THE WET DREAM OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY U.S.A.

 Democrats are gloating over the likelihood that Donald Trump may be arrested in New York on Tuesday. I am not a lawyer but it seems that his crime was paying hush money to porn star Stormy Daniels before the 2016 election. Supposedly, his former lawyer Michael Cohen paid her hush money to keep her quiet about an alleged affair. Trump in turn allegedly reimbursed Cohen the money that Cohen paid to Daniels. At issue is whether this was done to silence Daniels in order to avoid embarrassment to Trump and improving his chances of being elected. Or was his motivation to avoid personal embarrassment for his family? It is my understanding that the former reason is illegal but the latter reason is not. First of all Alvin Bragg, the prosecutor in this case, has no basis for prosecuting Trump because if he was paying hush money to influence the election that is a Federal crime and not a state crime. It is my understanding that even the justice department refused to prosecute him on this because they had no case. At best it is a misdemeanor but Bragg is trying to elevate it to a felony. It is also my understanding that that Cohen is prepared to testify against Trump. If a true crime has been committed here I am in no way going to try to justify it. Personally, I believe in transparency in all things. Trump should have been prepared to tell the truth if the Stormy Daniels story had broken prior to the election rather than paying her hush money. It implies that he had something to hide whether he was guilty or not. I have heard that it is fairly common for wealthy people to pay hush money because it is cheaper than fighting the accuser in court and having to pay out thousands of dollars in legal fees. If he had an affair then he should have admitted it. Trump already had the reputation for such things. If he didn't have the affair then he should have denied it and stuck to his guns. It is hard to justify paying hush money if nothing happened.  

 

 Personally I wish he had handled this scandal the way Grover Cleveland handled his own sexual scandal when he ran for president in 1884. I am not comparing what Trump did to what Grover Cleveland was ultimately accused of doing but this is a situation from history that Trump might have learned from. On July 21, 1884, the Buffalo Evening Telegraph broke the story that many in Cleveland's home state of New York already knew. That Cleveland had an illegitimate child by a woman named Maria Halpin in 1874. She had been committed to a mental hospital soon after the child's birth and he was adopted by a respected family. Cleveland was a bachelor and when the story broke he knew he couldn't refute it so he promptly owned up to it. He said that Mrs. Halpin not only had sexual relations with Cleveland but several of his friends. This was before DNA and although he could have easily denied paternity he protected his married friends by claiming paternity. The child which was a boy was given his name and Cleveland saw to it that he was placed in a good home. Or at least that was his side of the story. 

 

 When reporters tracked down Mrs. Halpin she gave a different account. Mrs. Halpin was a thirty eight year old widow at the time and she said that Cleveland pursued her relentlessly. She finally agreed to eat dinner at a restaurant with him. After dinner he accompanied her back to her boarding house where in a 1874 affidavit she testified that Cleveland entered her room and raped her in a forceful and violent way. She testified that Cleveland promised to ruin her if she went to the authorities. Halpin told Cleveland that she never wanted to see him again but after she found out she was pregnant five or six weeks later she felt that she had to ask for his help. Unmarried pregnant women in the 1800's did not have many options other than asking a man for their help, especially if there was no family to lean on. Eight months later when the baby was born she was admitted, under suspicious circumstances, to a mental hospital. When doctors from this institution were interviewed in 1884 they claimed that she shouldn't have been admitted. The Chicago Daily Tribune reported: Dr. William G. King, an honored citizen of Buffalo, was then the attending physician at the Providence Asylum. When visited by a Telegraph reporter last week he said that he remembered Maria Halpin well. He says she was brought to the asylum without warrant or form of law. When he examined her he found that she was not insane, though she had been drinking. The managers of the asylum had no right to detain her, and she left in a few days—that is, as soon as she chose to after her terrible experience. After leaving the asylum she looked for her son who in her words had been “spirited away”

Grover Cleveland and Maria Halpin

 Halpin contacted an attorney named Milo Whitney about bringing charges against Cleveland for assault and abduction. Whitney says Maria Halpin came to consult him about instituting proceedings against all concerned in the assault and abduction. She said she knew that Grover Cleveland had plotted the abduction and hired the men to carry it out, as he had previously tried less violent means to deprive her of the child and get her out of the way. Halpin's brother-in-law arrived from New Jersey to offer assistance. Halpin and her brother-in-law showed the attorney an agreement which stipulated that upon the payment of the sum of $500, Maria Halpin was to surrender her son, Oscar Folsom Cleveland, and make no further demands of any nature whatever upon his father. Whitney maintained that this agreement was in Cleveland's handwriting. The same Dr. King, who stated that Halpin was not insane was the one who had adopted Halpin's child. During the campaign when Halpin was told that Cleveland had said that any number of men could have been the father of the baby she was outraged. She stated “There is not and never was a doubt as to the paternity of our child, and the attempt of Grover Cleveland or his friends to couple the name of Oscar Folsom or any one else with that of the boy, for that purpose, is simply infamous and false.”

A political cartoon of the time

The fact that Cleveland at least acknowledged his relationship with Halpin rather than trying to deny it may have saved his campaign although his enemies tried to use it against him with political cartoons and slogans. This story remained in the newspapers all throughout the 1884 campaign and the consensus was that Cleveland probably bore some guilt. Cleveland had his supporters and detractors. One detractor was a Buffalo New York Presbyterian minister who knew Cleveland. He said, "I am very sorry to say that he is a corrupt, licentious man. He has never been married, and is notoriously bad with women. Cleveland is well known here, and it is a reproach to the city that he ever got into the Gubernatorial chair. I most sincerely and earnestly pray that he will not be our next President. His public life is revealing his true character. It may be said these stories are put in circulation for political effect, but the trouble is they cannot be refuted". In the end this episode was seen as a young man's folly although Cleveland was forty years old at the time. The other thing that helped him was that James G. Blaine, his Republican opponent, had his own political scandal to deal with. It had been disclosed years earlier that he had exchanged congressional favors for cash. The most famous chant of the Republican's during the campaign was “Ma, ma, where’s my Pa?”. After the election the Democrats responded with “Gone to the White House, ha ha ha!”

 

 

 The media, which was mainly newspapers at the time, was probably more balanced and not dominated by the Democrat party like it is now. Fast forward to today. If a Democrat presidential candidate favored by the Democrat establishment was involved in a similar scandal it would be virtually ignored. The only ones talking about it would be conservative talk radio, One America News, Newsmax or maybe Fox News. I know Tucker Carlson would be talking about it. The Democrat alphabet media, newspapers, which are virtually all Democrat controlled, and social media, with the exception of maybe Twitter, would simply ignore it. Unfortunately the mainstream media sources are still where most independent and Democrat voters get their news from. We know this because the mainstream media ignored the violent rape of Juanita Broaddrick when it was revealed during the Clinton impeachment trial. Also, when it was discovered during the 2008 presidential primaries that John Edwards had a love child and had been cheating on his dying wife during the campaign. The National Enquirer broke this story, not the mainstream media. Or the violent sexual assault by Joe Biden on a congressional aide named Tara Reade in 1993 that was made known during the 2020 election. What's up with Democrat presidential candidates raping women? It must be in their DNA. Of course we can't forget the Hunter Biden laptop that was in the possession of the F.B.I. before the 2020 election and the mainstream medias successful squelching of the story by branding it Russian disinformation when they knew better. The laptop by itself has enough information on it to send both Hunter and Joe Biden to prison for the rest of their lives. Then there are all the other Democrat crimes that have been ignored that are too numerous to mention here. 

 It is because of this glaring two tiered justice system that protects Democrats and persecutes their political enemies like Trump that I can't get excited about his prosecution for an alleged crime. A crime that pales in comparison to anything the Democrats are guilty of. One thing that I have learned over the years is that if the Democrats accuse a Republican of something they have already committed the same crime or are in the process of committing it. Stalin's secret police chief  Lavrentiy Beria once said "Show me the man and I’ll show you the crime." This is what the Democrats are doing. They have their man, Donald Trump, and they will not stop until they pin a crime on him. The New York District attorney Alvin Bragg who is prosecuting this case is a George Soros funded prosecutor. It is a political witch hunt designed to keep Trump from winning the presidency. Bragg is man in the habit of letting real criminals off everyday in New York City for murder and other serious crimes to focus on a person who has probably committed no crime. Two things could be going on here. Either the Democrats believe that persecuting Trump will cause his supporters to rally around him and stop the nomination of Ron Desantis, who they really fear, or they actually fear Trump and feel that he has the best chance at winning. Personally, I think it is the latter but I believe, like Elon Musk, that it will backfire on them. Their goal has always been to separate Trump from his base. To weaken him so much that his base will desert him. Their real hatred is reserved for us. The "deplorables" who would dare to vote for this man. Personally I think that these attempts will only strengthen Donald Trump and draw in fair minded voters who can see through the evil intent of the Communist Party USA .