Dick Morris: Donald Trump Has Been One of Our Great Presidents

H/T Western Journal.

In spite of the lies being told about President Trump he is one of our greatest presidents.

Despite a level of condemnation by the media that dwarfs anything to which Nixon, Clinton, Hoover or Grant were subjected, Donald Trump ranks as one of our great presidents.

As Richard Nixon once said, “history is written by liberals,” so don’t count on any objectivity. But we, Trump’s supporters, need to keep the memory of his record in mind so we can unpack it for the next election.

Here’s my take on what he did:

He defied almost every vested interest group in the country — and in the world — to achieve his ends. And in 2020, those interests took their revenge.

He began by defying the almost-royal power of the economic establishment — Wall Street, the big banks, hedge funds, multinational corporations. These giants were used to writing tax policy to benefit only themselves, but Trump changed that. He forced Congress to pass a massive tax cut, skillfully crafted to benefit the middle class, the working poor and small businesses, producing millions of jobs.

Then he upended the pro-China foreign policy elites — and corporate America — by holding Beijing accountable for its unfair trade practices through massive and highly effective sanctions.

President Trump virtually eliminated illegal immigration over the southern border, first by using the threat of trade sanctions to induce Mexico to hold refugees on its side of the Rio Grande and then by brilliantly contriving to build a border wall and funding it despite congressional opposition.

And when the coyotes who shepherded immigrants to the U.S. began sending unaccompanied minors to the border, where they would be separated from their mothers, he had a brilliant solution: Using trade sanctions as a cudgel, he got Mexico to hold them on their side of the border where more generous U.S. laws — and liberal judges — had no jurisdiction.

In the process, he incurred the wrath of the immigration establishment which included American industrialists and agribusinessmen by cutting off their supply of dirt-cheap labor and making them hire decently paid Americans instead.

Perhaps the most dramatic initiative he took was to cripple the most notorious and dangerous anti-American regimes in the world.

When Iran was caught secretly building nuclear weapons in defiance of international agreements, he confronted them with a new and devastating weapon: massive and crippling economic sanctions. Where some wanted to send in troops, he chose, instead, to use this economic weapon.

When Russian oligarchs evaded law enforcement, laundering money and brutally killing opponents, he called them out by name, barring them from obtaining visas to the U.S. and from accessing the international banking system.

And when Venezuelan dictators proved to be immune from diplomatic pressure as they rigged elections and repressed the opposition, his sanctions destroyed their economy. Where others saw no middle ground between war and appeasement, Trump’s reliance on economic sanctions imposed a true new world order

Climate change, the sacred cause of the left, put Trump and the environmentalists at loggerheads over the issue of America’s signature on the Paris accords. Flying boldly in the face of a worldwide consensus, the president pulled out when Europe gave China a free pass, allowing it to continue to emit more carbon pollution into the atmosphere than the U.S., Europe and Japan combined.

Then he further defied the environmental lobby by granting fracking rights so that natural gas would replace coal in U.S. power generation.

At the same time, he demanded aggressive oil drilling offshore and throughout America, finally realizing a goal set more than forty years ago to eliminate our dependence on foreign oil.

The vast labyrinth of national and international environmental agencies and organizations would never forgive this heresy.

He alienated the military establishment by demanding withdrawal from the Middle East and Afghanistan while still wiping out ISIS. Our NATO partners were also furious when he successfully forced them to pay their delinquent assessments for our common defense.

When he scrapped the two-state solution on the West Bank and used the looming threat of Iran to induce the Arab OPEC states to coalesce with Israel and end their subsidy of Hamas and Hezbollah, the foreign policy establishment was aghast.

He quit NAFTA and negotiated a new deal that stopped China from sneaking products into the U.S. and allowed free hemispheric trade only for goods produced by Mexican, American or Canadian workers paid at least $15 per hour.

He alienated the legal establishment by appointing and confirming Supreme Court justices who uphold our values, even as they proved their independence by voting — wrongly — against his post-election challenges.

The intelligence community hated him for exposing their corrupt lying about his so-called collusion with Russia, which was a subterfuge designed to keep him out of the White House.

When that failed, the intelligence community knowingly spread the fictional Christopher Steele dossier throughout the media. Compiled at the behest of Hillary Clinton’s campaign, the dossier was used to try to oust Trump from the presidency.

Silicon Valley bristled at his attempts to stop them from controlling and censoring the content that their amazing technology put at our fingertips. Facebook, Google and Twitter wanted to be the exclusive arbiters of what information was sufficiently politically correct to distribute to their audience.

Trump insisted that tech companies could not censor the news or opinions any more than broadcast or cable networks could.

He paid for his sins with his presidency when his various establishment enemies ganged up on him and tried to finish him off.

But his most serious error was to incur the wrath of the media. They hated him as they have never hated any politician, crime boss, dictator or even mass murderer before. It was bloodlust.

Why?

First and foremost, he was an existential threat to the media’s power and credibility. He alone dared to challenge them and fearlessly speak the truth.

He wouldn’t kowtow to the media deities. He ignored them, going over their heads and speaking directly to the voters

And when he did speak to them, he didn’t hesitate to call them out. In a debate with Hillary Clinton, he refused to follow debate protocol and curtly berated moderator George Stephanopoulos for his obvious Clinton bias.

It isn’t just that the media disliked Trump. They hated him. They were liberals who hated his policies, insiders who hated his outsider mentality and unorthodox appointments.

They denigrated his proposals. They belittled his accomplishments, his style, his confidence and most of all, his success.

He was their rival for power.

Dick Morris: The Coming Democratic Reign of Terror

H/T Western Journal.

There are dark days ahead if you are a Conservative and a Republican.

Himmler would be proud of the tactics of the DemocRat party and of the censorship they will impose.

If you listen closely you can hear the scraping of hobnailed boots on the pavement and the faint cries of Seig Heil.

Like Robespierre, Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden are taking no prisoners. A new Democratic reign of terror is upon us, endangering our free speech, free press, political playing field and personal liberty.

Watch your back.

The Democrats are using the outrageous and unsupportable Capitol riot the same way that Hitler used the Reichstag Fire of 1933 — as a pretext for an authoritarian crackdown.

The impeachment of President Trump and the banning of his tweets and Facebook posts are merely the first examples.

But the threat of punitive actions and censorship in this new reign of terror hangs over us all.

Will we be banned from using the communication tools of modern technology? Will Twitter, Amazon and other tech giants determine what messages and what content can be sent out?

Will books we would like to read be dropped by their publishers because of the author’s lawful constitutional activities?

Will our favorite cable TV news stations have to face organized boycotts by their advertisers or be banned by cable systems if they criticize the election of the government?

Will the left use “lawfare” to sue frivolously for defamation, bankrupting their opponents with legal fees to defend their right to free speech.

Will the Democrats equate our political speech in citing election irregularities with sedition, subjecting us to fines or imprisonment just for challenging the election of 2020?

That is the new premise of the coming Democratic reign of terror: that political statements charging that the election of 2020 was stolen or riddled with fraud are, by themselves, inciting violence by Trump supporters.

This approach harks back to efforts to suppress opposition to the World War I draft, the Alien and Sedition Acts passed by John Adams in 1798 and the 1954 law criminalizing membership in the American Communist Party (Communist Control Act of 1954). All three laws tried to criminalize political speech as seditious. They were all equally offensive to our Bill of Rights.

The reign of terror is trickling from the president on down.

The left is trying to frame the remarks of Sens. Ted Cruz of Texas and Josh Hawley of Missouri — and those of President Trump and his supporters — as incendiary, false and designed to cause a riot, thereby allowing them to criminalize it.

But bear in mind:

Trump never advocated entering, much less taking over, the Capitol building and always explicitly opposed violence.

The charge that he “incited” the riots only refers to his peaceful exercise of free speech, denouncing the election of 2020 as the result of fraud and saying that it was “stolen.” That is the essence of free speech that is protected by the First Amendment.

Impeachment is a vengeful kick while the president is down. A purely symbolic act, removal from office is a logistical impossibility within the time remaining until Inauguration Day. Although the speaker and her minions claim that President Trump is so dangerous to the country that he must be removed immediately, they speak of a trial in a few months.

The reign of terror rolls on.

The publishing firm Simon & Schuster abruptly decided to drop Hawley’s new book, “The Tyranny of Big Tech.” The publisher said, “We take seriously our larger public responsibility as citizens, and cannot support Senator Hawley after his role in what became a dangerous threat to our democracy and freedom.”

Note that Simon & Schuster published anti-Trump bestsellers by Bob Woodward, Mary Trump and John Bolton — and a major flop by Paul Begala.

What was Hawley’s role in the rioting? After protesters surrounded his home, banging on the door and threatening his wife and newborn daughter, he said, “Violence is not how you achieve change. Violence is not how you achieve something better.”

And the terror may soon call former Trump staffers to the journalistic guillotine.

Randall Lane, Forbes’ chief content officer, announced that Forbes Media was “holding those who lied for Trump accountable.”

Lane mentioned five top Trump aides as examples of “the people paid by the People to inform the People.”

His hit list includes former White House press secretaries Sean Spicer, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, and Stephanie Grisham, current press secretary Kayleigh McEnany and former senior counselor to the president Kellyanne Conway.

Lane beseeches us not to “let the chronic liars cash in on their dishonesty.”

Alluding to book deals by previous White House spokesmen, he wrote, “Trump’s liars don’t merit that same golden parachute. Let it be known to the business world: Hire any of Trump’s fellow fabulists above, and Forbes will assume that everything your company or firm talks about is a lie.”

Hari Sevugan, a former senior spokesman for the Barack Obama presidential campaign, recently announced, “We just launched the Trump Accountability Project to make sure anyone who took a paycheck to help Trump undermine America is held responsible for what they did.”

And Stuart Stevens, Mitt Romney’s former media consultant, tweeted, “At @ProjectLincoln we are constructing a database of Trump officials & staff that will detail their roles in the Trump administration & track where they are now. No personal info, only professional. But they will be held accountable & not allowed to pretend they were not involved.”

The Serbian war criminals hunted down by The Hague never received such scrutiny.

The Daily Mail reports that JPMorgan Chase, Citibank, Marriott, the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association and the parent company of Commerce Bank have are all “suspending donations to the group dubbed ‘the treason caucus’ by critics,” as the U.K. Daily Mail reported. (The Treason Caucus apparently includes senators who voted not to certify the Electoral College votes.)

And, comically, Democratic Rep. Bennie Thompson of Mississippi called for Sens. Cruz and Hawley to be added to the no-fly list.

Digital payments company Stripe will also stop processing payments for Trump’s campaign website in the wake of the Capitol incursion.

For the president, the reign of terror may mean impeachment and seeing his tweets, posts and other messages banned from Twitter, Facebook and Google.

Where will it end?

When will it begin? It just did.

Dick Morris: Here’s How Trump Can Still Win

H/T Western Journal.

I hope Dick Morris is right.

1. Only the electoral college or the various state legislatures can declare a candidate the winner. To base this decision on network vote totals and projections and to call Biden the “president-elect” is irresponsible.

2. The recounts in Arizona, Georgia, and the other states are likely to go heavily for Trump. Most of the likely errors or invalid votes took place on mailed-in ballots. (Machine votes are harder to tamper with). Since Biden won upwards of two-thirds of mail-in votes and absentee ballots, it is likely that most of the discarded mail ballots will be subtracted from Biden’s total.

3. The networks currently give Trump 214 electorate voters (270 is the victory level)

4. Alaska, where Trump has led by 2:1 all week and is now more than half counted will likely throw its 3 votes to Trump giving him 217.

5. Trump has likewise led in North Carolina (15 votes) all week and his margin of 75,000 has not diminished. He will undoubtedly carry North Carolina. Like Alaska, the media will not call it for Trump to promote the illusion of a Biden victory. North Carolina would bring Trump’s vote to 232.

6. The vote count in Arizona shows Trump’s deficit shrinking from 30,000 on Friday to 18,500 on Saturday with about 100K left to count.

After Arizona (11 votes) is fully counted, it will go through a recount subject to the pro-Trump bias identified in point 2. Were he to win Arizona, he would have 243 votes

7. In Georgia (16 votes), Biden leads by only 8,400 votes, a margin that has been dropping. Like Arizona, Trump may still win the count and, if not, would have a very good chance of prevailing in the recount. With Georgia, Trump would have 259 votes

8. Wisconsin (10 votes) is tallied as having been won by Biden by 21,000 votes but a recanvass is in the offing. Given the facts enumerated in point 2, there is a very good chance Trump will carry Wisconsin. The recount process in Wisconsin is uniquely fair and transparent — a model for the nation — so Trump may well flip the state. If he does, he will have 269 votes — one shy of victory.

9. Then, it comes down Pennsylvania and its 20 votes. The Supreme Court provisionally allowed ballots to be counted if they arrived before Friday, Nov. 6, and were postmarked before Election Day, Nov. 3, and ordered late votes to be segregated. When Justice Samuel Alito was informed that the state had not segregated the late votes, as Pennsylvania’s secretary of the commonwealth had advised, Alito made it an order on Friday.

Biden currently leads by 37,000 votes in Pennsylvania. The number of late-arriving ballots likely far exceeds this total (the state has not published this information). Justice Alioto and a Court majority may throw out the late ballots, likely delivering the state to Trump.

In addition, for the reasons stated above, a recanvass is likely to give Trump a decisive advantage. If he wins Pennsylvania, he would have 289 votes and a victory.

Will there be a recount in Pennsylvania? The current law requires one if the margin is under 0.5 percent and in Pennsylvania, it likely will be slightly greater.

There are two ways to trigger a recount: First, the Supreme Court could order one after the vote counters so flagrantly violated Alito’s order to segregate the votes that he had to re-issue it. And remember, four justices wanted to reconsider whether to allow late ballots entirely but the court deadlocked 4-4 in October. Now with Justice Amy Coney Barrett in the mix, it may take a different view, particularly if the presidency hangs in the balance.

Second, Article II Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution reads:

“Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress.”

The Pennsylvania Legislature, solidly in Republican hands (both houses) may choose to demand a recount before appointing electors. To build the case for doing so, it may hold hearings into the allegations of fraud so as to help the voters of the state understand how flagrantly their votes were mishandled.

Already, the leader of the State Senate in Pennsylvania and the Speaker of the State Assembly have held a news conference announcing their intention to “audit” the vote-counting process.

As the saying goes: “It’s not over until the fat lady sings.” And she hasn’t.