How to Destroy the US Navy

Reading Time: 2 minutes

You don’t need bombs and torpedos to destroy the Navy. Political correctness and terrible senior management are the Navy’s greatest threats. And today the Navy dropped a bomb on itself, with the help of Barack Obama.

Obama’s Secretary of the Navy eliminated the 241-year-old Navy enlisted rating system. Because Obama felt the ratings were too politically incorrect? They weren’t gender neutral. Via

No more Yeoman, Corpsman, or even Fire Control Technician. No more Torpedoman or Machinist’s Mate. No more Boatswain.

Now, a sailor is just “petty officer.”

What’s the big deal, you say?

It’s a big deal. I spoke to a Navy sailor about the dictate. “The biggest problem is many sailors feel like they have lost their identities and had absolutely no say in the matter,” he told me.

The sailor countered my assertion that this is about political correctness. This source says the move was to fill undesirable jobs, known as billets. (Warning: salty sailor talk): “Even the females are pissed. It has nothing to do with gender neutrality it’s about the Navy trying to fill unwanted billets. No one wants to be a Shit Shoveler on the USS Never Home so now the Navy expects everyone to be a Shit Shoveler.”

Here’s what that means.

Say a submarine tender has an open billet for a junior Boatswain’s Mate. That job entails  a lot of hard, back-breaking work like chipping paint, rigging lines. There’s little chance of promotion. And submarine tenders, while vital and dangerous, are not the sexiest ships in the Navy. Few people ask for orders to the deck division of a tender.

The Navy doesn’t assign Yeoman or a Torpedoman to a tender’s deck div. But if everybody’s just a petty officer, anybody can get those orders. Petty officer is the great equalizer.

By eliminating ratings, the Navy can eliminate a headache for its leadership while making sailors lives miserable. Management guru Peter Drucker said all problems are management problems. In this case, the Navy’s senior management solved a problem for themselves by dumping it on the enlisted community. It’s bad management 101.

Whether driven by political correctness or lousy management, the Navy’s decision will lead to future retention and quality-of-recruit problems. Quality enlisted people will likely flee in droves. That means less desirable recruits will move in, reducing readiness and increasing accidents. But the managers can go home at 3:30.

This is how you destroy the United States Navy.

And this opens up a great opportunity for Donald Trump. “Seriously, most people here I talk to don’t support Trump or Hilary, but if Trump could come out on this issue and call it bullshit like it truly is, he would gain a whole lot of support.”

How to Destroy Radical Islam Without Firing a Shot

Reading Time: 1

You probably know that I admire Scott Adams quite a bit. He’s brilliantly predicted everything Trump has done. And he’s not finished dazzling us with his prediction skills.

Yesterday he made a prediction of how we’ll kill ISIS. It isn’t pretty. He’s not advocating what will happen. He’s just telling us what will happen.

I’m going to offer an alternative end to ISIS. It’s one I’ve advocated for attacking radical Islam since 2001. And it’s far less brutal. It’s perfect for a Master Persuader President like Trump.

Try to remember the feelings in the fall of 2001.  It’s easy. The month after 9/11 was a time of high anxiety. Amid the angst, my ex-wife asked me what I would do about radical Islam.

My answer: undermine their youth.

I went into a little detail.

I said, “corrupt their youth. Replace their religion with sex, drugs, and rock-n-roll. Destroy the dignity and authority of parents, especially fathers. Give them distractions–cell phones, computers loaded with video games. And wait 10 years.”

Today, I’d substitute smart phones for computers. (The iPhone was still six years away then.)

She responded later, saying, “but that’s what you’ve always said was ruing this country.”

“Exactly,” I said.

I like my plan better than Scott’s. Not only does mine avoid the problems of a messy genocide (followed by a lot of finger-pointing), my plan opens up new markets for American goods and services. All those Carrier air conditioners that Trump will keep coming out of Indiana need to go somewhere. What’s a better market for AC units than a desert?

If George Bush had implemented in my plan in 2001, the terror threat would be over and GDP growth would be 5 percent.

Shameless James Comey Is a Liar and Darrell Issa Is a Hero

Reading Time: 3 minutes

No honest company would hire FBI Director James Comey. He might be loyal, but he’ll commit crimes of loyalty.

Comey would have fit right in at Enron. Or in Ceauşescu’s Romania.

Today we learned that Comey flat out lied about Cheryl Mills’s immunity agreement. Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) exposed Comey’s lies just minutes after Comey lied to Congress under oath about the extent of immunity granted to Mills, who was both a State Department employee and one of Hillary’s huge stable of personal attorneys. (Comey previously lied to the Senate, but our lazy Republican Senators never bothered to read the immunity deals.)

I happened to be in my car when Fox News cut in to carry the dramatic exchange. I couldn’t wait to get home and write this.

Issa violated rules to reveals details of Mills’s immunity deal–details that Comey previously denied under oath. Issa broke the rules because Comey relied on those rules to cover his own lies. Comey had no idea Issa would have none of Comey’s repeated perjuries.

Here’s the dramatic exchange, straight out of an Otto Preminger movie:

Face it: James Comey is a liar and crook. Fifty years ago, he’d be headed to prison for a decade. His own children would scorn and disown him.

Over the top?

After Comey lied to Rep. Issa in the clip above, Issa received even more information about the immunity deal from the Department of Justice. It turns out, Mills received immunity from every possible crime related to the case. Via Dan Abrams’s Law Newz blog, Issa returned to the hearing and laid Comey’s crimes bare:

Congressman Issa then took the microphone and explained that Mills “negotiated a very, very good deal….”  He further explained, “She did not just receive immunity related to the production of the drive, the computer and [its] contents, but, in fact, received immunity under 18 U.S.C. § 793(e) and (f), 18 U.S.C. § 1924 and … 18 U.S.C. § 2071.”

18 U.S.C. § 793(e) covers the illegal retention and transmission of materials “relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation.”

18 U.S.C. § 793(f), of course, is the now infamous gross negligence statute that the Department of Justice considers to be unconstitutional, according to Director Comey.

18 U.S.C. § 1924 is the misdemeanor statute involving the unauthorized removal and retention of classified material.

Finally, 18 U.S.C. § 2071 covers the concealment, removal or mutilation of certain government documents.

Congressman Issa said he wanted to pay particular attention to the immunity under § 2071 because of evidence uncovered in recent weeks.  Specifically, Issa referred to Reddit posts that Director Comey acknowledged at the hearing on Tuesday were by written Paul Combetta.  The now deleted posts said a client asked to have the email address belonging to someone who was “VERY VIP” stripped from a batch of archived emails.  Director Comey also acknowledged that Combetta likely received the directions to strip the email address from Cheryl Mills.

In short, Comey has testifed under oath that Mills’s immunity was limited to information discovered on her MacBook. In fact, Mills cannot be prosecuted for any crime related to the case, including:

  • Illegally holding and transmitting classified materials
  • Gross negligence
  • Illegally removing and storing classified material

In other words, Mills cannot be prosecuted for the crimes she most certainly committed. And James Comey is covering that crook. Which makes Comey a crook, too.

Let’s hope President Trump’s DOJ rescinds Mills’s immunity and tries Mills, Comey, Clinton, and those smirking Bleach Bit ass hats who deleted documents under subpoena. They’re all crooks and liar like Hillary Rotten Clinton.

By the way, when someone who’s granted immunity lies to investigators, the government rescinds the immunity. Immunity is always predicated on telling the truth. It’s why they give immunity in the first place: to get the truth.

Well, we know beyond a reasonable doubt that Cheryl Mills lied to the FBI investigators after signing her immunity deal. She lied about numerous things to protect Crooked Hillary. But the government has refused to rescind her crooked immunity deal because the entire US government is criminal enterprise.

I have no respect for the FBI anymore. None. As far as I’m concerned, they’re all crooks. Every last agent and filing clerk.

It’ll take 10 years to straighten out that crooked operation. And that’s if Trump gets started on January 20. If Hillary wins, the FBI will never be more than the US version of the Soviet committee for state security.  

Trump Bunted a Hanging Slider He Could Have Walloped

Reading Time: 1

Donald Trump missed numerous opportunities to use humor to destroy Hillary Clinton Monday night.

The clearest example was on Lester Holt’s question on cyber security. Hillary went first and gave a long, robotic answer, hitting all the buzzwords her handlers made her memorize.

Trump countered with a similar answer. But Trump could have crippled Hillary with a single line:

If you’re worried about cyber security, don’t elect a woman who runs an email server out of her basement.

That’s the clearest example of a hanging slider that Trump bunted. He could have crushed it.

I don’t think the debate will change the polls much at all. I do think Trump laid up. But why?

One possibility: suspense.

The candidates have two debates left. Trump understands television. Did Trump lay up in debate one to crush it in a later debate?

It’s possible.

Everyone remembers 2012. Romney ran circles around Obama in round one, only to collapse in round two. Round three became meaningless.

Reagan fell eight points after his first debate with Mondale in 1984. After round two, Reagan went on to win 49 states.

Trump might realize that it’s impossible to knock out an opponent when two more rounds are guaranteed. Why not fight to a draw in round one to set up round two?

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying Trump lost round one. I’m saying he could have creamed her, and he didn’t. He didn’t swing away on the hanging sliders. And he seemed supremely pleased with his performance.

It’s clear that Trump did exactly that he set out to do.

The second debate just became fascinating. And it’s in St. Louis.

Trump’s Closing Statement Tonight

Reading Time: 2 minutes

If he asked me, here’s how I’d end the debate of the century.

First, I’d close off any open loops that arose during the debate. Then:

American children under 10 have never known a year with three-percent GDP growth. Americans under 40 have no memory real wages going up. And American people of every age, from infant to elderly, never knew a time of greater threat from foreign terrorist attack.

While my opponent’s wealth skyrocketed from zero to hundreds of millions of dollars by pedling influence, largely to foreign governments and mega banks, the lives of ordinary Americans declined by almost every measure. You might remember that her husband once talked about the people who “work hard and play by the rules.” Well, those rules changed, and no one told you. Those rules changed to give unfair advantage to their well-connect cronies who hover over Washington like buzzards, waiting for one of your tax dollars to drop.

I am running for President to give voice to you, the builders, the makers, and the silent American people. I am running for President because, in my lifetime, I have seen the greatest nation in history, the greatest hope for democracy and peace, pushed to the brink of collapse. I am running for President to restore the rules we all agreed to, the rules that have been covered over and pushed aside.

This push came from people I know–cynical people I know all too well. It would be fair to say I am not without some hand in this coarsening of America. Maybe that’s why I am working so hard now to fix the problem that I began to recognize long ago.

I told Oprah Winfrey in 1988 that I would only run for President if things got so bad. So bad. At the time, I never believed that would happen. But you know now that things are so bad.

While my opponent denies your pain, I want to heal it. While my opponent denies her hand in aggrivating your pain, I can see it. And so can you. While my opponent attacks my character and yours, I stand with YOU.

In the remaining days of this election, I hope, in a moment of reflection, you will ask yourself one simple question: if America remains on its current path, what kind of country will our children inherit? Will our children inherit a Pottersville of greed, lust, violence, corruption, and decay? Or will we restore the shining city on  a hill that Ronald Reagan spoke of?

I sincerely offer my remaining years on earth to restore that shining city on a hill, and I humbly ask for your vote on November eighth.

Thank you, and God bless you.


BONUS: Rate My Prediction


Powered byTypeform