The American Ruling Class

[aljhoa]

"European military action must be grounded in the diverse domestic politics of its key member countries and include non-EU countries like Norway, Turkey and, later, the U.K." Yeah right,, include Turkey which is about 98% muslim.
The author is from the CFR,,, but, you could have guessed that.
How Trump will save Europe – POLITICO

Al

[Danny B]

Preet Bharara

There is a lot of discussion as to whether or not Trump is going to clean house OR, just get rid of his enemies. He just appointed an anti-vaxxer Robert Kennedy to oversee the vaccine safety committee.
Trey Gowdy and Jason Chaffets are cutting a wide swath through entrenched corruption and incompetence.
His latest "weapon" is Preet Bharara . "He put away Shelly Silver (D), long feared Speaker of the Assembly and Dean Skelos(R) Senate Majority Leader. For a while it looked like he was going for the trifecta, with Governor Andy Cuomo (D) firmly in his sites, imagine the heads of NY’s three branches of government under indictment."
He definitely isn't afraid to go after the heavy weights.

" A meeting between Bharara and deBlasio is to take place to allow the Mayor explain his knowledge of the above. As any first year law student knows, nothing good can come of it. Especially because Comrade is a fool, a poor judge of his own limited talents, a buffoon of the lowest order and an all around idiot,"
"His reign as mayor of the country’s largest city has been an unmitigated disaster, decriminalizing public urination, ushering in a homeless pandemic, intentional traffic paralysis, potential financial calamity as he pays off his union masters and a personal war upon the police. In short, he’s been the Calamity Jane of New York City. "
Astalavista Comrade de Blasio – Financial Survival Network

The Man Who Terrifies Wall Street
Bharara decides to stay as US attorney in New York after meeting with Trump
U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara: The Mob Is “Still There” | Vanity Fair
The Most Dangerous Man In Bitcoin Isn't A Criminal | Fast Company
The more people like this that Trump can find, the tougher it will be for the crooks.

[rickoff]

@Rick


We may be a little socialist with our universal health care but I can assure you we are very conservative in our nature.

I see Trump just applied a travel/immigration ban. Here in Canada this is considered guilt by association. In effect a hate crime based on religion, beliefs and the color of ones skin. I might expect this in some petty third world dictatorship but I thought our friends south of the border were better than this.

On the upside, if nothing else, it has everyone here in Canada saying thank god we don't live in America. Sure we have problems but they are small and almost insignificant by comparison and we are thankful for that.

AC

I think that the first thing we need to do, if we are going to converse, is to agree that conservatism and liberalism have opposite meanings in our two countries. In Canada, liberalism is a philosophy that follows the principles of the English philosopher John Locke. As the online Canadian Encyclopedia points out, "Locke was the first to argue that individuals have innate rights of life, liberty and property. These rights exist prior to government. Governments come about only through the agreement of autonomous individuals that their rights are best protected by joint association. If this contract is broken the people have the right to rebel. Locke's ideas justified England's Glorious Revolution of 1688 and animated the American revolutionaries of 1776." It might interest you to note that Locke's principles are exactly the same as those of America's Founding Fathers, and can be seen echoed in our Declaration of Independence from Britain, as well as in our Constitution. Those Americans who choose to remain loyal to these ideals self associate themselves as being conservatives, and for the reason that they appreciate what the Founding Fathers gave us and want to conserve that which was given. Indeed, we conservatives in America are the dictionary definition of the adjective "conservative," which means "disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change." While the same definition of the word "conservative" holds true in Canada, the form of governance desired by Canadian conservatives is exactly opposite to the American ideal.

In Canada, conservatives want to conserve the system of British rule which American conservatives celebrate our independence from on July 4th each year. Your Canadian Prime Minister, and all other government officials, must swear an oath of allegiance to the British monarch Queen Elizabeth II, as well as to any of her heirs and successors, and recognize her as the "Queen of Canada." Since we Americans detest the very idea that any man or woman, because of their bloodline at birth, should be afforded any special majestic social status and regarded as "royalty," our Declaration of Independence included a statement that all are created equal, and our Constitution included a prohibition against anyone in government service holding a title of nobility. Instead of swearing an oath of allegiance to a monarch, those who perform government services in the United States must swear to support and defend our Constitution, and all Americans pledge our allegiance to our flag, and to our American republic for which it stands.

In America, liberalism is the opposite of American conservatism. American liberals are very much opposed to the ideals of the American republic, which holds individualism and the ideals cited by John Locke as its foundational basis. American liberals would prefer the ideals of a collectivist society in which the inherent rights of individuals are discarded and merely become privileges which can be granted or taken away at will by a simple majority who determine that doing so is "for the greater good." For that reason, American liberals would prefer that our country were a democracy rather than a republic, and thus refer to their party as the Democrat party. Those who prefer the republican form of government which our Constitution guarantees us in every state refer to themselves as Republicans. It should be understood, though, that not all who identify as being Republicans are true conservatives. Moderate and left leaning members of the Republican party are often referred to as "RINO's," meaning Republican In Name Only, and for good reason. That's because RINO's are willing to compromise true conservative values by reaching agreements with liberals that undermine our Constitution and strip away individualist liberties. Liberal Democrats often refer to themselves as "progressives," and deride anyone who does not agree that progress towards their socialist collectivist democracy ideal is the favored way to go. Conservatives find that idea repugnant, and heed the warning given by one of our most revered Founding Fathers, Benjamin Franklin, when he said, "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote."

And so, you see, conservative Americans will always choose liberty and maintain that our inherent right to bear arms to protect life, liberty, and property is an inseparable right that we will never relinquish. It is a right that was not granted by the 2nd Amendment to our Constitution (part of our so-called "Bill of Rights") but rather was an inherent and inalienable right that was simply recognized by that Amendment, which prohibited government from infringing upon it. In Canada, your Supreme Court ruled in 1993 that Canadian citizens had no similar constitutional protected right to keep and bear arms, saying, "Canadians, unlike Americans, do not have a constitutional right to bear arms."

In opposition to conservatives, liberal progressive Democrats favor and promote unconstitutional gun control legislation that would strip away our liberties by leaving us no way to defend those liberties, as a last resort, from an overreaching and tyrannical government. True conservatives have been aware, for decades now, of a slow but steady erosion of liberties, and of corrupt and overreaching federal and state governments that seek to usurp powers never granted by the federal or state constitutions in an attempt to gain absolute control over every facet of our lives. During the last two federal administrations (16 years) conservatives, independents, and blue collar working class Democrats alike, all began waking up to the reality that our nation and our freedom was doomed unless the people intervened. In our 2016 elections, only one candidate, Donald Trump, arose to take a stand, with the people, against government corruption, and promised to return control of government to the people. You see, in America the people are the true sovereigns, and government is a servant - not a master. Government hoped that we had forgotten that, but we have not. You can go ahead and happily state that you are glad you don't live in America, but some day in the not too distant future when you see your final liberties being diminished at an alarming rate, and find that you have no way to prevent that from happening, you may be very happy to know that America is your next door neighbor.

While you say you are a conservative, and that I am really a liberal, surely you must now see that this is a matter of differing perspectives. If I were in Canada, yes, I would be a liberal, and if you were living in the United States you would side with liberal progressive Democrats, right? Your tirades against Trump and Trump supporters offer rather convincing proof of that supposition. Now if you can readily admit that what I have stated in this post is factual and honest, and do so politely, I believe that we can continue to have meaningful conversations in which both of us will have an opportunity to learn something interesting and useful. Otherwise, we would simply be wasting each others time, as there would be little to nothing that we could agree upon if there is no foundation of mutual respect based upon facts and honesty. Of that, I'm sure you would agree, and once agreement is confirmed I will be happy to answer any of your questions and concerns.

Sorry if my reply took longer than you had hoped or expected. Ever since the November elections it seems that I spend the majority of my time dispelling fake mainstream media news reports and other misinformation and disinformation attacks that are attempting to discredit Trump and sway public opinion in opposition to him. In America, we used to have more than 50 major news outlets, but today mainstream media is controlled by just 6 massive corporations, and those corporations are a propaganda arm of the powerful elite Ruling Class establishment. I can see that you believe all that you hear from your own mainstream media, but in reality your newscasts concerning any goings on involving America are mostly echoes of our liberal mainstream media political talking points.

[fan1701]

Hi Rickoff. Bravo! Excellent post.

al

[rickoff]

Hi Rickoff. Bravo! Excellent post.

al

Thank you for your kind words of approval, sir.

[bistander]

Liked it

I found it informative and interesting. Well written. Especially liked the Ben Franklin quote.

Thanks,

bi

[bistander]

Post #1 revisit

Hi Rick,

By chance I clicked on page 1 and then noticed and read post #1. Seeing as how it is over 200 pages and 8 years ago, I will copy and paste the first half of it here.

Regards,

bi

The American Ruling Class
I don't watch very much TV, but sometimes there is a show scheduled with a topic that interests me. Tonight was such an occasion. A documentary titled The American Ruling Class aired on LINK TV. LINK TV is an alternative media station that presents topics and viewpoints you would never expect to see on a MSM station. It is fully funded by viewer donations, and I was pleasantly surprised to see that a woman from the town where I live pledged funds of up to $100,000 to match viewer donations to LINK TV. This documentary was particularly interesting in that well known people within the ruling class (basically people who earn more than $500,000 annually and who are in positions of power and influence) were interviewed and often revealed the truth about the wealthy ruling class through what they said. In one scene, a young man visits the office of a hedge fund manager who logs into the Bloomberg information website on his computer and pulls up information showing who the actual owners of General Electric really are. It is a list of several well known banks and Investment firms, including JP Morgan and Deutsche Bank. I'm not at all surprised by that, but I think many others would be. General Electric Company is well known by most people for their electric home appliance products, but they are actually a multinational corporation that is involved in manufacture of a multitude of products including jet engines and atomic generators. They are also one of the largest patent holders worldwide, and are probably only second to General Motors in the number of suppressed technology patents held. As the documentary goes on to point out, big money owns everything, and there are just a handful of people in the world who control these major banks and investment firms. Anything they don't already own can be bought, including the presidency. Presidents and administrations come and go, but the big money bankers and investment firms never go away. ...
Rick

[Danny B]

Crooked federal judges

Martin Armstrong; "The Federal Judges of New York City routinely break the law and change the transcripts of hearings to maintain the 98%+ conviction rate. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals ruled “Nevertheless, whether we have the power to order a change in such a practice is unclear. We review judgments, and our review of the convictions and sentences here may not be an appropriate vehicle for the fine tuning of this practice. However, we invite the judges of the Southern District to consider revision.”
They lie but, we have no problem with that.

"The New York Times NEVER reported the details of what went on or how the judges were conspiring with the banks and the government to protect the bankers as always."
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/i...judge-gorsuch/

[Allcanadian]

@Rick

Those Americans who choose to remain loyal to these ideals self associate themselves as being conservatives, and for the reason that they appreciate what the Founding Fathers gave us and want to conserve that which was given. Indeed, we conservatives in America are the dictionary definition of the adjective "conservative," which means "disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change." While the same definition of the word "conservative" holds true in Canada, the form of governance desired by Canadian conservatives is exactly opposite to the American ideal.

I would disagree and I and my fellow Conservatives follow these ideals -- Conservatives believe in personal responsibility, limited government, free markets, individual liberty, traditional values and a strong national defense. Believe the role of government should be to provide people the freedom necessary to pursue their own goals.

As such the problem I have with your last post was when you suggested "If they do that, Trump will raise the tariff on foreign imports so that America always wins". This is government interference in a free market to support workers who cannot compete or a social welfare system... socialist not conservative views in my opinion.

In Canada, conservatives want to conserve the system of British rule which American conservatives celebrate our independence from on July 4th each year. Your Canadian Prime Minister, and all other government officials, must swear an oath of allegiance to the British monarch Queen Elizabeth II, as well as to any of her heirs and successors, and recognize her as the "Queen of Canada." Since we Americans detest the very idea that any man or woman, because of their bloodline at birth, should be afforded any special majestic social status and regarded as "royalty," our Declaration of Independence included a statement that all are created equal, and our Constitution included a prohibition against anyone in government service holding a title of nobility. Instead of swearing an oath of allegiance to a monarch, those who perform government services in the United States must swear to support and defend our Constitution, and all Americans pledge our allegiance to our flag, and to our American republic for which it stands.

In Canada the conservatives suggested separation from the monarchy with good reason which was rejected by most Canadians while I agreed with it. Personally I find the concept of nobility and monarchies outdated. In my opinion Americans have simply substituted a Monarchy with Nationalism. Your "Queen" is simply an entity you call "America" which many swear allegiance to and blindly follow without question.

And so, you see, conservative Americans will always choose liberty and maintain that our inherent right to bear arms to protect life, liberty, and property is an inseparable right that we will never relinquish. It is a right that was not granted by the 2nd Amendment to our Constitution (part of our so-called "Bill of Rights") but rather was an inherent and inalienable right that was simply recognized by that Amendment, which prohibited government from infringing upon it. In Canada, your Supreme Court ruled in 1993 that Canadian citizens had no similar constitutional protected right to keep and bear arms, saying, "Canadians, unlike Americans, do not have a constitutional right to bear arms."

The Canadian judicial case you refer to was a mentally unstable person stockpiling automatic weapons which was a clear threat to the general public. I believe your argument is false because if what you suggest is true then should you have the inalienable right to bear a nuclear weapon?. Well no so everyone including yourself does have very real restrictions on their right to bear arms because it always relies on context and common sense. Some responsible adults should owns guns and convicted killers and psychopaths etc...not so much. There must be balance and common sense and to suggest everyone has or should have the inalienable right to bear arms is absurd. Would you also believe a muslim neighbor across the street convicted of multiple felony's should have the right to have a fully loaded chain gun mounted in his living room pointed at your house at all times?, they do have the right to bear arms do they not?. Your argument is absurd in my opinion.

While you say you are a conservative, and that I am really a liberal, surely you must now see that this is a matter of differing perspectives. If I were in Canada, yes, I would be a liberal, and if you were living in the United States you would side with liberal progressive Democrats, right? Your tirades against Trump and Trump supporters offer rather convincing proof of that supposition.

No I would not side with the liberal progressive Democrats
Your using a straw man argument to suggest my not liking Trump means I do not like all Rep/Con in general which is not true in any sense of the word.

What I find offensive is when people try to pigeonhole myself and others as a Liberal/Democrat simply because I think Trump is immature, dishonest and unfit for public office. As if to suggest we could just pick any psychotic fool off the street and elect them just because they call themselves a Rep/Con and all is well. It is not because Trump is a Republican or a Democrat or otherwise it is because he is unfit for public office due to his own actions and has obvious character flaws.

Ever since the November elections it seems that I spend the majority of my time dispelling fake mainstream media news reports and other misinformation and disinformation attacks that are attempting to discredit Trump and sway public opinion in opposition to him.

Again this is where we differ in opinion, I believe if a man cannot stand on his own two feet and defend his own words and beliefs then he's not really a man. I think it's wonderful so many in America feel compelled to defend Trump however in Canada our leaders can defend themselves. I was also seriously considering getting a Conservative party membership so we in Canada might avoid the embarrassing fiasco we see south of the border. Obviously we cannot have our prime minister contorting his hands, grunting and whining while mocking disabled persons or speaking of grabbing women by the crotch or fabricating ridiculous alternate facts on national television because it would make everyone look immature if not incompetent.

AC

[Allcanadian]

Just watched the latest Trump news conference... wow I felt embarrassed and I'm not even American. It has to be the most idiotic display of complete incompetence I have ever witnessed.

As Trump said..."We're going to put in a new executive order next week some time,", "But we had a bad decision. That's the only thing that was wrong with the travel ban." I could almost hear old Spicey ... *parrot voice*--IT'S NOT A BAN, IT'S NOT A BAN CAW CAW

However at the press conference I also noticed the press themselves. They were smiling and laughing and making calls like it was new years eve, Wow are they going to have a field day with this.

AC

[aljhoa]

in Canada our leaders can defend themselves

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1bCd492qCP4

Wow are they going to have a field day with this.

https://thezog.info/who-controls-donald-trump/


Al

[aljhoa]

18 USC Ch. 115: TREASON, SEDITION, AND SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES

Coup D’état - Piers Morgan joins Sean Hannity and Joe Digenova


Al

[rickoff]

Just watched the latest Trump news conference... wow I felt embarrassed and I'm not even American. It has to be the most idiotic display of complete incompetence I have ever witnessed.

As Trump said..."We're going to put in a new executive order next week some time,", "But we had a bad decision. That's the only thing that was wrong with the travel ban." I could almost hear old Spicey ... *parrot voice*--IT'S NOT A BAN, IT'S NOT A BAN CAW CAW

AC

Actually, the executive order that you mention does not contain a single word referring to the order as a "ban" on anything. You can call this a ban if you want, but "ban" is not a synonym for the word "suspension," and "suspension" is not a synonym for the word "ban." Despite that fact, liberals and the press immediately labeled this order as a ban, and I believe that misnomer is what Spicer was referring to - that use of the word "ban" is technically inaccurate. The order is a temporary 90-day suspension against entry of immigrants and non-immigrants from Iran, Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Libya, Yemen and Somalia, countries which had already been identified as hotbeds of terrorist activities by the previous administration. Here's the most relevant portion of the order, describing its purpose, in which I bolded the text that is of highest relevance:

To temporarily reduce investigative burdens on relevant agencies during the review period described in subsection (a) of this section, to ensure the proper review and maximum utilization of available resources for the screening of foreign nationals, and to ensure that adequate standards are established to prevent infiltration by foreign terrorists or criminals, pursuant to section 212(f) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f), I hereby proclaim that the immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States of aliens from countries referred to in section 217(a)(12) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1187(a)(12), would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and I hereby suspend entry into the United States, as immigrants and nonimmigrants, of such persons for 90 days from the date of this order

In other words, this is the "extreme vetting" which Trump had promised to initiate during his campaign, and which was a major reason why his campaign was successful. The entire purpose of the order was to do all that's possible to keep Americans safe from infiltration by foreign terrorists or criminals.

Note also that if the order was in fact a "ban" then all immigrant and non-immigrant entries from the affected countries would have been prohibited, but it wasn't. Trump included the following provision, which ensured that persons not representing a potential threat would still be allowed entry during the 90-day suspension period:

(e) Notwithstanding the temporary suspension imposed pursuant to subsection (a) of this section, the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security may jointly determine to admit individuals to the United States as refugees on a case-by-case basis, in their discretion, but only so long as they determine that the admission of such individuals as refugees is in the national interest -- including when the person is a religious minority in his country of nationality facing religious persecution, when admitting the person would enable the United States to conform its conduct to a preexisting international agreement, or when the person is already in transit and denying admission would cause undue hardship -- and it would not pose a risk to the security or welfare of the United States.

Trump was correct is stating that a "bad decision" by the 9th circuit court was the only thing wrong regarding this executive order, and the order will definitely be upheld as lawful and constitutional if and when it reaches the Superior Court.

I really can't understand why you find this order to be offensive or inappropriate in any way, so perhaps you could explain your objection to it. You may think that it is somehow a religious ban, but it is not. The only mention of religion within the order, as seen in the quoted section (e) immediately above, is a protection of any refugee who is of a religious minority in one of the affected countries and is facing persecution. It may interest you to know that most all Islamic majority nations have laws which allow the open persecution of minority faiths, prohibit the possession or distribution of books and other materials used by minority faiths, and consider conversion or attempts of conversion to such faiths as punishable by death.

Perhaps you would also be as kind as to say what you find to be offensive regarding the following quoted section of the order:

In order to protect Americans, the United States must ensure that those admitted to this country do not bear hostile attitudes toward it and its founding principles. The United States cannot, and should not, admit those who do not support the Constitution, or those who would place violent ideologies over American law. In addition, the United States should not admit those who engage in acts of bigotry or hatred (including "honor" killings, other forms of violence against women, or the persecution of those who practice religions different from their own) or those who would oppress Americans of any race, gender, or sexual orientation.

Speaking of "honor killings" and "other forms of violence against women" (forced arranged marriages, genital mutilation, domestic abuse, etc.) you may or may not be aware of that becoming a concern in Canada as well as in the United States. Are you familiar with the case of Mohammad Shafia, who had brought his family to Canada from Afghanistan in 2007? Two years later, he was convicted, along with a wife and brother, of drowning three daughters and another one of his wives who were found in a submerged automobile. Their unforgivable "crime," according to Shafia, was simply that his daughters had disgraced him by dating, and wearing what he thought was inappropriate clothing. Apparently, the wife's "crime" was simply that she had disgraced the family by bearing these daughters. These cold blooded killers would not have been convicted of any wrong-doing in their native country, and were not in the least bit remorseful for what they had done. When they came to Canada, they brought along their own traditions considered acceptable under Sharia law, and chose not to respect Canadian law, tradition, and morals. We see the same things happening here in the US, and find it extremely repugnant. For example, Phoenix Arizona police arrested the mother, father and sister of 19-year-old Aiya Altameemi after they allegedly beat her, restrained her, and burned her for reportedly talking to a boy and refusing to enter into an arranged marriage with a 38-year-old man. These Iraqi immigrants, like their Canadian counterparts, believe they did nothing wrong, that they were simply defending their family's honor. How honorable of them!

[Danny B]

Socialism and Christianity are incompatible

A vid with the title of , "The Deep State's Dramatic Emergence Is Proof Our Elections Mean Nothing " https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wK_YEc5HxFA
I don't agree with this. I SERIOUSLY doubt that the deep state wanted to emerge.
There is definitely a battle going on. The CIA and deep state is at a distinct disadvantage because almost everything they do is illegal and / or immoral.

Rense, US District Attorney Vows To Charge Obama With Treason
White House Leaks 'Almost A Form Of A Soft Coup' I'm sure that George Soros has 'harder" plans in store.
ICE Names CNN, NBC, Etc For False, Dangerous
And Irresponsible Fake News Reporting
House Dems Say Were Kicked Out Of ICE Meeting.
DHS Insider Warns 'It's Spy Versus Spy'
Tillerson Firing Holdover State Dept Staffers In Droves
Trump Purges State Depart '7th Floor Shadow Govt'
Stone - ‘CIA Leaks Like A Sieve'

Judicial Watch Sues FBI, NSA, CIA For Flynn Records
Jewish Dems, Neocons, Cuckservatives, (MSM)
And ADL All Unite To Stump Trump
Obviously, the jews are against Trump. But, why?
Trump represents capitalism. Capitalism has been given a bad name in recent decades because of crony capitalism.
Socialism rears it's ugly head once again. It's nothing new.

Felix Morrow
How Shall We Fight Anti-Semitism
Socialism Only Hope for Jews
(December 1938)
https://www.marxists.org/archive/mor...isemitism4.htm
Russia and the U.S.S.R. had a nasty encounter with socialism.
Jews and the Rise of Communism in Russia | Guided History

It's not just socialism that is emerging from the shadows. ISIS is a creation of the neocon controlled CIA and MOSSAD. Why did ISIS particularly target Syrian and Yazidi Christains? Why did Stalin kill off 85% of the Christian clergy? Why are the neocons so down on Russia,,,, at the same time that Putin
Is fostering a resurgence in the Coptic Christian church?
Killary, "theology that adheres to millennia-old Christian teachings on human life, other social issues, and religious liberty are “deplorable,” so much so that those who hold such views are “irredeemable” in the eyes of a woman who wants to become the most powerful person in the world. That was why in 2015 she said in a speech that orthodox Christian views on these issues “have to be changed.”

Paul Craig Roberts claims that the CIA controls the media. That would make the MSM, CIA and the tribe ONE and the same. The tribe is hard at work to stop nationalism and spread socialism in Europe, THE MARSHALL SCAM

[Allcanadian]

In the news

Friday Trump said:
"The FAKE NEWS media (failing @nytimes, @NBCNews, @ABC, @CBS, @CNN) is not my enemy, it is the enemy of the American People!"

The media is quote: "THE ENEMY OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE" then we have the courts making "bad decisions" so I imagine they will be declared the enemy of the American People next. Then we have a memo suggesting the military would be rounding up illegal immigrants and once you have a soldier on every corner... you know the rest of the story.

You know it sounds like some racist psychotic fascist dream but it's not... it's Trumps new American government. I have to wonder how anyone could become so desperate, so blind and so scared to elect Trump. It's pathetic it really is and it's embarrassing. What a sheet show.

AC