I’m writing this because everything else that’s going on is just the same old thing. I would note that I’m disappointed that no one has addressed the questions I raised in the Butler shooting and the the recent attempt which makes me wonder just what the government’s involvement actually is in these cases.

But now the point of this rant. What would happen if the next attempt, and I believe there will be one, is successful? Will Vance be the Republican on the ballot? I think he will because the ballots have Trump/Vance and I believe that he would win in a landslide because the people will be outraged, but you can count on the Democrats suing their asses off to try to keep him off the ballot. However there have been several instances where a person who died before the election getting elected. By that precedent, Trump and Vance would be elected and Vance would succeed Trump.

Just killing time until something noteworthy happens.

I’m sure you’ve all heard about another assassination attempt on Trump. Given the rhetoric on the left, I don’t think this will be the last. They view and constantly refer to Trump as an existential threat to our country and basically encourage these nutcases.

As I’ve said many times previously, I’m tired of the 24/7 coverage of these things, be they school shootings or attempts to kill Trump. When you have new information then inform me. Until then quit interrupting what I had planned to watch.

Now from what I’ve heard, no shots were actually fired at Trump. The shots were from a Secret Service sharpshooter who saw the rifle barrel poking through the fence and opened fire causing the would be assassin to flee. Thank God. However the question I have is why the would be assassin wasn’t killed. The person who fired the shots clearly knew where the target was based on the rifle barrel. So did he fire warning shots to scare the person off his mission or was he actually a poor shot. I think the answer is the former because of what I heard one former FBI agent say. Namely that the rules of engagement are such now that there is a concern that if he had actually shot the assassin he might have been subject to some kind of action. This is an ongoing issue where cops are afraid to do what’s required because they know they might end up being the one charged.

If the assassin had fired first, he would have been killed as was demonstrated in Butler. We need to change any rules of engagement to say that if someone is pointing a rifle in the direction of a protectee, then lethal force is appropriate.

BTW I think that was also a problem in Butler because I’ve heard that a counter sniper had the shooter in sight but didn’t fire until after the assassin fired first.

Since I know one of you did, I wouldn’t want you not to be able to enjoy this.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2024/09/12/yes-tim-walz-just-called-kamala-harris-a-prostitute-sort-of-n2644711

Just in case you’re wondering, again if I remember correctly, when you pass your house to your heirs after your death, the basis becomes the value at the time of your death. Also keep in mind that I’m talking about courses that I took 50 years ago. I have know idea of what the actual law is today.

I’m sure that most of you understand this, or at least think you do. The reason that I say you think you do is because if you bought a house for $100 K and then rolled it over for a house that cost $200K, your basis if I remember correctly from tax class is still $100K. And if you kept rolling it over and now own a home worth $1 million, your basis is still $100K. So anyway if you bought your first house for $200K and it’s now worth $600K, you have an unrealized capital gain of $400K.and under SK’s plan at 25%, I believe it’s actually 28% but to make the math easier, you would owe $100K in taxes just to stay in your house. Even if you took out a second mortgage or refinanced for $250K, your basis for this tax is still $200K. And this will continue every year.This would destroy the economy.

I have been meaning to address this for sometime, and since she keeps saying it, I’m going to. SK keeps saying that she is the only person on stage that has ever prosecuted transnational gangs. She has never personally prosecuted transnational gangs. She doesn’t have the ability to prosecute what would be a multi-week trial. She’s taking credit for cases brought by DA’s who are independently elected. It’s like Garland taking credit for all the cases in the federal system. He doesn’t even know about a fraction of them. Trump should have called her out and asked her, how many did you personally try.

Now I know that some of you are thinking hindsight is 20/20, but don’t forget my first rant was contemporaneous. Further more I wasn’t even remotely part of Trump’s debate preparation team. Had I been, he would have been prepared with that response. I was surprised that he didn’t mention her family history of slavery.

As I put up shortly after the debate that Trump should have pointed out when she called him racist that he should have said that her family owned slaves. Reflecting on it what he should have said is my family never owned slaves, your family did. And you are for reparations. Do you expect to receive them or pay them? At that point I believe she would have folded up like she did when Tulsi Gabbard confronted her. It would have been a showstopper!

You maybe wondering about my position that SK doesn’t have the mental horsepower to actually process information and respond on the fly. I was right. The difference between her and Magoo is that he tried to and she didn’t. All her responses were either he’s lying or some canned talking point that had nothing to do with the issue. Trump should have made her pay for it but he didn’t. Bad on him but it doesn’t demonstrate that she can think on her feet.

Now SK and the presstitutes are demanding another debate and saying that Trump is afraid to do it. Trump should accept but demand that it be on a truly neutral site and make sure that the moderators are either neutral or each gets to pick one. Last night on Watters, Clay Travis said he had a brilliant idea. Each candidate picks a moderator who will question the other candidate. Trump’s pick would question SK and her pick would question him.

It is a great idea, but I either ranted about it or discussed with some of you over a year ago and my suggestion was that Mark Levin question Magoo (now SK) and Rachel Maddow question Trump. That would be must see tv and she would absolutely refuse to do it because she knows that she can’t answer unscripted questions.

(BTW: I deleted my last rant and put Seger where he should have been.)

Now I had not planned to rant about Swift’s endorsement of SK. However one of you HS texted me out of the blue about it and even went so far as to do the research on her academic background. She left high school in her junior year to pursue her musical career and later got her diploma via homeschooling. She never went to college. So I figured I would address it.

First I’ve never been a Swift fan. I considered her as bubblegum country and have never heard any of her songs since she went pop other than when someone covers one of them on Idol or the Voice. She’s attractive but so what?. If you are going to vote for SK because Swift endorsed her then you should probably not be voting.

Now if you look at why she said she endorsed her, it gets worse. She said she did her homework and research and came to the conclusion that her policies were best. PROBLEM: what policies? She has none as she demonstrated last night. The only ones she has are the ones she is now trying to disavow. If Taylor likes the changed positions then she should endorse Trump because as he said last night her new ‘positions’ are his positions. The only thing that is clear is that Taylor is one more person who thinks the only issue is deproductive rights.

I personally don’t think celebrity endorsements mean anything. Anyone who votes based on them was already going to vote that way.