Do the Democrat candidates for president really think that they can pander and patronize black voters into voting for them? It was pathetic viewing and listening to them at the South Carolina debate as they tried to outdo each other by feigning compassion and concern of the supposed plight of black people. These same concerns were not brought up at the previous debates as the main audiences in those debates were white. The insincerity of the comments in South Carolina were deafening to say the least.

For the past 80 years the majority of black voters have voted over 90% for Democrats. It has been a voting block that the Democrats could count on, election after election. But why? Don't they realize that the party of slavery, secession, segregation, and Socialism should be an anathema to blacks, but that has not been the case. The party of Lincoln and the Republicans has been the major champions of civil rights ever since the Civil War, but still the blacks overwhelmingly vote for Democrats. Over the years, in order to energize black voters, the Democrats trot out the “race card” in an attempt to scare blacks into not voting for Republicans. That tactic has seemed to work quite well for the Democrats until the election of Donald Trump as president. President Trump has asked black audiences what have the Democrats really done for them over the years to be worthy of their vote? He asked them the question, “What do you have lose” in voting for Republicans? President Trump got a slight bounce from the black voters in the election of 2016.

The latest poll numbers today seem to show that the policies of President Trump seem to be resonating with a sizable number of black voters as the estimate of blacks supporting the election of President Trump could approach 15% to 20%. President Trump has reached out to the black community with his policies of prison reform, enterprise zones in inner cities, and with the lowest unemployment rate of blacks in history. Many prominent blacks like Ben Carson, Candace Owens, Senator Tim Scott, Larry Elder, Burgess Owens (no relation to Candace), Dr. Walter Williams, Dr. Thomas Sowell, and Elvida King (niece of Martin Luther King) have all been championing the policies of President Trump and how those policies have really helped black people as opposed to the policies of the Democrats and black President Barack Obama. If those polls are correct, it will probably mean that President Trump will be re- elected in a landslide.

If it wasn't for the Republican Party, the plight of minorities, including blacks, we wouldn't have the civil rights laws protecting the rights of all minorities. Besides Republican Lincoln's “Emancipation Proclamation”, the Republican Party was responsible for the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments to the Constitution, and also the Civil Rights Acts of the 1960's. The percentage of Republicans voting for those measures was greater in each instance than that of the Democrats, and yet the blacks continued to vote for the Democrats year after year. It boggles the mind.

So, as the Democrats pander and patronize the blacks by using just words, President Trump has been producing actions that directly benefit blacks. His efforts will payoff this coming November, mark my words.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Two of our recent most “illustrious” families - The Clinton's and the Biden's have proven how “public servants” can become very wealthy by using their public service as a profitable vehicle to generate monetary gains.

First the Clinton's. Look at what the Clinton's accomplished from their public service jobs, both during and after their government employment. When Bill Clinton left office, both Bill and Hillary claimed that they were broke and in debt (mainly because of big legal fees incurred by Bill's behavior both before and while he was in office). But, within a matter of 12 years they were multi-millionaires and the chief owners of a close to a billion dollar “charitable” foundation where most of the “charitable donations” went to the Clinton's themselves and their flunky's who surrounded them. (A fact chronicled in the the best selling book by Peter Schweizer called,
“Clinton Cash).

These two “grifters” used their prior and present government service to accumulate millions of dollars. Bill, being an ex-president, and Hillary being a U.S. Senator after Bill's two terms as president, used their “gravitas” to feather their nest. Enormous speaking fees by both Clinton's were received from people interested in getting favors from the Clinton's in their various positions, in and out of government. These monetary gains increased when Hillary was appointed Secretary of State in the Obama administration. Donations to the Clinton Foundation increased exponentially, especially from foreign countries and individuals who wanted something of value in return (does “quid pro quo” sound familiar?). A prime example was the sale of 20% of our uranium reserves to Russia, that resulted in big donations to the Clinton Foundation and a $500,000 speaking fee to Bill Clinton from a Russian bank with ties to Vladimir Putin.

All these financial shenanigans by the Clinton's caused many to think of them as the “Bonnie and Clyde” of politics. A title well deserved. As to the Biden's, here's another case of using public service as a means of generating wealth. Joe Biden has been in politics for over 40 years. During that time he and his family have become wealthy by “sucking on the teat of Uncle Sam”.

It seems the 5 members of the Biden family, including Joe, have all benefited from the government offices that Joe Biden occupied over the years. His son, Hunter, his two brothers, and his daughter, have all become very wealthy just by being related to Joe. The recent revelations about his son Hunter, getting million dollars positions in the countries of Ukraine and China with no credentials or expertise whatsoever, has become a scandal that most probably will derail the presidential bid of Poppa Joe. The list of the Biden family shady deals deals are chronicled in Peter Schweizer's latest book, “Profiles in Corruption”.

How have these two families been able to get away with all this “legal shadiness”? Could it be that they belong to a protected class of individuals who are members of the Democrat Party? It seems that there is a two-tier system of justice in our country. One system for the political elite and the other for the rest of us.

Let's hope our present Attorney General, William Barr, will follow through, like he said he would, and get to the bottom of these nefarious slimy deals by these two families. As the old saying goes, justice delayed is justice denied.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

From what we see and read in the news media, and what is produced in Hollywood, you’d think that global warming is a “fait accompli” and that no further debate is needed on this very debatable subject. Wait! Not so fast! Who gave them the right to close debate on this subject? It is not settled science. No science is ever settled, it is always evolving.

Before we all follow the “doom and gloomers” into the dark ages, let’s hear what others have to say about our “impending demise”. Thousands of years ago, we were in an Ice Age - the ice melted and there were no SUV’s ( Sports Utility Vehicles) or extensive use of fossil fuels. According to climatologists and scientists, in medieval times the Earth was warmer than it is today – still no SUV’s in sight and the industrial revolution didn’t even begin as yet..

Remember also, Greenland was named by the Vikings for its lush landscape, not its ice and snow coverings, as it looks today. In the mid- 1970’s, the same “ chicken little's” were championing the theory of “ global cooling” - that theory went bust, but over the years since, these same people have regrouped and are now championing “ global warming”. What a difference a few decades make. Two totally different theories in just over 50 years.

Remember the phrase, “follow the money”, well, by scaring the daylights out of the public, millions of dollars of our tax money will have been given to the global warming “scam artists” to find ways of averting a “non-threatening” disaster, mainly by giving them research grants to prove the non-provable.

What is the real agenda of these so-called environmentalists and tree hugging enthusiasts? They even have recruited a 16 year old Swedish girl, Greta Thunberg, to be their  emotional ”spokesperson at the U.N. and around the world. They have no shame about exploiting a naive youth for their dubious cause.

Are their motives to really to save the planet or is it to install an economic system more to their liking? They are anti-capitalist, anti-free enterprise socialists. If we acceded to the demands of these “environmental wackos”, we would decimate our standard of living and cause a world-wide depression, making today’s hard times seem insignificant in comparison. The past proposals of Congress and past President Obama to institute a “cap and trade system” to punish businesses that use fossil fuels and energy, in conducting their business by taxing them unmercifully, was right out of the “Communist Manifesto” of Karl Marx. The Democrats and their present proposal to create a “Green New Deal” boggles the mind as being a totally unworkable theory that would change our way of life, and not for the better.

I’m sure most people, who now sympathize with the alarmists and their scare tactics, would rebel at the consequences that will come about once they are educated and informed as to the real magnitude of the “Greens” misguided solutions. Once these charlatans can prove that they can change “Mother Nature”, then we can sit down and work out a plan to confront the climate, but as of now, no one can show how we can control “Mother Nature”. Therefore, we should not give credence to these climate change “snake oil” salesmen.

Maybe the Oscar winning movie producer and Nobel Prize winner, Al Gore, should have titled his pseudo–documentary, “A Convenient Lie”, for in essence, that is what it was, a means of gaming the system to extract money from a gullible public under the guise of a noble “nonexistent” cause.

Yes, our global climate, in some areas, is warmer by about one degree over the past hundred or so years, but in some areas, like the Antarctic, the ice cap has been increasing and it has been getting colder. Does this climate change give us any reason to panic and call for a complete change in the way we live our lives? Is it man-made or the normal evolution of nature? For every scientist or climatologist who champions global warming (euphemistically called “climate change” now, so they can call whatever happens, climate-wise, in the world, they can now have a catch phrase to describe it), there are many more who challenge that theory and the “dire consequences” that the alarmists are trying to sell. You make the call, but remember, “FOLLOW THE MONEY”, the “green” they champion is not in the climate, but it is the “green” in their wallets.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

As a person who eagerly voted for Mitt Romney in 2012, I am totally disappointed in his desire to stab his president in the back over a personal pique.

This “holier than thou” phony politician, tried to justify his misguided personal animosity toward President Trump by claiming that his religious faith caused him to act the way he did in voting “Yes” to find President Trump guilty of Article One of the impeachment of President Trump that was put forth by House of Representatives.

Ever since he came out with his virulent denunciation of Trump as Trump was running for president, he has shown his jealously about “being a loser” in his quest for president, by throwing all common sense to the wind in pursuit of undercutting a fellow Republican. In his statement about his decision to vote “yes” on impeachment, he used the same terminology as both Schiff and Nadler used in their bogus impeachment hearings. Since he claimed to have studied the evidence of that phone call between Trump and Zelensky, and to come up with the conclusion that Trump was guilty of a “high crime and misdemeanor”, shows that his final decision was personal rather than factual.

To believe the lies put forth by the “Trump haters”, Adam Schiff, Jerrold Nadler, and Nancy Pelosi, shows that his decision was not based on anything Trump did wrong, but that his personal animosity toward Trump was the deciding factor to justify his decision.

This vote by Romney to “convict” Trump will endear him to the feckless Democrats for the time being, but I'm sure he will be the subject of vilification in the future by the Democrats as was the case when he ran for president in 2012. Remember, he was accused of being a tax cheat, a misogynist, a racist and a myriad of other sins by the Democrats as he challenged Barack Obama for the presidency. He ran a lousy campaign as he seemed to be always on the defensive instead of challenging the weak administration of Obama.

Romney was the same person who “kissed the ring” of Donald Trump during his run up to the Republican nomination in 2012, and finally during the actual campaign, in asking for his support, both financially and personally. Didn't he know the “evil personality” that was Trump,
the individual, as be begged for his money and support? Even after his shameless put down of Trump as Trump ran for the office of president, and once Trump was elected, he magnanimously had Romney over to discuss a possible job in his administration. Romney did not get that appointment which I'm sure added to this final display of disloyalty.

Listening to Romney trying to justify his decision was really painful to listen to as a former supporter of his. If I agreed with what he said, as I said in my headline, we'd both be wrong. The next step for Mitt Romney would be to join the Democrats. Good riddance.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

There are times when people with extensive schooling and college degrees do things that could be considered stupid. I'm referring mainly to Rep. Adam Schiff and Rep. Jerrold Nadler, who both seem to have an advanced case of “cognitive dissonance” (definition: when men's ideas, beliefs or behaviors contradict each other) and an ample supply of personal stupidity.

In trying to undo the presidential election of 2016, the two pariah's of the truth, have concocted a scenario that boggles the mind. Their hatred for President Trump trumped (no pun intended) all reality in their quest to unseat a sitting president.

If you were a masochist and listened to the Democrat presentations on the floor of the Senate as to why President Trump should be impeached, you could come to the conclusion that so-called intelligent people could show signs of abject stupidity.

It has taken 3 years for the Democrats to finally do what they have been trying to do since President Trump was inaugurated - that to impeach him and try to have him leave office. It was only minutes after he was sworn in as president that President Trump was targeted by the Democrats as an illegitimate president, who should not hold the title as president. Is that a reasonable response by sane individuals who are blinded to reality by their loony liberal ideology? Most all the Democrats were counting on Hillary Clinton winning the presidency in a landslide, as most all the polls and pundits said would happen. The shock of a Trump winning the election sent many of the Democrats over the edge – including both Schiff and Nadler. They
both, from the beginning of Trump's presidency, were determined to do everything possible to try to undo the results of the 2016 election.

First it was the Russians who they claimed was working with the Trump campaign to undermine the election in his favor. Working with some “bad cops” in the FBI and the Obama Justice Department, a Special Counsel was appointed, by using some unseemly tactics like getting a phony “dossier” to use in getting warrants in the FISA Court to spy on people associated with Trump. After 2 1⁄2 years of intensive investigating, the Robert Mueller Report (he was the Special Counsel) came back with the conclusion that Trump didn't collude or conspire with the Russians nor did he obstruct justice. That was a devastating blow to both Schiff and Nadler, who claimed that they had “overwhelming evidence” of Trump's involvement.

Not taking defeat easily, the Democrats, under the direction of Schiff and Nadler, latched onto an innocuous phone call between President Trump and Ukrainian President Zelensky. A so-called anonymous “whistle blower”, with ties to Schiff's office, was presented as someone who claimed that Trump bribed or extorted the Ukraine president thereby committing a “high crime or misdemeanor”, which was an impeachable offense under our constitution.

This is where the “cognitive dissonance” and stupidity of these two dishonest politicians came into play. They convinced a naive and shaky Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, to bring impeachment charges against President Trump, which the Democrat controlled House of Representatives then voted to impeach the president on a strictly partisan vote. No Republican voted for the Articles of Impeachment in the House.

Now, the Senate must decide whether the Articles of Impeachment are valid and that President Trump should be relieved of his post as President of the United States. Since 67 votes are needed in the Senate to find the president guilty, there is no way that that will occur.

All the bluster and shenanigans by the Democrats in the House will have been for naught. All the liars on the Democrat side, especially Schiff and Nadler, were stupid to pursue this phony matter against all rational thinking. It is too bad that stupidity isn't painful because that is what they deserved in wasting all this time when they could be doing the country's business, for that is what they were elected to do.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann