I’ll take 10 minutes of Dave over 60 minutes of Don

This has been out for a few weeks, but I thought I would post today right after I listened to Trump’s live CPAC speech. The one thing I have learned about either reading poetry, or philosophy or even political analogy is that less is more. Trump doesn’t understand this, but Chapelle does.



12 comments ↓

#1 Fear & Loathing in Sioux Falls on 03.01.21 at 12:49 am

Trump’s CPAC motorcade was much shorter today, than ones of the past. That was very reassuring. And I am glad Dave is back, but let’s make sure Don is never back.

Some of us remember NCPAC. They took out four Democratic senators. CPAC is missing the “N”. Let’s keep it that way. No “National” hopefully means no returned reality for our country with a Trump 47. That’s my only analogy.

#2 Mike Lee Zitterich on 03.01.21 at 12:52 pm

Just think of this Democrats –

1) Donald Trump gets elected to the U.S House, he is very loved in Florida; the House Republicans vote him Speaker of the House

2) Republicans take back control of the U.S House, and the U.S Senate in 2022.

3) We begin Impeachment Discussions against Joe Biden’s “Unlawful Combinations” with China, remove him in the Senate, then remove kamala Harris as well.

4) Big Don gets revenge on the Democrats, becomes President to finish Biden’s term;

5) BIG DONE then wins the Presidency for a ‘third time’ in 2024 serving as President thru 2029.

That means BIG DONE will have been president for 9-1/2 years.

Only thing that can stop this movement from occuring is the DEMOCRATS trying to cheat, by changing more rules.

WE cannot allow H.R 1 to become law !!!

#3 Very Stable Genius on 03.01.21 at 2:40 pm

Maybe Trump primaries Gaetz, huh? Well, he is very self-centered you know.

“‘Unlawful Combinations’?” That’s sounds like something kinky between Trump and Stormy, if you ask me.

There’s one big problem with you theory, however, you need 67 Republican senators to get it done, probably a couple more since seven Republicans voted to impeach Trump the second time. And since 23 of the 34 senate seats up for election in 2022 are currently held by Republicans, that’s a rather tall order for the Republicans to hold onto, plus then achieve a 67+ majority.

Also, without Trump actually on the ballot, the Trumpian reality won’t be as strong as in 2020.

Oh, and if Trump did become president for “9-1/2 years”, something tells me he would want to stay on longer and the GOP would oblige, if they are still in power, that is.

But everyone has the right to dream, I guess.

( and Woodstock adds” “‘dream’?”…. “It sounds more like a nightmare to me”…. )

#4 "Woodstock" on 03.01.21 at 2:45 pm

“Say, I forgot what to do”…. “What do I need to do again to get those Russian bride ads on your website?”….

#5 l3wis on 03.01.21 at 6:47 pm

Personally I liked the Star Mangled Banner;

https://crooksandliars.com/2021/02/cpacs-national-anthem-was

#6 Very Stable Genius on 03.01.21 at 8:40 pm

I can’t even sing, but I know for sure that was awful. But see what happens sometimes when you Goggle: “National Anthem singer”? They should have used Angie’s List. “Singer” comes right after “plumber”, I believe.

( and Woodstock adds: “Well, some burn the flag, while others burn the Anthem”…. )

#7 Mike Lee Zitterich on 03.02.21 at 1:27 am

Unlawful Combination – The President, by using the militia or the armed forces, or both, or by any other means, shall take such measures as he considers necessary to suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy, if it—

(1)so hinders the execution of the laws of that State, and of the United States within the State, that any part or class of its people is deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law, and the constituted authorities of that State are unable, fail, or refuse to protect that right, privilege, or immunity, or to give that protection; or
(2)opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.

In any situation covered by clause (1), the State shall be considered to have denied the equal protection of the laws secured by the Constitution.

Lets not forget the Executive Orders TRUMP signed and are still in effect 13848, 13959, 13971

All set up to capture any U.S PERSON committing Election Fraud, but also doing business with Foreign Companies whom then do business with the “China Military Industrial Complex”, and where China is at war with the United States to steal our jobs, our tangible property, let alone “interfere” in our Federal Elections.

JOE BIDEN is heavily invested in FOREIGN COMPANIES whereas they do business with China and the Chinese Defense Contractors, making the said ‘transactions” highly UNLAWFUL.

Hence … Unlawful combination refers to an agreement in restraint of trade. It is a thing forbidden or declared to be unlawful by a statute.

Exactly what Executive Order 13959 is seeking to enforce by law…

– Mike Zitterich

#8 scott on 03.02.21 at 6:32 am

if communism is bad, why does the communist owned meat packing plant get a free pass from local republicans?

#9 Very Stable Genius on 03.02.21 at 3:05 pm

What about Ivanka’s trademark agreements with China? I believe there are 87 of them. And let’s not forget about Trump’s secret Chinese bank account, too. Or, how about when he told the Chinese leader that he would end the trade war after ’20, if China would just start buying soybeans immediately so he could get re-elected (“Unlawful combination anyone?”). And am I gaslighting here, or merely demonstrating a double standard of your concerns for Biden’s relationship with China versus Trump’s?

Plus, I was way to generous in my assessment above. Let’s assume that all current 50 Republican senators go along with convicting Biden in ’23. Actually, I think you only have 43 potential Republican senators willing to do that, but if you would get all 50, and 23 of 34 senate seats up for election in ’22 are Republican seats, I might add, that means you need to also turn the other 11 Democratic seats which are up in ’22, which then, however, only gets you to 61, but you need 67 to convict. So which six Democratic senators, who are currently in office and not up for re-election in ’22, do you realistically think would vote to convict Biden after a Republican House impeachment?

#10 utter nonsense on 03.02.21 at 4:23 pm

much as i think biden is a truly mentally impaired figurehead…and what he has done the past month with immigration policy, climate bullshit, and caving to china and iran will prove to be a disaster, BIG DONE is all done. there is no way he’d ever run for a house seat, and by 2024 he might be a convicted felon, and wouldn’t win presidency again anyway. this conservative is wondering if we’ll ever win the white house again. the only hope for us to have a voice is to get the house and senate back. side note, dr. suess is a racist? who knew?

#11 Mike Lee Zitterich on 03.04.21 at 1:39 am

Donald and Ivanka Trump’s business dealings are NOT considered any unlawful transactions; they OWN the businesses, and NOT invested in any activity within China that meets the criteria as “unlawful combination”.

The BIDEN’s are NOT business owners in the Ukraine or in China, they are INVESTORS of Chinese Companies whom then invest a portion of their profits into the Chinese Military Defense System, of which “WE” are at war with, and of which the Chinese are outright attempting to rob America’s jobs, stealing our Tangible Property Rights, and Influencing our American Election Systems.

– Mike Zitterich

#12 Very Stable Genius on 03.05.21 at 5:04 pm

Ivanka struggled to get her Chinese trademarks, then her Dad became president, and then guess what: “BINGO!”

And if we are at “WAR” with China, then you must be against the Keystone Pipeline, too, huh?

( and Woodstock adds: “Say, if we invade China through the rear, like via Kathmandu for example, would Greece help?”…. )