This is part two of my series on my list of the best choices for Trump as a running mate.

Choice one: Ron DeSantis is here.

Today we go for our 2nd choice on the list of possible running mates for Donald Trump. To remind everyone there are two things that any person who wants to make this list needs to qualify.

  1. Can’t be from the same state I’m going to be slightly loose with this because “can’t be from the same state” can mean either:
    • Not born in the same state OR
    • Not living in the same state at the time of the election
  2. Must be hated by the left almost if not more than him because if he was to take a “deep state” running mate or a person like Nikki Haley he might as well, as I’ve noted before hang a target on his back with the words “assassinate me” in bright luminescent paint.

Today we have Choice 2: Senator Ted Cruz of Texas

Ted Cruz back in the days before the beard when I was covering Presidential Elections in person

Senator Ted Cruz brings all kinds of things to a Trump ticket.

  • He brings one of the most brilliant minds in conservatism
  • He is one of greatest debaters conservatives have having argued before SCOTUS
  • He brings one of the best records when it comes to conservatism over the last 10 years
  • He was one of the original Tea Party Candidates who came out of nowhere after being endorsed by Sarah Palin
  • He like Trump is a fighter who is fearless and had a long record of fighting for conservatism before Trump ever considered running.

All of these things weigh big but here is one thing that to me is huge and frankly should appeal to Donald Trump.

During the 2016 campaign Ted Cruz was hit hard by Trump in such a way that if it had been me I’d have found it hard, in fact almost impossible to support him while in office. Ted however saw how Donald Trump governed and decided that in the end he was doing good in fact great for the country and the world. He put aside his feelings and backed him becoming in the end one of his staunchest supporters.

He put the country ahead of himself there and that speaks volumes.

And he of course meets our top two requirements, being from Texas qualifies and it hated by the left almost as much as Trump, and even the most fanatical Trump hater would hold his fire to prevent Ted Cruz from being the 1st Latino vice president.

Just think how much that would piss off the left. If that’s not the crowning argument I’d like to know what is?

A primer on Palestinian groups

Posted: May 14, 2024 by chrisharper in Uncategorized

By Christopher Harper

Many pro-Palestinian demonstrators know little about the history of the Middle East. Here is a basic primer on the conflict between Israel and Palestinians:

Q. What was the Balfour Declaration and its importance in the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians?

A. The Balfour Declaration was a public statement issued by the British government in 1917 during the First World War. It announced its support for establishing a “national home for the Jewish people” in Palestine, then an Ottoman region. The declaration was in a letter from the United Kingdom’s Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour to Lord Rothschild, a leader of the British Jewish community in Great Britain and Ireland.

Q.  What is the Palestinian definition of the “occupied territories”?

A. The Occupied Territories, which include the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip, are subject to the jurisdiction of Israel and the Palestinian Authority, with the division of responsibilities overlapping in much of the territory

Q. What are the main points of United Nations Resolutions 242 and 338?

A. United Nations Security Council Resolutions were passed (respectively) in the aftermaths of the 1967 and 1973 Arab-Israeli wars.

Resolution 242 (reaffirmed in 338) was designed to provide the framework for peace negotiations based on a “land-for-peace” formula and has become the foundation of all subsequent negotiations and peace treaties in the region.

The resolutions called for the withdrawal of Israeli forces “from territories of recent conflict,” an Arab “termination of all claims or states of belligerency,” and a recognition of the State of Israel and its “right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force.” The resolution also called for “achieving a just settlement of the refugee problem.”

Q. What does the phrase “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” mean?

A. Hamas supports the elimination of Israel.

Q. What is the relationship between Hamas and Iran?

A. Iran provides financial and military support for Hamas.

Q. What is the role of religion in Hamas?

A. Hamas considers itself a movement based on Islam, which is the dominant religion among the Palestinians.

Q. Why did Hamas oppose the role of the Palestinian Authority?

A. Hamas viewed the Palestinian Authority leaders as those who spent most of their lives outside of Israel, while Hamas leaders had fought from inside the country. In late 2017, the Palestinian Authority tried to pressure Hamas into reconciliation by cutting payments for fuel, electricity, and government salaries. However, a preliminary deal between the PA and Hamas failed over disputes about public finance and Hamas’ refusal to demilitarize. In March 2018, an assassination attempt on Palestinian Prime Minister Rami Hamdallah, which the PA blamed on Hamas, doomed prospects for compromise.

Q. Why have Jordan and Egypt refused to allow a Palestinian state within their borders?

A. Both countries consider such a state to be a security threat.

It’s been a while since I’ve done a post that were pure wild speculation but as I’ve been thinking about who Trump will choose as his running mate I thought I’d put one together.

This list will consist of three “A” list choices along with one dark horse. I will cover one each day.

In choosing a running mate there is one constitutional consideration and one non-constitutional consideration that have to be made in doing so.

  1. Can’t be from the same state I’m going to be slightly loose with this because “can’t be from the same state” can mean either:
    • Not born in the same state OR
    • Not living in the same state at the time of the election
  2. Must be hated by the left almost if not more than him because if he was to take a “deep state” running mate or a person like Nikki Haley he might as well, as I’ve noted before hang a target on his back with the words “assassinate me” in bright luminescent paint.

For the purpose of this pieces I’m going to assume the former as the choice and all of my choices are going to confirm with the 2nd choice.

Choice 1: Ron DeSantis Governor of Florida

If there was ever a person who would be the natural choice for a Trump Ticket this time around it’s the governor of Florida:

Ron DeSantis is the governor of the single most successful state in the country. He has successfully resisted every single one of the Biden administration’s attempts to curtail said success.

  • He is part of the highly successful move to export illegal aliens to blue cities and states
  • He has cracked down on the “death to jews” protestors when they have violated law
  • He has (and this is huge) cracked down on cheating by the left in elections to the point where his state which was once a swing state is now as solidly red as they come.
  • He has crippled the DEI industry and taken on woke corporations like Disney and won.

There are also two considerations that would appeal specifically to Trump.

  1. He is likely the only person more feared by the left then Trump himself, in fact Trump recognized this and leveraged this fear to get himself back on social media platforms for the purpose of attacking him during and even before the primaries.
  2. Unlike Nikki Haley DeSantis recognized the situation on the ground early and pulled out of the primary race after Iowa and endorsed Trump recognizing that the voters had decided on Trump and accepting their choice.

He also has one other quality that Trump likes in people. Trump is a doer, he all about getting things done. DeSantis is the same, from handling natural disasters to getting people from Florida out of Israel who were stranded there at the start of the war he has ignored the naysayers and focused on what he could do rather than what others said couldn’t be done.

And while I think this election is all about Trump so a running mate doesn’t add a lot to a ticket a vet who has won the Bronze Star certainly doesn’t hurt.

Bottom line he has all of the positive characteristics of Trump from being a doer to being unafraid of the left with absolutely none of the baggage, furthermore he is not only hated and feared by the left as much if not more than Trump which is the best insurance against assassination but because he is so hated by the left Trump by picking him would be able to stick another finger in the eye of said left by having him as a successor.

I suspect President Trump would find that rather sweet.

The only real question is can he pass constitutional muster? (born vs living in). It goes without saying that if he’s chosen the left will go to court on that basis. If there is any doubt or if Trump wants to avoid one more court battle he can always move to choice #2 who we will cover tomorrow

There have been a lot of critiques of the sham Trump trial in NYC showing that there is no sign of any “there” there but in the latest critique Jonathan Turley boils it down to a single point:

The assumption was that no rational prosecutor would base a major criminal case almost entirely on the testimony of Michael Cohen, who was recently denounced by a judge as a serial perjurer peddling “perverse” theories in court.

The calculus of Alvin Bragg is now obvious. He is counting on the jury convicting Trump regardless of the evidence.

“Now obvious”? Do you seriously mean to suggest that this wasn’t obvious from day one?

Frankly the next line of this piece is even more amusing:


Which is also why Bragg likely fears that the judge, not the jury, will decide the case.

No he doesn’t. If there has been one thing clear from the start of this entire process is that judge Merchan is there to make sure that Trump is convicted. His previous rulings all point in that direction, in fact the only reason he hasn’t put Trump in jail for contempt is fear that it will even further expose his court as the farce it is to the few in the country who haven’t figured it out.

The goal here is to give the left grounds to remove Trump from ballots or to give congress grounds to bar him from running because frankly it’s looking like Trump is going to win this thing far beyond the margin of believable fraud. That is Merchan’s entire purpose, to make this possible, particularly since the other cases are falling apart on a federal level. This is the preverbal “hail Mary” pass although given the corrupt nature of the move it’s more of a “hail satan”.

This isn’t a movie from the 30’s or 40’s where the corrupt judge or congressman decides to redeem himself at the end, this is part of a long trek of the American left toward the soviet system that they have craved for decades.

Furthermore If Merchan suddenly decided to act, like you know an actual judge he instantly becomes an “unperson” to the left a convenient scapegoat for Trump’s re-election. Whatever social life he has is gone, whatever favors that his family might have received is gone and it’s not like the right is going to suddenly embrace him for taking his oath as a judge seriously.

The only reason why this trial is taking place is because the verdict was decided long before it began. If the prosecutor’s entire case was Mr. Bragg singing “I’m a little teapot” Merchan would pass it to the jury and the jury would convict.

Anyone thinking otherwise is deluding themselves.