Trump is Russia’s Worst Nightmare

ggmvCgW.gif

With the Trump-Russia narrative dying a well deserved death it is time to acknowledge reality. Despite rhetoric that is friendly to Russia, mainly because Trump is attempting to use Russia as a counterbalance to China which he views as the real threat, the policies Trump implements are actually very harmful to Russia. There really is no comparison to the previous administration where Russia and its allies were allowed to get away with murder.

Energy

The Russian economy is dependent on oil and natural gas. If the prices for these are high then Russia does better and if its low then they do worse. By encouraging American companies to drill for oil and produce natural gas President Trump increases the supply of these products in the market. The more supply of something the lower its price weakening the Russian economy.

Middle East

There are two main factions in the Middle East. The Sunni camp headed by Saudi Arabia and the Shia camp headed by Iran. Since there are always fewer Shia states than Sunni states the Sunni states that want to replace Saudi Arabia or break away from their group tend to side with the Shia as well. Historically the Sunni bloc has sided with the US while the Shia block has sided with Russia.

President Trump has given the Saudis leeway to use any and all methods to go after Iran which is why we are seeing the diplomatic situation in Qatar. Qatar and Iran share the worlds largest natural gas field which the Iranian economy is dependent upon. The Saudis and the other Sunni nations in the region have blockaded them in an effort to end that relationship crippling Iran’s economy and invalidating Russia’s principal ally in the region.

Please note that with the Iran deal Obama actually strengthened Iran and by extension Russia in the region.

NATO

Most left leaning analysts would insist that Trump has weakened Europe and Nato against Russia. These analysts refuse to acknowledge one thing that most American citizens, whether Democrats or Republicans, know. The US does not have the willpower to fight another war. Make no mistake it has the technical capability to do so. The fact is 15 years of unending war in the Middle East have driven war exhaustion so high that the public will not support any future wars. Even if we pull out from the Middle East completely tomorrow it would still take some time for public sentiment to recover.

This is not lost on Putin and other world leaders. This is why he was confident he would face no military retaliation when he went after Crimea. By forcing the European countries to rearm themselves President Trump is creating a Europe which can defend itself against Russian aggression even without US support. Even with the example of Crimea Europe refuses to prepare for this and have to be forced to do so. A strong Europe is the best deterrent against Russia.

The Trump-Russia narrative is not only fake news it does not make logical sense as Trump is weakening Russia with every move.

Advertisements

The Great Democrat Con

cc0acd311506b8e39c537c8f5bc15e0d.jpg

The Democratic party has run the most amazing con job in political history. For the longest time it has convinced the American public that it is the party that works for the benefit of the working class while painting the Republicans as evil tools of corporate greed. In reality every single one of their major policies have massively enriched the big business they are supposed to be railing against. Despite their demonization from the press and complete lack of effort in defending their viewpoints it is actually the Republicans who pursue efforts that end up helping the poor and middle class citizens.

Lets take a look at a few of the most popular Democrat accomplishments.

Dodd-Frank

I have written about this in the past. According to Democrats this was supposed to protect the economic system from the banking industry being too big to fail and requiring bailouts. In reality it increased the market share of giant backs from 25% to 63% and increased the share of 4 banks from 11% to 43%. It has devastated smaller banks causing 25% of them to close outright and creating a period in the Obama administration where only 3 new banks opened as opposed to 100’s per year under Bush. Of course since there is no competition consumers take it on the chin as well as they have more fees to contend with.

Due to their brilliant marketing consumers still think Dodd-Frank is good for them and major Democrats like Bernie Sanders still want to continue this policy even after seeing its effects.

Obamacare

Obamacare was billed as a way to deliver affordable quality healthcare to every man , woman, and abortion in America. It was supposed to lower all premiums, let everyone keep the same doctor, and let people with existing illnessess benefit from insurance. The insurance companies complain about Obamacare but in reality they have more than doubled their profits under this system. In exchange for their doubled profits they have delivered massive premiums and sky-high deductibles. People were indeed covered but deductibles are so high very few people could use their insurance effectively. After all there is no incentive to provide quality insurance when the government holds a gun to your head and forces you to purchase it. In most cases you are forced to buy it from an effective monopoly.

Illegal Immigration

Democrats have always been big supporters of illegal immigration. The cynic in me says they do it for voters. Others will say because they want to help the poor citizens of South America and other places. Whatever the reason the policy depresses income for those who make the least.

Labor like anything else is a commodity. As with any commodity when there is plenty of supply its value drops. Illegal immigration increases the supply of labor massively undervaluing the labor provided by citizens. The concept is similar to plantations importing slaves in the past because they could not make the same profit paying citizens fair wages.

It is very sad that Republicans are too shy to point out these failures of Democrats enabling them to continue misleading their public about their image.

 

 

Never Forget: Democrats Incite Assassinations

images.png

I have been getting some pushback from my previous article about the connection between the Democrats and the attempted political assassination of the Republican lawmakers. Make no mistake Democrats are responsible for these attempted assassinations and they should be held responsible for it.

Let us try to look at things logically. Before we go further the first question we have to ask is are political assassinations ever acceptable? Can somebody or some group be so evil or so damaging to the world that its better to just kill him or them in cold blood for the greater good? I have something called to Hitler test to answer this question. When asked some people would say that if they had a chance to kill baby Hitler they would. Please note that you do not need everyone to believe this. The Democrat dog whistles for political assassination only needs to reach a minority of their followers for results to be achieved. All we have to do is check whether or not the Democrats have painted Trump and the Republicans to be at least as great a threat as Hitler.

Hitler

Democrats have already compared Trump to Hitler and everyone supporting him to brown shirts. I could stop the article right here but lets go on.

The Planet

Not content with painting Trump and the Republicans as Hitler Democrats have actively tried to paint them as threats to the planet and life itself. Noam Chomsky one of the more prominent liberals has called the Republicans the most dangerous organization on earth.

Never mind that the United States is reducing emissions while China , India, and Germany are increasing theirs. It has to be Trump and the Republicans that are destroying the world.

And Your Little Dog too!

Not content with portraying Republicans as Nazis who want to destroy the world Democrats go one step further. According to them Trump and the Republicans want to personally remove your healthcare so you can die in a gutter.

This is, of course, despite the fact that medicare and medicaid are getting more funding that they have the year before.

Democrats have sent out dog whistles that Republicans want to destroy the planet and make you personally suffer while worshipping Hitler. It is not a surprise one of their followers picked up on this and started hunting Republican lawmakers. It is a surprise that more of them have not done this.

 

The Truth About the Medicaid “Cut”

th (7).jpg

I originally meant to write this article last week when the AHCA came out but things got in the way and I only managed to find time to complete it today. As always it is very important that these points come from the administration and highly visible Republicans. Independent bloggers like me only have so much time to devote to writing.

One of the most consistent talking points used by Democrats is that President Trump and the Republicans are slashing Medicaid. This is then usually accompanied by a story about a senior or some other ill person left to die by the cruel Republican.

The Truth

A quick look at the headlines will show a lot of similarities. “Trump’s budget to slash medicaid by 800 billion” or “AHCA cuts 600 billion from medicaid”. No mention about a time frame or anything like that. Just a massive cut by the greedy Republicans. In the previous year the budget for Medicaid was 378 billion and the budget for Medicare 593 billion. If you were to actually cut the 800 billion and the 600 billion from that there would be nothing left. Fake news anyone?

In reality if you look at the HHS website the budget for medicaid and medicare is increasing. In fact it will be increasing every year for the next 10 years. This continual increase qualifies as a massive budget cut to the left. What is happening is that there is a projection of how much money medicare and medicaid will need by a certain date. The amount that the budget of President Trump sets aside for it is actually similar to what is needed by medicaid for the next 4-5 years. The only time it drops off is after that. In the official estimates Medicare would need 1.19 trillion by 2027. Under the Trump budget they would be getting 1.16 trillion by 2027. That is the only difference. If you are getting medicaid or medicare you will be receiving the same services for the coming years. You will not be left to die , driven out of your retirement homes, or anything else the media would have you believe.

This is a perfectly valid thing to do. Essentially there are some experts who say that no matter what we do the number of people dependent on medicaid will increase at the same rate as they have been in the past. The Trump administration is saying that our budget and tax reforms will increase the income of all people therefore less people will require aid in the future. There is literally no risk in doing this. Budgets can be proposed every year. If after 4-5 years we find that the number of people who need aid are increasing then we can just increasing funding levels again.

What They Don’t Tell You

The experts that came up with the estimates for the money that Medicare and Medicaid would need also came up with another estimate. By 2044, less than 30 years from now, 100% of the federal budget will be taken by mandatory spending. Everything else from defense, to education, to arts programs, and school lunches will be financed entirely by debt.

Both sides agree that some sort of entitlement reform is necessary. The only true way to achieve this is to create an economy where people have more income. If we continue down the same path we are now then we are headed for some very hard choices in the future. President Trump has not only made the correct choice he has made the responsible one as well.

 

The Truth About the AHCA

th (6).jpg

The senate has recently come out with its version of the AHCA. Since there are still no provisions about price controls on drugs I do not support it. Despite that it is important that the truth about it be told. Democrats have said that this bill is nothing but a massive tax cut for the rich. The truth is that Democrats will always say that no matter what Republicans do. We have to take a look at the actual taxes that have been repealed to see what happened. Obamacare delayed a lot of the most harmful taxes it required to run until Obama left office so some of the taxes I list here that have been repealed have not taken effect yet. They are mostly scheduled to take effect in the next year or two. As usual it should be the Trump administration and its Republican allies doing this but since they cannot be bothered too it falls to independent bloggers like me to do so.

Tax on Retiree Prescription Drug Coverage

Remember when Democrats tell you that Republicans want to push granny of a cliff? Democrats actually removed some of the benefits seniors had to push thru Obamacare. Seniors used to be able to recoup 28% of what they pay for prescription drugs and companies used to be able to take this as a deduction encouraging them to take on more seniors. This is especially important as seniors could have unique illnesses that generic drugs would not treat. The Republicans returned this benefit to seniors.

Chronic Care Tax

There is a tax deduction available for Americans who have high out of pocket costs. In order to pay for Obamacare Democrats reduced this deduction was reduced. Wealthy people are less likely to have high out of pocket costs. They would already have very good insurance that covers them. It is poorer people that have worse insurance that have the potential to get bigger costs. President Trump and Republicans returned this benefit to them.

HSA Withdrawal Tax

Democrats doubled the penalty to withdraw money from Health Savings Accounts for non-health related expenses to 20% from 10%. The AHCA bill restores the penalty to 10%. Wealthy people would have other sources of funds to draw money from instead of the HSA as that is already going to cost a minimum of 10%. The only people who would need to use this are those who have lower income. Trump and the Republicans return this to 10%.

Tax on Prescription Medicine

Over and above the reduced deductions for seniors the Democrats also levied a tax on prescription medicines. As mentioned seniors and others may have needs that generic medicines cannot fill so this is a direct tax on them. The truly wealthy would also have very good insurance which would probably cover those things already. Republicans have lowered this tax on the poor and middle class.

Surtax on Investment Income

This is the only thing that can be truly considered a tax break for the wealthy. At this point I would ask you to remember that Trump has already proposed that investment income from people who invest for a living be treated as income tax instead of capital gains tax. That already represents a massive increase in the tax liability for investment income. This is something that Republicans proposed not Democrats.

Medical Device Tax

Democrats levied a tax on medical devices to pay for Obamacare. The entire premise behind Obamacare is that when hospitals are given a cost. Like the uninsured packing emergency rooms they would then pass those costs on to the public. Using the very same logic Democrats used to justify Obamacare then this would be a tax on the public as the hospitals pass the costs on to the final consumer. Republicans have repealed this tax.

Medicine Cabinet Tax

As part of their suite of taxes to pay for Obamacare health saving accounts and flexible savings accounts were restricted from purchasing non-perscription over the counter medicines. Health Savings accounts are not limited to the very wealthy. Most of the people who use them are middle class. By limiting their accessibility to medicine Democrats have made healthcare more expensive for them. The Republicans have repealed this.

Individual Mandate

This is the biggest tax on them all. A tax on all people who do not have insurance. Who is more likely to have insurance a rich person or a poor one? Who is more likely to pay this tax? I think everyone knows the answer to that. Republicans have repealed this and instead rely on insurers to provide competitive options to attract customers.

Employer Mandate Tax

At first glance removing this tax only seems to benefit employers with more than 50 employees. When we take a closer look we see that the number of employees insured from work did not increase after Obamacare took effect nor did the companies pay any new taxes. The companies were already offering health insurance before or were structuring their new hires in such a way that they would not need to be offered health insurance through work.

As you can see most of the taxes that are repealed help the middle and lower income classes. The one thing that does help the rich has been addressed in tax reform. Democrats and their allies in the media hope that everyone is too lazy to look up what taxes have actually been repealed and instead rely on them for the information.

 

On Leadership: Trump and Obama

th (5).jpg

There has been a lot of comparisons on the leadership capabilities of President Trump and Obama. Before the presidency it was hard to draw a comparison between the two as they are from different worlds. I waited for a while before commenting on the subject as I was waiting for a good area to draw some examples from. The middle east presents a good opportunity for this as both parties were able to implement their strategies relatively free from partisan interference.

Active and Passive

One of the hallmarks of leadership is that they would like the initiative to remain with their team. This allows them to control the situation and gives them the opportunity to act for their benefit.

Obama is actually terrible in this regard. His main solution to the problems of the middle east is the Iran deal. It essentially gave Iran a huge amount of money and allowed them to resume their nuclear tests in exchange for regular inspections. In addition to the nuclear issue it was supposed to build better relations with Iran and normalize their standing with the international community. This deal gave all the initiative to Iran as all the benefits, the cash and recognition, was given to them up front. It is them dependent upon their goodwill to continue the terms of the agreement in the future.

Trump is the polar opposite. He gave the initiative to our allies in the region. Saudi Arabia and our other allies were given free reign to deal with the threat of Iran in the region with our support. All barriers were removed to give them more options to deal with the threat. Whatever happens in the region will depend on the US and its allies as opposed to Iran.

Permanent and Temporary

A leader would seek for permanent solutions to problems instead of temporary band aids.

In this regard Obama fails as well. The Iran deal empowered Iran at the cost of our allies in the middle east. There is a delicate balance of power in the middle east which have endeavored to stack in favor of our allies. Moving this balance the other way causes more problems in the future as both sides fight longer. In effect the Iran deal is a tribute to keep Iran quiet until the end of Obama’s term requiring his successor to deal with it.

The solution proposed by President Trump has the potential to solve the problem for good. By giving the Saudis carte blanche to deal with the shia muslims they have the potential of breaking the power of Iran for good. We already see initial moves in this game with the diplomatic isolation of Qatar. For all intents and purposes Qatar is the lifeline of Iran and the most friendly Sunni state to it as it shares the worlds largest natural gas field. Forcing Qatar to remove this cooperation would cripple Iran’s economy.

Good leaders work to get things done themselves and thru their allies and solve problems permanently. Trump is a good leader. Obama is not.

 

Lessons From Georgia

download (2)

The most important, earth-shattering, stupendous special election of all time (at least according to media) is over. The result is that the Republican beat the Democrat by 3.8%. The media have billed this as a referendum on Trump. If that is the case then Trump is more popular now than ever as he only won the district by 1.5%. Democrats certainly went all in on this election. They spend 50 million on one congressional seat. The most expensive race in history with nothing to show for it. Very similar to the last presidential election if you think about it. With all these well-funded races Democrats do run the danger of exhausting their donor base before the midterms.

There was also another election in South Carolina which was supposed to be an easy win for Republicans but was only won by 3.2%.

For the Democrats

The first question anyone ever asks is why Democrats lost. Make no mistake this was a very winnable race for them. Trump only won the district by 1.5% and previous Democrats running in the district were doing so with almost no funding.  So what went wrong?

The Democrats lost the minute they started spending all that money on the district and advertising it as a referendum on Trump. Reports on the ground say the residents were inundated with mail, volunteers and advertisements on tv. People in the area are most likely breathing a sigh of relief now that the torrent is over.

The reason Democrats do all these things they believe in the conventional wisdom that higher turn out benefits Democrats while lower turnout benefits Republicans. The problem with relying on conventional wisdom is that you never take the time to understand why it came about and instead rely on it blindly.

The theory is that Republicans vote no matter what and that Democrats need to be led to the voting booths by hand. This could not be further from the truth in this environment. Democrats are angry. They would have come out to vote whether you spent money or not. Republicans on the other hand are divided between the regular conservatives and the Trumpian nationalists. There is friction between the two as there have been some issues where they have not been able to compromise on. For all intents and purposes Handel was a regular conservative. By making the issue a national referendum on Trump the Democrat strategists forced the nationalists to come out as well and vote for her.

In this environment a lower turnout helps Democrats as they are the side that is more energized. The race in South Carolina is a perfect example. The district was leaned a lot more Republican than the one in Georgia. The turnout was lower so the Democrats did better.

It is very sad that with 50 million the Democrats could not afford better strategists.

For the Republicans

I have a confession to make. I wanted Ossoff to win. I believe Republicans have not figured out that they either hang together or hang separately. An Ossof win would have forced them to learn that.

Luckily the South Carolina contest happened on the same day so we can still learn the same lesson. For better or worse conservatives have to realize that they are not the only ones in the Republican party anymore. Nothing frustrates me more than conservative thinkers like Ben Shapiro refusing to support Trump when he enacts policies that the nationalist faction wants him to enact. I understand that it may not be exactly what you want but having the other members of your coalition there lets more of your people get elected so you do get some of the stuff you want. It is literally a difference between getting some of the things you want and nothing. What Ben Shapiro and the rest have not figured out is if nationalists get nothing from Trump then there is no reason for us to support the Republicans in the future.

The Georgia race should be an object lesson for Republicans. The opponent spent unlimited amounts of money and lost by a bigger margin than Clinton did. The different factions in the party united has the potential to score even greater majorities in 2018.

Has Warren Been Bought By Big Banks?

th (4).jpg

The Republicans have started work on undoing the damage done to the banking industry by Dodd-Frank. Predictably Democrats like Elizabeth Warren have gone all out in defending this bill. It is one thing to support a bill in its inception without seeing its real world consequences. It is quite another to keep supporting it when the bill is put in practice. At this point we have to ask ourselves. Have Elizabeth Warren and the Democrats been bought by lobbyists from Giant banks?

Dodd- Frank

Dodd Frank has been disastrous for the financial industry. Elizabeth Warren and the Democrats say they support the bill because they feel that banks should be reined in from becoming too big to fail. Four banks went from controlling 11% of the banking industry to controlling nearly half after Dodd-Frank. Giant banks went from controlling 23% of the banking industry to controlling more than 60%.

Dodd-Frank has decimated the small banks that Elizabeth Warren and the Democrats say they want to protect. Since Dodd-Frank 25% of small banks have closed. Bank of America controls more of the banking industry than all small banks COMBINED. Before Dodd-Frank hundreds of new banks were opening up. After Dodd-Frank only 3 new banks opened up. There used to be 14000 banks in America now there just a little more than 6000 and dwindling.

Dodd-Frank has been hugely beneficial for the big banks. It has helped them clear away the competition and grab more of the market. They went from being too big to fail to too giant to fail. If Elizabeth Warren and Democrats were serious about the threat of banks that are too big to fail then they would join President Trump in the Republicans in finding a solution for it. The fact that they insist on supporting a bill that has had the empirical effects Dodd-Frank has had should raise suspicion on their motives. After all what better way to help big banks than by creating a loyal opposition.

Follow The Money

In order to find out who the banking industry has purchased we just have to follow the money. In recent elections Democrats have been raising a lot more money than Republicans. Obama and Clinton both outraised and outspent Romney and Trump in their elections. The difference was glaring in the last election as Clinton spent more than twice President Trump did 1.4 billion to 600 million.

The raw numbers are not enough to go on of course. After all what if all 600 million of President Trumps warchest came from big banks but none of the 1.4 billion of Clinton did? In the last election wall street donated 48.5 million to Clinton and donated 19000 to President Trump. According to opensecrets.org Chase, Citibank, and Bank of America are among the top 10 donors of Clinton. These companies appear nowhere in the top donors of the Trump  campaign.

Given all the money that the big banks are giving to Warren and the Democrats is it any wonder that they are protecting a law that allow giant banks to eliminate their competition?

 

The Truth About Gun Violence

gun-control-cagle-cartoon

Democrats are quick to link anything they possibly can to gun control. They argue that since Republicans are hesitant to pass laws limiting the second amendment rights of citizens they are responsible for these killings as well. As usual since the Trump administration and mainstream Republican sources are unwilling or unable to offer up a counter argument to this accusation so it falls to independent bloggers like me to do so. Once I am done you will find it is actually the Republicans doing more to stop gun violence than Democrats. In essence what I will show that it is immigration from the developing countries into developed ones that cause most of the violence not any gun control laws that a country may or may not have.

Developed Countries

Do you ever notice that when liberals give stats about gun violence it is always a comparison between the US and other developed countries. I admit this does make sense. Developed countries have different cultures, laws, and habits than developing countries. The reason that I even bring this up is to point out that it is not racist to think like this. Even liberals acknowledge it when they refuse to compare the US to developing nations in the same continent.

Immigration

When presented with the list of countries which the US is compared to pay attention to the ones with the highest rate of gun violence and the lowest. The nations with the lowest rates like Japan or Australia have draconian immigration policies to keep unwanted immigrants out. Australia even goes the extra mile of isolating illegal immigrants in a special island. They also have the added benefit of being island nations surrounded by water which form another natural barrier. Other countries that have relatively low rate are separated from developing countries by other nations like Poland or Hungary which have put up literal walls to control unwanted immigration. The countries with the highest rates like Greece or Italy are on the front lines of the migration crisis but even they have the Mediterranean Sea providing a natural barrier.

America is in a unique situation where it directly shares a sizable land border with a developing nation. To make matters worse that developing nation shares borders with a whole host of others each clamoring to get in. To further entice the people America offers something other developed countries don’t. Birthright Citizenship.

Statistics

It is of course important to provide facts to back up my statements. These are all stats from 2013 as this was the only year I could find comparative stats.

In that year the US had 3.55 death per 100,000 people. Mexico had a rate of 12.55 deaths. Columbia had 35.08 and Venezuela had 32.66. El Salvador had a rate of 52.39. The other countries are somewhere in the middle.

The Truth

There is nothing wrong with gun control laws but it is not the solution to our problem. What is worse is it asks people to give up constitutional rights for no reason at all setting precedent that we can legislate away rights when we want to. To the credit of Republicans they have seen the unique geographical disadvantages of the United States and are working to secure the border solving the problem without requiring people to give up constitutional rights.

 

 

How Democrats Incite Political Assassinations

hands

This is part of my #bloodontheirhands series of articles.

Political assassinations have proven to be of great benefit to the party that calls for them. In the American scenario not only do the Democrats have a chance to replace any slain Republicans in special elections they also delay any votes and derail the agenda of the opposition. Rand Paul was already confirmed to be in the practice area when the attempted assassination happened. If the Democrat assassin were successful the Republican majority would have dropped to 51-49 making everything that much harder to pass. Details are scarce about who else was there but if by chance two more senators were then the Democrats would have made the Republicans lose their majority pending special elections. Best of all some statements of sympathy afterwards absolves you of all blame.

Now that Democrats have brought political assassinations into American politics it is important for us to understand how they use dog whistles to tell their followers that it is perfectly fine to kill Republicans.

Step 1: Dehumanization

The first step is to use your media mouthpieces and allies to paint Republicans as the enemy of humankind. Take a look at the New York Times, Washington Post, or any other major news outlets. Whenever a Republican does anything it is because they want to destroy humanity, destroy the country as we know it, or slay you personally. There is no nuance or any other motive. Republicans are portrayed as parasites that must be killed if the body is to survive.

My favorite example is Dodd-Frank. According to the propaganda arm of the Democrats the Republicans want it repealed because they are greedy and have been paid for by the giant banks. They do not care whether or not they cause a financial crash. Nothing is mentioned about how at the end of a bill designed to prevent banks from becoming too big to fail giant corporations have somehow increased the market share of these banks from 11% to 43%. Quadrupling their size. No mention of how a bill meant to protect and nurture small banks caused 25% of them to close. Notice that there is no reason given why the bill is good. It is just necessary and the Republicans are evil because they oppose it because the propaganda arm of the Democrats say so.

Once you succeed in portraying Republicans like this then it becomes an act of good that is even heroic for them to be slain.

Step 2: Normalization

The second step is to normalize the portrayal. Every story must be of world shattering importance where the Republicans step up to destroy everything that is good in the world. Experts have warned Democrats of this stance as there would be nowhere to escalate to after. They are of course wrong. These stories do have an escalation and the Democrats have been sending their base dog whistles for someone to step up and do it.

In order for this to be successful it must be a unified effort. When a Democrat or Democrat leaning voter listens to any source he trusts whether it be the media arm, the political arm, or the celebrities in the entertainment arm of the DNC he must hear the same message. Republicans are evil and are coming to destroy you and all you hold dear. They must be destroyed. This reinforces the belief in the mind of the average citizen.

More than the image of the Republicans themselves the reaction to Republicans must be normalized too. Violence against Trump supporters, disruption of their rallies, tear gas employed against their children must be seen to be done over and over again. Celebrities then use their platform to advocate for this violence in the form of “harmless satire”.

At the end of step 2 violent reprisals against Republicans whether through economic, physical, or social means must become the norm.

Step 3: Deification

This is the final step of the creation of the political assassin. The calls and acts of violence against Republicans must not only be normalized but they must be applauded. In this step violence is elevated to be the superior form of retaliation, while other forms while still valid are less worthy of praise. Katie Griffith beheading Trump, plays calling for his violent death, musicians from the entertainment arm calling for his death and the sale of his wife into prostitution and slavery are all met with cheers from the Democrats.

This sends a dog whistle to their base that if they do these things not only do the Democrats approve but they applaud them for it as well. Not everyone will take up the cause of course and it would not be beneficial if everyone did. The Democrats only need to swing a few votes and a successful political assassination would go a long way towards cowing the rest of the Republicans. The majority can show their disdain and preference for violence against Republicans through social media while a chosen few can do the actual deed.

This is how Democrats incite political assassinations. #bloodontheirhands