Michelle Obama time traveled to July 2016, copied Melania Trump’s speech then used it back in August 2008

Editorial Article by Jim Lantern, Lantern Timeglass Journal

Tuesday 19 July 2016

Melania Trump – and her speech writers, as well as others in the Trump Campaign who should be responsible – have been accused of plagiarism. The claim is she copied lines from Michelle Obama’s speech presented on 25 August 2008 at the Democratic National Convention, for her 18 July 2016 speech at the Republican National Convention.

CNN on TV this morning presented a side-by-side videos comparison of the two speeches. It leaves no doubt one is a nearly word-for-word identical copy of some lines of the other. One line could be coincidence. Two lines less likely to be coincidence. Three lines it is plagiarism.

The Trump Campaign Manager, Paul Manafort – and others interviewed, including Chris Christi – have denied the plagiarism. To do so is an insult to the common sense, education, and intelligence of all people who can clearly hear the obvious. Manafort, who reminds me of a burned out member of an old organized crime family portrayed in stories on TV and in movies, has blamed Hillary Clinton for causing the controversy – further claiming Hillary Clinton feels threatened by a strong woman like Melania Trump. The whole world can clearly see the sky is blue, while Trump and his ilk will with straight faces seriously insist the sky is green. The Trump Campaign has become like the so-called “Ministry of Truth” presented in the Nineteen Eighty-four novel by George Orwell, about a dystopian dictatorship. It is the end result of political correctness on steroids. Excerpted from Wikipedia…

  • The Ministry of Truth is the propaganda ministry. As with the other Ministries in the novel, the Ministry of Truth is a misnomer and in reality serves the opposite of its purported namesake: it is responsible for any necessary falsification of historical events. In another sense, and in keeping with the concept of doublethink, the ministry is aptly named, in that it creates/manufactures “truth” in the Newspeak sense of the word. The book describes a willful fooling of posterity using doctored historical archives to show a government-approved version of events.

A victim being interrogated might be asked, “What color is the sky?” He answers, “Blue.” The interrogator says, “No, the sky is green.” Then the victim is taken away for reprogramming. Torture. After a series of beatings, the victims is returned to the interrogator. “What color is the sky?” he asks. “Green.” the victim answers. If Trump is elected, then the sky will be green. Clinton is just as bad, if not worse. If she is elected, then only endless darkness will follow.

Paul Manafort denying plagiarism makes him appear to be like a lying sack of shit. A sack that has been labeled “Sugar” but from the stink it is obvious the sack contains shit.

Chris Christi, who would have got my vote for President – if he had stayed in the race, won the primary, and received the nomination – has lost all credibility by agreeing with Manafort to deny the obvious plagiarism. I can no longer believe anything he says about any subject. He has become one of the many puppets of the puppetmaster Donald Trump. Kind of like…

Get the picture?

Hillary Clinton didn’t have anything to do with this. The Trump campaign – engaged in willful stupidity on steroids – caused this controversy. It would not surprise me at all if it they did this deliberately to cause controversy and the resulting coverage of it by the mainstream news media – who they would then also put the blame on. This in fact has been the modus operandi of Donald Trump and his campaign to be the next U.S. President. He has been saving a lot of money by getting all of the free news coverage – more effective than campaign commercials on TV and much less costly – by causing such controversy – usually the result of what comes out of his mouth.

We have two speeches, side-by-side for comparison. Some lines nearly word-for-word identical. Enough so to qualify for plagiarism. If it were two students in the same classroom sitting near enough to each other, who turn in identical or nearly identical reports, then the teacher would have to determine which is the original and which is the copy. In this case, it is assumed Melania copied Michelle. For the Trump Campaign to deny it causes me to take it down the road into the Twilight Zone. Yes, obviously, what really happened is Michelle Obama time traveled into the future of 18 July 2016 to copy Melania Trump’s speech at the Republican National Convention, to then use her version of it back on 25 August 2008 at the Democratic National Convention! What a nightmare if Democrats, or republicans, were to acquire time travel ability. Alternate history time paradox. Why bother? They can simply re-write history without the need of a time machine.

It is said, “Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.” Meaning, “Copying someone is flattering because it shows you want to be like that person.” – Idioms, The Free Dictionary. If Melania Trump had given credit to Michelle Obama, then doing so might have gained more votes from the political left than loss of votes from the political right. Such a compliment – no greater than that from an enemy. However, Proverbs 27:6 (KJV), “Faithful are the wounds of a friend; but the kisses of an enemy are deceitful.” This has also been the modus operandi of Donald Trump, speaking highly of Kim Jung-on, Saddam Hussein, and Vladimir Putin.

No chance I’d ever vote for Hillary Clinton. I was in favor of Donald Trump, to put a businessman in the White House instead of another lying politician. It has become crystal clear Trump is not that businessman – not the kind I had in mind. Trump has lost my vote. I’m registered as an Independent (unaffiliated) voter. I average out to be Centrist by agreeing with Conservatives on some issues and agreeing with Liberals on some issues, similar to but not as extreme as Libertarians. Even so, the Libertarian Party will be on the ballot, and has put forward Gary Johnson for President and William Weld for Vice President. A legitimate third choice. Election 2016 will be the choice of the least of three evils, rather than the usual choice of the lesser of two evils. Johnson-Weld will get my vote.

No doubt Donald Trump reviewed and approved Melania Trump’s speech. They had enough help and time to prepare it that I have no doubt they knew what they were doing.

Trump’s campaign has been to “Make America Great Again.” Considering the history of lying politicians, maybe it’s time to “Make America Honest Again.” It is clear now that such honesty will not come from Donald Trump and his ilk. We already know honesty is an alien concept to Hillary Clinton and her ilk. As for Johnson and Weld, I’m not presently aware of any honesty concerns, so perhaps a vote for Johnson-Weld is a vote for the truth.

Some of the other speeches during the first night of the Republican National Convention caused me to begin to lean back in favor of Donald Trump. Then the reported Melania speech controversy has caused me to lean all the way in favor of Johnson-Weld, having no other reasonable options.

The speech I disliked the most was by Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke, dressed in his law enforcement uniform, which made him look like a banana republic dictator. Either a person is part of the problem or part of the solution. My opinion, based on what he said, he is part of the problem – police shooting and killing innocent people. It’s been about white cops murdering black citizens, and black citizens having revenge on white cops. The fact that Clarke is black does not improve his credibility.

I compare that to Keith Humphrey, the Norman, Oklahoma, Chief of Police – who is an African-American from another state and is a registered Democrat – recently claimed none of the recent police shootings of black males have been racially motivated. It amounts to more Orwellian political correctness and distortion of reality. Further, he is opposed to the U.S. Constitution, all Amendments – especially the First and Second – and the Bill of Rights. He is opposed to the Oklahoma Law that it is legal for a person in their home to use deadly force (by any means – not just a gun) in self defense against an intruder whose intent is to harm or kill. He believes anyone who agrees with that state law is mentally ill and should be locked up for mental illness so as not to harm anyone – even someone who is trying to kill them. Chief Humphrey wants to establish “thought crime” in order to lock up people who disagree with him.

My concern now is if police shootings continue – more of them being killed in revenge than anyone killed by them, then Martial Law will be declared – perhaps at first limited to cities where the trouble is, then expanded to counties, then states, and finally at the national level. The theme of Trump’s first night of the Republican National Convention was “Make America Safe Again.” A good basic idea, but I have no doubt the means would result in loss of basic freedoms – loss of constitutional rights.

My opinion, Rudy Giuliani gave the best speech at the Republican National Convention yesterday. His speech, more than any other, caused me to reconsider Trump.

The attempt by Republican rebels to Dump Trump on the first day at the Republican National Convention was defeated by Trump loyalists. The rebels got a taste of their own medicine – having “rigged” (or at least tried to) the primaries so that another candidate (Ted Cruz) would win, but then failed and Trump won it anyway.

Repeating a past warning…


Excerpts from Wikipedia article…

  • “If This Goes On—” is a science fiction short novel by Robert A. Heinlein, first serialized in 1940 in Astounding Science-Fiction and revised and expanded for inclusion in the 1953 collection Revolt in 2100. The novel shows what might happen to Christianity in the United States given mass communications, applied psychology, and a hysterical populace. The novel is part of Heinlein’s Future History series.
  • The story is set in a future theocratic American society, ruled by the latest in a series of fundamentalist Christian “Prophets.” The First Prophet was Nehemiah Scudder, a backwoods preacher turned President (elected in 2012), then dictator (no elections were held in 2016 or later).

The following paragraphs have been excerpted from the 1986 Baen Book printing of Robert A. Heinlein’s novel titled “Revolt in 2100” –from the story titled “If This Goes On—”:

Successful revolution is big business – make no mistake about that. In a modern, complex, and highly industrialized state, revolution is not accomplished by a handful of conspirators whispering around a guttering candle in a deserted ruin. It requires countless personnel, supplies, modern machinery and modern weapons. And to handle these factors successfully there must be loyalty, secrecy, and superlative organization.

I was kept busy but my work was fill-in work, since I was awaiting assignment. I had time to dig into the library and I looked up Tom Paine, which led me to Patrick Henry and Thomas Jefferson and others – a whole new world was opened up to me. I had trouble at first in admitting the possibility of what I read; I think perhaps  of all things a police state  can do to its citizens, distorting history is possibly the most pernicious. For example, I learned for the first time that the United States had not been ruled by a bloodthirsty emissary of Satan before the First Prophet arose in his wrath and cast him out – but had been a community of free men deciding their own affairs by peaceful consent. I don’t mean that the first republic had been a scriptural paradise, but it hadn’t been anything like what I had learned in school.

For the first time in my life I was reading things which had not been approved by the Prophet’s censors, and the impact on my mind was devastating. Sometimes I would glance over my shoulder to see who was watching me, frightened in spit of myself. I began to sense faintly that secrecy is the keystone of all tyranny. Not force, but secrecy . . . censorship. When any government, or any church for that matter, undertakes to say to its subjects, “This you may not read, this you must not see, this you are forbidden to know,” the end result is tyranny and oppression, no matter how holy the motives. Mighty little force is needed to control a man whose mind has been hoodwinked; contrariwise, no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything—you can’t conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him.

My thoughts did not then fall into syllogisms; my head was filled with an inchoate spate of new ideas, each more exciting than the last. I discovered that travel between the planets, almost a myth in my world, had not stopped because the First Prophet had forbidden it as a sin against the omnipotence of God; it had ceased because it had gone into the red financially and the Prophet’s government would not subsidize it. There was even an implied statement that the “infidels” (I still used that word in my mind) still sent out an occasional research ship and that there were human beings even now on Mars and Venus.

…Maybe someday the United States would have space ships again…

+ + +

Categories: Editorial Articles | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Post navigation


Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: