HT: Bird Dog.

Vogue’s “Fashion Muse” Lynn Yaeger (see photo below) saw a photograph of First Lady Melania Trump boarding a Houston-bound plane in stiletto heels and made a major thing out of it.

This morning, Mrs. Trump boarded Air Force One wearing a pair of towering pointy-toed snakeskin heels better suited to a shopping afternoon on Madison Avenue or a girls’ luncheon at La Grenouille.

While the nation is riveted by images of thousands of Texans wading with their possessions, their pets, their kids, in chest-high water, desperately seeking refuge; while a government official recommend that those who insist on sheltering in place write their names and social security numbers on their arms, Melania Trump is heading to visit them in footwear that is a challenge to walk in on dry land.

A spokesperson says she has other shoes to change into on the plane—and one sincerely hopes there is a pair of leopard-print Wellies-in-waiting to get her from the tarmac to the limo. But what kind of message does a fly-in visit from a First Lady in sky-high stilettos send to those suffering the enormous hardship, the devastation of this natural disaster?

And why, oh why, can’t this administration get anything, even a pair of shoes, right?

The Washington Post chimed in:

Melania Trump is the kind of woman who travels to a flood-ravaged state in a pair of black snakeskin stilettos. Heels this high are not practical. But Trump is not the kind of woman who has to be practical. Heels this high are not comfortable. Comfort is not the point. Neither hers nor yours.

Trump is the kind of woman who knows that when she walks from the White House to Marine One there will be photographers, and so she will dress accordingly. On this soggy Tuesday morning, she wore her stilettos with a pair of cropped black trousers and an Army-green bomber jacket. Her hair was nicely blown out, and she was wearing a pair of sunglasses though it was overcast and drizzly at the time. As she walked to the chopper, she glanced toward a camera, and the photographer captured her with one hand in her pocket, her weight shifted slightly to one leg. She looked great.

Trump’s fashionable ensemble was defined by its contradictions. She was wearing a working man’s jacket but it was juxtaposed with sexy limousine shoes. The trousers and the top were basic black — utilitarian. The oversize aviator sunglasses were Hollywood. It’s an image that would have been at home in any fashion magazine, which is so often the case with the first lady. …

It was also an image that suggested that Trump is the kind of woman who refuses to pretend that her feet will, at any point, ever be immersed in cold, muddy, bacteria-infested Texas water. She is the kind of woman who may listen empathetically to your pain, but she knows that you know that she is not going to experience it. So why pretend?

Well, sometimes pretense is everything. It’s the reason for the first lady to go to Texas at all: to symbolize care and concern and camaraderie. To remind people that the government isn’t merely doing its job, that the government is engaged with each and every individual. Washington hears its citizens. That’s what the optics are all about. Sitting around a conference table and talking into a speaker phone are not good optics. A politician has to get on the ground in work boots and a windbreaker. Rolled-up sleeves. Galoshes. Baseball caps.

and the New York Times also eagerly joined fashionista firing squad:

Mrs. Trump’s heels… appear to be classic Manolo Blahniks …redolent of a certain clichéd kind of femininity: decorative, impractical, expensive, elitist (all adjectives often associated with the brand “Trump”).

Mrs. Trump, of course, actually emerged from the plane wearing a pair of white sneakers.

The president himself was also criticized by Jezebel for inappropriate flood attire, i.e. khakis. Tom Knighton notes that khakis were fine for hurricane wear when Obama wore them.

All this was started by Lynn Yaeger of Vogue. The same Vogue whose idea of fashion these days is a cover shot by Annie Leibovitz no less of Bradley Manning pretending to be female in a swimsuit.

Milo Yiannopoulos described the Vogue columnist as: “An unspeakable Eldritch horror from the depths of aeons and untouched by mortal creatures.”

Daily Mail:

A wallpaper company in Pennsylvania was shocked when it received an order from the White House earlier this month.

So shocked, in fact, that the owners at York Wallcoverings actually thought it was some sort of prank, Fox 43 reported.

It wasn’t, and the company quickly realized they had a long day ahead of them – the White House wanted the wallpaper delivered by 7pm that same day.

And to throw another complication into the mix, the print the White House requested, which was hand picked by the President himself, had been discontinued in 2014.

Though it was a difficult task – the company was up for the challenge, as it meant their wallpaper would hang in the Oval Office.

The wallpaper was part of the extensive White House renovation which included an new HVAC system, a paint touch-up and a total replace of all of the carpeting, among other changes, according to CNN.

RTWT

Vanderleun likes the Trump Revolution.

The Trump effect is a good thing. He is doing exactly what he said he would do and exactly what people elected him to do. Newsflash to the Beltway establishment: Americans who elected Trump do not worship the current gods of the city. They know you’re responsible for killing the old ones and they wish to return the favor now. We want your gods dead. That is sort of what “drain the swamp” means. And, as Trump points out repeatedly: in America (at least in the middle part) we don’t worship government; we worship God. As in the one true God.

Think of the glory of it all. This is the fight we have been waiting for. This is the turmoil we need.

RTWT

Michael Thau comes to Donald Trump’s defense, in the process totally demolishing that exquisite twit Rod Dreher.

Last week, the American Conservative published a headline that, with the addition of a little profanity, would fit right in on the bathroom wall of some Leftist dive: “Donald Trump, Treacherous Loon.” But the piece isn’t by an antifa graffiti artist seeking mainstream attention; its author is one of the site’s senior editors, Rod Dreher.

If you haven’t yet heard of Dreher or his recent book, The Benedict Option, it’s definitely not his fault. You probably never visit The American Conservative, where he’s used his perch as senior editor to write 17 posts plugging the book in the last four weeks alone. That’s on top of the thousands upon thousands of words he’s written about the book since its publication in March.

For those unfamiliar with his work, Dreher became prominent in the early 2000s as a writer for National Review. His most famous NR piece begins, “One day this summer, I told a colleague I had to leave early to pick up my weekly fresh vegetables from the organic food co-op to which my wife and I belong.”

Legions of men, in Dreher’s circumstances, have courageously told their wives that buying food labeled “organic” is a waste of both time and money; legions more have capitulated in silence. But it takes a truly self-absorbed man to publicly rationalize his capitulation into a heretofore undetected strain of conservative thought; and a hopelessly twee one to label it “crunchy conservativism.” Monetization quickly followed rationalization, and a book with a title as lengthy as it is nauseating was born: Crunchy Cons: How Birkenstocked Burkeans, Gun-Loving Organic Gardeners, Evangelical Free-Range Farmers, Hip Homeschooling Mamas, Right-Wing Nature Lovers, and Their Diverse Tribe of Countercultural Conservatives Plan to Save America (or At Least the Republican Party).

Besides sucking up to liberal elites, Dreher also showed his flair for self-promotion in his NR days. He got them to run, as lone dissenter Jonah Goldberg called it, “a blog entirely dedicated to [his book], in which most of the contributors seem committed to finding new and exciting ways to illustrate the genius of the book and the insights of its author.” …

Dreher’s penchant for turning self-absorption into self-promotion reached almost artistic levels in a later essay explaining his conversion from Roman Catholicism to Eastern Orthodoxy. His reason involves the gravest of matters: disillusionment by the Catholic Church’s sexual abuse scandals. But, his essay reads like Dostoyevsky’s caricature of Turgenev’s account of a ship wreck. …

When Dreher summarizes his remarks, the actual victims of abuse get pushed aside to make room for the true subject of interest: “I have talked about how the Church itself failed me in all this . . .” Dreher’s mania for self-promotion also manifests itself; he refers to his book twice; indeed, the very title of this allegedly serious piece about religious depravity and conversion is, almost unbelievably, “Crunchy Con’s Conversion Crisis.” He’s even so immodest as to brag of his modesty: “you won’t see me ballyhoo my conversion to Orthodoxy as I did with my conversion to Catholicism.” Nope, no ballyhooing here at all. And the above is just a taste of the unseemly narcissism exuded by Dreher’s story.

So, as you can probably tell, Dreher isn’t just a simple Christian. Christianity is an essential part of his commercial brand and, hence, the Eucharist isn’t the only kind of bread the Lord provides. Thus, his self-absorption notwithstanding, it’s surprising to hear a man who lauds the “Amish example of forgiveness and detachment from anger” call the president a treacherous loon. My first thought was that maybe hurling abuse is, like vulgar egotism, a habit for which he hasn’t yet managed to follow Christ’s example and break. So, I searched for some headlines about President Obama that were equally nasty. But, the closest I could find was “Obama Disses Chaput,” which only the most fanatical admirer of both Obama and the Archbishop would find at all offensive.

So, what had Donald Trump done to deserve the appellation of “treacherous loon”? Surely, he must have exceeded Obama’s many transgressions. Had Trump sold guns to Mexican drug lords? Had he used the IRS to target his enemies? Did he secretly send billions of dollars in cash to Iran? Perhaps, like Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, he lost track of $6 billion in government money or used a charitable organization as a pay-for-play service.

No, in fact, the president hadn’t done anything. Dreher’s crude insult had nothing to do with Trump’s actions. The fuss was, rather, about something he said; namely, that if he knew Jeff Sessions was going to recuse himself from the Russia probe, he wouldn’t have appointed him attorney general.

Now, at worst, the president’s remark is a perfect example of Michael Kinsley’s famous definition: “A gaffe is when a politician tells the truth—some obvious truth he isn’t supposed to say.”

RTWT

Kurt Schlichter has written Robert Mueller’s dismissal letter for Mr. Trump:

Robert Mueller

Special Counsel

United States Department of Justice

Dear Mr. Mueller:

I write in my capacity as the President, and to you in your capacity as a subordinate executive branch officer.

[This is where the president clarifies who works for whom – and whom the American people elected. Hint: It wasn’t the Menschian Suddenly-Aware-That-Russia-Is-Bad Gang.]

You were appointed to investigate the baseless and politically motivated claims of collusion with Russia. While I am frustrated at the partisan innuendo and improper leaks, I respect this process. Yet these false claims have interfered with my administration’s ability to deliver on the promises I made to the tens of millions of Americans who voted for me last November.

[This is where the President makes clear that he will not let these bogus charges derail the policies the American people voted for. You establishment creeps want to go back to business as usual? Win an election. Your coup fantasies? Not happening.]

It is important for me to tell you and the American people, who will read this letter since I intend to make it public, that nothing here seeks to impugn your integrity. You served your country honorably as a Marine overseas and in various roles at home.

[Of course, Trump must tweet out this letter, and it must be distributed far and wide by the skillful and smooth Anthony Scaramucci so that voters can read it themselves and not have to rely on the CNN/NYT/MSNBC/WaPo Lie Machine’s spin.]

But several troubling matters related to your investigation have arisen, so I am directing you to provide me a written explanation regarding the following matters no later than noon three days hence. I intend to release your response to the public, which must have full confidence in your investigation if it is to put to rest these baseless allegations.

[Shift the paradigm! Mr. President, this guy works for you. He owes you – and the American people – an explanation!]

1. 28 CFR 45.2 (”Disqualification arising from personal or political relationship”) bars participation in any investigation involving a personal friend. You are a long-time, close personal friend and mentor of James Comey. He is the source of allegations against me that leaks from your team that indicate that you are investigating. Please explain why you contend that 28 C.F.R. 45.2 does not apply to you based upon your close personal friendship with Mr. Comey. Please explain how your close friendship with this accuser will not undermine the American people’s confidence in the impartiality and fairness of your investigation.

[I was just discussing with one of my very, very prominent lawyer buddies how this whole thing stinks and would never be tolerated in the normal legal world. Any American is going to understand that you don’t appoint the pal of the “victim” to investigate the “crime.”]

2. Federal Election Commission filings show the political donations made by your staff, including donations of the maximum amount allowed by law, are overwhelmingly directed toward the Democratic Party. [Insert here a list of them and their Hillary payoffs so the people can see just how outrageous this really is.] Please explain why 28 C.F.R. 45.2 does not apply to your staff based on their demonstrated partisan preference for liberal Democrats who oppose my administration. Please explain how it happens that none of your staff appears to have primarily donated to Republicans – nor any of them to my candidacy despite the fact about 45% of American voters voted for me.

[Seriously. What the hell? The American people need to hear loudly and clearly that Mueller is picking members of the Felonia von Pantsuit fraternity for his metastasizing mob – and they’ll ask “Why?” Mueller cannot give a good explanation because there isn’t one.]

3. On June 14, 2017, the news media reported a leak from inside your investigation to the effect that I was personally the subject of an investigation for “obstruction of justice.” This leak was widely perceived as a bureaucratic maneuver designed to prevent me from exercising my prerogative under the Constitution of relieving you, a subordinate executive branch officer, of your duties. Recently, there were leaks about you unilaterally further expanding the probe beyond the bogus Russian collusion claims to my personal financial matters from a decade ago. Fairly or not, these shameful betrayals of your confidence by members of your team (assuming the media is accurate, which is questionable) portray you as using the kind of tactics that resulted in my mandate to “drain the swamp.” And these endless leaks are especially troubling in light of Mr. Comey’s admission that he leaked information to manipulate the special counsel process, while hiding from the American people the fact that I was never under investigation for collusion with Russia.

[Time to remind people that Mueller is not leading a group of dedicated professionals pursuing the truth but a liberal agenda-driven, undisciplined band of Hillary hacks who are just another set of Washington insiders playing the same old political games.]

If these leaks are accurate, please explain the steps you are taking to identify who on your team violated your trust and the trust of the American people. If the leaks are not true, please unequivocally state that fact. Please also explain the steps you are taking to ensure that your staff will act professionally and with integrity in the future in order to regain the American people’s confidence in the impartiality and fairness of your investigation.

[Boom. Put it back on Mr. Integrityâ„¢ to explain what he plans to do to restore some professionalism to the circle of jerks that is his team.]

This matter must be resolved quickly and completely, in a manner which all Americans see as absolutely impartial and fair. I am directing your public response to this letter both in fairness to you, because you deserve a chance to answer these concerns, and for the American people, who have questions that require answers.

[So you wanna play this out in the media? Okay. Except now you can’t do it from in hiding using whispers and lies. Time to stand up and be held accountable instead of talking smack via cowardly gossip through friendly liberal media catamites.]

And the American people deserve those answers soon, because they deserve an executive branch that can devote its full efforts to the agenda the people voted for. I am confident you share my determination that this not become another endless, expensive, and ultimately meaningless exercise in Washington gamesmanship. Accordingly, unless additional time, not to exceed 30 days, is granted upon a showing of good cause, I direct you to present your written findings by October 31, 2017. At that point, your appointment as Special Counsel will expire and any remaining matters requiring further investigation will continue to be investigated via normal Department of Justice investigatory channels.

[Set a fuse and light it. This charade cannot go on endlessly, so don’t let it.]

Donald J. Trump

RTWT

HT: Vanderleun.

Six months into the Trump presidency, at Ricochet, V the K explains what he likes about the current president’s performance.

I like that he doesn’t let himself be a punching bag for the Democrat Media Complex. The last two Republican presidents seemed to think that defending their administration’s policies from Democrat attacks was ungentlemanly. Trump has also identified the weak point of the media establishment — their egos. Most of the media operatives, especially on television, are dumb, vain, and egomaniacal. Trump knows that if he pokes them, they will go into paroxysms of “How Dare He Criticize Us” vituperation. He provokes the very media temper tantrums that discredit the media.

I like that some of Obama’s executive overreach has been repealed, and that some of Obama’s worst policy decisions are being revoked. We’re out of the Paris “Redistribution of Wealth to the Third World” Accords. Criminal aliens are being deported once again. Israel isn’t being treated as a pariah state. More of this, please.

Neil Gorsuch was an outstanding Supreme Court appointment. Good Lord, can you imagine the horrible people Hillary would be putting on the court? Sotomayor and Kagan were bad enough. Try Justice Kamala Harris on for size. (Not that it would be her, but it would be someone just as hard left, just as hyperpartisan, and just as corrupt). Democrat presidents never nominate swing votes.

He adds three things he does not like.

RTWT

Washington Times:

An op-ed posted June 11 by Huffington Post contributor Jason Fuller was pulled by the website after Wednesday’s attack on congressional Republicans.

“Impeachment Is No Longer Enough; Donald Trump Must Face Justice,” a call for the prosecution and execution of the president, was published just three days before 66-year-old gunman James Hodgkinson shot Rep. Steve Scalise and three others on an Alexandria, Virginia, baseball field. A reporter for The Daily Caller noticed the deletion late Wednesday and found a cached version still available.

“Trump’s impeachment and removal from office are no longer enough,” the HuffPo contributor wrote. “Draining the swamp means not only ejecting Trump from the presidency, but also bringing himself and everyone assisting in his agenda up on charges of treason. They must be convicted (there is little room to doubt their guilt). And then —  upon receiving guilty verdicts  —  they must all be executed under the law. Anything less than capital punishment  — or at least life imprisonment without parole in a maximum security detention facility  — would send yet another message to the world that America has lost its moral compass.”

The writer then asserted that Republican leadership should face the same fate.

“Nothing would do more than to convict them of the highest offense defined by our Constitution, and then to deliver the ultimate punishment. Donald Trump deserves nothing less,” the author wrote. “Mitch McConnell, Steve Bannon, and Paul Ryan should also share Donald Trump’s fate, for they have done more than practically anyone to protect him and to throw our country under the proverbial bus. In order to survive, we as a nation must deliver the ultimate punishment under the law to all involved in its current destruction.”

Jason Fuller was mendacious, but not repentant, in the aftermath of the removal of his posting. Medium