{"id":64162,"date":"2018-10-28T18:57:27","date_gmt":"2018-10-28T22:57:27","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.thedailygouge.com\/?p=64162"},"modified":"2018-10-28T18:57:36","modified_gmt":"2018-10-28T22:57:36","slug":"the-daily-gouge-archive-friday-october-26th-2018","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.thedailygouge.com\/?p=64162","title":{"rendered":"The Daily Gouge Archive, Friday, October 26th, 2018"},"content":{"rendered":"

It’s Friday, October 26th, 2018…but before we begin, though the facts aren’t all in, we’re already smelling a rat; hence, t<\/strong>his tweet by Scott Adams as forwarded by Pete Groetzinger pretty much sums up our thoughts, at least for the moment:<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

And though we’ll reserve judgement pending an investigation by federal law enforcement personnel with no connection whatsoever to (i) the Clintons; (ii) The Obamas; (iii) the Russian collusion scam; or, (iv) the Hillary email cover-up, again, for now we’re quite convinced these “bombs” were deliberately designed to distract from the Dimocratic-created disaster currently marching towards our southern border.\u00a0 Should the facts prove us wrong, we’ll happily stand corrected.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Meanwhile, as this item from the New York Post<\/em> via Ed Harvey relates, at least one Progressive presidential hopeful attempting to recover from an ill-advised expression of utter disdain for America<\/span><\/em><\/span><\/a>\u00a0has tried to use the “bombings” to elevate his own importance:<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u2018Device\u2019 sent to Cuomo had nothing to do with bombs sent to political figures<\/span><\/a><\/span><\/h1>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

“A \u201cdevice\u201d has been sent to Gov. Andrew Cuomo\u2019s Manhattan office, he<\/em><\/span> announced Wednesday \u2014 but later revealed it was just a thumb drive<\/em><\/span> containing information about the Proud Boys<\/strong><\/span>…”<\/p>\n

Soooo…the “device”…was a thumb drive.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Rumors Cuomo, when told what the “device” actually was<\/em><\/span>, tried to shove it up his kiester immediately adjacent to his head remain unconfirmed.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Now, here’s The Gouge<\/em>!<\/strong><\/p>\n

First up, courtesy of FOX News<\/em>, Frank Miniter explains…<\/strong><\/p>\n

Here\u2019s why Hillary Clinton losing her security clearance matters for the rest of us<\/span><\/span><\/a><\/span><\/h1>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

“Hillary Clinton no longer has a security clearance.\u00a0A\u00a0letter\u00a0released from the Department of State to Senator Chuck Grassley, a Republican from Iowa, says she lost her clearance on August 30 at her request<\/span><\/em>.<\/span><\/strong><\/span> The State Department also withdrew security clearances from five people Clinton had previously requested clearances for, as she had designated them \u201cresearchers.\u201d One was Cheryl Mills, who was once\u00a0the deputy White House counsel for President Bill Clinton who defended him during his 1999 impeachment trial. The names of the others were redacted.<\/p>\n

The mainstream media is treating the loss of these clearances as a move by Clinton to avoid a political snub by the Trump administration.<\/span> Treating this security issue in such a purely political manner misses a growing problem that the media is purposely trying to ignore, as an honest analysis of it doesn\u2019t help their attacks on the current administration<\/span><\/em>.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Hillary Clinton should<\/em><\/span> have lost her clearance back when the government found out she had classified information on her private servers<\/em><\/span>.<\/span> Actually<\/em><\/span>, they should have done this even before that<\/em><\/span>; she should<\/em><\/span> have lost her security clearance when she left her public position, as secretary of state, for her private quest to get the nation\u2019s top job<\/em><\/span>.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

What other employer allows former employees to access their networks<\/em><\/span>?<\/span> Companies commonly terminate employees email accounts and access<\/em> before they even tell them they\u2019ve been let go<\/em><\/span>.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

But this isn\u2019t<\/em><\/span> some private<\/em><\/span> company.<\/span> This is our federal government<\/em><\/span>, an unfathomably large bureaucracy that has a lot of our personal information, top-secret data and so much more in its hands<\/span><\/em>.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

All of this should focus our attention yet again on how wide-open our government has allowed itself to become<\/strong><\/span>…<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

…<\/span>By overlooking and explaining away how Hillary Clinton treated government data, including classified information, and then covering up what Imran Awan allegedly did for years in the House, the mainstream media has done a massive disservice to the state of our democracy. Light needs to be shined on Congress and on anyone who abuses the safeguards of our system so that reforms can take place.<\/span><\/strong><\/span>“<\/p>\n

Rest assured light is one thing neither the Clintons nor Congress can ever afford to have shined on their shenanigans.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Next up, the\u00a0WSJ<\/em>‘s Dan Henninger comes down where we’ve been since this “caravan” kicked off:<\/strong><\/p>\n

The October Surprise Arrives<\/span><\/a><\/span><\/h1>\n

The politics of the migrant caravan sound a lot like the Kavanaugh nomination fiasco<\/span><\/a>.<\/span><\/h3>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

“It looks as if the 2018 election\u2019s October Surprise is about to arrive\u2014from Honduras<\/em><\/span>.<\/strong><\/span> There they are\u2014all 7,000 or so of them meandering across Mexico, on television 24\/7 and the front pages every day. Unavoidably, everyone is forced to shape an opinion about it. <\/span>Unavoidably, it\u2019s political.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Most media coverage runs on two joined tracks. One, the caravan is a human tragedy. Two, Donald Trump and the Republicans are<\/em>, needless to say, on the wrong political side of the tragedy<\/em><\/span>.<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Does this sound familiar<\/em><\/span>?<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

That\u2019s right, the October Surprise<\/em><\/span> in its media and political particulars sounds similar<\/em><\/span> to the September Surprise<\/em><\/span>\u2014the Kavanaugh nomination hearings.<\/strong><\/span> The Senate Judiciary Democrats dropped the Christine Blasey Ford bombshell late in the process to drive a wedge between Republicans and female voters.<\/strong><\/span> It backfired<\/em><\/span>.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

…Now<\/em><\/span> come the Hondurans<\/span><\/em><\/strong><\/span>…Unfortunately for the Democrats<\/em><\/span>, the Honduran caravan is the Kavanaugh nomination all over again<\/span><\/em>.<\/strong><\/span> (A second one with thousands is forming now in Guatemala.) It\u2019s a massive event that forces voters to think about immigration, an issue Democrats thought had been weaponized this summer against Republicans.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

To borrow an old Marx Brothers joke, the question about the caravan for voters is<\/em>: Who are you going to believe, media<\/span> or your own eyes<\/span><\/em>?<\/span> Tens of millions of Americans have been staring for a week at the images of this caravan and asking: What exactly are we expected to do<\/em><\/span> when it arrives<\/em><\/span> in Texas?<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

…Amid whatever is \u201cnormal\u201d in our politics anymore, voters have had to process two overwhelming pre-election events: the Kavanaugh nomination and now these migrant caravans heading toward the U.S. With each, the Democrats<\/em><\/span> reduced their political proposition for voters to just one thing: We care<\/em><\/span>.<\/span> For a lot of people<\/em>, I suspect, saying only that you care won\u2019t be sufficient reason to earn their vote<\/em><\/span>.<\/strong><\/span>“<\/p>\n

In a related item brought to us by NRO<\/em>, the great Victor Davis Hanson highlights how…<\/strong><\/p>\n

\n
\n

Midterm Optics Are Bad for Progressives<\/span><\/a><\/span><\/h1>\n

Hordes of immigrants and screaming protesters won\u2019t win many moderate votes<\/span><\/span><\/a>.<\/span><\/span><\/h3>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

“F<\/strong><\/span><\/span>or progressives<\/em><\/span>, the looming midterm elections apparently should not<\/em><\/span> hinge on a booming economy, a near-record-low unemployment rate, a strong stock market, and unprecedented energy production<\/em><\/span>.<\/span> Instead<\/em><\/span>, progressives hope that race and gender questions overshadow pocketbook issues<\/em><\/span>.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

The media are fixated on another caravan of foreign nationals flowing toward the United States from Central America.<\/strong><\/span> More than 5,000 mostly Honduran migrants say they will cross through Mexico. Then they plan to crash the American border, enter the U.S. illegally, claim refugee status, and demand asylum. Once inside the United States, the newcomers will count on a variety of ways to avoid deportation.<\/p>\n

This gambit appears mysteriously timed<\/em><\/span> to arrive right before the U.S. midterms \u2014 apparently to create empathy and sway voters toward progressive candidates supporting a more relaxed immigration policy<\/em><\/span>.\u00a0<\/strong><\/span>Open-borders advocates and progressives assume<\/em><\/span> that if border-security officials are forced to detain the intruders and separate parents who broke the law from their children, it will make President Trump and Republican candidates appear cold-hearted and callous<\/span><\/em>.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Earlier this year<\/em>, a similar border melodrama<\/span> became sensationalized in the media and almost certainly dropped<\/span> Trump\u2019s approval ratings<\/em>.<\/span> But this<\/span> time around<\/em>, the optics may be different<\/span><\/em><\/strong><\/span>…”<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

We for one believe, if properly handled, the looming confrontation at the border could cement Trump’s reelection in 2020.\u00a0 Because, when it comes to the Progressive push for open borders, the majority of Americans are with Howard Beale when he observed…<\/strong><\/p>\n