Sweden Adopts Stern Response to Country’s Rape Epidemic

 By John Semmens — Semi-News — A Satirical Look at Recent News

JohnNow that the influx of Muslim refugees into the country has catapulted Sweden to the top of the international heap when it comes to the crime of rape, government officials have determined it is time to take action. That action is the publication of a “sex guidebook” intended to convey a message to immigrants from Muslim countries that rape is wrong.

Youth and Civil Affairs Authority Director General Lena Nyberg explained that “the issue seems to be one of culture shock for young Muslim males entering Swedish society. These refugees were raised in a culture that explicitly designates females as sex objects for Muslim men. Naturally, these young men have a hard time adjusting to the western concept of equal rights for women.”

“Even worse, their religious doctrine declares that women who show their faces in public are whores,” Nyberg continued. “Consequently, Swedish women who go out in public with their faces showing are considered legitimate targets for punitive rape, assault, and murder by devout Muslims. Hopefully, our guide book will clarify the situation and deter Muslim men from committing these crimes.”

In Rinkeby, a suburb of Stockholm, local Imam Iwan Akillya denounced the guidebook, calling it “a violation of our religious rights and duties. Unbelievers trying to force their degraded western values on the people of Islam is unacceptable. True believers must follow the Quran, not the satanic blather of Swedish bureaucrats. It is Allah’s command that the faithful have a duty to slay the unbelievers, though it does permit using them as temporary sex slaves before killing or converting them.”

Nyberg said “the Imam’s statement is unfortunate. We hope it doesn’t reflect the real feelings among the young immigrants we are trying to reach. Our assumption is that those coming to our country as refugees are interested in fitting in with a new culture. Otherwise, why would they have chosen to leave the country of their birth?”

Akillya pointed out “the key flaw in the government’s reasoning is that Sweden is their country. All the world is for Allah. The sooner the unbelievers recognize this and convert to Islam, the sooner they can begin to enjoy membership in the only legitimate religion and know the peace of being one with the umma.”

In related news, Germany’s threat to support a European Union penalty of $75 million on Poland for its refusal to take in more Muslim refugees brought a stinging reply from Poland’s foreign minister Witold Waszczykowski. “We have seen the crime and social disruption that the importation of these so-called refugees has done to other European nations,” he said. “Germany, of all countries, should be keenly aware of the havoc that unwanted invaders can do to a country. By our estimation, the uninvited German visitors of 1939 ended up causing close to a trillion dollars worth of damage to Poland. Before Germany goes on a campaign to intimidate us to accept more invaders perhaps they should consider paying for the damage their country inflicted on all the places their troops went without being asked during World War II.”

Dem PAC Files Ethics Complaint

The Democratic Coalition filed a complaint with the Office of Government Ethics alleging that Presidential Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders’ suggestion that ESPN host Jemele Hill’s tweet labeling the President “a white supremacist who has largely surrounded himself with other white supremacists” might be a “fireable offense,” broke the law.

Democratic Coalition chairman Jon Cooper insisted that “we cannot ignore the sinister implications of what the Trump Administration has done here. Mrs. Sanders contends she is entitled to express her opinion about the outrageous comments of Ms. Hill, but clearly her statement was intended to intimidate ESPN into firing one of its valued employees for merely expressing her opinion about Trump and his henchmen.”

Nate Lerner, the Democratic Coalition’s executive director, cast Sanders’ words as “another example of the Trump White House’s blatant disregard for the Constitution. A few months ago we had Kellyanne Conway urging people to buy Ivanka’s clothing line, now this. It is of the utmost importance that we hold the Trump administration accountable for its illicit behavior. If Sanders doesn’t go to jail over this it will be a dark day for our democratic institutions.” The law Lerner has in mind calls for a fine, up to 15 years in prison, or both.

Whether ESPN could conceivably be frightened into a firing action it disagrees with based on comments made by a Trump Administration official seems dubious. Anti-Trump commentary has become an annoying and intrusive part of the network’s sports broadcast coverage over the past year. The only employee ESPN has fired for expressing political views was former Major League Baseball pitcher Curt Schilling after he questioned the wisdom of laws forcing organizations to allow professed “transgendered” individuals to use whatever restroom or locker room they pleased despite their conflicting physical anatomy.

Weiner Pleads for Leniency

Former congressman Anthony Weiner (D-NY) asked a Manhattan federal court to grant him leniency after his conviction for sending obscene emails and texts to an under-aged 15-year-old girl last year. Prosecutors are seeking a sentence of 21 to 27 months for a charge that carries a maximum of 10 years in prison.

Weiner’s lawyers argued that “the girl was the instigator of the crime. She preyed upon the weaknesses of a man who was widely known as a sex pervert. Now she’s written a book and will profit from the experience. So, to say that she was an innocent victim is false.”

A second mitigating factor cited was “the fact is, Mr. Weiner’s wife has already suffered enough. Her political career has been crushed. She’s lost the confidence and affection of former Secretary of State, and the only person she truly loves, Hillary Clinton. Under the State of New York’s community property law, her suffering ought to be credited against her husband’s legal liability.”

A third mitigating factor cited was that “given the narrow margin of her loss, it could be argued that the untimely revelation of Mr. Weiner’s misdeeds tipped the scales against Mrs. Clinton in her run against Donald Trump for the presidency. Surely, the misery now being experienced by this dedicated public servant and her supporters is sufficient punishment without putting Mr. Weiner behind bars.”

Lastly, Weiner’s lawyers argued that “putting this man in jail will deprive his son of his father’s presence. The boy’s development would be stunted without the daily interaction and guidance his father would be able to provide if he is allowed to go free. Who will teach the boy how to be a man? Who will teach the boy the difference between right and wrong? For the sake of this young boy’s future he needs his father.”

Hillary Admits “Mistakes Made”

One of the more bizarre revelations in Hillary Clinton’s campaign autopsy book—What Happened—was her admission that she tried Voodoo, “but it didn’t work. I had dolls of all the key players—Trump, Bannon, Limbaugh. I stuck them with pins like you’re supposed to, but none of them even got sick, much less died.”

The former presidential candidate speculated that “some sort of Russian radiation or hypersonic interference may have short-circuited the effectiveness of this time-tested technique. I mean, it’s not like I haven’t successfully used this tool before. We made a lot of problems disappear when Bill was governor of Arkansas and when we were in the White House. So, there’s got to have been some outside interference that prevented it from clearing a path to my election last year. Putin and the Russians seem to be the logical answer.”

A more predictable Clinton reaction in the book was her castigation of the “mistakes made by every woman who didn’t vote for me. They had a chance to make history by electing the first person without a penis to the presidency, but they blew it.”

“I’ve been searching for the reasons,” Clinton said. “In some cases I think it was a case of spousal abuse intimidating women from acting independently and voting for me. In other cases I think domineering fathers discouraged their daughters from breaking free of the patriarchy. So fearsome were these baleful male influences that even the secret ballot could not overcome their fear of what would happen to them if the men in their lives suspected they had voted for me.”

Though Clinton feigned a vague implied sympathy for women frightened away from voting for her, she refused to offer any absolution. “I’m not letting anyone off the hook for the evil they’ve done by not voting for me,” Hillary declared. “It’s their sin and they should suffer their well-deserved anguish and sleepless nights for as long as they live—like the young woman whose mother made her publicly apologize to me for not voting for me. Perhaps the humiliation that woman experienced will inspire other mothers to exert more effective control over their daughters the next time a woman runs for president.”

In related bad news for Mrs. Clinton, a County Circuit Court in Maryland ordered the State Bar to open an investigation into the conduct of three lawyers who allegedly helped her illegally delete her emails. Judge Paul Harris ruled that “an accusation that lawyers who have a special obligation to obey the law actually broke the law merits more than a hasty dismissal.” Harris rejected arguments from the three lawyers—David Kendall, Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson—that the case was frivolous since a similar complaint had already been dismissed in Arkansas, saying that “we should aspire to higher standards of ethics than might prevail in Arkansas.”

Meanwhile, 1600 newly released Clinton emails from her term as Secretary of State provide fresh examples of a “pay to play” scheme wherein donors to the Clinton Foundation received special favors from the State Department. Not only do these emails indicate a pattern of self-dealing corruption, they also contradict her testimony that she turned over all her Department-related correspondence before erasing only her personal correspondence upon leaving the office in 2013. A Clinton spokesperson, in a not-for-attribution statement, denied that the former Secretary of State’s testimony constituted perjury “because she was never asked to testify under oath. So whatever lies she may have told are, technically, not perjury.”

A Satirical Look at Recent News
John Semmens is a retired economist who has written a weekly political satire for The Arizona Conservative since 2005. He says working on his satires is one of the ways he tries to honor the liberties our Founding Fathers tried to protect.

Please do us a favor. If you use material created by The Arizona Conservative, give us credit and DO NOT change the context. Thank you.

Advertisements

Menendez Trial Raises Thorny Issues

By John Semmens — Semi-News — A Satirical Look at Recent News

JohnSen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ) and his “campaign donor” Salomon Melgen are currently on trial for political corruption—the Senator for taking bribes and Melgren for paying them. Menendez argues that the “bribes” in exchange for pursuing legislation favorable to Melgren was “just ordinary politics—no worse than the actions of my many peers in Congress.”

As a case in point, the Senator pointed out that “former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev) was able to fatten his bank account through ‘sweetheart’ real estate deals with one of his donors. And he inserted language in the Affordable Care Act in exchange for money from the drug companies. He wasn’t prosecuted for any of this. Why am I being singled out?”

Prosecutor Peter Koski contended that Menendez “went outside the bounds of traditionally acceptable ‘pay-for-play’ bribery. Mr. Melgren doesn’t live in New Jersey. The Senator can’t pass off the favors he did as ‘constituent services.’ Former Senator Reid’s land deals were all conducted with a Nevada resident and constituent. And the payments he received from the drug companies were in the form of campaign donations. That Senator Reid retired and can now pocket these campaign donations is irrelevant.”

Kirk Ogrosky, the defense attorney for Melgen, called the distinctions between the actions of Senators Reid and Menendez “artificial. Mr. Melgren may not be a constituent of Senator Menendez in a geographic sense, but he is a constituent in a shared ethnicity. Both were part of the fellowship of Hispanic Americans. This trial is not only an attack on the two defendants, it is an attack on all Hispanics.”

Whether Menendez should resign from office if he is convicted posed a difficult dilemma for his Party peers. Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-NY) pondered the issue, observing that “on the one hand, a criminal conviction is not good for one’s resume as a member of government. Given the fact that so many have been able to skate past the rules that would typically land a violator behind bars, a conviction in his case would signal an unusual degree of incompetence. I mean, the Clintons raked in hundreds of millions of dollars using the leverage of public office. This was a much bigger heist than Senator Menendez’s petty larceny. Yet, neither of them are on trial nor likely to ever see the inside of a prison cell.”

“On the other hand, there is no constitutional bar to an elected representative also being a convicted felon,” Schumer continued. “Let’s not overlook the fact that the Senator does represent the State of New Jersey. The voters there have a right to elect whoever they wish. Who is to say that he isn’t the kind of person who best reflects the values and talents of that state’s inhabitants?”

Dems in 15 States Sue Over Trump DACA Action

Democrat Attorney-Generals in 15 states plus the District of Columbia have filed suit against President Trump for his executive action overturning former President Obama’s executive decree on Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). Trump justified his countering executive decree by pointing out that Obama lacked the authority to unilaterally modify US immigration law. Trump’s decree goes into effect in six months—a time span giving Congress the opportunity to handle the issue in a legal and constitutional fashion.

Nonetheless, the suing AGs described Trump’s action as “illegal” and “unfair.” New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman cast Trump’s argument that only Congress can enact laws as “putting adherence to the law ahead of human decency. Whether President Obama had the legal right to enact DACA isn’t as important as whether it was the right thing to do. We’re hoping that the court will see past the legalities and confirm the fundamental justice of the DACA decree. These childhood immigrants are blameless. They have become accustomed to living in the United States. They shouldn’t be punished for the crimes committed by their parents.”

Schneiderman brushed aside the possibility that the suit may be premature since Congress may actually pass a law within the six-month grace period allowed by Trump’s executive action. “No person’s fate should be held hostage to a contingency that Congress will take timely measures to deal with an issue,” he asserted. “We have all seen how little Congress has accomplished over the past eight months. It would be foolish to count on this body to respond in an expeditious manner to the artificial deadline imposed by President Trump.”

For his part, Trump further muddled the issue by tweeting that he “may revisit the issue should Congress fail to act.” This is the same rationale used by Obama when he stepped outside the bounds of his authority to institute the DACA program.

In related news, Chicago Mayor Rahm Emmauel slammed Trump’s DACA move and declared “our City will always remain a safe haven for those pursued by immigration authorities. The same is not the case for Mr. Trump himself. He is barred from entering and police have orders to use whatever force is required to see that he stays away.”

Dem Drafting Legislation to Crack Down on College Freedom of Speech

Rep. Anthony Brown (D-Md) says he will introduce a bill that would require universities and colleges to define “acceptable speech” on campus. “On too many college campuses fresh-mouthed youths hide behind the First Amendment claiming that they have a right to air their unfiltered political views regardless of whether others might find them hurtful or outside the bounds of respectable opinion,” Brown said. “They openly flout the ‘free speech zone’ restrictions that school officials have imposed in an effort to protect students from hearing offensive remarks. We’ve got to put a muzzle on these free-speech abusers.”

Brown’s proposed legislation would set up a program to award grants to schools that “properly control what, when, and where students are allowed to voice their unsolicited opinions. No student should have to fear that a walk between classrooms would expose him or her to the rantings of right-wing anti-government ideologues. Universities that develop speech codes and procedures that will silence anti-progressive elements from infringing on the rights of others to not have to hear disturbing contradictions to prevailing mainstream views should be financially rewarded for their enterprise. My bill will do that.”

In related news, black caucus representatives at Harvard demanded that noted author and scholar Charles Murray be barred from speaking on campus—for public safety reasons. It’s not that the mild-manner Murray will rouse a rabble of right-wing goons to cause trouble. The fear is that “this racist apologist will instigate an oppressed minority to attack him. We haven’t read his books and we shouldn’t be forced to allow him to speak.”

More Comey Malpractice Unveiled

On top of last week’s revelation that former FBI Director James Comey drafted an exoneration memo for Hillary Clinton before more than a dozen witnesses had been interviewed, this week it was disclosed that the famous “30,000 missing emails” were in the possession of the National Security Agency (NSA). And, it turns out, Comey declined to accept the NSA’s offer to provide him with copies.

In defense of this refusal to receive evidence, Comey pointed out that “the decision not to prosecute Secretary Clinton was unanimous. As such, there was no reason to probe these emails. At best, we would have found that she was telling the truth that none of these emails dealt with government business. At worst, we would have found that she lied. This would have cast a serious pall of doubt over the reputations of those of us, including Attorney General Lynch and President Obama, who had already agreed that there would be no prosecution.”

“I was the ‘good soldier’ following the orders of my superiors,” Comey explained. “It is the Attorney General who determines which cases are worthy of prosecution. She, of course, must answer to the President. If he decides there is to be no prosecution then both she and I, as his subordinates, must obey. That I stepped up and took the heat for announcing there would be no prosecution was a heroic act of a loyal subordinate. I deserve praise, not persecution, as will become obvious when my book is published.”

Justice Dept Declines to Press Charges Against IRS Official

Assistant Attorney General Kevin Boyd announced that the Trump Administration will not be pursuing charges against former IRS executive Lois Lerner for discriminating against conservative organizations seeking tax-free status from the Agency.

While conceding that Lerner’s refusal to testify on the grounds it would be self-incriminating was, in effect a “smoking gun,” Boyd insisted that “the prosecution of a government functionary for carrying out the wishes of the president would be excessively punitive and set a dangerous precedent. A person entering the ranks of an administration shouldn’t have to be second-guessing every decision—is it right, is it wrong, is it legal or illegal. That would slow the gears by which the president’s will prevails in the making of policy.”

“Ideally, the chief executive is the one who should be held accountable,” Boyd argued. “Difficult as this might be given that the president can order enemies to be killed, nevertheless, it is a basic principle of our Constitution. The proper remedy would be impeachment. Since the person responsible for the IRS’ illegal acts is no longer in office the entire matter is now moot.”

Rep. Kevin Brady (R-Tex), chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, called the decision not to pursue the case “terrible. It sends the message that the same legal, ethical, and Constitutional standards we all live by do not apply to Washington political appointees—who will now have the green light to target Americans for their political beliefs and mislead investigators without ever being held accountable for their lawlessness.

A Satirical Look at Recent News
John Semmens is a retired economist who has written a weekly political satire for The Arizona Conservative since 2005. He says working on his satires is one of the ways he tries to honor the liberties our Founding Fathers tried to protect.

Please do us a favor. If you use material created by The Arizona Conservative, give us credit and DO NOT change the context. Thank you.
 

 

Trump Blamed for Violence Against Media

By John Semmens — Semi-News — A Satirical Look at Recent News

JohnAssorted media spokespersons have pointed the finger of blame at President Trump for incidents of violence that have endangered members of their profession in various locations since he became president. Jim VandeHei, founder of the news website Axios, asserted that Trump is directly “putting reporters at real risk of retribution or violence.” New York Times media columnist Jim Rutenberg wondered “how long before someone is seriously hurt, or worse?” Jeffrey Toobin, a writer for the New Yorker warned “Someone is going to do something awful to a journalist.”

Well, someone is doing some awful things to journalists, but it is mostly not Trump supporters. The lion’s share of the violence has come from leftists protesting Trump. Nonetheless, the media still insist Trump is at fault because, as Rutenberg maintained, “these protests wouldn’t be happening if Trump hadn’t stolen the election from Secretary Clinton. There might have been some anti-Clinton demonstrations, but it is unlikely that the kind of behavior we have seen from the Antifa movement—masked men throwing rocks and bottles, brandishing cudgels, and smashing property would have been so prevalent.”

“We have to ask ourselves whether the civil disruption that has emerged in the wake of Trump’s victory isn’t sufficient reason to reverse the election results via more peaceful mechanisms,” Toobin suggested. “Removing Trump through impeachment or the 25th Amendment may be necessary if we are to dampen down the kind of street violence that threatens the domestic tranquility our Constitution was established to ensure.”

53 Democrats Denounce Sessions’ Policy on Sanctuary Cities

Fifty-three Democratic members of the House and Senate signed a letter of protest against Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ plan to withhold federal law-enforcement aid from cities that flout US immigration laws.

Signer Sen. Dick Durbin (Ill) complained that “Sessions is only making a bad situation worse. Even with the federal aid Chicago is a virtual combat zone with dozens of shootings every week. He should be backing gun-control legislation, not insisting on the enforcement of immigration laws that would end up deporting felons who are in the country illegally.”

Sessions called the letter “an endorsement of illegality. We have laws that prescribe the approved procedures for persons to enter this country. If these senators and representatives have objections to these laws the proper way for them to respond is to work to repeal them, not to support local governments that defy these laws. The number of incidents where cities have shielded illegal aliens from this law only to see these people go on to commit heinous crimes ought to have given pause to their rash demand that we continue to tolerate the ill-considered practice of coddling these threats to the safety of law-abiding citizens.”

Durbin countered Sessions by pointing out that “not all the crimes committed by those given sanctuary can be accurately described as heinous. Many are mere crimes against property. In other instances the victims survive the attempted murder or assault. Even when they don’t survive, the toll taken by those shielded by sanctuary is small compared to the carnage perpetrated by native citizens.”

Pelosi Calls for Crackdown on “Dangerous Speech”

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif) demanded that “we be more selective in what kind of remarks people are allowed to make in public. I’m generally in favor of freedom of speech, but some statements and points of view are so far outside the bounds of respectable opinion that they present a clear and present danger.”

She went on to elaborate by analogy, saying “you can’t shout ‘wolf’ in a crowded theater because everyone knows there is no wolf. If we don’t suppress these bogus cries then one day when there really is a wolf no one will believe it. At that point people will be attacked without recourse. Our only option then will be to have FEMA distribute food and blankets to the victims.”

While the Minority Leader’s statement struck many as “confused and possibly demented” a spokesperson for the long-time member of congress explained that “what she was trying to say is that statements by President Trump and his supporters are inherently dangerous. Questioning policies of his predecessors undermines people’s faith in their government. Questioning the media’s coverage of the Trump Administration undermines people’s faith in the news. If these two pillars of our way of life are knocked down it would be the equivalent of exposing us all to being devoured by wolves.”

Germany to Remain Neutral in Possible US-NK War

Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany has told the US Government “not to count on Germany’s support in any potential armed conflict with North Korea.”

“I don’t see how Germany would gain from allying itself with the United States in such a conflict,” Merkel said. “North Korea is far away and poses no direct threat to us. The United States’ military would most likely crush the under-fed North Korean Army with ease. If the unimaginable happens and North Korea somehow wins, our stance of neutrality will reduce the incentive for them to turn on us.”

The Chancellor also admitted to an emotional component stemming from World War II, saying that “it wasn’t Koreans who mercilessly bombed every city in Germany, sank virtually our entire navy, shot down virtually every aircraft in the Luftwaffe, and sent millions of troops into my country in 1945. It was the United States and its allies. Germans have far more reason for antipathy toward America than they do toward North Korea. If Germany were to fight anyone, my gut tells me that it ought to be the Americans.”

Merkel also complained that “President Trump’s insistence that we must honor our NATO obligations is an added grievance. No previous American president made such a demand. We haven’t budgeted for these obligations. The wisdom of our frugality has been born out by the lack of any military attacks on our country during the entire time of the NATO alliance. By assuming a position of neutrality we’re hoping that Mr. Trump gets the message that we will not be pressured into fulfilling these unnecessary obligations.”

Study Shows More Registered Voters than Adult Citizens

Data from the U.S. Census Bureau analyzed by Judicial Watch’s Election Integrity Project found that there are 3.5 million more registered voters in America than there are citizens if voting age. More than 40% of these “ghost voters” were found in two California counties—700,000 in Los Angeles County and 800,000 in San Diego County.

Of course, not every citizen eligible to vote actually registers to vote. So, the potential over-registration is even larger than these figures imply. The potential for election fraud would seem to be huge. Nevertheless, Democrats adamantly deny that any significant fraud is taking place. The Brennan Center for Justice contends that it has conclusively proven that allegations of widespread fraud are “baseless.” And the New York Times asserts that “there is essentially no voter fraud in America.”

Given the confidence that Democratic partisans have that there is no election fraud it is puzzling that they hold such animosity toward President Trump’s Election Integrity Panel. If the evidence is so overwhelmingly against the idea that fraud exists wouldn’t the Panel end up confirming their contention?

California Secretary of State Alex Padilla rejected the need for investigation saying “it makes as much sense as the Administration’s suggestion that global warming be the topic of a policy debate. It seems that every informed person but Trump knows that global warming is proven science. Likewise, every properly informed person but Trump knows there is no election fraud. Bucking this consensus is a waste of time and money.”
Padilla explained the apparent over-registration endemic in his state as “an enigmatic anomaly. Even if we could figure out why there are millions of bogus registrations there is no proof that any of these resulted in ballots being cast.”

The absence of “proof” may owe a lot to procedures barring use of photo IDs as a step toward verifying the identity of those casting ballots at the polls or by mail. Even the matching of signatures on mailed ballots with signatures on voter registration forms has been challenged by the ACLU as “disenfranchising.”

ACLU spokesman Bertram Petty said “requiring a voter to prove his or her identity is humiliating. It puts procedural technicalities ahead of the obvious truth that a human being has a natural right to elect those who rule him. To deny a person the right to vote because he doesn’t reside in the district or isn’t a citizen is a violation of his human rights. So, what we are saying is that, in the big picture, all the ID rigamarole is aimed at suppressing the vote.”

In related news, Richard Robert Rawling, a former elections worker in North Carolina, was indicted for altering vote totals by running ballots through the counting machine multiple times during a primary election in March 2016. In his defense, Rawling maintained that “I wasn’t trying to favor any candidate. I was just trying to make sure that the results of the provisional canvass would match the number of approved provisional ballots. Otherwise, I’d have had to fill out a discrepancy report. That would’ve made me look bad and could have cast doubt on the reported election outcome.”

A Satirical Look at Recent News

John Semmens is a retired economist who has written a weekly political satire for The Arizona Conservative since 2005. He says working on his satires is one of the ways he tries to honor the liberties our Founding Fathers tried to protect.

Please do us a favor. If you use material created by The Arizona Conservative, give us credit and DO NOT change the context. Thank you.

Congresswoman Has Plan to Avert War with North Korea

By John Semmens — Semi-News — A Satirical Look at Recent News

JohnRep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif) has a simple plan for deescalating tensions between the U.S. and North Korea: “give them what they want.” She acknowledged that “we may not know specifically what that is, but surely it has to be a better option than going to war.”

“Look, Korea is a small, far away country,” Waters observed. “From what I understand it is a very poor place. We could probably feed, house, and clothe everyone in it for less than it would cost to bomb them. If we could ensure Kim that all the material needs of his people could easily be met via a generous foreign aid package, what reason would he have for wanting nuclear weapons?”

In support of her recommendation, the Congresswoman cited “the pacifying effects that our domestic welfare program has had upon the poor in our own country. We don’t see any of them trying to get nuclear weapons or threatening to turn America into ashes. I’d say this experience provides the guidance we need to construct a more successful foreign policy.”

Former President Barack Obama’s National Security adviser, Susan Rice, hailed Waters’ suggestion, calling it “a breath of fresh air. As both Presidents Clinton and Obama realized, a nuclear armed North Korea would be in a better position to demand social justice from the West. The disproportionate distribution of wealth that currently exists between our two countries needs to be rectified. The ability of North Korea to do serious damage to the United States is a key element in forcing a long overdue reallocation. That Trump would attempt to turn this leverage into an excuse for a military response that would defend an unjust status quo is a crime against humanity.”

Judge Bars Defendant from Testifying

U.S. District Judge Gloria Navarro barred Eric Parker from mentioning the First Amendment after he took the stand to testify in his own defense in a trial stemming from the 2014 Bunkerville standoff in which ranchers confronted Bureau of Land Management officers in a dispute over grazing rights.

“Once a duly authorized law enforcement action is underway the First Amendment guarantees of freedom of assembly and freedom of speech no longer apply,” Navarro ruled. “Allowing a jury to hear these words would only serve to undermine the respect for authority that is essential to an orderly enforcement of the decisions made by government officials.”

The Judge also cited “the need to avoid another hung jury in this case. If we allow the defense to raise issues that I have determined aren’t pertinent to the case we could end up in the same quandary where some jurors might elevate their uninformed opinions about freedom of speech and assembly above the instructions from the bench to consider only whether the defendants did or didn’t obey the lawful commands of the Bureau.”

Since one of the “lawful commands” forbade video taping of the confrontation, recordings that the defense contends demonstrate the peaceful intent and behavior of the defendants will not be shown to the jury.

Mysterious Death Ruled “Suicide”

In May of this year, federal prosecutor Beranton Whisenant’s body was found on a Hollywood, Florida beach with a gunshot wound to the head. Three months later, the Hollywood Police Department has ruled the death a suicide. Whisenant worked for the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Miami in its major crimes unit. He was handling several visa and passport fraud cases in the congressional district represented by beleaguered former Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

Oddly, no weapon was recovered at or near the scene. Chief of Police Tomas Sanchez admitted that “the absence of a weapon near the body would seem suspicious to non-professionals. However, there could be a number of logical explanations. One possibility is that rising sea levels caused by global warming could have washed the firearm away. Another is that Mr. Whisenant swam out a ways before he shot himself and the gun is still out there somewhere.”

Sanchez brushed off contentions from family members that Whisenant had shown no signs of depression and had even seemed enthusiastic about “reeling in some big fish” in his investigation. “A person can be depressed without anyone knowing,” Sanchez said. “I just heard that vegetarians are more likely to be depressed than meat-eaters. Perhaps Mr. Whisenant was a vegetarian.”

CAIR Defends McMaster

The Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) rallied to the defense of National Security Council (NSC) adviser Gen. H.R. McMaster this week. McMaster has come under some criticism for purging the NSC of individuals he maintains were “overly focused on an illusory Islamic threat.” These included Ezra Cohen-Watnick, the NSC’s senior director for intelligence programs; Rich Higgins, the NSC’s director for strategic planning; and Derek Harvey, the NSC’s senior director for the Middle East.

Ibrahim Hooper, National Communications Director for CAIR, blamed “agents of the Zionist conspiracy for world domination” for what he characterized as “vicious attacks on an honorable man. President Trump is clearly a tool of this conspiracy. His failure to denounce the Jewish occupation of Muslim lands and his verbal support for the Israeli oppression of non-Jews throughout the Middle East mark him as an enemy of Allah.”
For his part, McMaster justified his purge saying that “we cannot build bridges to the adherents of Islam if they see that we have the apologists for Jewish aggression within our government. By cleansing our councils of these troublesome elements we will win the appreciation and, I hope, the friendship of the Muslim community.”

“What a lot of Trump’s supporters overlook is the strategic advantage of aligning with the much larger contingent of Muslims vs. the much smaller Jewish segment of the global population,” McMaster said. “There are more than a billion Muslims. There are only 12 million Jews. An alliance with the former is numerically superior to an alliance with the latter. President Obama understood this. I would be derelict in my duty if I didn’t do everything in my power to protect that strategic decision from being overturned by an ill-informed outsider.”

Document Dump Casts Doubt on Official Version of Tarmac Meeting

Documents obtained through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request cast a long shadow of doubt over the official version of events surrounding the “chance meeting” between former President Bill Clinton and Obama Administration Attorney General Loretta Lynch in June 2016.

The official story that the meeting was a random occurrence and that the discussion was an innocent chat about grandchildren and golf was severely damaged by correspondence among Department of Justice personnel. For one, the correspondence was heavily redacted. Redaction is justified when sensitive personal data (like Social Security numbers or home addresses) or classified information might be exposed. There is no legal justification for redacting innocent chatter about grandchildren and golf scores.

On top of this, a lot of the content dealt with the development of “talking points” aimed at putting the proper “spin” on the meeting for public consumption. In this correspondence, AG Lynch used an alias. Why the DOJ would need to invest so much time and effort to develop talking points about an innocent meeting or why the AG would need to use a fake name remains unanswered, as does FBI Director James Comey’s inclusion in the loop.

A week after this “chance meeting” and following the correspondence, Comey announced that Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton would not be prosecuted for her “extremely careless handling of classified information.” Comey insisted that his untruthful denial that any such correspondence existed “was due to my embarrassment at being inadvertently ‘cced’ on such an intimately private conversation” and that “no one can prove the correspondence had anything to do with my decision.”

At this point, perhaps the biggest mystery is why the Trump Administration DOJ redacted so much of the “innocent” content of the correspondence. So far, no one is talking, but the rumor is that AG Jeff Sessions has “recused himself out of respect for the privacy of his predecessor” and allowed holdovers from the Lynch regime to decide what needed to be redacted.

Trump’s “Excessive Expectations” Rile Senator

Chafing at President Trump’s very public display of frustration with the failure of the Senate to pass health insurance reform, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ken) blamed “excessive expectations.”

“Frankly, the President is out of his depth on this,” McConnell maintained. “He comes from a business milieu where the emphasis is on action and results. In government the emphasis is on process.”

The Majority Leader offered to “explain the process in terms that even Mr. Trump can understand. In the Senate we have agreements that both Parties abide by. All the repeals of Obamacare that we passed were guaranteed to be vetoed by President Obama. That’s the only reason the Democrats let us pass these repeals. They could have easily filibustered and kept us from getting the 60 votes needed to stop debate. By promising to sign a repeal bill President Trump forced us to come up with another path that would be acceptable to the Democrats. That path required that several Republicans switch their previous votes for repeal to against repeal.”

McConnell expressed his disappointment that “Sen. McCain rising from his virtual deathbed to cast the deciding vote didn’t provide a greater respite from the unreasonable demands of an inexperienced and ill-informed outsider. I would think that the drama of a mortally-wounded hero making a last stand would’ve bought us some time to relax from the onerous burdens of lawmaking for a while.”

The Senator also dismissed the President’s pleas that he get back to work. “What he needs to understand is that he can’t make us do anything we don’t want to do,” McConnell asserted. “And if he keeps insulting and bullying us like he has been to Sen. Blumenthal, well we might find that to be the sort of high crime or misdemeanor requiring his removal from office.”

In contrast to the lack of legislative results in Congress, it was announced that the executive branch under Trump has reduced business regulatory costs by 90% compared to rules issued by the Obama Administration. McConnell warned that “the untimely release of this information will only further aggravate the already antagonistic relationship between the President and the Senate. This does not help his case for remaining in office.”

In related news, the prospect of being impeached is mild compared to the prediction by ex-FBI and CIA operative Phil Mudd that “they are going to kill this guy because he doesn’t support them. His joke about Russia saving us money by sending our spies home is likely the last straw. Remember what happened to Kennedy after he threatened to tear the CIA apart? Well, I think Trump has signed his own death warrant as far as these expert assassins in our government are concerned.”

Clinton’s Pastor Says Hillary’s Loss Worst Injustice Since Christ’s Crucifixion

Methodist minister Bill Shillady compared Hillary Clinton’s loss to Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election to the crucifixion of Jesus Christ and concluded that “it was the second worst instance of injustice in human history. In both cases we saw exemplary paragons of virtue punished for the sins of others.”

Shillady predicted “a Hell on Earth under the demon that is Donald Trump,” but offered a ray of hope that “the forces of righteousness will triumph in the end. Right now, true believers are working assiduously to unseat the unholy Trump and clear the way for the ascension of God’s chosen candidate.”

A Satirical Look at Recent News

John Semmens is a retired economist who has written a weekly political satire for The Arizona Conservative since 2005. He says working on his satires is one of the ways he tries to honor the liberties our Founding Fathers tried to protect.

Please do us a favor. If you use material created by The Arizona Conservative, give us credit and DO NOT change the context. Thank you.

 

‘Legacy’ Legislation to Honor McCain Proposed

By John Semmens — Semi-News — A Satirical Look at Recent News

JohnFresh off his crucial vote to kill the repeal of Obamacare, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) is now working with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) to craft what McCain called “a fitting legacy to honor my service to the country and Senate over my lifetime.”

The bill they are drafting is a revival of the so-called “Gang of Eight” measure passed by the Senate in 2013, but rejected by the House. It would give a path to citizenship to most illegal immigrants, greatly increase the number of visas to allow companies to replace American workers with foreigners and greatly increase the number of legal immigrants who would be eligible to enter the country over the next 30 years.

Schumer suggested that “the new law might be dubbed ‘McCainesty’ as way to help people remember the man we are honoring with this crucial reform to our immigration policy. Considering the dire health of Sen. McCain, his good friend Sen. Graham (R-SC) has reluctantly agreed to surrender his long-held claimed right to name the policy change ‘Grahamnesty.’”

McCain compared his proposal with the immigration bill recently unveiled by the Trump Administration, calling it “a glaring contrast between a stance of selfishness and generosity. Trump wants to restrict immigration to protect already rich Americans from having to share our nation’s wealth with those less fortunate. This is not the America I want to leave behind when I’m gone. I want an America that lives up to the Statue of Liberty’s promise to house the homeless, wretched masses yearning to eat free.”

The Senator cited the $1.3 billion in welfare paid to illegal immigrants by Los Angeles County over the last two years as “a down payment on our historic promise. Our new bill will remove barriers to an even greater fulfillment of the dream of a more equitable redistribution of the Earth’s bounty and take us further toward President Obama’s vision of a transformed world.”

Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti endorsed the McCain-Schumer initiative as “a demonstration of common sense. In theory, the redistribution could be accomplished by sending our wealth to other countries. It would be more practical, though, to let the beneficiaries come here. Not only will they spend a greater portion of the welfare in the local community, they’ll also be present to cast the votes needed to elect those who will work to continue the transformation.”

Senators Want to Strengthen Independence of Special Counsel

Sens. Thom Tillis (R-NC) and Chris Coons (D-Del) are proposing legislation that would bar anyone from firing or in any way impeding Robert Mueller, the special counsel appointed to investigate President Trump and his associates for winning the 2016 presidential election.

“It is critical that special counsels have the independence and resources they need to lead investigations,” Tillis said. “Mueller can’t be independent if he can be fired by anyone in the chain of command in the executive branch of government. He can’t be independent if he must rely on congress for appropriations. He can’t be independent if he must rely on a court or jury to validate his prosecutions.”

Jay Sekulow, one of President Trump’s lawyers, blasted the proposed legislation as “unconstitutional. Ours is a representative government. What Sen. Tillis and Coons are proposing is to create an omnipotent new office within the federal government. They would immunize Mueller from any executive oversight. They would enable him to dip into the treasury for any amount of money he deems necessary.”

Coons rallied to the defense of his senate colleague, pointing out that “the premise that Trump represents the people is belied by the fact that he didn’t win the popular vote. Every member of congress did win the popular vote in his state or district. It is our prerogative to transfer whatever powers we deem appropriate to whom ever we want.

Much of the legislating that is now done in this country is by executive agencies that congress has empowered to make laws. In our view, setting a man with an untarnished record of integrity like Robert Mueller above and outside the normal processes that are suggested in the Constitution is a clear improvement over the governance we see incompetently emerging from the Trump Administration on a daily basis.”

Poll Results Addle Dem Leader

A poll conducted for Minority Leader Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif) by her “House Majority PAC” produced consternation and confusion for this top Democrat. For one, the poll found that the political ideologies of voters were 41% conservative, 32% moderate and 19% liberal, with 37% identifying as Independents, 35% as Republicans and 29% as Democrats. For two, among white working class voters 69% favored policies that reward hard work.

“These findings make no sense,” Pelosi argued. “Surely leisure is preferred over hard work. The Democratic Party has enacted measures that have expanded the opportunities for people to leave the workforce and still be able to live comfortably. There’s public housing, food stamps, cell phones—all supplied gratis by laws and regulations we’ve championed. The liberal and Democratic cohorts among voters should be expanding, especially among the undocumented portion of the population.”

The Congresswoman speculated that “perhaps the life of leisure we’ve provided has insidiously sapped the energy and initiative of those whose votes are crucial for our Party to continue to win elections. We think asking the beneficiaries to cast a vote is a small effort, but maybe once we’ve removed the effort required to support oneself from the equation even the minimal task of marking a ballot may seem too arduous.”

“Even worse, our new slogan–‘a better deal: better jobs, better wages, better future’–seems to have backfired,” Pelosi lamented. “In the six months since Trump became president the economic data has been awful. There are more better-paying jobs and lower unemployment than anyone expected. Welfare rolls are shrinking. Fewer are living on food stamps. It’s as if Trump’s view is being vindicated.”

In related news, a recent poll conducted by the Pew Research Center found that 61% say the Democratic Party “too often sees government as the only way to solve problems.” Unsurprisingly, this view was held by 83% of registered Republicans. Less expected was the finding that 44% of registered Democrats agreed. This perception of the Party as an advocate for statism is probably best encapsulated by Connecticut Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy’s statement that “there is no anxiety, sadness, or fear that cannot be cured by political action.”

Felons Vying to Be Detroit’s Mayor

Half of the eight candidates for mayor on Detroit’s primary ballot have been previously convicted criminals. Donna Marie Pitts has multiple felony convictions dating back to 1977. Danetta Simpson has a 1996 felony conviction for assault with intent to murder. Articia Bomer was charged in 2008 with carrying a concealed weapon. In 2004, Curtis Christopher Greene was sentenced to 18 months’ probation under the Holmes Youthful Trainee Act for dealing marijuana and in 2005 plead guilty to writing a fraudulent check.

Pitts called her conviction stemming from a shoot out at an auto repair shop “an honest disagreement over the bill. Both sides were armed. Sending me to jail was bogus.” She says she is running to “stamp out the kind of discrimination and racism that wrecked my life.”

Simpson got into a dispute with a woman who was living with the father of two of her four children, pulled out a gun and fired a shot that missed hitting the other woman. She contends that she was “wrongfully convicted. No one was hurt. How is that an assault with intent? If I had intended to kill the bitch the bullet would’ve been in her head.” She says she is running to offer voters “someone new and different.”

Bomer was charged in 2008 with carrying a concealed weapon. “Overly suspicious” police approached her while she was sitting in a parked car and found a loaded gun in the vehicle. Bomer denied that it was hers, but was convicted during a bench trial in January 2009 and sentenced to a year of probation. She says she is running on a platform of “preservation, restoration and revitalization.”

Greene contends that “my youthful indiscretions shouldn’t be held against me. I have a seven point plan to rebuild Detroit. It addresses jobs, discriminatory lending and access to meaningful employment for convicted felons. I believe I’m the one to change the city.”
Whether any of the former felons will be able to win over the four other candidates—incumbent Mayor Mike Duggan, state Sen. Coleman A. Young II, Edward Dean and Angelo Brown—that do not have criminal records seems improbable. However, this election is the first since the City went bankrupt under the governance on non-felon Democrats over the last five decades.

In related news, Fayetteville, N.C. Mayoral candidate Quancidine Gribble has been arrested twice in the last two months for stealing and vandalizing a water company’s equipment. Gribble, a philosophy student, community activist and charity leader, contends that “water is a basic human need. No business has the right withhold it from the people. My action to liberate it from their control so it could flow freely to those who need it is simple social justice.”

Trump Threat an “Impeachable Offense”

After the failure of the Senate to repeal Obamacare, a frustrated President Trump’s threat to reverse President Obama’s executive action exempting members of congress from having to live under the same regulations that apply to ordinary citizens forced into Obamacare brought howls of rage from Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT).

“We are members of government,” Murphy fulminated. “For Trump to vindictively throw us into the pit with the common people violates the unwritten rule against one segment of this elite group harming the privileges of another. It would renege on the bipartisanship exhibited by President Obama in even handedly extending the exemption to congressional Democrats and Republicans alike.”

“Trump may think he’s immune from retaliation, but he should think again,” the Senator advised. “The House has the power to impeach and the Senate has the power to convict. The Constitutional grounds for impeachment are vague and unspecified. Let me remind Mr. Trump that Congress has the sole prerogative of determining what constitutes a satisfactory cause for his removal from office.”

A Satirical Look at Recent News
John Semmens is a retired economist who has written a weekly political satire for The Arizona Conservative since 2005. He says working on his satires is one of the ways he tries to honor the liberties our Founding Fathers tried to protect.

Please do us a favor. If you use material created by The Arizona Conservative, give us credit and DO NOT change the context. Thank you.

Sen. Flake Thinks Selling His ‘Conservative’ Book to Chris Mathews is a Good Idea

By Curtis Houck, Newsbusters | August 1, 2017

While on his book tour, Republican Senator Jeff Flake (Ariz.) stopped by Tuesday’s Hardball for an interview in which host Chris Matthews heaped effusive praise on Flake’s book Conscience of a Conservative as one that’s not only “tough” and “hard-hitting” on the GOP and President Trump, but a “very compelling” one too.

Flake strangely didn’t wade too deep into slamming Trump and the party’s voters as he did in previous interviews, but it was nonetheless a friendly segment in which his comments were no different than if Nicolle Wallace or Steve Schmidt were instead sitting next to Matthews.

Right from the get-go, Matthews set the tone:

With the publication of the new book today, Senator Jeff Flake of Arizona has quickly emerged as the most outspoken Republican critic of president Donald Trump. And he makes it clear he blames his own party for enabling Trump’s rise to power. Well, with the title borrowed from former Senator Barry Goldwater, the book is called Conscience of a Conservative: A Rejection of Destructive Politics and a Return to Principle.

After the interview started with a pointed back-and-forth about whether Trump is the leader of the Republican Party, Matthews teed up Flake by asking “what’s wrong with Trump.” 

Flake flaunted himself as Goldwater (and, by extension, L. Brent Bozell II) when the latter wrote the original Conscience of a Conservative:

I talk about it in the book. Barry Goldwater in 1960 thought that the conservative party, the Republican Party had been compromised by the New Deal. And so he wrote Conscience of a Conservative. I think today we’ve been compromised by other forces. Protectionism, you know, populism and I don’t think those bode well in the long term. That’s not a government policy.

Eventually, Matthews expressed disappointment with how the interview was going but not the book, declaring he’s “fascinated with how tough you are on Donald Trump.” 

“Very hard hitting on Trump. Demagoguery is the word you used. Populism, protectionism, you used all the tough words and you don’t like them. You don’t think this President is good for the country, do you,” Matthews wondered.

Flake noted that he’s backed Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch and Trump’s “great…cabinet picks” yet “where I think that he’s profoundly unconservative is on things like free trade.”

Matthews then continued to sit by as Flake offered red meat for viewers:

FLAKE: I mean, that’s something that we can’t abandon as Republicans. We are decidedly less conservative if we do so and also, being conservative on policy is just part of it. You’ve to be conservative in demeanor as well. Conservatives —

MATTHEWS: Is he?

FLAKE: — a conservative — No. Conservative foreign policy ought to be measured and deliberate and sober and that’s not what we have today.

Despite it having been at least five to six years after Trump’s despicable birtherism crusade against Barack Obama, Matthews gushed over how Flake spent time on this subject in his book.

“I think it is a tough, well-written book and I just want to keep you to it. Anyway, a portion of your book focuses on conservative conspiracy theories and the recent spread of fake news. Most notably, you criticized those who pushed the false notion that Barack Obama wasn’t born in the U.S.,” Matthews explained before reading two book excerpts.

“To me, the original sin was saying Barack Obama was born in Kenya or whatever and denying he was a legitimate President, calling him sort of a con-artist. That was, to me, racist in its nature, to claim the guy’s not a true American when he was clearly, to make fun of his documentation to say he was sort of an illegal immigrant. I think you’re dead right on that. I don’t understand why your party went along with it,” an appreciative Matthews added.

At the end of the interview, the longtime liberal pundit and former aide to Jimmy Carter and Tip O’Neil argued that Flake’s book contained the “same principles” as Goldwater’s Conscience of a Conservative. Media Research Center president Brent Bozell would probably disagree with that, as per his statement earlier Tuesday.

He also predicted that “everybody’s going to talk about this book” seeing as how “it’s a tough, hard-hitting book” and “very compelling.” 

To be honest, Matthews’s asinine claim of “everybody” falling for this book should just be contained to The New York Times, MSNBC hosts, failed GOP campaign officials, and adoring liberal elites on the East and West coasts.

Senator Flake, You’re No Conservative

By Newsbusters Staff | August 1, 2017

On Tuesday, August 1, Media Research Center President Brent Bozell issued the following statement: On behalf of my late father and my family, I am denouncing Senator Jeff Flake and his new book, dishonestly titled, Conscience of a Conservative.

Since entering the Senate in 2013, Jeff Flake has, time and again, proven he is part of the indulgent hypocrisy in Washington. While he waxes poetically about conservative principles, his Conservative Review Liberty score is an abysmal 53%, also known as: “F”. In 2013, I watched first-hand as Flake refused to sign a letter pledging to defund ObamaCare, among his many betrayals to conservatism. Jeff Flake is neither a conservative nor does he have a conscience.

As every conservative leader knows, my father, L. Brent Bozell, Jr., ghost-wrote Conscience of a Conservative for Barry Goldwater. While the Goldwater Institute may own the rights to the book’s title, neither the organization nor Senator Flake have the right to unjustifiably trade on my father’s work. Conscience of a Conservative is the greatest selling polemic in history, and Senator Flake is trading on its reputation to shamelessly promote himself and disguise his own conservative deficiencies. My father would be appalled to see this fraud as the author of the so-called “sequel,” which it most certainly is not.

The media need to know, when reporting on Senator Flake and his “book,” that the author is a deceiver out for personal and financial gain.  I also call on my conservative brethren to denounce this impostor, who dishonorably claims to speak for conservatism, in the strongest possible terms.

McCain Kills GOP Health Care Bill

By John Semmens — Semi-News — A Satirical Look at Recent News

JohnJust days after receiving brain surgery to remove a malignant tumor, Sen. John McCain (R-Az) returned to the Senate in time to cast his vote killing the so-called “skinny” repeal of Obamacare. McCain joined fellow Republicans Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) and Susan Collins (Maine) to vote with all 48 Democrats for a 51-49 margin against the bill.

The Senator cited “bipartisanship” as his primary motivation. “The original Obamacare legislation was enacted without a single Republican vote, he pointed out. “For us to repeal any part of it without a single Democratic vote would only continue to spur rancor between the aisles of congress.” McCain said he was “confident that my reach across the aisle on this day will inspire both sides to work together for the good of the American people.”

McCain acknowledged that the “skinny” repeal “would have offered some relief to those suffering from the high premiums and high deductibles Obamacare has inflicted on them, but it wouldn’t have solved all of the ACA’s deficiencies. Worse, it would have sent us back toward a system where individuals would be left free to choose not to buy insurance or to buy plans that do not require the coverage of essential services like gender reassignment surgery. The imprudent may think they don’t need this option, but if we allow them to bypass paying for this coverage they’ll be left holding the bag if the itch to switch ever strikes them.”

“We all know that Obamacare has its faults,” McCain continued. “Fortunately, essential personnel working in government are exempt and have been awarded superior coverage by President Obama’s executive order. This puts members of congress in a position to exercise judgment without the pressures and biases that would accompany any decision that had a direct effect on our own health. It is my hope that a leisurely and dispassionate discussion between Republicans and Democrats will produce a comprehensive reform.”

A teary-eyed Senate Minority Leader praised McCain’s vote. Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) called it “the most courageous act I have ever personally witnessed. He has sacrificed his political future to rescue former President Obama’s signature legacy. His stand for bipartisanship will forever protect the Affordable Care Act from repeal or adulteration as long as Democrats remain solidly against every GOP attempt to alter it.”

Deputy Chairman of the Democratic Nation Committee Rep. Keith Ellison (Minn) vowed tobe one of those Democrats and “stand strong against Republican efforts to derail the progress President Obama has bestowed upon America. We need a truly comprehensive health care system like they’ve had in Cuba for the last 50 years. And I won’t rest until we do.”

Meanwhile, former House Speaker John Behner (R-Ohio) and former Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va) admitted that “all the votes to repeal Obamacare while Obama was president were just for show. We knew he would veto whatever we passed. The Democrats in the senate cooperated by refraining from filibustering the repeal. We placated our base. The Democrats got to portray us as cold-hearted bastards. It was a win-win for both Parties.”

In related news, the death of 11-month-old Charlie Gard after the UK’s National Health Service went to court to prevent his parents from seeking medical treatment outside the country presented a preview of what a fully functioning single-payer health insurance system might deliver to the United States. The gist of the NHS’ objection to Gard’s parents spending their own money to treat him was that “scarce resources must be allocated by society, not individuals. The notion that his parents owned the resources they raised and could use them to selfishly benefit their own child is the evil that socialism must continually oppose.”

Dems’ IT Guy Arrested

This week, Imran Awan, one of a trio of brothers hired by the Democratic National Committee to handle the computers and other devices used by key Democrats on the House Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence was arrested trying to flee the country. News of the arrest prompted former DNC chairwoman Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (Fla) to fire Awan, but she warned investigators there would be “consequences” if the laptop seized from him by police was not promptly returned to her. “The lap top is mine. I am a member of congress. I have immunity from prosecution.”

Despite her assertion of immunity, Wasserman-Shultz is reportedly in a state of high anxiety over “this unprecedented persecution” and is said to have complained to friends that “We followed all the normal security procedures. We smashed the devices. We deleted the emails. We threatened the police to back off. We did everything Hillary did, but I’m still under the gun. The double-standard I’m seeing here is so unfair.”

Former prosecutor and Chairman of the House Oversight Committee, Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC), observed that “smashing devices and deleting emails rarely erases all evidence of criminal activities. Anyone who has watched the TV show ‘Forensic Files’ knows that investigators have been able to recover content from ‘destroyed devices’ and ‘erased files’ that has led to the conviction of numerous murderers and other felons.”

Gowdy also suggested that “the recent arrest of Mr. Awan also sheds a more sinister light on Rep. Wasserman-Schultz’s remarks about cutting the budget of the DC Police. What might ordinarily be merely a fiscal issue starts to look like extortion when coupled with a demand that a certain line of inquiry ought to be discontinued.”

The DC Police have been unsuccessfully “investigating” the murder of DNC staffer Seth Rich for more than a year. Rich, a Bernie Sanders supporter, is suspected of being the person who sent DNC emails exposing how Wasserman-Schultz worked to rig the Democratic primary election for Hillary Clinton to Wikileaks.

Meanwhile, Awan’s attorney blamed “Islamophobia” for the arrest of his client. “We are asserting the affirmative defense that since Mr. Awan was acting under the direction of a member of congress her immunity covers any and all crimes he may have committed at her behest. Should this defense be rejected we will be pleading ‘cultural ignorance.’ In Mr. Awan’s native land, what American law may regard as illegal is allowed under the traditional practice of baksheesh. Mr. Awan was the subordinate of a powerful American governmental official. He should not be held criminally liable for accepting money to do as he was told by a person who he trusted to know American law.”

County Has Thousandss of Voters Older than 100

Examination of the registered voter rolls in Broward County, Florida revealed that there are thousands of voters over 100 years of age, including several over 130 years old. The Public Interest Legal Foundation (PILF) filed a lawsuit accusing the Broward County supervisor of elections, Brenda Snipes, of dereliction of duty.

“This quantity of centenarians on the voter rolls is actuarially improbable,” argued Logan Churchwell, the head researcher for PILF. “This improbability alone should have spurred the elections officials to scrutinize the data and purge deceased voters from the lists.”

Snipes countered by asserting “I am no mathematician and should not be held accountable for such calculations. Besides, our records show a consistent casting of ballots by every one of these elderly voters. I am not going to insult them by assuming they’re dead or that even if they are they shouldn’t have ballots cast in their name. For all we know, their wills may have directed their heirs to continue to perform the civic duty of voting for them as a condition of receiving their inheritance.”

Churchwell called Snipes’ response “inane. A person cannot will his vote to an heir. The fact that there are more registered voters in the county than there are persons of voting age as recorded by the census is prima facie evidence of a problem. Illegally casting votes for the dead is fraud. Failure to address this fraud makes Ms. Snipes an accomplice.”

Votes cast by dead people aren’t the only possible source of fraud in Florida. There are 180,000 non-citizens with driver’s licenses whose names also appear as registered voters. Snipes insisted that “this is not my responsibility. The Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles (DHSMV) is registering these people to vote.”

DHSMV Director Terry Rhodes explained that “the courts have barred us from requiring that those registering to vote must show proof of US citizenship. We do indicate whether or not the person registering has checked the citizen box. The 180,000 non-citizens on the voter rolls shows the number who did not check that box. We have no way of knowing how many non-citizens falsely claimed to be citizens by wrongfully checking that box.”

In related news, a quick survey by the Government Accountability Institute (GAI) found 8,000+ instances of “double voting”–ballots cast by the same individual in more than one venue during the same election. These were votes by individuals with the identical first and last name, middle initial, birth date, and partial Social Security number. “There can be little doubt that these were illegally cast votes,” said the GAI’s Peter Schweizer. “Considering that our scan did not include probable duplicate votes where an individual may have omitted a middle initial or used a different last name (say a birth name in one venue and a married name in another), the number of duplicate votes is likely far higher than our study indicated.”

“Allah Is Gay” Sign Banned

London police barred Britain’s Council of Ex-Muslims (CEMB) from displaying their “Allah is gay” sign in the City’s annual gay pride parade. Police did allow a “Jesus is gay” sign to be displayed.

London Mayor Sadiq Khan explained that “calling Allah gay is a slander that cannot be tolerated. Anyone who has read the Quran can clearly see that Allah is NOT gay. In fact, in the Quran Allah prescribes death for homosexuals. A proclamation that Allah is gay is obviously untrue.”

Khan contrasted the clarity of Islam’s stance on homosexuality with what he characterized as “the ambiguity of Christianity on this issue. First, you have the ‘cast no stone’ doctrine, which implies that the sin of homosexuality should be forgiven. Second, Jesus never married and spent an inordinate amount of time closeted with a dozen men as he roamed around preaching his message. Mohammed took on numerous wives and inseminated many infidel women as Allah bid him to do. Finally, we see that Pope Francis has refused to publicly condemn homosexuality saying ‘who am I to judge.’ So, it is not unreasonable to suspect that Jesus may have been gay. Banners that express that suspicion are possibly true and, thus, protected freedom of speech.”

In related news, a study conducted in Denmark discovered that children of immigrants have attitudes that are more favorable toward Islamic violence than their parents. This finding was interpreted as supporting German Chancellor Angela Merkel's determination “to never limit the number of immigrants coming to our country from the Middle East. Clearly, we need the moderating influence of recent arrivals to dilute the murderous impulses of the children of earlier
immigrants.”

A Satirical Look at Recent News
John Semmens is a retired economist who has written a weekly political satire for The Arizona Conservative since 2005. He says working on his satires is one of the ways he tries to honor the liberties our Founding Fathers tried to protect.

Please do us a favor. If you use material created by The Arizona Conservative, give us credit and DO NOT change the context. Thank you.

McCain Kills Obamacare Repeal

By Tom Howell Jr. – The Washington Times – Friday, July 28, 2017

Drained by self-inflicted wounds, shifting aims and unrelenting protests, Republicans’ push to kill off President Obama’s signature health law sputtered out of gas early Friday, as Senate leaders failed to rally the votes for a significantly pared-down repeal bill in a vote after midnight.

Sen. John McCain, the Arizona Republican who stormed back to Washington after a shocking cancer diagnosis, cast a pivotal “no” vote as three Republicans linked arms with every Democrat to doom the plan.

The vote leaves President Trump without a clear path to repeal and heaps grave doubt on the GOP’s seven-year promise to dismantle the Affordable Care Act, though Mr. Trump quickly pivoted to a new Plan B — “let ObamaCare implode.”
Republican Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska also rejected the plan, though both had balked at GOP efforts earlier in the week, casting Mr. McCain’s vote as the decider.

Mr. Trump took to Twitter after the vote early Friday to declare that “3 Republicans and 48 Democrats let the American people down. As I said from the beginning, let ObamaCare implode, then deal. Watch!”

Earlier this week the Arizona senator saved Mr. Trump’s push to for repeal, yet he scolded his colleagues over the one-sided process that led to the debate.

Vice President Mike Pence, who was on hand to break a potential tie, huddled on the Senate floor with Mr. McCain and other holdouts for a long time before the vote, but couldn’t change their minds.

“This is clearly a disappointing moment,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said, his voice wavering, noting Obamacare’s struggles with high premiums and dwindling choices would live on.

Explaining his vote in a statement early Friday, Mr. McCain said he’d warned colleagues he wanted bipartisanship and would shy away from any GOP-only plan.

“I’ve stated time and time again that one of the major failures of Obamacare was that it was rammed through Congress by Democrats on a strict-party line basis without a single Republican vote. We should not make the mistakes of the past that has led to Obamacare’s collapse,” he said.

He said the bill should be sent back to go through the usual legislative process rather than the speedy budget process that allowed the GOP to avoid a Democratic filibuster.

But Democrats have shown little interest in working toward the GOP’s idea of a total overhaul of Obamacare, instead calling for boosting the government control and taxpayer spending that are at the heat of the 2010 law.

Mr. McConnell said now it’s time for Democrats to offer their ideas, but said “bailing out insurance companies with no thought of any kind of reform, is not something I want to be part of.”

He also pointed to a vote on Thursday that saw Democrats shy away from backing the single-payer “Medicare for all” system that their liberal leaders have called for. Democrats said the vote, orchestrated by Republicans, was a sham.

In the wake of Friday’s vote, Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer said Democrats were relieved about the health vote, yet refused to spike the football, acknowledging that Obamacare is struggling and will need fixes in relevant committees.

“It did a lot of good things,” he said, “but it needs improvement.”

The 49-51 vote was an embarrassing blow for Senate Republican leaders who earlier this week failed to pass a robust health overhaul or the same “clean” repeal that got through the chamber 18 months ago.

They decided to buy themselves more time Thursday with a pared-down bill, dubbed “skinny repeal,” that they acknowledged was a “fraud” — but which they said they had to pass in order to keep the process alive.

Few seemed happy with idea, which was a far cry from promised or repeal-and-replace that the GOP took to voters ever since 2010, when Democrats muscled their overhaul into law.

Instead, the eight-page repeal the Senate was aiming to pass would leave Obamacare’s economics in shambles, raising the prospect of premium increases for consumers and market disruptions for insurers who prefer certainty.

With no other option alive, however, GOP senators said that was better than admitting failure — and said they would vote to approve it, with the understanding that it never become law.

“The skinny bill as policy is a disaster,” Sen. Lindsey Graham, South Carolina Republican, said. “The skinny bill as a replacement for Obamacare is a fraud.”

Realizing the peril, senators pleaded with House Republicans to agree to a conference committee to keep talking instead of actually passing the plan.

House Speaker Paul D. Ryan assured new talks, but it wasn’t enough in the end.

The political fallout was immediate, with Democratic operatives swiftly panning Sens. Dean Heller of Nevada and Jeff Flake of Arizona — the two most vulnerable senators in next year’s cycle — for supporting the plan when other Republicans didn’t.

Sen. Ted Cruz, Texas Republican, said the fight wasn’t over, but added that voters who expected a swift repeal had a right to be angry.

“I sadly feel a great many Americans will feel betrayed, that they were lied to,” he said amid a throng of reporters outside the Senate chamber. “And that sentiment will not be unjustified. You cannot campaign against Obamacare and go vote for Obamacare.”

Thursday’s skinny plan would have ditched Obamacare’s unpopular mandate requiring individuals to hold insurance and its rule requiring large employers to provide coverage.

It also would have shifted federal money from Planned Parenthood to community health centers, raised a cap on contributions to tax-advantaged savings accounts to pay for out-of-pocket costs and extended a freeze on Obamacare’s tax on medical device sales for three more years.

“The American people have suffered under Obamacare for too long. It’s time to end the failed status quo,” Mr. McConnell said.

The plan also sought to expand states’ ability to use waivers to abandon Obamacare’s list of mandated benefits, though the Senate parliamentarian flagged the language as incompatible with budget rules, giving Democrats the opportunity to block it.

The Congressional Budget Office estimated that 15 million fewer people would hold insurance next year under the plan, slightly rising to 16 million by 2026 — largely because the mandate requiring people to get coverage would go away.

GOP released the bill around 10 p.m., leaving senators and the public less than three hours to review the plan before the vote.

“This process is an embarrassment,” said Sen. Chris Murphy, Connecticut Democrat.