obligation to usurp the will of the masses.  

Like him or not, Trump is the Republican nominee because he got more popular votes in the primaries than any of the other 16 candidates.  It takes some popularity to achieve those numbers.  But, Kristol doesn't give a damn what the people think or want.  He deems it to be his responsibility to climb upon the throne of dictatorship and assert his will upon the dumb people who disagree with him.  

Who in the hell is David French?  The only thing we really know about him is that he is apparently willing to do Kristol's bidding, even after countless other "prospects" have turned Kristol down.  The only thing he has going for him is that he served admirably in the U.S. Army; but he has three major strikes against him: he's a "journalist," an attorney and he's on the wrong side of the issue.  

So yesterday, the self-proclaimed kingpin of the Republican Party, Mitt Romney, came out and suggested that he might endorse French.  We can only anticipate that such an endorsement would be enthusiastically followed by the Bush family, Paul Ryan and the like... the very people we seek to get out of the way of where we are going.  And where we are going is straight back to democracy in this country, where the people are in charge and not the government or the elitists who think they are the government.  

Mr. French, don't make the mistake of joining the voices of those who would assert that their poop doesn't stink, because the people are only just beginning to take back their country.  In other words, the backlash has just begun.  

Don't stand in our way, or you're going to get badly run over.  


That's MY AMERICAN OPINION, respectfully submitted.  

CLINTON'S EMAILS: IS THE "FIX" IN?

SPECIAL POST

The proposition now being put forth by the Democratic Party is that Hillary has all but sewn up the party's presidential nomination, so we as a nation must now forget about her mistakes of the past and allow her to press on to greater mistakes of the future?  I mean, they suggest that she's entitled to that.  

Senator Diane Feinstein urged critics of Hillary Clinton to drop the discussion surrounding the former secretary of state’s email controversy and instead focus on the “major problems” the country’s next president will have to address.  “This goes on and on and on. We’re reaching the final stages of a primary,” Feinstein said on ABC’s “This Week” in an interview that aired Sunday. 

In the meanwhile, the Justice Department has filed a motion to prevent Clinton from being ordered to testify in a deposition in a case brought by Judicial Watch connected to her use of her private email server.  The DOJ, which will be charged with prosecuting her if the FBI recommends that charges be brought, is arguing that the court order requiring Clinton to testify is too broad and uncalled for.  

Then we hear that the Obamas are planning on moving into a Washington D.C. mansion next door to a Washington Mosque... a house owned by longtime Clinton associate Joe Lockhart.  

Get the picture?   


That's MY AMERICAN OPINION, respectfully submitted.