1) Yesterday evening, a dear friend of mine asked me to comment on the HRC/Gabbard case from a #SunTzuForMAGA perspective, and I will in a moment. Before I do, I have to comment again on another story that's currently evolving, public support for Impeachment.
2) Twice now, I've delved into the data the polling outfits are putting forth, and I found it to be absolute malarkey. They have no idea what the majority of Americans want. What they know is what they want. These false polls are most dangerous in the following way.
3) They're used to manipulate key decision makers. For instance, let's say you're a Washington player and you're trying to plot out the best course from a purely political perspective. You look at these false polls, others quote them to you, and you leaning is affected.
4) These polls are a part of a sophisticated PSYOP perpetrated against America. They are learning from their previous failures, and adapting their methods. On the other hand, we do have a data point to focus on. It's from @parscale and is bedrock solid.
5) Brad tells us that those responding to the last rally in Dallas we over 20% self-identified as Democrats. Who remembers the phenomenon of Reagan Democrats in the 80s? Evidently, Brad has been monitoring a strong uptick in this direction. And what does that tell us?
6) First, allow me to reiterate that proper science never demands that you sacrifice your intellect or logic. Polling data, any political data must make logical sense. If you take Brad's number, it has to indicate that Democrats are lining up with Trump in growing numbers.
7) So let's go back to strategy. How many Republican Senators are there? The left is poking and prodding, testing and exploring their strengths and weaknesses, predilections and desires, each and every one of them. If they can turn McConnell, Impeachment succeeds.
8) McConnell is a poll of 1. Or, if they can turn 25 Republican Senators, they'll win their Impeachment. Now that's a poll. That's data. Can they turn 25 Republican Senators? Can they recruit just 1 Senate Majority Leader? That's a poll that matters.
9) Enough on that for now, and now to my friend's question. What she said, exactly, was that she fears our side becoming too enamored of Tulsi Gabbard, now that HRC is attacking her. This is an interesting, and worthy challenge for us to face. How do we respond, wisely?
10) Our first step is to consider, very simply, the following. HRC is the worst enemy we have. For the moment, she's worse even than Obama. Be clear, Tulsi is an enemy too. She'll rip the Constitution to shreds if she's elected POTUS, with her Socialist agenda.
11) Yet, for the moment, Tulsi is a far weaker, far less threatening enemy than HRC. So, our natural response of warm regard in light of HRC's vicious, virulent and 100% warrantless accusations is completely natural, completely understandable. Remember our ancient map.
12) Here's the map: 1) The Friend of my Friend is my Friend 2) The Enemy of my Friend is my Enemy 3) The Friend of my Enemy is my Enemy 4) The Enemy of my Enemy is my Friend
m
13) The fact that HRC has declared herself Tulsi's enemy does, in fact, and for the short term, place Tulsi in the position of temporary friend. To let that sink in, a principle is required: FRIENDS AND ENEMIES SWITCH ALL THE TIME, IN SHORT TERM OSCILLATION.
14) There is a wonderful term for this principle, actually, its outcome. There is no such thing as conflict without alliances of convenience. The term is Realpolitik. You ally with whom you do, for the reasons of the moment. It shifts. One alliance is replaced with its opposite.
15) So, my analysis leads to the following conclusion. By all means support Tulsi against HRC. It's merely an alliance of convenience. Our Enemy, HRC, is now a declared Enemy of Tulsi. That makes Tulsi our temporary Friend. But, make no mistake, in the end, Tulsi is our Enemy.
16) Let's nuance this a bit further, friends. I consider HRC to be pure evil, period. I hope that, if in a room with her, I'd refuse to shake her hand. I don't know what I'd do, as nothing like that has ever happened to me. Well, as far as Tulsi goes, I'd shake her hand any day.
17) Master Sun teaches us to never assume our enemies are evil. I do NOT assume that about HRC, I judge it. I don't imagine Tulsi is evil, in any way. I just disagree with what I know about her positions. If I find out otherwise, I'll say so. I'm not shy.
18) And now strategic again. HRC has NO idea how to win anything. She was a complete strategic idiot in 2016, and, how wonderful for us, she's doing it again right now. Her presence is like a black hole for the Democrats. They can't afford her.
m
19) Every single minute of time she gets in national media is a win for us. Our best, brightest hope would be 100% HRC all the time, every hour of every day. We might win a 47-state victory that way. Hell, we might win that the way things are now.
20) So, as to Tulsi, I can like her all day long, not judge her evil as of yet, and be temporary friends while HRC attacks. Oh wait, I forgot an important dynamic. This one is HUGE. Attacking DJT and us, his supporters, as if Russia got him elected was idiotic. It didn't work.
21) It is a logical and strategic error of literally EPIC proportions to whip out the same old, tired, braindead attack against one of your own. HRC and Tulsi would be friends, policywise. But, HRC isn't friends with anyone other than HRC. Just ask Bill.
22) The error, though, is in the tell, in the reveal. HRC doesn't believe the Russians are behind Tulsi for a New York or, sadly her home town and my own, a Chicago minute. She has no need of belief behind her words. She's just a lying liar, and nowhere near as talented as Bill.
23) No, most Democrats may not be able to walk all the logic through instantly, in the face of their understandable belief system. But, once again, HRC has revealed her despicable nature too early, and with plenty of time for everyone to see through her perfidious claim.
24) If there was anyone in the country left who still thought HRC might have a fresh thought in that decrepit head of hers, they've now been utterly disproved. Attacking Tulsi, in the EXACT same manner as she attacks DJT, come on. It's beyond idiotic. It is self-destructive.
25) HRC self-destructing before our eyes in a reprise of 2016? Who could have hoped for such a delightful encore? Certainly not me. I'm not a big popcorn guy. But I do love my Martinis. Tell me when HRC will reprise the attack, and Martini made, I'll be watching with glee.
26) This is kind of a PS. During 2016, when I was providing analysis to the @realDonaldTrump campaign through my working, volunteer partnership with @GenFlynn, there were many different forms and formats of analysis. Anyone reading them would find today's familiar.
27) In the ensuing years, my method has evolved, and today's analysis was a bit more freeform, free flowing if you follow. I enjoy that now, greatly. Yet, I do have the following request to extend.
28) Two things. One, if anyone reading has the ability to connect with any member of the Trump team inner circle, they need to read today's analysis. It is a counter-perspective to so much of what they get every day from all other sources.
29) And last, there is the problem/opportunity of @GenFlynn's case. I've made, over and over again, the argument that his pardon would be the best possible outcome. Is there an inner circle champion who might consider that I might be right?
30) If so, it's a conversation that desperately needs to occur. Someone on the inside should be carrying these words forward: Please Mr. @POTUS, Sir, #PardonFlynnNow by a #PardonOfInnocense
Comments