The Kamikaze Congress

It’s become all too apparent that this Democrat-controlled House is so Trump-deranged that they’ll stop at nothing to try and remove the president from office. Democrat House Counsel Douglas Letter recently suggested that if this impeachment fails in the Senate—which it surely will—they may impeach him again. Rep. Al Green also said they would continually impeach until they hound the man out of office.

When Nancy Pelosi and the gang were in charge before I often referred to them as the kamikaze Congress. They knew the American people wouldn’t allow them to remain in power for very long so they were going to try and destroy as much of America as they could while they could.

Looks like the kamikaze Congress is back.

If you believe polls it looks like the tide is starting to turn against them. Even a CNN poll showed more people against removing the president from office than for it. There’s so much that can go wrong for the Democrats between now and November. The impeachment itself can overshadow the Democrat primaries. Key candidates will have to stay in Washington for a ridiculous trial instead of campaign in Iowa and New Hampshire. That leaves Joe Biden virtually all alone on the campaign trail. I’m still convinced he will be their nominee.

If Biden is the man then the timing couldn’t be worse for him and the Democrats. No matter your opinion of Hunter Biden’s deal with the Ukrainian gas company, you have to admit, as they love to say in Washington, the optics don’t look good. At the very least it’s an egregious case of cashing in on your privileged daddy. At worst it’s a full-blown political scandal. Which may be why Pelosi held onto the articles of impeachment. Could she have finally realized that an impeachment trial in which Biden is the centerpiece might backfire?

Meanwhile, Sen. Schumer is insisting that Mick Mulvaney and John Bolton testify. I can’t imagine what they can bring to the table that hasn’t already been revealed in the phone call transcript with the Ukrainian president, but bring it on. I’m one of those who isn’t afraid to see all the evidence. People who don’t want to allow the Democrats to call their witnesses are just as bad as what they’re accusing the Democrats of. If President Trump has done something truly illegal and impeachable then we all need to know it. This is not a time for the Republicans to play politics, too.

In fact, it’s a great time to let the American people see the truth. Once they do it’s probably not going to go well for the Democrats. I don’t want to get overly excited, but if even half the evidence turns out to be true, then the Democrats are in for a bad year. If the Democrats are exonerated in the process then so be it. I honestly think it would be bad for the country if they won the White House, but it would be worse if they lost at the expense of the truth.

The truth is the economy couldn’t get much better. The Saturday before Christmas was the biggest spending day on record. Those who choose to judge Trump in totality by what he tweets are missing out on a great time. Even Pierce Brosnan, former 007 and now an American citizen, has had a change of heart. A year ago he was threatening to leave the country. Now he’s crediting Trump for the good times. In the era of Trump, it’s better to be shaken, not stirred.

Phil Valentine is the host of the award-winning talk radio show, The Phil Valentine Show, on SuperTalk 99.7WTN in Nashville. He's also co-host of The PodGOATs podcast.

None dare call it conspiracy

It was 1966 when the brutal communist dictator of China, Mao Zedong, launched the Cultural Revolution. Mao called on the youth of China to rise up against the establishment and their elders and purge anyone who was not robotically toeing the party line. Roaming gangs of youths called the Red Guards harassed and attacked their elders. Students would drag old people into the universities and literally beat them to death. Their sin? They weren’t pure enough in the communist dogma. They dared disagree with political correctness of the day.

Sound familiar?

We don’t have a Mao in the United States, but what we do have are millions of brainwashed youths who have become so vile, so nasty, that it demands closer inspection as to what in the hell happened.

On January 10, 1963, Congressman A.S. Herlong, Jr. of Florida read into the Congressional Record ‘The 45 Communist Goals’ taken from The Naked Communist by W. Cleon Skousen. Looking back at them these 56 years later it’s downright eery. 

Take No. 17: ‘Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers’ associations. Put the party line in textbooks.’ Check. There’s no doubt that they’ve achieved that goal.

No. 20: ‘Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policymaking positions.’ Check. No. 21: ‘Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.’ Check. No. 22: ‘Eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward, and meaningless forms.’ Check. Sounds like the purge of Confederate statues. And now they’ve moved on to the founding fathers. No. 29: ‘Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the “common man.”’ Check. The founders are under attack. 

No. 36: ‘Infiltrate and gain control of more unions.’ Check. No. 38: ‘Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand [or treat].’ Check.

Oh, and I almost forgot the biggie. No. 15: ‘Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.’ Double check.

The left has now re-educated the youth of this nation to believe that catastrophic climate change is on the verge of destroying the planet, and the only way to stop it is to destroy what caused the damage: capitalism. We have marauding gangs of youth thugs like the Red Guard called Antifa. Antifa is a communist organization with roots in 1930s Germany as they were fighting the Nazis for control of the people. The Nazis won the battle but Antifa is winning the war.

Anyone who dares try to roll back their work on things like climate change indoctrination and stemming the flow of illegal aliens like Donald Trump has is viciously attacked to the point of trying to run a duly elected president out of office. Note how irrational their hatred of Trump is. He has become the biggest threat since Reagan ended communism in the Soviet Union. I still believe Trump’s grand plan is the same fate for communist China.

And who’s behind this witch hunt of the president? The socialist/Marxist wing of the Democrat Party is calling the shots. Notice how we haven’t heard a whole lot from ‘The Squad’ during this impeachment debacle. Nancy Pelosi has apparently made a deal. I’ll give you your impeachment if you’ll just keep quiet and act like I’m really still in charge.

From here on out every election matters. Put somebody like Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders in and you can check off all 45 goals.

Phil Valentine is the host of the award-winning talk radio show, The Phil Valentine Show, on SuperTalk 99.7WTN in Nashville. He's also co-host of The PodGOATs podcast.

Obscuring the truth in the IG report

The long-awaited Inspector General’s report from the Department of Justice was finally released. Inside were accounts of 51 violations and 9 false statements by the FBI. What were the headlines from the coup-complicit mainstream media? “FBI was justified in opening probe,” said the Washington Post. “Russia Inquiry Report Finds Mistakes but No Anti-Trump Plot,” headlined the New York Times. CNN crowed, “Start of FBI Russia probe was justified and unbiased.”

But what’s the real story?

We already know about the toxic text messages floating back and forth between the adulterous FBI lovers, Peter Strzok and Lisa Page. Both were highly involved in the Trump probe. Strzok led that investigation. Their bias is obvious, yet it was explained away by the IG report as not relevant because “while Strzok was directly involved in the decisions to open Crossfire Hurricane (codename for the Trump investigation) and the four individual cases, he was not the sole, or even the highest-level, decision maker as to any of those matters.”

In other words, it doesn’t matter that those investigating were dirty cops, they weren’t making the ultimate decisions. Yes, but they were feeding information to the decision makers. And the one clear case of bias within the FBI has been totally ignored by the mainstream media.

Kevin Clinesmith, an attorney involved in the Trump investigation, was referred to the Department of Justice for prosecution after he was alleged to have altered an e-mail regarding Trump aide Carter Page in an effort to continue a FISA warrant on him. This was an obvious and successful attempt to spy on the Trump campaign by a clearly partisan operative. Think he wasn’t partisan? The IG report chronicles some of his text messages. The day after the 2016 election he wrote, “I just can’t imagine the systematic disassembly of the progress we made over the last 8 years. ACA (Obamacare) is gone. Who knows if the rhetoric about deporting people, walls, and crap is true. I honestly feel like there is going to be a lot more gun issues, too, the crazies won finally. This is the tea party on steroids. We have to fight this again.”

Not bad enough? How about this?

Two weeks after the election another FBI colleague checked in with him to see if he’d had a change of heart about Trump. “Hell no,” he wrote. “Viva le resistance,” And resist he did. He didn’t alter the Carter Page e-mail until June of 2017.

Oh, that’s not biased at all. (Where’s my sarcasm emoji when I need it?) Michael Horowitz, the Inspector General, will tell you that those types of messages don’t matter because Clinesmith wasn’t a decision maker. That flies in the face of common sense. If people who are working a case are biased then the information they send their superiors will be biased.

And two people high up in the investigation having an affair? Remember what Ross Perot said about adultery? “If your wife can’t trust you neither can I.”

Fortunately Horowitz is not the final word on this. Attorney General Bill Barr and his chief investigator, U.S. Attorney John Durham, are ordinarily tight-lipped about their investigation into the origins of the Trump/Russia hoax. They both came out blasting the conclusion that there was no bias in the FBI. Not only did they believe there was “clear abuse of the FISA process,” as Barr put it, they believe the FBI actually uncovered exculpatory evidence and hid it.

The IG report is not the end, as the mainstream media hope. It’s just the beginning.

Phil Valentine is the host of the award-winning talk radio show, The Phil Valentine Show, on SuperTalk 99.7WTN in Nashville. He's also co-host of The PodGOATs podcast.

The lady doth protest too much

Those of us who seek justice and wish for the other side of the Trump/Russia collusion hoax to be told eagerly await Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s report. I hope we will not be disappointed. If the pre-release hysteria from some of the principals involved is any indication, we won’t.

Lisa Page, a former FBI lawyer and married mother of two young children, carried on an unforgivable extramarital affair with then-FBI special agent Peter Strzok. With the help of the willing accomplices at The Daily Beast, Page is attempting to portray herself as just another victim of President Trump’s misogyny. He hates women so much, they’ll have you believe, that he would continually attack a veteran FBI lawyer who was just doing her job.

She says the “straw that broke the camel’s back” was when, as she put it, Trump performed a “demeaning” impression of her having sex with her FBI lover. This purportedly happened at a rally in Minneapolis. What Trump was doing was reenacting in breathless dialogue a text message exchange between Strzok and Page in which he assured her Trump would not stay president if he was elected president because Strzok had an “insurance policy.” That “insurance policy” has been widely interpreted as the Trump/Russia collusion hoax. It’s also the subject of a criminal investigation by the Department of Justice.

While Lisa Page was pretending to be righteously indignant, the mainstream media jumped into action to pounce upon Trump and his imagined hatred of women. They lament the fact that he treats women exactly the same as men, which means when a woman attacks him he counter-attacks just as he would if it were a man. This is something feminists have fought for over the last century, yet when Trump dares treat a woman as his equal and not lay down the proverbial jacket so she can cross the mud puddle they come unglued.

That’s not to excuse Trump’s vulgarity. It’s just to point out that he’s equally vulgar with both men and women.

Without getting too excited about the Horowitz report, it should be noted that it is not meant to be the definitive investigation. In fact, it is an independent investigation from the Justice Department itself and will not be nearly as thorough as the one being conducted by U.S. Attorney John Durham. Supposedly leaked portions of the Horowitz report criticize some FBI employees and their tactics but stop short of agreeing with President Trump that it was a witch hunt concocted to destroy his presidency. We’ll see.

The more important investigation is the Durham inquiry which is much broader in scope. When one pulls out to look at the big picture we may see a coordinated effort by some not only in the FBI but in the CIA to thwart Trump’s efforts to become president and then to bring him down after he wins. That’s purely speculation at this point, but so was the entire Trump/Russia collusion story, yet it was treated as a foregone conclusion by the press.

It seems rather odd to me that someone in so despicable and indefensible a position as Page would now go all out to convince the country that she’s a victim. It could be a clear sign that Durham and the DOJ are over the target. If the next exposé from the Beast is an exculpatory piece on Peter Strzok we can be certain of it.

I’ve been saying the impeachment circus is a preemptive strike on the Durham investigation. Page’s paroxysm is more of the same.

Phil Valentine is the host of the award-winning talk radio show, The Phil Valentine Show, on SuperTalk 99.7WTN in Nashville. He's also co-host of The PodGOATs podcast.

Transgenders will destroy women's sports

I must confess I’m becoming quite confused. We’ve got girls wanting to play on boys sports teams. We’ve got guys who aren’t really girls but who identify as girls wanting to play on girls teams. We’ve got upset girls who now have guys who identify as girls but are still equipped as guys getting naked in the girls’ locker room. How I long for the days when girls were girls and boys were boys. I’m afraid we’re way past that now.

A doctor in New York State was let go by the school board after he wouldn’t clear a 12-year-old girl to wrestle on the boys’ wrestling team. He cited New York law allowing him to make that judgement based on the girl’s safety. Safety be damned. We have a society to upend here.

That’s basically the motivation behind all of this. We have boys teams and girls teams for a reason. The reason is girls and boys are different. I know this may get me banned from cocktail parties in San Francisco, but males tend to be physically stronger than women. Smart women understand this. They don’t want men competing in women’s sports. That’s going to be the final frontier. Once that happens women’s sports as we know it will cease to exist.

It’s already well on its way with so-called transgenders competing as women. What’s a transgender? Well, that’s the problem. It can be anyone from a man who’s had a sex-change operation to some guy who enjoys wearing dresses. A case can be made for the former to compete alongside women. Allowing the latter to compete is inexcusable. 

There was a case recently where girls were in tears after the school approved some dude who ‘identifies’ as a girl to use the girls’ locker room. This guy’s cavorting about stark naked in front of girls and dares anyone to challenge him. The crazy people running the school sided with him. I don’t have daughters, but I can imagine I’d be fit to be tied if this were happening to my girl.

This is happening all over the world. Guys who identify as women are invading women’s sports and mopping up. Again, this is why we have men’s and women’s sports. It’s like allowing professional basketball players to play on a high school team. Pretty soon there would be nobody who goes to that high school making the team. Sort of defeats the purpose, doesn’t it?

But there’s a new purpose. That’s what I still can’t quite get my mind around. Is it to totally destroy women’s sports? Because that’s what it’s going to do.

Venus and Serena Williams once boasted they could beat any man in tennis. Some guy ranked 203rd in the world took the challenge and beat both of them back to back. This battle of the sexes in tennis has been played out dating back to 1888. In every match but one the man was victorious. The only victory for a woman was Billie Jean King over Bobby Riggs and that’s the one everybody’s heard of. They’ve never heard of the other nearly dozen battles. In fact, the same year Bobby Riggs lost to Billie Jean King he beat Margaret Court who was ranked number one in the world. Nobody remembers it.

What’s my point? My point is the Riggs-King match notwithstanding, you turn men loose in women’s sports and they’ll destroy them. You want to see LeBron James in the WNBA? Me either. Nor do the women in the WNBA. Let’s stop this before we ruin women’s sports.

Phil Valentine is the host of the award-winning talk radio show, The Phil Valentine Show, on SuperTalk 99.7WTN in Nashville. He's also co-host of The PodGOATs podcast.

Impeachment hearings expose arcane bureaucracy

I’ll have to say that the impeachment hearings have proven to be quite elucidating. One pattern is becoming crystal clear. There is a deep-seated problem with government bureaucrats who think they, rather than the president, set foreign policy. Each witness called before Adam Schiff’s committee has expressed concern about, in the words of Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, “outside influencers” promoting a “false narrative” about Ukraine that, in Vindman’s mind, was “inconsistent with consensus views of the interagency.” 

Let’s analyze that for a second. The “outside influencers” Vindman was referring to are Trump’s personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, and the ambassador to the European Union, Gordon Sondland. Think about that for a moment. These are two of President Trump’s hand-picked people and Vindman calls them “outside influencers.” That’s because he believes he and other government bureaucrats dictate America’s foreign policy. When pressed by a Republican congressman on whether he tried to discourage Ukrainian officials from cooperating in Trump’s requested corruption investigation he answered, “The president of the United States has the authority to do this, I guess. I don’t know.” You guess? You don’t know? Who else would have the authority to do that? Vindman added, “I didn’t think it was right.”

Here’s the bottom line. It doesn’t matter what Vindman thinks is right. He says Trump and his associates created a “false narrative” about Ukraine. He says Trump’s Ukraine policy was “inconsistent with consensus views of the interagency.” Dude, Trump’s the president of the United States. He sets the policy. It doesn’t matter what the so-called “consensus view” is. It doesn’t matter what Vindman thinks. The job of every member of the National Security Council is to give the president the best advice they can then get on board with whatever decision he makes.

Vindman was born in Ukraine and speaks the language fluently. He’s also rabidly anti-Russian. He’s upset because he’s the self-described “authority for Ukraine” at the White House and Trump’s not listening to him. That doesn’t mean he sets the policy. Those who work with him say he has a bad habit of going outside the chain of command when he doesn’t get his way.

But Vindman is not alone. Other career government bureaucrats like Acting Ambassador to Ukraine Bill Taylor somehow believe that anything that runs counter to their views on foreign policy somehow constitutes a crime. Taylor’s aide, David Holmes, overheard a conversation between Trump and Sondland where Trump was asking about the progress on the “investigation.” This is seen by impeachment nuts as some sort of evidence of wrongdoing. President Trump had just discussed the “investigation” the prior day with the president of Ukraine. Following up with Sondland the next day is neither unusual nor criminal. However, it does cut against the grain of “consensus views” of the foreign policy bureaucrats, but so does slapping tariffs on China. We heard ad nauseam about how that was going to lead to a global depression.

President Trump is overturning the tables of the business-as-usual bureaucrats, and they don’t like it. Just as we’re liable to see when the Department of Justice completes its investigation into how the whole Trump/Russia collusion hoax got started, there are lots of bureaucrats who have gone to extremes to protect the status quo. When government is on auto-pilot no matter who occupies the White House we have serious problems.

This same establishment thinks it’s unseemly to investigate a questionable deal between a VP’s son and a corrupt Ukrainian oil company. I suspect it’s because that corruption is just the tip of the iceberg.

Phil Valentine is the host of the award-winning talk radio show, The Phil Valentine Show, on SuperTalk 99.7WTN in Nashville. He's also co-host of The PodGOATs podcast.

The gatekeepers of thought

I have to admit I don’t follow hockey. If I’m honest I’ll tell you that hockey doesn’t really interest me. However, when I saw that one of hockey’s longest-running commentators had been fired over something he said, I had to know why.

Up until recently Don Cherry was an 85-year-old hockey commentator on ‘Hockey Night in Canada,’ a sports program on Sportsnet. The network issued a statement saying Cherry “made divisive remarks that do not represent our values and what we stand for.” His partner on the show, Ron MacLean, went even further writing, “Don made comments that were hurtful and prejudiced.” I had to know what he said.

Don Cherry

I read the quote, frowned, scratched my head, then tried to dissect the statement in order to ascertain what was so offensive. This is what he said. “You people that come here, whatever it is—you love our way of life, you love our milk and honey, at least you can pay a couple bucks for a poppy or something like that. These guys paid for your way of life that you enjoy in Canada. These guys paid the biggest price.”

I knew he was talking about immigrants so I thought it might be the poppy part. Was that offensive to Middle Easterners since heroin comes from the opium poppy grown in the Middle East and Asia? No, I was way off. The poppy that Cherry was referring to is a tradition started by the Brits dating back to the first World War. The tradition is to wear a poppy in remembrance of those who died in war. That comes from the poem “In Flanders Fields” by John McCrae who was a lieutenant colonel in the Canadian Expeditionary Forces. He had just lost a friend in the battle of Flanders, Belgium. On the bloody battlefield thousands of bright red poppies appeared among the carnage. McCrae was so touched by the scene that he memorialized it in verse.

Remembrance Day is observed in the UK and Canada. It’s much like our Memorial Day and falls on our own Veterans Day. A deeper dive into Don Cherry’s remarks reveals he was lamenting the fact that fewer and fewer people are wearing the poppy on Remembrance Day. “Very few people wear the poppy,” he said in the same conversation that got him fired. “Downtown Toronto, forget it. Nobody wears the poppy. Now you go to the small cities. You people that come here, whatever it is—you love our way of life. You love our milk and honey. At least you can pay a couple bucks for a poppy or something like that. These guys paid for your way of life that you enjoy in Canada. These guys paid the biggest price for that.”

Okay, I still wasn’t getting it, although I had my suspicions. But that couldn’t be it. Ross Perot was chastised for that way back in 1992 when he spoke to a black group and was forced to apologize. Then I saw a CNN story. That was it. Don Cherry’s horrible offense was he used the term “you people.” OMG.

I’ve spoken to dozens of groups. Women’s groups, black groups, Hispanic groups. I’m almost positive I’ve used “you people” in the course of my speech. “You people do great work” or “You people know exactly what I’m talking about.” We use that term when we’re not part of that group. Oh, but you can’t say that…anymore. It’s offensive.

It’s offensive only to the dim-witted or the speech police. And I don’t know which one’s more dangerous.

Phil Valentine is the host of the award-winning talk radio show, The Phil Valentine Show, on SuperTalk 99.7WTN in Nashville. He's also co-host of The PodGOATs podcast.