POLITICAL CAMPAIGN REFUSES OPPOSITION RESEARCH
by Dwight Kehoe, Editor, TPATH, ©2017
(Jul. 14, 2017) — It was a heated campaign like no other in the history of the new Republic. The run-of-the-mill name- calling, backstabbing and dirty tricks had taken a back seat to volatile, outrageous, gutter-swiping vitriol.
The standard twisting of words and statements had been brushed aside and replaced with pure fabrications and invented ruminations. All manner of decorum had been replaced with uncontrolled anger and hatred embroiled in a cauldron of fear. This was a battle the left side never dreamed they would or should ever have to be engaged in. Therefore, nothing was off-limits, no disgusting enterprise was to be discarded.
It was not just about a divergence in policy where both sides agreed on the greatness of their country but differed on how to maintain or restore it. No, it was about one candidate’s life-long struggle to destroy individual freedoms and replace them with government control over everyone and everything. It was about that candidate having been anointed by peers and pundits as the one who would ascend to the throne and continue the evil work of those who came before.
Any means which led to a victorious election night, illustriously filled with fireworks and joyous celebration, were means to be exploited.
- Using a politically-appointed position to extort funds from citizens and foreign governments alike was part of the game plan.
- Making deals with troublesome dictators, clearing the way for a very dangerous country to acquire the Republic’s natural resources which would ultimately result in nuclear weapons manufactured and aimed at the Republic.
- Colluding with party members to cheat one of their own out of a fair chance to be seated in that throne.
- Accepting and then using questions illegally transferred to the Anointed One prior to a debate.
- Hiring thugs to infiltrate the opponent’s rallies with the intention of injuring and intimidating people who came to hear a message.
- Paying foreign agencies to create damaging dossiers out of thin air.
- Disseminating world-wide private conversations between two private citizens.
- Viciously attacking a minor child of the opposition’s candidate.
- Using the Republic’s security agencies to eavesdrop on the candidate’s phone calls and emails.
- Deleting 30,000 emails which could most likely prove collusion and illegal activity.
Having been not just aware of these and many other illegal and unethical activities of the Anointed One’s campaign, it was not difficult for the opposition to surmise that those scoundrels had many more devious and revolting schemes afoot. They had become very well aware that no fabrication, no disgusting thought or cocktail would be off-limits to the Anointed One’s cabal.
As the opposition waited and tried to prepare for the next media-supported prevarication, there appeared on the horizon a beacon. Information might be coming about the Anointed One’s activities involving possibly illegal operations with an evil foreign country. It appeared that a well-connected and influential attorney from that monstrous land had information and was willing to share it.
There arose in this a dilemma. Could this information, if it pointed to illegalities, create an advantage for the opposition campaign? If the Anointed One had broken laws and there was evidence of it, should not the citizens of the Republic know? Should not the FBI know?
This supposed holder of wrongdoing information by the Anointed One had for years been a player in the Republic’s politics and had had meetings and dealings with many of the Republic’s political leaders and power-brokers. But should the opposition be afforded that same privilege?
As the opposition campaign pondered the proffered information it ultimately decided to ignore it and move on with defending themselves against the ongoing onslaught of lies and misrepresentations being generated by the Anointed One’s liars.
Wait just a minute! TPATH might be guilty of a Fake News Headline. Question: Would or could any campaign be that asinine? Let us answer: No! The campaign did what had to be done. It set up and met with that evil foreigner.
Meeting with her and hearing what she had to say could hardly be considered as anything but necessary. What would be an unbelievably incompetent thing is if they didn’t. Even the Anointed One’s people would secretly snicker at the stupidity of it. Imagine the nanosecond of time the Anointed One’s campaign would ponder the “should we meet” question.
As it turned out, that evil lawyer was in control of no information, had no intentions of hurting the Anointed One, even if she had anything. In fact, this was just another sleazy operation created by the Anointed One’s complot. Another example of the filthy underbelly of leftist operational tactics.