Bloomberg Defends Tax Hikes on the Poor

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

Seeking to differentiate himself from what he derided as “the lunatics leading the pack of Democrats trying to become the next president by offering boatloads of free stuff,” former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg pledged to “be the president that can unify America under my benevolent wing.”

“Consider the poor,” the former Mayor said. “They are poor because they make poor choices. We must ensure that poor choices are discouraged. The simplest way of doing this is to increase the cost by directly taxing poor choices. For example, sugary soft drinks are unhealthy. By slapping higher taxes on their consumption we make them less affordable and achieve the dual purpose of bringing in more revenue to the government and improving the health of the population.”

“I know I’ve been called a ‘nanny-stater’ for my views on this, but is that really a bad thing?” Bloomberg asked. “Wouldn’t most people benefit if they had a nanny to protect them from their own bad impulses? I’m the only candidate man enough to take on this role. I’m a father. I know how to mold children for their own good. I can do this for everyone in the country if given the chance.”

Rival Democratic hopeful Sen. Elizabeth Warren (Mass) called Bloomberg’s position “exactly wrong. The bad choices poor people make are far less damaging than the bad choices the rich make. The poor aren’t withholding money from those in need. It’s the greedy billionaires who deny the poor a fair share of the wealth they have hoarded for themselves. That is the bad choice we must rectify by expropriating the selfishly held wealth so the government can redistribute it to more deserving people.”

Harris Campaign Flailing

Kelly Mehlenbacher, former state operations director for the Sen. Kamala Harris campaign recently resigned citing “the poorest treatment of staff I have ever seen. A lot of talented people were misused and abused. There is no viable plan for winning.” Oddly, despite Harris’ disastrous leadership of her own campaign, Mehlenbacher illogically maintained in her resignation letter that “I still believe that Senator Harris is the strongest candidate to win in the General Election in 2020.”

Harris herself blames rival Democratic presidential hopeful Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (Hawaii) for the collapse of her polling numbers and the ensuing chaos of her campaign. During one of the debates Gabbard slammed Harris’ hypocrisy of indulging in marijuana use while prosecuting others—mainly minorities—for possessing and smoking the weed. Gabbard also exposed Harris’ pattern of prosecutorial misconduct in withholding exculpatory evidence that could have freed innocent men from prison.

Harris’ response to Gabbard’s criticism was to mock her “lower tier” status among the contenders. Ironically, following that debate Harris, once a self-described “top tier” candidate, plunged to the “lower tier” with only 4 percent of voters saying she is their choice for the nomination.

Judge Bars Requiring Would-be Immigrants to Have Health Insurance

Oregon U.S. Dist. Court Judge Michael Simon issued a nationwide injunction stopping the State Department from requiring foreign nationals to show they will be covered by health insurance within 30 days of entering the country before they can be granted a visa. The Judge rejected the Trump’s Administration’s assertion that the new rule is needed to alleviate the burden on US taxpayers of having to supply immigrants with health care.

“Inasmuch as it is the unanimous opinion of all right thinking individuals that free health care is a human right, we cannot allow Trump’s deviant minority viewpoint to overrule the majority,” Simon wrote in his decision. “Since one of the key motivations for immigrating to the United States is to claim a fair share of the global bounty available to this country’s residents, it would be unjust to deny them the benefit of the free health care that will be provided to all once the current Administration is removed from power.”

White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham pointed out that “Simon’s decision disregards federal law and violates a Supreme Court decision last year recognizing the president’s broad authority to impose such restrictions. We will be appealing his decision and expect that a higher court will obey last year’s Supreme Court ruling.”

Doug Rand, a former White House official under President Obama, chided the White House for being “fixated on the notion that immigrants aren’t entitled to US taxpayers’ resources. This notion was thoroughly debunked by President Obama. He established the principle that US taxpayers have no right to resist sharing their wealth with those less fortunate, especially foreigners.”

China Demands Reparations for Global Pollution

Zhao Yingmin, China’s Vice-Minister of Ecology and Environment, demanded that developed countries pay poor countries the $100 billion in reparations promised by the Paris Accord for the damages done by global pollution. The roster of proposed recipients of this $100 billion includes China. Ironically, China is currently spewing out more pollution than any other country.

The chance for China’s demands being met seem slim since the Trump Administration has withdrawn US participation in the Paris Accord. Nevertheless, Zhao denounced “this unilateral rejection of an agreement made by his predecessor,” labeled Trump’s action “a crime against humanity,” and called efforts to get his country to reduce its pollution “an infringement on our sovereignty.”

FBI Conspirator Boasts of Destroying the Republic

The more that is revealed about the deep state plotters against President Trump the more their loathsomeness is confirmed. We learned that in 2016 then FBI Special Agent Peter Strzok emailed his illicit paramour, FBI lawyer Lisa Page, to reassure her that the Agency had “an insurance policy” designed to undermine a Trump presidency. Then we learned that in January of 2017 Mark Zaid, the attorney for the “whistleblower” that sparked the House impeachment hearings against Trump, tweeted “the coup has begun.” This week, Kevin Clinesmith, the FBI lawyer accused of falsifying the FISA warrant used to authorize spying on the Trump campaign and presidency, texted “I have initiated the destruction of the Republic!” to his illicit paramour, FBI lawyer Sally Moyer.

While the participants in the covert action against the Trump campaign and presidency purport to be the “true patriots,” their electronic trail of words imparts a more sinister objective. Secret police meddling in an election and efforts to conduct a coup and destroy our republican form of government are the kinds of behavior we so justly objected to when carried out by goons in service to the communist dictatorships behind the Iron Curtain. Interestingly, their self-justifications are often couched in terms of “saving our democracy.” Remember, though, that the oppressive communist regimes routinely touted themselves as “people’s democratic republics.”

Head inquisitor of Congress’ anti-Trump efforts, Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif), brushed aside the sinister emails, tweets, and texts, insisting that “all they show is the noble intent of those in our intelligence agencies against a man representing the most serious threat in our nation’s history. Similar comments were made by our nation’s leaders during the fight to defeat the Nazis. They deserve our gratitude, not the kind of undeserved scrutiny that Trump and his fellow criminals are trying to inflict on them.”

Meanwhile, over in the Senate, self-professed “undecided and impartial prospective impeachment juror” Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del) says he “will carefully weigh the evidence,” but lamented “the disheartening lack of votes for conviction and removal of President Trump.” Coons contends that “the direct evidence quoting the President as refusing a ‘quid pro quo’ does not outweigh the testimony of the diplomatic witnesses who say that their perception was that a ‘quid pro quo’ was what they thought he wanted. The fact that 95% of the media agrees with this perception is, in my opinion, a pretty definitive demonstration of guilt.”

Buttigieg May Name Kaepernick as Running Mate

Now that he’s leading in the polls in Iowa and New Hampshire Democratic presidential contender South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg is reported to be mulling over possible running mates. Rumored front runner is former National Football League quarterback Colin Kaepernick.

“Kaepernick is a man of unrivaled courage,” Buttigieg said. “His willingness to kneel while thousands of others stood for the National Anthem was beyond brave. It cost him his job and millions of dollars. That’s a far higher price than any other protester has paid. I think voters who believe in justice would relish the opportunity to elect him as my vice-president.”

In an effort to curry favor with the Buttigieg campaign, Kaepernick, while participating in an Unthanksgiving Day celebration in San Francisco on Thursday, took the opportunity to blast the US Government for “stealing over 1.5 billion acres of land from the Indians. It’s time we evict all the non-indigenous inhabitants squatting on this stolen land and send them back where they came from.”

Nadler Invites Trump to Participate in Hearing

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) extended an invitation for President Trump to participate in his upcoming impeachment hearing.

“We will be following the same protocols that were used in Rep. Schiff’s hearing,” Nadler reminded. “Republicans may request that certain witnesses be asked to testify, but I will decide whether any specific witness will be called. Republicans will be allotted a limited amount of time to pose questions, but I will determine whether the witnesses will be permitted to respond. Republicans will be responsible for supplying the Committee members with donuts, but I will be in charge of how they are distributed.”

Mexico Warns Trump Not to Attack Drug Cartels

Mexico’s President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador warned President Trump against taking military action against the vicious drug and human smuggling cartels that control the Mexican side of the United States’ southern border. “These cartels reside on our sovereign soil,” he pointed out. “Therefore, it is our prerogative to decide what to do about them.”

“The situation is more complicated than Mr. Trump’s simplistic observation that the cartels murder people,” Lopez said. “Generally, murder is a bad thing. On the other hand, these cartels bring a lot of US dollars into our country and that is a good thing. Trying to prevent the murders would be expensive and probably futile. Disrupting the positive cash flow could be devastating to our fragile economy.”

“We can never tolerate the presence of US troops inside our country, but we might be willing to allow President Trump to provide weapons and ammunition for our troops to fight the cartels if he will also agree to replace the lost cash flow with US dollars should we attain victory in this fight,” Lopez suggested.

Trump discounted the Mexican President’s suggestion, calling it “weak. I doubt his troops can be counted on for much. If the President is willing to tolerate the slaughter of men, women, and children because it might bring more cash in from America I don’t see him as a reliable partner in an effort to combat these terrorists. Any weapons we give them would probably end up in the hands of the cartels. Any money we give them would probably be stolen or embezzled. I think our best course will be to finish building the wall and to make sure it is manned by law enforcement and military personnel sufficient to deter or defeat any incursions by cartel thugs.”

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.” His work has been cited on the Rush Limbaugh program.

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.

New Dem Prez Candidate Triples Support in One Week

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

What some observers saw as a bad sign for his newly announced bid to become the Democratic Party’s 2020 presidential nominee, former Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick saw as “an encouraging start on the road to victory.”

While only two people showed up to hear him speak at Morehouse College in Atlanta, Patrick pointed out that “this is three times the number of supporters I had last week. If I can sustain this pace I’ll have more than three billion supporters by May of next year and be headed toward a landslide win in the 2020 election.”

Abortion Advocacy Becomes More Strident

Seeking to bolster his record as the most abortion-friendly candidate among those vying for the Democratic 2020 presidential nomination, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt) boasted that “my support for abortion has been 100% pure. Unlike some of my rivals, I have never wavered. Nevertheless, the trend in recent years has shown a decline in the rate at which expectant mothers have availed themselves of this option. If there’s ever a time in American history where the men of this country must stand with the women, this is the moment.”

“Considering the dire fate that climate change portends we must do everything in our power to strike at the root cause of environmental catastrophe—people,” Sanders asserted. “I think it’s time we all admit that abortion is more than a right. It is an obligation if we hope to save the planet. Until we can get laws passed to enforce this obligation it is up to the men who have impregnated the women to persuade them to abort the unnecessary augmentation of the population that can only worsen global environmental conditions.”

Not wanting to be totally outflanked, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass) called abortion “a human and an economic right. Having a baby places enormous burdens on a woman. Abortion provides a simple solution for averting these burdens. Any impediments to exercising this human right are immoral. If I become president, unlike Senator Sanders, I won’t wait for legislation or rely on men to persuade women to get abortions. I will issue an Executive Order codifying abortion as every woman’s unalienable human right.”

To emphasize her sincerity and determination, Warren announced an all-female “troika” will chair her presidential campaign. This troika will be consist of three congresswomen—Rep. Deb Haaland (D-NM), Rep. Katie Porter (D-Calif), and Rep Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass). “We are going to take this country back from the patriarchs that have ruined it and put in positions of power where they can right the wrongs of more than 10,000 years of human history,” Warren promised. “A sufficient number of sperm donors will be retained to ensure that future generations of women will be available to rule the world.”

Biden Defends Son’s Business Acumen

This week it was revealed that Rosemont Capital, an investment firm in which former Vice-President Joe Biden’s son Hunter is a partner, received $130 million of federal money as part of the Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility (TALF) during the Obama Administration. Under this program the government lent as much as 90% of the money to buy risky bonds. If the investment turned a profit the borrowers benefited. If it didn’t the government agreed to absorb the loss. Rosemont Capital routed its profits through a subsidiary in the Cayman Islands—a move that allowed it to avoid paying US taxes.

The former Vice-President, a key advocate for the TALF program, cited the Rosemont deal “as further evidence of the business smarts of my son. The fact is, that a deal where you get to keep any profit and avoid any loss while dodging taxes is pure genius. I think this brilliance was what inspired Burisma to offer him a million dollars a year to serve on their board of directors. This further debunks Republican insinuations that the money he received was corruptly obtained.”

Rival candidate for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination Sen. Bernie Sanders disputed the “genius” interpretation floated by Biden. Instead he characterized the TALF program as “corporate welfare for large, greedy, reckless financial institutions. Every one of these transactions is outrageous.”

Candidate Vows “No Compromise”

Billionaire 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Tom Steyer says he will unify the nation behind his vision “without having to compromise with Republicans. I will be the president. Why should I compromise with the losers? They will cooperate with my policies or be completely shutout of government.”

“The notion that governing requires splitting the difference between contending parties is the kind of ‘deal making’ approach that Trump has inflicted on America,” Steyer maintained. “Why should we make deals with racists? If voters make the right choices across-the-board we’ll have Democrat majorities in the House and Senate as well as own the presidency. We won’t need to consider Republican views on any topic. If, by some freak chance, Republicans hold a majority in either the Senate or House I can govern by executive order, like President Obama learned he could do during his second term. He had the media behind him and I will too. There’ll be no stopping us from completing the transformation of America that he began.”

Schiff Says “Presumptions” Better than ”Eye Witness”

Though Republicans have denounced the so-called “evidence” the House impeachment hearings have produced as “hearsay” and “presumptions,” Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif) claims that “hearsay and presumption are better than the direct evidence the Republicans insist is the only valid evidence.”

“Last week, Rep. Quigley pointed out how hearsay was superior to direct evidence,” Schiff recalled. “If we were to restrict ourselves to only direct evidence then Ambassador Sondland’s testimony that the direct words from Trump stating that he wanted nothing from Zelensky—no quid pro quo—would be inadequate to support a charge of bribery against Trump. But if we expand our scope to include the rumors, scuttlebutt, and presumptions being passed around among the individuals involved we have a mounting pile of proof.”

“If all the experts on Ukraine are reinforcing each individual’s presumptions by passing them on to each other we get a consensus that is more real than the verifiable facts,” Schiff argued. “A group that knows Trump is a crook is a better guide for action than the isolated testimony of an eye witness who says he’s not. We’re confident that voters will be with us on this.”

Pelosi Says Impeachment Will Correct Voters’ Error

With polls showing voters turning against impeachment, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif) told fellow Democrats “that fact alone makes it even more imperative that we complete the job of removing Trump from office. We must reject the weak and dangerous suggestion to just let the voters decide whether to vote against letting him continue in office. I mean, do I have to remind you that we trusted voters to choose wisely in 2016. Well, we saw how that turned out.”

The speaker urged that “we ‘trail blaze’ a new process for selecting a president. In parliamentary systems like they have in most other democracies the chief executive is chosen by the party that has a majority in the legislature. This strikes me as a superior method. Rather than allow relatively ignorant voters to separately elect a president, why not have the better informed members of the legislature make the final determination? We can let voters cast ballots for whoever they like. If the House is satisfied with their choice no further action would be required. The election day results would stand. However, if the voters make an unsatisfactory choice, the House would impeach and remove the person chosen and schedule a new election.”

Pelosi rebuffed criticism that her proposed new process would be unwieldy or undemocratic, saying that “at first it might seem so, but I believe that eventually voters would learn to make better choices and relieve the House from having to undo poorly thought out choices like the one they made in 2016. In fact, by pledging to impeach Trump should the voters mistakenly reelect him in 2020 I think we will considerably accelerate the learning process.”

In related news, the House of Representatives reauthorized the Patriot Act in an emergency funding bill. All 230 Democrats voted for the measure—including waiving the normal 72-hour period that would have allowed representatives time to read the bill prior to voting. Pelosi justified the haste saying “the surveillance powers granted in the legislation are essential. Without them the FBI would not have been able to legally spy on Trump and his loathsome supporters. There must be no unsurveilled gaps going forward.”

Buttigieg Defends Outreach to Blacks

Polls have shown that Mayor Pete Buttigieg is having a hard time attracting minority voters. A Quinnipiac University survey found that he has the support of less than one percent of black voters—lower than rival candidate Marianne Williamson. Worse still, a photo on his website purporting to illustrate blacks who have backed his bid for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination is actually a photo of a Kenyan woman.

The mayor insists that he was “not trying to deceive anyone” and maintained that the photo in question “is more akin to that of a duck decoy. My hope was that by showing the photo of a black person among photos of claimed supporters I could attract other blacks to my pond, so to speak.” Of course, the fate of ducks who are duped by decoys is to be shot by hunters. Buttigieg swears that blacks who are enticed into his camp “will definitely not be shot. I want their money and their votes, not their lives.”

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.” His work has been cited on the Rush Limbaugh program.

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 Rule on Heath Care Pricing Assailed

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

This week the the Trump Administration’s Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced new rules requiring insurers and hospitals to inform patients of the cost of 300 common procedures and tests before the patient agrees to undergo them.

Insurance companies and hospitals complain that the push for full disclosure goes too far. Democratic presidential candidate Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren agreed. “Consumers aren’t competent to decide which procedures or tests they need,” she contended. “Forcing providers to quote prices to them asks these simple people to make judgments they aren’t qualified to make. This is the exact opposite direction from where we should be headed on health care.”

“My plan for free health care for all will relieve individuals from having to make such decisions by consolidating all authority in the hands of federal administrators,” the Senator explained. “Experts will decide how the nation’s medical resources will be deployed. This will ensure that the collective welfare of society is the decisive factor in who receives what care. Persons determined to be of sufficient value to warrant treatment will get treatment without having to agonize over the cost. Those who don’t deserve treatment will be mercifully spared the trauma of having to weigh their options. They will be provided with palliative care or be offered an assisted suicide alternative.”

Warren went on to chide critics of her health care plan for “ignoring the inherent cost-saving that will ensue once all decisions are centralized in the United States like they are in other democratic socialist countries like Cuba and China. The era of selfishness in determining how goods and services are distributed in this country must come to an end. Trump’s new rules are incompatible with this objective and cannot be allowed.”

HHS Secretary Alex Azar called Warren’s plan, “a march toward health care tyranny. The genius of America’s system of capitalism is its empowerment of individuals to run their own lives. Government lacks the expertise, knowledge, and moral authority to suppress individual autonomy and replace it with collectivist regimentation. If we really care about good health the patient has to be in control.”

In related news, revelation that Warren’s tax proposals might, in some cases, result in tax rates higher than 100% of a person’s income failed to dent her enthusiasm for reform. “My opinion is that in such cases, my free health care for all should acquire even more fans and supporters. I mean, if taxes take more than you earn you’ll need government health care. I will see that you get it.”

Congress Told Killing Babies Is Moral

Colleen McNicholas, who performs abortions at the Reproductive Health Services Planned Parenthood center in St. Louis, told members of Congress during a hearing this week that “abortion is moral. Having a baby is a stressful experience. No woman should be forced to endure that experience if we have the means to save her from it. Abortion is that means. Implementing it is her right.”

Podcast host Allie Beth Stuckey called McNicholas’ argument “appalling. It’s like a professional hitman justifying murder as a legitimate service because it helps solve a problem for his customer. The ‘hits’ put on babies by abortionists like McNicholas are especially gruesome. These tiny humans are torn apart limb-by-limb. There are more humane and moral ways for women who don’t want to be mothers to avoid this cruel fate. They could refuse to have unprotected sex. The means to do so are inexpensive and widely available. If these means fail, the life of the child could be spared and his or her care could be undertaken by one of the many other women eager to volunteer for this role.”

McNicholas dismissed Stuckey’s stance as “detrimental in so many ways. She fails to appreciate the great inconveniences of having to obtain and use condoms or birth-control pills in advance of every amorous encounter or the terrifying ordeals of bearing a child. She also neglects to acknowledge that over 11,000 scientists have recommended a drastic reduction of the human population in order to save the planet from climate change. Aborting unwanted children is a relatively painless method for achieving this goal.”

Sanders’ Dubious Climate Plan

Now in fourth place among the Democrats vying for the Party’s 2020 presidential nomination, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders hopes his $16 trillion plan to mitigate global warming will revive his flagging campaign. The gist of his plan is to expropriate private sector energy companies and use the ill-gotten gains to foster a government-owned alternative energy “ministry.” The target is to have 100% of the United States energy needs met from wind, solar, hydropower or geothermal energy by the year 2030.

Sanders rebuffed claims that the notorious inefficiency and ineffectiveness of government would undermine his plan, pointing out that “the expected shortfall in meeting demand is a feature, not a flaw, of the plan. We got into this climate mess by catering to unconstrained desires for comfort and mobility. The free market abetted these unreasonable demands by contriving schemes to increase supply and decrease costs. My plan will end this vicious circle. When supply is unavailable consumers will be compelled to cut back.”

Whether solar-powered high-speed rail or mass transit is even feasible seems a major drawback in Sanders’ attempt to reshape how Americans would live under his presidency. Sanders, though, remained unfazed, suggesting that “travelers could pack a snack or bring a magazine to read to deal with occasions when the trains or buses are slowed down by cloudy weather or darkness. People in other socialist countries have learned to be patient, I don’t see why Americans should fear they can’t adapt.”

Of course, Sanders’ advice to pack a snack is not without potential risk to the traveler. In San Francisco four City cops cuffed and arrested Steve Foster for the crime of eating a sandwich at a Bay Area Rapid Transit station. One of the arresting officers informed Foster that “it’s a violation of California law. I have the right to detain you. You’re going to jail.”

Dems Settle on “Bribery” in Impeachment Push

The initial failure of “quid pro quo” to generate a satisfactory narrative for impeachment within the ranks of voters inspired Democrat Party leaders to search for different terminology. The term they’ve settled on for now is “bribery.”

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif) lamented that “our internal polls revealed that the Latin phrase ‘quid pro quo’ is too arcane for the average person to grasp. ‘Bribery,’ on the other hand is something even the most dense voter can understand—as we discovered from a bevy of focus groups. It has the added advantage of being one of the listed offenses in the Constitution for which a president can be impeached.”

A byproduct of this switch is that the “quid pro quo” former Vice-President Joe Biden has boasted about using to coerce the Ukraine government into firing the prosecutor who was investigating the company whose payroll his son Hunter was on is now okay. “Translated, ‘quid pro quo’ means ‘this for that,’” Pelosi observed. “That’s basically how the free market works. You perform a service for me, I give you money. The Republicans trying to use that simple trade to tar Biden and his son can now be seen as a big nothing. As the former Vice-President himself has pointed out, President Obama was fully on-board with the deal.”

While the word “bribery” may be music to Democrat ears, the absence of evidence that President Trump received or offered a bribe to Ukraine sounds a sour note. Unlike Biden, Trump did not threaten to withhold money from Ukraine. The military aid that was pending during a review of the newly elected Ukraine government was eventually paid. Meanwhile, the investigation of Ukraine’s involvement with the Clinton campaign’s efforts to smear Trump has been proceeding separately at the direction of Attorney General William Barr.

In related news, documents obtained from the Ukrainian General Prosecutor’s office show that millions of dollars were transferred into a fund jointly owned by Devon Archer, Former Secretary of State John Kerry, John Kerry Jr., Kerry’s stepson Christopher Heinz, and Hunter Biden—an arrangement that Joe Biden called “the kind of profit-making enterprise that any man would want for his son.”

“Hearsay Better than Direct Evidence”

While fans of the TV show Perry Mason are very familiar with the inadmissibility of “hearsay” testimony, Rep. Mike Quigley (D-Ill) asserted at the Schiff impeachment hearing that “hearsay can be much better evidence than direct evidence. Rather than being a collection of isolated facts, hearsay has the distinct advantage of having been vetted by the layers of people telling other people what they heard. This gives it the chance to gel into a coherent narrative in ways that direct evidence might not.”

“The most astounding aspect of what we’ve heard from Taylor, Kent, and Yovanovitch is that while none of them were among those listening in on Trump’s phone call to Zelensky they were in perfect agreement that there was something wrong with it,” Quigley said. “These witnesses have decades of experience in the US State Department. That experience has given them a unified vision of what our foreign policy should be and how Trump has deviated from that norm.”

“The great travesty in the case of Yovanovitch is that she was fired by Trump for trying to enforce normal foreign policy,” Quigley added. “It’s an unforgivable injustice for a career diplomat to be fired over a mere disagreement about foreign policy. Trump’s assertion that the policies she favored had been failing for years is only an opinion, not, in my mind, sufficient cause to remove her from office. We shouldn’t be surprised that she broke down in tears during her deposition seeing how badly she’s been treated.”

More astounding than the groupthink of the aforementioned long time bureaucrats was the admission under oath of both Kent and Yovanovitch that they had been briefed on the shady dealings of Burisma and Biden more than three years ago. Kent even went so far as to acknowledge that “further investigation into those dealings is warranted because we can’t have US tax dollars used in a way that fosters more corruption in Ukraine.”

Meanwhile, Committee Chairman Rep. Adam Schiff insisted that he doesn’t know the name of the so-called whistleblower whose hearsay-based accusations kicked off the impeachment hearings, but warned that “any Republicans who mention his name will be locked up in the House jail.”

Clinton Defends Snubbing Thatcher in Her Book

Despite becoming the United Kingdom’s first female Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher received no appreciation from Hillary Clinton in her latest book: The Book of Gusty Women: Favorite Stories of Courage and Resilience. Asked about the snub, Clinton claimed that “Thatcher didn’t make the kind of positive difference that would have merited her inclusion in my book.”

“Let’s compare two simple statements,” Clinton suggested. “Thatcher once said ‘the problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.’ This exhibits a negativity toward social reform that discourages further expansion of government to meet the needs of the people. Besides, it isn’t a true statement. As long as there are other people there will be other people’s money that can be taken to do good. The Clinton Foundation is a prime example of doing good with other people’s money.”

“Let’s contrast her statement with my observation following our overthrow of the Gaddafi regime in Libya–‘we came, we saw, he died,’” Clinton said. “Notice my clever imitation of Caesar’s ‘I came, I saw, I conquered.’ Both were triumphant acclamations of accomplishment, not fallacious reasons for why something can’t be done like Thatcher gave. She didn’t belong in my book. I do, but I didn’t want to make the book about me. That’s not the kind of person I am.”

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.” His work has been cited on the Rush Limbaugh program.

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.

Biden Says State Dept Emails Prove Son’s Value to Burisma

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

Democratic presidential contender former Vice-President Joe Biden glommed onto recently revealed email correspondence within the US State Department during 2016 as “proof my son’s work on the Board of Directors for the Burisma company was not without value.”

“A lot of critics have been making a big deal about Hunter’s lack of experience in the energy business to assert that his presence on that company’s Board was unwarranted,” Biden recalled. “Now we see that after he got on the Board the U.S. State Department was ready to discuss ways to assist Burisma in its efforts to rebuff the Ukrainian government’s probe of its business practices. Clearly his connection to that company helped open some doors in DC. It even got so far that a deal for the State Department to co-sponsor an energy project with Burisma Holdings was hammered out. I say that makes Hunter’s monthly $50,000 stipend a wise investment by Burisma.”

Senators Ron Johnson (R-Wis) a Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) had a different take on this recent revelation, calling it “a textbook demonstration of influence peddling. That Burisma wanted the Obama State Department to pressure the Ukrainian government into ignoring corruption allegations against the company is perfectly understandable. For this purpose, the ‘skill’ of being the US Vice-President’s son was highly valued and why his father was so forceful in his 2014 demand that the Ukrainian prosecutor investigating Burisma be fired.”

The former vice-president characterized the Senators’ complaints as “typical Republican elitism against working class people like Hunter and myself. We weren’t born into wealth like these representatives of the upper class were. We have to scratch and claw our way to the top. There was nothing wrong with my efforts to give my son a helping hand and nothing wrong with him earning a buck helping to improve the fortunes of the Burisma company in its troubles with the Ukrainian government.”

In related news, Joe Biden demanded that the priest who refused him communion at a Sunday Mass last week be fired. “Who does this guy think he is?” Biden asked. “I’ve had discussions with the Holy Father in Rome. He agrees with me that my support for tax-funded abortions shouldn’t bar me from receiving this sacrament. Any priest who’s out of step with the Pope has no business calling himself a Catholic or conducting services in a church.”

Schiff Defends Total Control Over Impeachment Hearings

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) defended procedural rules that grant him absolute control over which witnesses will be called and heard, saying “the fate of the nation is in my hands. I will not jeopardize its future by allowing Republicans to derail my hearings by attempting to inject irrelevant issues, witnesses, or questions into the mix.”

Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), the ranking Republican member of the committee, called Schiff’s stance “a blatant violation of due process. Speaker Pelosi’s contention that this procedure is fair because we are allowed to request that certain witnesses be permitted to testify is ludicrous if Schiff may reject these witnesses or the questions we might like to ask of any witnesses at his sole discretion. It is tantamount to granting a prosecutor total control to bar any defense witness or any cross-examination questions of his own witnesses. This is contrary to the fundamental principles of fairness in ascertaining the truth or lack thereof of any charges lodged against a person.”

Schiff dismissed Nunes’ objections as “improperly focused on the constitutional rights of the accused. The impeachment power is not bound by the normal procedures of jurisprudence. The 5th and 6th Amendments do not apply when the person charged is the President of the United States. The Constitution grants the House sole authority to determine whether the president is impeachable. All that is required is that a majority vote for impeachment. That majority has voted to give me unconstrained latitude in how I conduct the process. I will not be deterred by the whining of the minority.”

“Whistleblower” Lawyer Claims Coup Is Constitutional Right

It turns out that Mark Zaid, the attorney representing the purported “whistleblower” that launched this latest round of allegations against President Trump for his phone call to the Ukrainian president in July, sent out a Tweet in January of 2017 proclaiming “the coup has started” and “impeachment hearings next up.”

The most reasonable interpretation of this statement leads to a conclusion that Zaid and others were part of an effort to oust President Trump from office before Trump even had an opportunity to commit a high crime or misdemeanor and that, consequently, the impeachment currently underway is not based on any evidence of wrongdoing. Nevertheless, Zaid strongly asserted that “the right of the governed to engage in a coup to depose a sitting president is a constitutionally protected right. I call your attention to the 9th and 10th Amendments where it states that rights not expressly mentioned in the Constitution are retained by the people. Those of us trying to save the country from the depredations of Donald Trump are people using this retained right.”

“We are freedom fighters and must not be constrained by stodgy notions of due process,” Zaid argued. “We can’t have our hands tied by legalistic ideals while a tyrant’s rampage goes unresisted. Trump’s unfitness to rule was recognized by every true patriot long before he won the 2016 election. Heroes like Comey, Brennan, myself, and others deserve the support of the masses as we struggle against the usurper who was able to fool enough voters so he could steal the presidency from its rightful heir—Secretary Hillary Clinton.”

Judge Rules Against Conscientious Objectors to Abortion

President Trump’s restoration of an Executive Order from the Bush Administration that allowed individuals to refuse to participate in performing abortions was voided by Manhattan U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer this week. In his 147-page decision, the Judge found that “there is no legal foundation for a person to refuse to obey a state law mandating participation in an abortion procedure. If a state requires a licensed medical practitioner to perform an abortion or to assist in its performance there is no ‘right of conscience’ escape clause.”

Engelmayer rejected assertions that a patient in the 26 states that have laws barring any conscientious objections to abortion have access to thousands of licensed medical practitioners who willingly perform the procedure as “contrary to the law’s demand that every patient has the right to require any qualified practitioner to perform the procedure. Why should a patient be inconvenienced in any way in her pursuit of the inalienable right to abort her unwanted child? Saying she should have to make the effort to find a willing doctor is the sort of ‘cruel and unusual punishment’ prohibited by the 8th Amendment.”

The Judge’s decision was extended to apply to all states, not just the 26 states party to the case. “While these states have differing laws that permit ‘conscience rights’ these rights stand in opposition to the kind of universal standard sought by the 1973 Roe vs. Wade decision and codified by President Obama’s 2009 Executive Order requiring all licensed medical personnel everywhere to use their skills to assist any woman seeking an abortion anywhere in the United States.”

University Terrorized by Hateful Flyers

Students and faculty at Western Connecticut State University were sent into a state of shock and terror when anonymous flyers saying “it’s okay to be white” were found posted in various locations around the campus. University President John Clark has called for an investigation by the Danbury police, CT State Police, and the FBI, saying “this attack on our university community is the type of terrorist instigation that requires eternal vigilance.”

Clark rejected suggestions that he might be exaggerating the perceived threat, contending that “Hitler also started out small. He and a handful of fellow Nazis were initially scoffed at, but later built a tyranny that plunged the world into a war that took 50 million lives. We must make every effort to ensure that those responsible for this hateful message are caught and properly punished. I am fully committed to the absolutely necessary goal this does not happen again.”

Meanwhile, the campus chapter of Black Lives Matter is planning to counter the threat by posting flyers saying “it’s not OK to be white”–an effort that Clark hailed as “an admirable demonstration of constructive independent action against bigotry.”

Va Gov Vows Gun Controls

Buoyed by Democrats winning majorities in both houses of the state legislature, Gov. Ralph Northam promised to “immediately get to work on serious gun control legislation now that Republican obstructionists have been ousted by the voters.”

A top priority target is removing so-called assault rifles from private hands. “If you listen carefully to the 2nd Amendment lobbyists’ arguments about these weapons it’s clear that their intent is to arm citizens who might object to government policies,” Northam observed. “They’re not arguing for the rights of hunters or sportsmen. They’re saying that the people ought to be armed as a guard against an oppressive government. Well, the election of a fully Democratic government disposes of this argument. Democrats are the guardians of the people’s rights. They have no need for weapons that might be used to interfere with our governance.”

In related news, in the People’s Republic of Venezuela, government “death squads” have killed over 800 opponents of the ruling regime. An example of a typical operation earlier this year saw Luis Ariza be pulled from his home and summarily executed in the street. In 2017, Ariza was arrested at an anti-Maduro protest. There is no right for private citizens to bear arms in Venezuela.

Clinton Critiques Warren Health Plan

Former Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton took aim at current presidential candidate Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s proposed method of financing free health care for all.

“The goal is the right goal, but I don’t think taxing the hell out of the rich is the way to go,” Clinton said. “We’ve already seen Bill Gates threaten to vote for Donald Trump if we try to tax him too much. I don’t think he’s an outlier. The rich are major donors to the Democratic Party. We need to find other sources of the funds needed.”

“From my own experience, it seems to me that extracting money from foreign sources would provide a more politically viable option,” she continued. “When I was Secretary of State the Clinton Foundation was able to secure tens of millions in donations after I approved the sale of 25% of a major US supplier of uranium to a Russian owned company. I think we can look for similar opportunities during the next Democratic Administration. Bill also received humongous fees for giving speeches in foreign countries. I think we can revive this source of income given the right circumstances.”

Bloomberg Makes Offer to Dem Candidates

Citing what he termed “an absence of viable candidates” in the field of Democrats running for president, former New York City Mayor, billionaire Michael Bloomberg, has announced plans to become the nation’s next president.

“I have $52 billion dollars,” Bloomberg pointed out. “I could easily crush any of those currently running for the office. Rather than futilely waste efforts trying to beat me, I advise my fellow Democrats to unite with me in a unified anti-Trump front. I can guarantee every one of them a key position in my administration. Whether their passion is taxing the rich, controlling what people eat, how rapidly they breathe, where they live, who they marry—whatever—there will be plenty of power to share. All prior limitations will be swept aside. The archaic freedoms bestowed by the Founding Fathers are no longer practical in today’s world. All of my cabinet members will have their own mini-fiefdoms to rule.”

“So, what do you say?” he asked. “Rule with me or get run over by me—the choice is yours.”

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.” His work has been cited on the Rush Limbaugh program.

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.

Why I Can’t Support Joe Biden

Joe Biden opposes:

  • The sanctity of life, supporting abortion
  • criminal penalties for harming a pre-born child by persons committing a crime against the mother
  • notifying the parents of minors who obtain out of state abortions
  • the nomination of Robert Bork, Samuel Alito and John Roberts for the U.S. Supreme Court justice
  • Effective border security
  • School vouchers for children trapped in failing public schools
  • Voluntary prayer in schools
  • Photo ID for voting
  • Second Amendment and citizens’ right of self protection

Biden supports:

  • federal funding for embryonic stem cell research, which treats humans as disposable and which has never resulted in the treatment of a single disease, yet he wants federal funding expanded
  • human cloning
  • hate crime laws
  • the Equal Rights Amendment
  • free college tuition for all
  • gun control
  • sanctuary cities
  • social security for illegal aliens

Biden flip-flopped on:

  • Death penalty
  • Crime, was tough on it in 1990s, now considers it racist
  • No Child Left Behind


  • Exposed as plagiarist in college
  • Strongly supported by radical NEA
  • has an anti-family values voting record
  • agrees that Tea Parties are not “terrorists”

For more, read:

The Beltway Bidens: Creepy, crooked, and NOT just like us

Eight Things to Know About the Biden Family’s Culture of Corruption

Biden’s Corruption Problem

Joe Biden’s Corruption with China

Warren’s Free Health Care for All Plan Costs $52 Trillion

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

This week, Democratic presidential contender Sen. Elizabeth Warren unveiled her much-touted “free health care for all” plan. The estimated ten-year cost of $52 trillion will be entirely borne by the “rich.”

“The middle class—those living on public assistance, unemployment benefits, or working in the informal economy—will receive care at no cost to themselves,” Warren boasted. “The rich—those who own businesses that withhold necessities from the masses unless they are paid for supplying them and their employees will be compelled to bear the burden of universal health care.”

Rival presidential contender former Vice-President Joe Biden accused Warren of “mathematical gymnastics. Clearly, the vast majority of those she is calling ‘rich’ are the working stiffs who are the backbone of the middle class. As she would have it, anyone who receives a salary or a wage will be hit with higher taxes to supply the expansive medical care she is proposing.”

The Senator welcomed Biden’s objections, saying “granted, my plan is projected to cost two million employees their jobs—knocking them out of the ranks of the rich and into the middle class—but the upside is that they will be the beneficiaries of the more complete health care coverage I am mandating. Joe’s objection is further proof that he is out-of-step with the modern Democratic Party. He doesn’t understand that it is the capitalistic system that forces people to have to work in order to live. Socialism will liberate everyone from this servitude by guaranteeing everyone the necessities of life without imposing the burdens of toil. I am the candidate that is best prepared to usher in the new era of total lifetime security and leisure that will be possible once we bring down the capitalist exploiters.”

Pelosi Praises Patriotism of Deep State

With the House finally endorsing the impeachment process being spearheaded by Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif), Speaker Nancy Pelosi took a moment “to give credit to the members of the deep state that made this possible. The willingness of men like James Comey, John Brennan, Peter Strzok, and others to go outside the bounds of strict obedience to the law despite the peril to their reputations, must not be overlooked or taken for granted. Their hyping of the Steele Dossier and surveillance of the Trump campaign nearly turned the 2016 election in Hillary’s favor.”

“Though that effort was thwarted by ill-informed voters in strategically positioned states, they didn’t give up,” she continued. “Before Trump was inaugurated they implemented plan B to undermine his ability to carry out his agenda. The covert surveillance of Trump and his supporters was extended. A Special Prosecutor was appointed to provide nearly two years worth of leaks alleging wrongdoing that fed a relentless media campaign against the illegitimate president. After that effort failed to oust Trump, plan C was launched as a CIA mole within the Trump Administration worked with Rep. Schiff to assail Trump’s authority to investigate foreign involvement with the deep state’s pre-election anti-Trump activities.”

“The persistence of these heroic men should be commended,” Pelosi urged. “Though not explicitly provided for in our Constitution, the deep state has organically evolved over the years to protect the nation from mistakes made by voters and to ensure that the permanent interests of the government would not be disrupted by unwarranted changes in administrations. The complaints from Trump and his backers should not be allowed to tarnish the work of these patriots. If it weren’t for them we’d have no viable way of getting rid of a man who never should have been elected president.”

In related news, Pelosi defended the impeachment procedures requiring Republicans to get Schiff’s permission to ask certain questions of the witnesses called to testify. “There is a great risk that Republicans will try to ask questions that are either irrelevant or antagonistic to the narrative being developed by the hearings,” she pointed out. “Rather than allow them to trip up witnesses into contradicting themselves and muddle the message, we are authorizing Rep. Schiff to rule out anything he deems to be out-of-line with the purpose of our inquiry.”

Omar Defends Vote on Armenian Genocide

In a rare instance of bipartisanship, the House voted 405-11 to condemn the extermination and expulsion of 1.5 million Armenians by Ottoman Turks during World War I as a genocide. Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn) voted “present.”

Omar explained that “while there should be accountability for unwarranted human rights violations, weighing in on one side of a religious dispute would be improper. Armenians are Christians. Turks are Muslims. It is the religious obligation of Muslims to fight unbelievers and to slay them if they resist. Even the most cursory reading of the Quran conforms this obligation. I understand the Christians’ aversion to being killed, but there was and is a simple solution—convert to Islam or pay the jizya, if that option is offered to them. To refuse to do either is a refusal to have peace. Congress has no business taking sides in this long struggle to make all the world for Allah.”

California Governors Blame Republicans for Fires

Former Gov. Jerry Brown (D) says the fires now consuming large swaths of the state are the fault of Republicans. “Both myself and current Gov. Newsom have been striving to return California to the kind of ecological balance that prevailed before the white man invaded the area,” Brown asserted. “It is the GOP’s insistence on imposing modern technology that is the true cause of the conflagration. If it weren’t for the massive amounts of electricity needed to power the unnatural lifestyles of the white man we wouldn’t need the PG&E electric lines that are setting our forests on fire.”

Prior to the Brown and Newsom regimes, PG&E was permitted to trim foliage near its power lines. This helped minimize the frequency of fires being started by branches falling onto the lines and breaking them. Now, there are more falling branches, more broken power lines, and more uncleared brush under the fallen lines ready to be ignited by sparks from the broken lines.

Most sensible people would recognize the chain of events leading to the fires. Most sensible people would support steps to mitigate the danger while still preserving access to electricity for California consumers and businesses. Yet, Newsom insists that “it is the refusal of these selfish consumers—all of whom are aided and abetted by Republicans—to adjust their modes of living to cut back on excess consumption that is responsible for the disaster that has befallen our state.”

Contradicting the claims of Brown and Newsom is a comprehensive analysis done by California’s Legislative Analyst Office last year. This analysis cited long standing failures of policy by the state. These failures included neglecting to properly thin out the forest overgrowth that fuels disastrous fires. They also included spending billions to reduce carbon-dioxide emissions by a tiny fraction of the world’s annual emission of this gas.

In related news, Newsom blamed homeowners for the surge in homeless encampments in Los Angeles and San Francisco. “Most residents of California have an excess of living space,” the Governor maintained. “Rooms that could house homeless people are set aside for such frivolous uses as separate bedrooms for each child, home offices, TV dens, or storage space. We need to look into legislation that will incentivize homeowners to take in boarders. Perhaps a property surtax for underutilized space could be folded into the state’s tax code.”

Late-Entry Dem Presidential Contender Endorses Reparations

In a bid for black votes, Democratic presidential candidate Tom Steyer came out strongly in favor of slavery reparations. “The 400 years of unfairness toward blacks must be offset with 400 years of favoritism toward the descendants of the victims of slavery and oppression.”

Steyer acknowledged that “it may not be possible to sort out the whites who were responsible for the crimes against blacks from the whites who worked, fought, and died to end these crimes. Neither can we identify blacks who contributed to the crimes by capturing people in Africa to sell to slave traders or who were, themselves, owners of slaves. Another difficulty is determining which of today’s blacks residing in America are descended from blacks who were slaves vs. blacks who were not—an example of which is Sen. Kamala Harris who is a descendant of slave owners.”

“Nevertheless, even a rough justice that punishes some innocents while rewarding the descendants of some of the guilty is better than no justice,” Steyer insisted. “We must not accept the Republican contention that each person must be judged as an individual and that specific proof of culpability must exist before compensation is extracted from that individual. This is the same kind of logic that would allow Trump to go free just because there is no tangible evidence of his guilt. It is a standard that is tied to out-dated concepts of individualism. We need to move beyond that if we hope to achieve the sort of social justice our consciences demand.”

Two Percent Budget Cut Rejected

Given the federal government’s accumulated $23 trillion national debt and current year projected deficit of nearly a trillion dollars, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) introduced an appropriations amendment that would cut 2 percent from next year’s planned federal spending in the departments of commerce, science, justice, transportation, housing, urban development, agriculture; and interior. The Senate rejected this proposal by a 67-24 margin.

Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), the top Democrat on the Senate Appropriations Committee, urged a vote against Paul’s measure, saying that “taking a meat ax to the federal budget is contrary to what the American voters want. Every dollar requested by each of these federal agencies is vitally needed to ensure the smooth flow of money to our chosen recipients. Sen. Paul’s contention that this money would be better spent by the individual taxpayers who earned it is an unproven assertion.”

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) argued that “the ‘fat’ in these agencies’ budgets is the payoff demanded by the Democrats for their votes to adequately fund our military. The risk of under-funded defense is a greater threat than the waste that will result from over-funding our bloated bureaucracies. I ask that all Republicans vote against Sen. Paul’s amendment.”