A Vast Left-Wing Democratic Conspiracy is Out to Get Trump in as Complicated a Way as Possible

Democrats could simply argue that Donald Trump is insane and should be removed under the 25th Amendment. After all, it certainly seems likely. Instead they’re wallowing in convoluted conspiracy theories involving Russia, Ukraine and WikiLeaks that don’t appear to be true, much less understandable. Any idiot can make something simple sound complicated, and that’s what Democrats are doing.

32 thoughts on “A Vast Left-Wing Democratic Conspiracy is Out to Get Trump in as Complicated a Way as Possible

  1. Fox News, the fake news extraordinaire, owned by Australian Rupert Murdoch, smacks of successful foreign influence in US elections, having a history of actually and demonstrably turning US elections, including that of 2016.

    And CBS gave their favored Trump campaign a valued $5 billion dollars of “in kind” publicity while blocking coverage of the Bernie Sanders campaign.

    It’s funny how minor influences, even those lacking evidence, take priority over the major foreign influences such as that coming from Israel and Australia.

    Conservative Democrats are so angry that the US unipolar rule of the world has been challenged by a nation that has resisted and overturned a US installed puppet government that their only response to the elephant turd dropped in the media is hysteria over a possible mouse turd.

  2. Fine. Let’s talk conspiracies.
    Take a look at today’s DJIA. The news spent almost as much time on it as they did about the two sisters who were born on the same month and day having their babies on the same month and day. Apparently it’s the worse DJIA in December since 1931. What? December’s not over? Shut up. There’s airtime to fill. They have to come up with SOMETHING and it sure as hell isn’t going to be about how the DJIA is meaningless.
    Take a look at the reporting on how Amazon is moving in to Long Island City. They’re gonna bring 50,000 jobs with an average salary of $150,000. (Or some such figures.) None of the reporting discusses the actual salaries. Is it 49,998 people making $150,000 each and one person making $1 and one person making $299,999? Is it 49,999 people making $1 each and 1 person making $7.5 billion? Who knows? Maybe Amazon. But certainly not anyone who’s talking about it.
    Climate change? A treaty was signed! Just keep sorting your recyclables, even though that’s worse for the environment in some cases than just burning it all at home.
    Conspiracies? I think if people simply started telling the truth, the absolute existential terror of how close we are to global collapse and a civilization-level endpoint would actually, literally, decimate the population through suicide.
    Conspiracy isn’t Left or Right. The whole system requires that everyone work together to ignore the real problems. THAT is the conspiracy. We all play along, and we all kid ourselves.

    • Indeed.

      Big Oil conspired to keep climate change secret, Big Tobacco conspired to keep lung cancer secret, and Big Sugar conspired to keep heart disease secret.

      The citiizen’s counter is always to ask, “Cui bono?”

      Forget the politics, the smoke and mirrors, and who’s side you’re on – follow the money.

  3. oh, Look!

    The [Republican] Senate Intelligence Committee has joined the Vast Left Wing Conspiracy along with Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.


    Even as they support Trump on all fronts, they still seek to undermine him with this huge network of lying liars and bribed technocrats. Yep, that’s a convoluted conspiracy theory all right.

    I wonder how much it took to bribe Zuckerberg, anyway.

    • I have heard near zero about the Zionist interference in the 2016 election even though one doesn’t need a magnifying glass to catch a glimpse of it.

      And Trump moved the US embassy into what he called the capital of Israel into Jerusalem, Cui bono?

      “US President Donald Trump called Jerusalem the capital of Israel on December 6 and began the process of moving his country’s embassy to the city.”


      • … and your point is? What? That there is only room for one co-conspirator? If we discover Israel tried to influence the election that somehow means Russia didn’t?

        If anything, proving the man conspired with one country just makes *more* likely that he conspired with another.

      • “If we discover Israel tried to influence the election that somehow means Russia didn’t?”

        Here you introduce some twisted logic, and in an attempt to play ventriloquist, imply someone else is responsible for it.

        Another Conservative Hocus-pocus pirouette.


      • > “If we discover Israel tried to influence the election that somehow means Russia didn’t?”

        A careful reading in context would reveal that I am trying to make sense of the post to which I responded. i.e. “Israel” was brought up in a discussion concerning Trump and Russia. The astute reader will further note that I am doing so in a sarcastic manner.

        Put plainly: I do not see any relevancy whatsoever.

        Do you?

    • To CH:

      Oh, look, indeed:

      1) Quote the article: “Internet Research Agency*** ‘leveraged pre-existing, legitimate grievances wherever they could’.” The unmitigated NERVE of those Russki MoFos! Is is precisely HRC’s failure to consider, much less “leverage,” the roughly 2 million, common “legitimate grievances” of the American registered voter that cost her the election!!!

      2) If you think for a moment that the Republican part of this apparent bipartisan effort has anything to do with harming their party’s president then you need to seriously reconsider. For example:

      The whole bonanza is simply an opportunity to squash any and all web-based dissent … no matter how appropriate, legitimate, sorely needed and constitutionally “guaranteed.”

      I’d assume the Democratic motivation for the bipartisan-fest is split between the above and also realizing HRC’s dream of starting WWIII — with all attendant profits^^^ accruing to her bicoastal “hi-tech” sector supporters.

      3) I’m sure the miserable pimp Z-berg, and the rest of his ilk, were privately informed by congressional jumbos that they would play ball (as #2) or else have their information-supply contracts with NSA/FBI/CIA/DHS/DOD/DEA etc., etc., etc. … severely slashed.

      4) Another quote. “Black voter turnout declined in 2016 for the first time in 20 years in a presidential election, but it is impossible to determine whether that was the result of the Russian campaign.”

      a) what election effects ARE/WILL BE ABLE TO BE DETERMINED THE RESULT of this and/or presumably, many more “Russian campaigns” to be revealed by congressional corporate clients?

      b) I’d suggest that the Black community has been clued-in on the cynical p/matronizing manipulation of them by the Clinton grifter duet for some time now and didn’t need no stinkin’ Russki’s to wise them up.

      5) When will the congressional huffers & puffers subpoena the DNC servers?

      *** Run by “ally” of Rootin’ Tootin’ Putin.
      ^^^ Based on the assurances of HRC’s “intellectual” neo-con supporters that exceptional USA can start and survive a nuclear war with Russia and/or China.

  4. “In 1986, the internationally quoted price of oil veered near and less than $10/barrel, a price that placed U.S. oil producers under pointed pressure. Sensitive to their plight, our then Vice President of the United States cloaked himself in the mantle of his deep Texas oilman roots and organized a trip to Saudi Arabia to converse with Saudi’s King Fahd. The purpose of Mr. Bush’s meeting was to focus on bolstering oil prices and to enlist Saudi Arabia, as the world’s leading oil producer and OPEC’s de facto leader, to support the price of oil by cutting its production and imposing discipline among its OPEC brethren.”

    That’s right, George H.W. Bush went to Saudi Arabia to ask them to RAISE oil prices so that his Texas Crude could sell at a higher price to make it worth pumping.


    Talk about emOILuments!

    Democratic Party rage has always rung hollow to me.

  5. > convoluted conspiracy theories involving Russia, Ukraine and WikiLeaks that don’t appear to be true, much less understandable.

    That’s FUNNY.

    It’s nowhere near as crazy and convoluted as the opposing theory. “Every single cybersecurity firm in the country and every intelligence agency on the planet, all of Trump’s cronies, his son, Facebook, Microsoft, Twitter, and multiple Russians are ALL in on a giant conspiracy to … uh … mumble mumble Hillary mumble … even though they have nothing to gain and everything to lose thereby.”


    “Some dishonest rich people who have done a lot of dishonest business together conspired to dupe the US public for personal gain.”

    I assert that is not only easily understandable, but it’s happened so many times before that it should be the first assumption of any informed adult.

    As for true: Butina’s plead guilty, DJTJR has admitted to conspiracy to peddle the influence of the highest office in the land, and his contact has admitted to being a Russian operative. … OR they’re all lying in order to support a conspiracy without a point.

      • “It’s politically correct to hate on Russia these days. To like Russia even a bit means you support Vladimir Putin, or are impressed by the Russian mafia and probably hate polar bears, or something.

        “If it is so bad to do business with the Russians, or even want to do business with the Russians, then maybe these companies should cut and run before the righteous threaten them with boycotts or defame their name in the press.

        “Here’s who’s doing business with the bad guys.” at the link:


        Russia is loaded with capitalist bastards both doing business with and funding both Democrats and Republicans.

        Russia was a big capitalist trading partner with the US before Hillary and Victoria Nuland pulled off their coup in Ukraine.

      • Followed the link. It starts with “Ever since the Democratic National Committee decided to turn their disdain for Bernie Sanders into disdain for Russians … ”

        Like I said, “Mumble mumble Hillary mumble”

    • > Russia is loaded with capitalist bastards both doing business with …

      True, that. Not sure what it’s got to do with the topic at hand, but it is true.

      With everyone doing business with the Dastardly Rooskies, one just has to wonder why so many Trump cronies told so many lies about it.

      • “one just has to wonder why so many Trump cronies told so many lies about it.”

        I wonder (sort of) why the Democrats made such a big deal about it.

        Whatever the reason(s) (fact or fiction), it really gave the losers something to talk (keep their lips flapping) about.

        Dead air is deadly.

    • Actually, no, CrazyH. Only the NSA, CIA, and FBI have made the allegations, and only Crowdstrike was allowed to analyze the servers themselves. Crowdstrike, by the way, got caught inventing out of thin air the claim that the Russians were hacking an app Ukrainian artillery was using, leading to losses by the Ukrainian army. The Ukrainians themselves said there was no evidence to back the claims, so we have proof Crowdstrike engaged in threat inflation to make the Russians look like more of a threat in another case. And since the FBI never took a look at the DNC servers before they were removed, a proper chain of evidence will never be established in a court of law, which means you’ll never be able to charge Russia collusion in regards to the alleged hacks. And to prove anything NSA & CIA officials will have to testify about how they were able to obtain the evidence, which will mean revealing exactly what they can and can’t do, something they’re loath to reveal to the world.

      • Thank you, austerlitz99.

        One can’t reason with crazy.

        Long time passing and short memories make a common basis for reasoned discussion a scarce commodity.

        But it really doesn’t matter who calls out the facts if there are facts. And the facts should be able to stand alone without the support of bluster.

        If there are facts.

      • Don’t confuse me with the facts, austerlitz99 ! Mr Mueller et consortes have been carryiing out this allegedly «full thorough» investigation for more than a year and a half, withour producing any evidence «of the [alleged] Russian government’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 [US] presidential election». Plenty of evidence to show that those surrounding Mr Trump are scumbags, but none of efforts on the part of the Russian government to «interfere» (whatever that means) with the US presidential election of 2016. Either Mr Mueller and his team are singularly incompetent, or Mr Rosenstein appointed them to do something else entirely ; viz, dig up dirt on Mr Trump and his campaign – which hardly requires a great deal of competence – under the guise of investigating alleged interference by a hostile foreign government (I’m not here referring to, e g, Israel or Saudi Arabia) in those elections….


      • CrazyH-

        In our justice system, the accused is presumed to be innocent and the prosecutor must provide evidence “beyond a shadow of a doubt” in a criminal case like Russiagate, so it’s your responsibility, not mine, to provide sufficient evidence. I (or Trump’s lawyers if it ever goes to trial) only have to poke enough holes in the case, which I think I’ve done quite adequately here.

        There’s no obvious quid pro quo either between Trump and the Russians. Trump’s Moscow hotel never went beyond a Kremlin assistant telling the Trump organization they wouldn’t get involved in such a minor deal. Trump’s been more confrontational with Russia in the Ukraine than Obama was, selling the Ukraine weapons (which Obama refused to do), and planning to deploy more of our soldiers to Eastern Europe (Camp Trump coming to Poland). Staging exercises on Russia’s borders, sending warships into the Black Sea, etc. I suppose you want Trump to slap more sanctions on Russia that will only strengthen Putin’s control and risk WWIII over Syria, right?

      • @austerlitz99

        > so it’s your responsibility, not mine, to provide sufficient evidence.

        While that is true in a court of law – you’ve missed my point. This is not a trial, it’s a debate. I’m taking “pro” and you’re taking “con” – yet you’ve made very few arguments to support your side, and your counters to my points fall short of the mark. (when you bother to address them at all: Trump Tower meeting anyone?)

        Even if it was a court of law, the defense would still have to answer these same questions, and provide evidence to support their side of the story.

        We the people see some stuff happening. If Trump is not guilty, then why is this stuff happening?

        Your point seems to be that DastardlyRussiansGate is all a big hoax – but that explanation just doesn’t hold water.

        1) The DNC is lying because Hillary lost. The biggest hole in that theory is that the email leak, hacking, Trump Tower meeting, Moscow Project and social media blitz all happened BEFORE the election. So, unless they’ve got a time machine there must be some OTHER explanation for these events – one that has yet to be revealed.

        Why leak emails that make the DNC look bad anyway? That certainly doesn’t help their cause.

        2) The CIA, FBI, NSA, and HS are all lying because they want to restart the cold war for money. I have just a whole lot of trouble believing that on its face, but let’s go with it for argument’s sake.

        The War on Terra is *already* providing sufficient funding – why go back to beating a dead horse? Americans aren’t scared of Godless Communists any more, in fact many Americans are identifying as Socialists.

        So, okay, they decide to revive the dead horse. Why go about it in such a ridiculous fashion? Why not instead focus on weapons of mass destruction, terrorism, and the Middle East? Those are proven winners in this millennium.

        Trump is doing a fine job of reigniting problems with Russia anyway – if that’s what they want, why don’t they support him instead?

        Trump loves authoritarianism and thuggish dictators – why in the world would secret police seek to undermine him in the first place? He’s their kind of guy.

        3) Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram are all lying … because why? They all do business in Russia, so they’re pissing off customers and spending money trying to fix non-existant problems? Making themselves look bad in front of the entire world … because why?

        4) Congressional Republicans are lying to undermine their man in the oval office? The one that’s giving them everything they want? Again, I find that just real hard to believe.

        5) Cloudstrike has been bribed – again I find that very hard to believe, but okay – why are the other firms going along with it? Have they all been bribed?

        6) EITHER Each of these disparate groups coincidentally decided upon the same hoax independently OR it’s a huge conspiracy. Which?

        7) Can you provide any evidence whatsoever of these hoaxes? Emails, letters, stool pigeons, anything at all?

        In the absence of a substantial ‘con’ argument – ‘pro’ takes it.

  6. Impeaching Trump in the House might be the kind of publicity stunt that could make the Democrats appear to be less effete, without actually breaking promises made by them to Wall Street in exchange for their money.

    Democrats are incensed. The truth that their angry mob holds is that Trump is guilty. But since when do Republicans consider Democrat beliefs as sufficient evidence to compel action? Did fear of Democrat outrage prevent the denial of consideration of Obama’s selection for Supreme Court deter them?

    How would Trump’s removal from office happen without any evidence that the Republican Senate majority will accept as being in conformance with the truth of their own mob?

    Democrats, once again could win for losing by explaining their failure to remove Trump from office on not having enough Democrats in the Senate, and then use that argument, once again, in a “get out the vote” campaign, and after having attaining a majority, Pelosi could declare, once again, that “Impeachment is off the table,” just as she did in the case of George W. Bush.

    Fool the Democratic Party electorate once, shame on the Democratic Party leadership; fool them again, shame on the Democratic Party’s electorate.

    • Pelosi might think it will be impressive to run impeachment through the house. But when it gets to the Senate and fails, even though Pelosi thinks it will show her as tough and smart and cool, it won’t because it will be failure. Sanders and Pelosi are just about the same age. The difference is that she’s a doddering old fool. Sanders is not.

      • Surely, Alex, it is the difference in external genitalia between these two figures which is of the greatest importance ?… 😉


      • The sad part? Although Henri’s making a joke, there’s a lot of people who really think that the people (male/female/diverse) who voted against Hillary (who is bestest friends forever with War Criminal Henry Kissinger) did so because of her womanhood.
        Hillary isn’t much of a woman. I’ve met much more impressive versions of the model. Women who were smart and tough and kind and clever and salty and Hillary’s a goddamned ghost compared to them–an empty husk with two mouths and zero morality.
        She couldn’t beat Donald Trump. She can’t find her Goldman Sachs speech transcripts. She can’t find the capacity to be sickened by her association with Henry Kissinger.
        True story: I was speaking to one of HRC’s supporters the other day. The conversation drifted to Pelosi. “Oh, I’m so glad Pelosi’s going to be Speaker! She’s great.”
        “So what did she do last time she was speaker that impressed you the most?”
        “Oh, I don’t follow politics.”
        That’s a surprisingly large cohort of HRC’s supporters in a nutshell: “I don’t know anything about politics, but I love Hillary, and I don’t know anything about what she’s done, and I won’t listen to anything negative about her either. Why can’t you let me have this?”
        Go ask a Bernie supporter why they’re voting for him. I’ve done it at least a dozen times. They ALWAYS have REASONS. Not, “Oh, I love old Jewish guys who can build spice racks!” But real reasons. Try it yourselves.

      • @alex_the_tired on December 18, 2018 at 2:10 PM


        I like this.

        Strong intelligent women are NOT the enemy of strong intelligent men.

        (Forgive me for saying this, but you are outgrowing your moniker. Too energetic for the name “tired”.)

        (I worked in a badly mismanaged, demoralizing engineering department, and a few people would come to me after a bad day for a tongue-in-cheek, random “daily affirmation” read to them by me in a mock ceremonious style from a handbook kept on my desk entitled “Effective Phrases for Performance Appraisals”, for a mild moment of levity amidst all the negativity.)

      • «Although Henri’s making a joke, …» But Alex, I was deadly serious – with emphasis on the adverb….

        (Loved that conversation, by the way, not least that punchline : «Oh, I don’t follow politics»….) 😉


      • > Strong intelligent women are NOT the enemy of strong intelligent men.

        Megadittos. They are, in fact, the perfect partners for strong, intelligent men (or other strong, intelligent women for that matter)

        One might postulate that weak, stupid, men are the only kind who feel threatened by strong, intelligent women – but I’ll let the American Preacher speak for himself …

      • Alex-

        Agree 100% It was identity politics, which is fine, but then you need to have an economic program that will win you enough midwestern votes to get the Swing states. It all goes back to the Clintonian DLC strategy- “they have no where else to go, so screw labor, blacks, etc.” Turns out they can stay home or even vote Republican when the Republican is giving voice to their hatred of the elites and corporations. Remember Trump’s ad attacking Lloyd Blankfein among others?

        After midnight on the day of the 2016 election, I signed off with a post on Facebook congratulating the Democratic Establishment for electing Trump. A Hillbot friend of mine posted back “No way. If that scumbag wins, it’s because all the racists of this country have been activated – by Trump – in reaction to eight years of an African-American man in the White House.” But Racist Trump did better than Romney with Black and Latino voters. And Hillary did worse than Obama in 2012 with White voters.

        A lot now depends on what happens to the economy in 2020. Will it crash before or after the election? If before, Trump’ll probably be sunk, but if it’s after the election an establishment Dem (even Biden) will probably lose. Bernie Sanders is the only candidate guaranteed to beat Trump, but of course he’d transform the party, get rid of the consultants and apparatchiks, so he must be opposed by the entire media/establishment complex to their last breath. And if they deny Bernie again, it’ll be clear we need to break the Dems by starting a 3rd party before climate catastrophe kills us all.

  7. Any idiot can make something simple sound complicated …

    But to do so, Ted, and still preserve one’s political power and perks, and «emoluments» ; that takes a certain kind of idiocy that not every simple run-of-the-mill idiot possesses….


Leave a Reply