Adam Schiff – The Pranking Member of the House Intelligence Committee

Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Adam Schiff, intentionally distorted the contents of a phone call between President Trump and Ukrainian Pres. Volodymyr Zelenskiy in an attempt to make it look “like a classic organized crime shakedown” perpetrated by Donald Trump.

After being called on it he explained, that his version of the transcript — which he read to Congress and millions of TV viewers watching — was a parody, and then later he proceeded to blame his critics, for not being sophisticated enough to realize that it was just his innocent attempt at being funny…
Well, I think that Adam Schiff will be better off, leaving the serious stuff, like comedy, to professionals.

Adam in Wonderland?

Because the release of a full, unredacted transcript of the conversation between Presidents Donald Trump and Volodymyr Zelenskiy have not delivered expected dirt on Donald Trump, Chairman Schiff decided to came up with his own, slightly modified, version of the dialogue between two leaders.

Rep. Schift’s summary:

We’ve been very good to your country. Very good. No other country has done as much as we have. But you know what, I don’t see much reciprocity here. You know what I mean? I hear what you want. I have a favor I want from you though. And I’m going to say this only seven times, so you better listen good. I want you to make up dirt on my political opponent, understand? Lots of dirt, on this and on that. I’m going to put you in touch with people, and not just any people. I’m going to put you in touch with the Attorney General of the United States — my Attorney General, Bill Barr — he’s got the whole weight of American law enforcement behind him. And I’m going to put you in touch with Rudy, you’re going to love him. Trust me. You know what I’m asking, so I’m only going to say this a few more times, in a few more ways. And don’t call me again. I’ll call you when you’ve done what I asked.

When later in the hearing, Rep. Mike Turner criticized Schiff for a grossly inaccurate portrayal of President Trump conversation with Ukrainian Pres. Zelenskiy, Schiff stated that his

Summary of the president’s call was meant to be at least part in parody.

Is there a jester in the house (of representatives)?

Parody? What parody?

So we should believe that Adam Shift wanted to ease the tension in the room and thought that opening Congressional Hearing with a reading of a summary of something he has dreamed-out the night before instead of the official transcript, was a perfect way to put a smile on everyone’s faces. But…

…his masterful use of satire was misread by humorless members of U.S. Congress who somehow took his presentation seriously and destroyed any chance of him ever landing a gig on the stand-up comedy circuit. It’s not his fault. He did his best to be funny.

It’s hard to get rid of the impression that the way Rep. Schiff read his “parody,” was meant to create the appearance of seriousness. (I’ve seen people saying eulogies at a funeral in a more joyful way then Schiff delivered his opening statement.) It seemed that he wanted to guarantee that people would take it seriously.

Read the official transcript of Pres. Donald Trump and Pres. Volodymyr Zelenskiy phone call conversation.

It’s not a surprise that republican members of Congress and

Trump refused to accept Schiff’s explanation.

The President called on Schiff to ‘immediately resign’ over his portrayal of the President conversation with Zelenskiy.

Biggs wants to censure Schiff.

The incoming House Freedom Caucus chairman Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) introduced a measure to censure House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff.

Rep Biggs’s described Schiff’s comments as

Egregiously false and fabricated retelling.

And then he added that,

Actions of Chairman Schiff misled the American people, bring disrepute upon the House of Representatives, and make a mockery of the impeachment process, one of this chamber’s most solemn constitutional duties.

Of Course, Adam Schiff is not going to resign, and Biggs’ resolution is unlikely to go anywhere in the Democratic-controlled House, but call to action is a good start.

The last thought.

As great Bob Grant used to say: It’s sick out there and getting sicker!

Let’s summarize the chain of events.
Member of U.S. Congress, House Intelligence Committee Chairman, during the congressional hearing of acting Department of National Intelligence Director, decides to deliver an utterly made-up account of U.S. President’s conversation with the foreign leader. Instead of reading the transcript of the conversation, the chairman chose to present his interpretation of it. He gave us what in his opinion, was

In sum and character, what the President was trying to communicate.

In case you haven’t figured it out yet, Mr. chairman just wanted to help. He served to us already digested (by him) intellectual steak, shielding that way our worn-out brains from the risk of overloading, which could lead to catastrophic failure causing irreparable damage and in effect death. Thank you, Mr. chairman!

I’m not sure what is worse.
House Intelligence Committee Chairman thinking that it is perfectly acceptable to severely misrepresent facts, as long as doing so promotes his and his party’s point of view.
Or
Him thinking that we, the people, are too dumb to read and understand a transcript of a simple conversation, and will blindly accept someone else’s interpretation of it.

The (another) last thought.

Speaking of interpretations:
Why is it, that conservatives use facts to support their views, but liberals use their interpretation of facts to support theirs?

Thank You For Reading

Sylvester Stallone New (Trumpian) Rambo Movie Drives The Leftists Insane

Ladies and gents, as a result of substantial pressure from my politically correct friends, I finally see the need to add a new word to my already extensive, official vocabulary!
The word is:

Trumpian

Trumpian is an adjective form for President Donald Trump. The term is primarily used by critics to characterize his language, conduct, and policies.

Rambo: Last Blood – the fifth (probably the last) installment in Rambo saga just hit theaters near you (September 20, 2019) and some people out there don’t like it. They don’t like it, because the storyline of the latest motion picture from action-movie legend Sylvester Stallone, lands way to close to the point of view represented by Pres. Donald Trump, therefore, they branded the movie; Trumpian.

Sly says a few words about the PTSD and brutal violence in the movie.

Directed byAdrian Grunberg
Screenplay byMatthew Cirulnick
Sylvester Stallone
StarringSylvester Stallone
Paz Vega
Sergio Peris-Mencheta
Adriana Barraza
Yvette Monreal
Genie Kim
Joaquín Cosío
Oscar Jaenada
Release dateSeptember 20, 2019 (United States)
RatedR

So, what’s broken?

Let’s start with a couple of headlines.

Sylvester Stallone’s perpetual warrior returns in a revenge story that couldn’t be more toxic and Trumpian.
( Rolling Stone – subtitle )

and

Rambo: Last Blood review – Stallone storms Mexico in a laughable Trumpian fantasy.
( The Gurdian )

and

Rambo: Last Blood Is Part MAGA Fantasy, Part Saw Movie. The new movie completes John Rambo’s transformation into a Trumpian hero.
( Slate )

and the last but not the least

Rambo: Last Blood’ Is a Trumpian, Anti-Mexican Nightmare.
( Daily Beast )

Critics consensus – everything is broken.

And Stallone is a very bad Trumpian dude…

There’s a lot of angry comments aimed at this film. The reviewers take issue with a number, in their opinion, offensive themes, and plots used in the movie.

Let’s dig a little dipper into some of the examples.

  • The depiction of Mexicans as criminals and thugs.
    It’s a matter of the fact that criminal characters in Stallone’s movie look substantially Mexican. But complaining about it would only make sense if the Mexican drug cartels were composed exclusively of tea-sipping English gentlemen and the members of the Royal Family. (Fortunately for English gentlemen and the Royals, this isn’t the case.)
  • The inability of the female victims to retaliate against their abusers.
    It appears that it is not cool anymore for a woman to be feminine. For some reason, members of the politically correct part of our society don’t like that female characters in Stallone’s movie are shown as regular women instead of Special Ops G.I. Janes capable of killing a man (even some machete waving psychopath) by driving a toothpick thru his forehead.
  • The portrayal of Mexico as a collection of slums, graffiti-covered buildings, streets overcome with garbage, stray dogs, and frightening residents.
    Mexico is beautiful. One can expect to see stunning architecture, eat delicious food, and meet amazing people. But Mexico is a vast country, and there’re many areas not as friendly as Cancún or island of Cozumel. Stallone is exposing the worst of the worst because that was the movie’s storyline. Rambo was looking for a kidnapped girl turned into a sex slave. In a case like that, no one sane is going to investigate archeological sites or historic churches.

Finally, everything is clear.

And I’m in shock.

The movie plot makes perfect sense. But because the story calls for main characters to cross the U.S. border couple of times and because some of those characters are Mexican, the guardians of political correctness have reached the conclusion that Stallone uses his movie to support President Trump border-agenda, and of course they (the P.C. guardians) hate that.

What’s the best way to unload all that accumulated anger?
Spread of lies and misinterpretations about the movie.

So, they insinuate that:

Rambo: Last Blood is a brutal, unadulterated attack on the entire population of Mexico. That opinion is based on the grounds that…
Stallone hired Latino actors to play Mexican criminals. What can I say? It’s perfectly obvious, Stallone is a racist who believes that all Mexicans are drug dealers, rapists, and psychopathic killers.

And that’s not all.

Stallone is also a sexist. He dares to portray women in his movie as soft, feminine human beings with feelings.
That’s not O.K.

And all those scenes with decaying neighborhoods.

How can Sly even suggest that such places exist, and worse, that they exist in Mexico? It looks like Stallone hates Mexico and everything associated with it – especially taco. Is he xenophobic?

Bad Sylvester. Bad, bad Sylvester.

And now on a little more serious note…

(Just a tiny bit more serious)

The last thought.

At first, when starting to write this paragraph, I wanted to drop a couple of short sentences containing my thoughts on all the reviews I’ve read so far and maybe something about the authors who’s written them. Then all of a sudden it hit me – I’ve realized that I haven’t read any reviews of the newest Stallone movie yet.

The articles I’ve read which claimed to be movie reviews, were not, in fact, reviews. Those were attempts by politically opinionated writers at convincing potential moviegoers to stay home or to pick some other motion picture to enjoy. Those “reviews” push leftist political agenda when accusing Stallone of supporting right-wing ideas.

Why all that opposition to a simple action movie sporting some senior-citizen tough guy inflicting damage on a bunch of bad actors who definitely deserve whatever has been served to them?
Well, Stallone managed to break every major rule of politically correct movie making.

He chose the wrong thugs for Rambo to kill, the wrong line of crime for them to be in and the wrong geographical area in which his film’s action was set. There’s Mexican cartel involved in drug/sex trafficking, making a weekend journey across totally unsecured U.S. southern border with intentions to take out some old, quiet veteran.

What the hell was Sly thinking when writing the script? Isn’t he aware that there’s absolutely no crime in Mexico? Isn’t it evident that no one is able of trafficking anything or anyone across our southern border, because it is a hundred and ten percent secured? I’ve thought that smart dude like Stallone would know that.

The second last thought.

Personal note to Sly Stallone. (I hate to say it, but I will say it anyway.)

Sylvester Enzio Stallone, you have royally screwed up! My favorite ass-kicking movie character is going to end up in the museum of cinema with a huge stamp across his forehead saying – TRUMPIAN HERO. Sly I will never forgive you for that.

However, if you’ll come up with another Rambo movie, where you’ll replace all those Mexicans with white guys wearing MAGA heats and set the action in the center of Manhattan during upcoming 2020 election, I will consider rewriting the previous paragraph.
I see multiple Oscars and the Nobel Peace Prize coming your way.
Good Luck!!!

Thank You For Reading

Sticks & Stones — Dave Chappelle’s Comedy For Regular People

The one and only, Dave Chappelle is back, and people are laughing again.

Sticks & Stones is Chappelle’s fifth special for Netflix (following The Age of Spin,” “Deep in the Heart of Texas,” “Equanimity” and “The Bird Revelation,”) premiered on Monday, Aug. 26, and generated lots of poor reviews from high flying politically correct bloggers, journalist, and activists, and at the same time, received excellent reaction from the rest of us – regular people.

Netflix

Q&A sessions held with audiences after the main stand-up show.

Politically correct critics say.

Critics Consensus on Rotten Tomatoes describes Chappelle’s latest stand-up as Edgy, but empty. They say; Sticks and Stones might not break any bones, but it won’t elicit many laughs, either.

“It won’t elicit many laughs.”
Says who?
Just because you ladies and gentlemen (some like to call you – snowflakes), don’t have a sense of humor, doesn’t mean that everyone else out there is as humorless as you are.

without much having to answer to anyone.
Why should he have to answer to anyone? It’s his show.

doesn’t care, how much he’s disappointing you.
I agree. Dave doesn’t care whatsoever. Why should he?

You just haven’t delivered the funny.
Sorry, pal. 99% of the viewers don’t agree with you. You’re in the minority.

And we the people say.

So, critics don’t like Chappelle’s stand-up. Rotten Tomatoes’ audience, on the other hand, projects very different sentiment.

99% out of the over 35 thousand reviews by the audience is positive.

“Hilarious, it at times offended me, and alternately had me applauding. In either instance, I was never able to stop laughing. Brilliantly written and expertly delivered comedic performance.”
David P

“Yet another example of Chapelle’s hyper thought-provoking humor… delivered with the honesty you’ve come to know, love, and respect.”
Derek M

“Un-apologetically hilarious. Dave makes a statement by taking on subjects people are scared to touch on. Without care or worry, he welcomes all of the criticism he knew he would get for it. Is it controversial? Yes. But what would comedy be without controversy?”
Bradley J

Aristocracy vs. plebeians?

It’s interesting how massive is the contrast between the ways two groups of people – those who, one way or another, make money by sharing their opinions (mostly progressive bloggers from the heights of Mount Olympus), and those who post their thoughts free from prejudice (regular folks living down here at the sea level), – react to the same material.

I think people are getting tired of being pushed around by politically-correct crowd telling everyone, what is or isn’t acceptable in today’s world. Support for Dave Chappelle (or anyone like him) and his stand-up specials is an easy and simple way to stick it to all those self-glorified, soaked in juices of sanctimoniousness, progressive members of social media. It also shows to the other entertainers, (who, for the last three years, let themselves to be bullied into being a part of Trump-bashing mob,) that there are other targets worthy of their attention (at least as funny), and people who are willing to pay for a chance of seeing something new instead of listening to the same old jokes about the same old guy.

Backlash? What backlash?

PC bloggers attempt to create a negative backlash to Netflix’s newest comedy special. There’re articles written about Sticks & Stones, saying that Chappelle has changed. That he has lost his comedic touch and is just offensive without any humor to it. That he’s tarnishing his legacy, some even view his latest work as disgusting. Well, ladies and gents, Dave Chappelle has not lost his touch, he’s not tarnishing any legacy and use of the word “disgusting” in an attempt to describe his work, is delicately speaking, insane overkill.


Dave Chappelle is not controversial, but he dares to talk about controversial topics.


Chappelle has not changed; he does the same kind of comedy today as he did 15 years ago. The only thing different today is a rise of political correctness. I don’t even think that the PC crowd got much bigger, but I’m sure as hell that it got much, much louder.

Dave Chappelle does not discriminate. He hits everyone with the same velocity, giving equal treatment to everyone, including himself. What is the most puzzling to me in this entire “Chappelle controversy” is the fact, that the people who are the loudest in demanding equal treatment (LGBTQ+ community is a good example), complain the most when they get it. Try to figure that one out.


No matter what you do in your artistic expression, you are never, ever, allowed to upset the alphabet people. You know who I mean — those people who took 20% of the alphabet for themselves. I’m talking about them, L’s and B’s and G’s and the T’s.

Dave Chappelle

Dave Chappelle does what every serious comedian should do. He uses humor to take on the topics that people, in general, don’t wont to confront out of fear of being attacked by the self-appointed PC police which members of, think that there’s only one right approach to all aspects of our existence on Earth — theirs.

The last thought.

I know there’s no way that Chappelle is going to find this post and read it. But just in case he will (optimism runs in my bloodstream).

Hey Dave, you’re the man! Keep on going and never stop.

Someone said that when it comes to war, business, or sex, all the tricks are allowed. I would add a fourth category to this lineup

Comedy

Thank You For Reading

How Hurricane Dorian Could Hit Alabama (with a picture)

My simple explanation of what sharpie mark on NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) map means.

CLICK IMAGE FOR FULL-SIZE VERSION

Lots of noise about nothing.

What I think has happened (and the following line of events is only the product of my imagination) was that President Trump wanted to know what was the worst possible scenario we could expect to happen with hurricane Dorian.

One of the experts said that if everything will go wrong, there’s a possibility that Dorian will reach south-east areas of Alabama.

President grabbed a black sharpie, and when asking:
Can it move that far?
He drew the line on the map. The expert said:
Yes, it can.

And here we are. The mystery has been untangled. Now we can go back to our boring lives and stop worrying about how government officials in the White House use office supplies.

You can buy Trump sharpie right here.

Thank You For Reading

Fine-Point TRUMP Sharpie Marker With The Magical Ability To Drive The Fake News Crazy

Official Donald J Trump Fine Point Marker.

President Trump’s ability to drive his critics crazy is unmatched by anything in the entire Universe. As a response to “Sharpie Gate,” his campaign is selling Trump-branded permanent marker in its store.

You can buy Trump sharpie right here.

Brad Pasquale wants to #KeepMarkersGreat.

Donald Trump’s reelection campaign just added a Trump-branded permanent marker (sharpie) to its web store, skillfully capitalizing on the Sharpie-gate spectacle.

The marker introduced by campaign manager Brad Parscale on his Twitter account is another, I think successful, attempt by Trump campaign to turn what could have been a controversy into an asset and poke some fun in “mainstream media” in the process.

Congrats to campaign manager Brad Parscale. I like the way you guys think.

And now, ladies and gentlemen,
My simple explanation of what sharpie mark on NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) map means.

Thank You For Reading

Cambria CEO Marty Davis: “Trump Is The Smartest Guy In The Room”

You cannot have free trade with a dictatorship that is harvesting the prosperity of an American Democracy.

Marty Davis

Cambria President and CEO

Worth watching.

Mr. Davis doesn’t hold back his criticism of people responsible for the unfair trade agreements and the current international crisis.

Published on Sep 5, 2019
by Fox Business

Maria Bartiromo talks to Cambria CEO Marty Davis, who shares his views on trade issues with China and President Trump’s approach to that problem. He talks about the roots of the conflict and then explains the consequences of short-sighted decisions made by Wall Street tycoons in an alliance with powerful U.S. and Chinese political establishment.

Thank You For Reading

Steve Bannon’s (Huawei) Claws of the Red Dragon

Does Chinese telecom giant Huawei have ties to the People’s Liberation Army?

Jan Jekielek sits down with Steve Bannon to discuss how the Chinese communist elites have gained power and wealth through access to Western capital and technology and used that power to stifle dissent and advance their self-serving global ambitions.

Steve Bannon is former White House chief strategist to President Donald Trump and former executive chairman of Breitbart News. He is also the Co-Founder of the Committee on the Present Danger: China.

Is it still worth it to do business in China?

Published on Aug 24, 2019
by The Epoch Times

Chinese business model is simple.

First:

  • The Chinese government lets western businesses open factories in China. Western companies like it because labor is cheap.

Then:

  • The Chinese government asks western businesses to transfer their technology to Chinese partners. (In many sectors, Beijing will only let foreign firms operate through joint ventures in which Chinese partners have the majority stake.)

Then:

  • The Chinese partners of western businesses use newly acquired technology to create “their product,” and manufacture it using laborers trained by, guess who, western businesses.

Then:

  • The Chinese partners of western businesses export “new” cheaper product all over the world, creating competition for other western companies.

Then:

  • Other western businesses, which don’t have factories in China, can’t compete. They ask the Chinese government for permission to open a factory in China.

Then:

  • The Chinese government lets other western businesses open factories in China. The western companies like it because labor is cheap.

Last:

Rinse and repeat. As many times as possible.

Note:
I know this is extremely simplified explanation, but…

Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.

Leonardo da Vinci

And I feel very, very smart right now.

Thank You For Reading

Social-Credit-Score? The Big Brother Gets Bigger And Bigger And Out Of Control

The Chinese Politburo will rate its citizens! Is Social-Credit-Score coming to an area near you?

It was the year 2010. China began to create this system as a pilot program but officially began development of a nationwide social credit system in 2014, and they plan to have fully operational Social Credit System for its 1.4 billion citizens by 2020.

At that time, there will be a searchable database of every Chinese citizen. It will include all the information collected from public and private companies – starting with social media activities and online purchases thru tax payments, credit history, legal matters and ending on health records and people the rated citizen associates within. Are you scared yet? If not, let me add, that face recognition technology will be a part of the system. (Analysts estimating the country will have somewhere between 300 million and 400 million cameras installed by 2020.)

There’s no flying under the radar.

Published on Nov 25, 2018
by Paul Joseph Watson

Your utility meters, smart televisions, cell phones, telephones, computers, credit cards, banks, and internet are all surveillance devices that are recording your activities and that information may be later used against you.

Steven Magee

All the data collected (authorities already claim to have the records of 990 million individuals and 25.91 million enterprises) will be used to determines a social-score ranking from 350 up to a theoretical 950. The value of human been will be measured in points, the higher, the better.

The social score will run people’s lives.

With a high score, life will be good, very good. Getting a great job – easy. Getting a low-interest or even no-interest loan – no problem. Getting kids admitted to the best school – simple. Even getting a great date on Baihe will be painless. 

With a low score, the word “easy” will be erased from the vocabulary. Forget a good job – accepting a low-score-person as an employee will lower the social score of the business and business owner. Forget getting a loan – high interest will kill you. Good school for kids… O.K. Forget kids. The internet connection service for low-grade citizens will be comparable to that of the early 1990s so no YouTube for those guys.


If some scoring system can either make you or break you, people will find ways to full the system. Where there’s the need, someone will come up with a way to accommodate that need and make lots of cash in the process.


Although the nationwide social credit system managed by the government doesn’t exist yet, Beijing uses social record systems run by local governments and some private versions like Sesame Credit (Zhima Credit) operated by Ant Financial as pilots programs. So far, taking part in both the government and private versions is technically voluntary. In the future, the official social credit system will be mandatory, and the hardware is already in place.

Published on Dec 25, 2017
by BBC News

The last thought.

We can Improve Your FICO Score! Call 1800 – something.” We all see and hear those commercials on TV and radio. China isn’t different. Numerous services have sprung up claiming to be able to boost social credit score. Most of them fly by night fakes, but some (very few) are legit which in this case only means that they know how to cheat the system, and they do.

If having low social score comes with harsh punishments – you might be unable to purchase high-speed train tickets, fly on an airplane, book hotel room, or send your kids to a private school – you will do anything to fix it and if cheating is the fastest way, you’ll cheat.

The Chinese government is creating a Social Credit System to “urge its citizens to do more good and be more trustworthy

I’m afraid that they will create an underclass of honest people who will live their lives by the book and get very little in exchange. On the other hand, those who will learn how to play the system will live very well at the expense of others.

Published on Dec 12, 2018
by VICE News

“I’m finally a normal person.”
As someone said: Life is brutal…

Thank You For Reading