Conspiracy!

The hellish cauldron of venom in D.C. has spilled over into the Potomac, is spreading through rivers and streams west to the Pacific and south to the Gulf of Mexico.  In my anxiety and fear of what the results of this might be, I came to a stark realization:  we’ve seen it before — but even worse.  Post Korean War, post Cuban missile crisis, America deteriorated into near Anarchy.  Think about it:  President Kennedy was assassinated as was his brother, Robert.  Malcolm X was killed, Martin Luther King, Jr. was assassinated.  Civil disobedience and rioting visited almost every major city in the United States.  National Guardsmen in Ohio killed Kent State protestors.  When MLK was assassinated April 4, 1968, major riots struck 1oo cities across America.  In Chicago, Mayor Daly mobilized 400 police officers as a 28 block square in the city sustained massive looting and violence.  The 1965 Los Angeles riots (later called the “Watts” riots because of the neighborhood where they occurred) were the most violent in L.A. history and would hold that title until the 1992 riots 27 years later.  A President — Richard Nixon — resigned rather than go through pending impeachment proceedings. In 1973, 21 prison guards were taken hostage in Oklahoma in the Nation’s worst prison riot in history.  Prisoners turned against each other.  Five hours into the riot the facility was in flames.  It took law enforcement 7 days to regain control.  In 1967 massive riots in Newark, NJ were triggered by a rumor.  The rumor was that police had stopped an unarmed black man for a traffic infraction and somehow the results were his being killed.  It was a complete fabrication — it didn’t happen.  However, the rumor ignited six days of anarchy in which $10 million of damage was done to the city along with 26 deaths.  Lost in history was that during the Newark riots, that unrest spread to nearby Plainfield, NJ which suffered similar rioting as Newark with similar results.  To this day, much of Plainfield remains as it was after the riots — empty buildings everywhere that businesses abandoned, never to return.  Who can forget the Los Angeles Rodney King riots, spurred by the acquittal of the 4 L.A. policemen charged with the brutal beating of Rodney King in late 1991?  The beating was captured on video and played nationally live on television.  All four were acquitted in a trial on April 29, 1992, which prompted massive riots with tragic results:  the National Guard was called in, 1000 buildings were destroyed, 53 people were killed with thousands injured, and a reported $1 billion in damages — the most deadly and costly civil unrest action in U.S. history.

Yet, when I detailed the above incidents, several were unknown to you until today.  The reason for that is why as brutal and devastating and costly as were those riots, those costs of dollars, civility, and human lives, pale in comparison to the “perception” of today’s national civil unrest.  Today it seems to most Americans that in the midst of the cradle of America — Washington, D.C. — there is NO civility, NO patriotism, NO love for “God and Country,” NO honor for our government and government servants, NO respect for the White House, the Office of the Presidency, and especially for President Trump, and NO loyalty to American ideals revealed in the U.S. Constitution.

Why is this?  As bad as it is, we are not seeing dozens if not hundreds of deaths in riots in 100+ U.S. cities, no massive destruction of buildings, no businesses shutting down for weeks and months and in many cases being shuttered altogether.  All of this and more were products of divisiveness and hatred and strife in the 60’s and 70’s.  What’s the difference between the 60’s, 70’s and today?  THE MEDIA!  Think about it:  there were no satellites in those decades, limited cable television, no high definition, no DVR’s, no VHS tape for recording, and because of these and the insurmountable expense of video broadcasting, very few television news outlets.  (I know it may be hard to believe, but CNN, Fox News, and MSNBC weren’t born yet!)  National newspapers were there and were much stronger and much more visible than today’s, but we all know that live video news compared to static print news is a much better source for real news and real news NOW.  And the media make those reports larger than life — often larger than reality.

Today we have news NOW, but it’s not necessarily REAL news.  (I’d steal the term from President Trump and use it here, but everyone knows it without my saying.)  I am not going to bore you with a “media rant,” because the horror we face in American politics today is not just about a product of the media.  The horror is that the media are NOT simply looking for truths to share.  They are not looking for news at all.  The scariest thing in all of this is that the media are out to change the fundamental foundation of America:  free elections.  Think about it:  the vitriol we see and hear spilled nationally on cable and satellite television daily in normal circumstances would simply dissipate over time as Americans began to see the truths and untruths in every story.  Day after day, night after night, story after story, the media are concentrating on one thing and one thing only:  to turn the American national election system upside down.  I no longer feel they are simply out to discredit Donald Trump and in doing so either unearth some evil that would cause him to resign in disgrace or to see him impeached.  They are out to unilaterally remove him from office.

If successful with this coup, the media would fulfill for Barack Obama what he said was his purpose for running for President:  “to implement fundamental change in America.”

Historically we have seen amazing negativity in America during political seasons.  Almost every President has at one time or another seen groups — sometimes large groups — of U.S. citizens go sour on an Administration or its policies.  We’ve seen this during every American war, each economic downturn, and in periods of dramatic racial unrest.  It seems that America’s diversity which made it the “Melting Pot” of the World also fuels much of its internal divisiveness.  Its that internal divisiveness that today seems to be a product of a combination of racial and economic inequality, ethnic and religious differences, and multiculturalism that fuels the media to whip Americans day after day into a frenzy for dramatic political change — instant and unconstitutional change — by removing for the first time in history a legally elected President.

Formerly I just thought the media because of their embarrassment for their loss in the election were just lashing out.  But I’ve come to understand that the loss was just one setback in the master plan for the American political landscape that had been set in place with the election of that junior Senator from Illinois as President.  Secretary Clinton was to be the bridge between Obama and the next liberal elitist to occupy the White House, and was to perpetuate that “change” started by Obama.

The election of Trump was a devastating blow to the master plan and to the media.  Many actually felt like they had failed this generation by allowing Trump’s election.  After all, the U.S. media knew that with their power, overpowering voices, and control through their “reporting,”  they control the essence of American government.  They caught on years ago that it is no longer about the truth or money.  Elections are now only about power:  power to re-shape the political structure of American government for generations to come.  With that power comes control of EVERYTHING.

I’ll close with this:  my position I have clearly detailed above is no longer just opinion.  There can be NO other explanation for all that we are seeing from the media.  I will not detail it because you see and hear it all day every day.  The only example I can give you to make you understand the significance of what the media is doing is that they are (almost unilaterally) perpetrating an evil overthrow of the American government with one and only one objective.  They want to unseat Donald Trump as President, and they are willing to do anything and everything within their power to make it happen.  And they totally disregard the fact that Americans voted and elected him.

The travesty here is not just that Trump is doing good work achieving great success and their objective would stop that.  That would be a first and would usher in a historical era heretofore never experienced in the U.S.  The United States would cease to exist as we have known it for 250 years.

 

Is Impeachment for Trump Ahead?

They have just gone crazy in D.C.  Once again a “leak” to the Washington Post has opened a mysterious door with an allegation from an “unnamed source” that Special Counsel Robert Mueller is investigating President Trump for Obstruction of Justice.  Really?  His “best buddy” James Comey publicly made numerous statements that would debunk any Trump obstruction, unless…….

Unless Mueller might think the President’s firing of Comey was actually to stymie the Russia investigation which would really BE Obstruction, IF Trump’s intent was to stop that investigation.  Firing Comey as evidence of Presidential intent to stop that investigation is a far reach.  But maybe that’s what all this noise in D.C. that seems to never end is about just that:  “far reach.”  Let’s look at what things have and are happening that REALLY are far reaches:

  1. Mueller being a Special Counsel at all.  Why?  His doing so under these circumstances is actually a violation of the actual “Special Counsel Statute.”  Greg Jarrett of FOX News in an editorial gave us these facts:
    The special counsel statute specifically prohibits Mueller from serving if he has “a personal relationship with any person substantially involved in the investigation or prosecution.”  The language is mandatory.  He “shall” disqualify himself.  Comey is substantially involved in the case.  Indeed, he is the central witness.  The two men and former colleagues have long been friends, allies and partners.  Agents have quipped that they were joined at the hip while at the Department of Justice and the FBI.  They have a mentor-protégé relationship.  The likelihood of prejudice and favoritism is glaring and severe.  So, it is incomprehensible that the man who is a close friend of the star witness against the president… will now determine whether the president committed a prosecutable crime in his dealings with Mueller’s good friend.  Mueller cannot possibly be fair in judging the credibility of his friend versus the man who fired him.
  2. In all matters, prosecutors are forbidden from presiding over a case in which they have a personal relationship with a key, pivotal witness. This is the kind of disqualifying mandate which, if violated, can and should result in disbarment proceedings against a lawyer. Mueller is violating not only the special counsel statute, but the Canons of Ethics and its successor, the Code of Professional Responsibility, which govern the conduct of lawyers.
  3. Compounding the conflict is the debate over whether Comey himself committed crimes. He admitted in his testimony that he leaked the memo reflecting his alleged conversation with President Trump. It is a felony to convert government property (the memo) to personal use and then “convey” it to someone outside the government without authorization.Moreover, Comey’s non-disclosure contract promises he will not disclose the very kind of information he leaked to the media. Doing so, subjects him to “criminal sanctions and personal liability in a civil action” for money damages. It matters not that he is no longer at the FBI. His agreement is a binding, enforceable and actionable contract regardless of Comey’s job status.
  4. Acting Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who appointed Mueller, is the only person who can fire the special counsel. But he, too, has a conflict of interest if Mueller’s investigation now includes Comey’s firing. Inasmuch as Rosenstein is the person who composed the memo that formed the basis for Comey’s termination and may have had conversations with the president about the reasons for firing Comey, Rosenstein now becomes an important witness.  He cannot serve as Mueller’s boss at the Department of Justice while simultaneously acting as a witness in the case being investigated by his appointee.

I don’t think I’ve ever in American politics seen as much history-changing activity set in motion for any alleged infraction of any political figure.  And the foundation for these leaked alleged Presidential infractions is nothing more than sand.  There is no there there!  Rosenstein is in a really tough spot here.  He appointed Mueller who has a reputation of being fair, but in this case fairness when his best friend and longtime business associate is deeply involved and may indeed himself be guilty of illegal activity in actions he took that may too rise to the level of Special Counsel investigation, even if he is no longer an FBI employee.  The confidentiality agreement he executed as Director STILL precludes his release of information and documents he voluntarily committed he had released.  Rosenstein has just one choice:  remove Mueller.  Mueller, on the other hand, should recognize this dilemma he has created and voluntarily step down.

But let’s “far reach” into a “possible” future occurrence in this matter.  What if evidence supports Impeachment action for Obstruction of Justice?  How does that work?  No president has ever been removed from office.  But 4 presidents have dealt with impeachment actions:  Andrew Johnson, John Tyler, Richard Nixon, and Bill Clinton.   “If” Mueller (or any subsequent Counsel) presented evidence to Congress for Impeachment, how would the process work.  Let’s break it down here:

In the House of Representatives, The House Judiciary Committee decides whether or not to proceed with impeachment. If they do…

  • The Chairman of the Judiciary Committee will propose a resolution calling for the Judiciary Committee to begin a formal inquiry into the issue of impeachment.  Based on their inquiry, the Judiciary Committee will send another resolution composed of one or more “Articles of Impeachment” to the full House stating that impeachment is warranted and why or that impeachment is not called for.  The Full House (probably operating under special floor rules set by the House Rules Committee) will debate and vote on each Article of Impeachment.  Should any one of the Articles of Impeachment be approved by a simple majority vote, the President will be “impeached.” However, being impeached is sort of like being indicted of a crime. The president will remain in office pending the outcome of the Senate impeachment trial.
  • In the Senate  the Articles of Impeachment are received from the House.  The Senate formulates rules and procedures for holding a trial.  The trial will be held with the president represented by his lawyers. A select group of House members serves as “prosecutors.” The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court (currently John G. Roberts) presides with all 100 Senators acting as the jury.  The Senate meets in private session to debate a verdict.  The Senate, in open session, votes on a verdict. A 2/3 super-majority vote of the Senate will result in a conviction.  The Senate will vote to remove the President from office.  The Senate may also vote (by a simple majority) to prohibit the President from holding any public office in the future.

“If” that were to happen, Vice President Mike Pence would be sworn in to replace President Trump.  Note:  Obstruction of Justice is a criminal offense.  However, the Senate has no authority to take any action in impeachment for criminal offenses other than their verdict.  If any judicial action were to be taken it would occur through the Justice Department.

Summary

Here’s the irony of all this:  there probably is no there there, and all of this is wasted time and money.  I don’t think there’s any Trump supporter who thinks that if Mr. Trump obstructed justice he should receive a pass.  But, in 11 months of intense investigation with the joint resources of the Justice Department, FBI, NSA, CIA, Washington Post, New York Times, etc., there is NO evidence!  (Remember:  Comey headed the FBI looking into this and HE found no evidence)

The tragedy is that all of this noise has drowned out what Washington D.C. is supposed to be doing:  governing for the People.  It has stopped.  And even if the Leftist hardliners received their gift of a Trump impeachment and conviction, what do they get?  Mike Pence.

Enough said.

Right to Live and be Free

I’m pretty much “all-in” when it comes to obtaining information about people hell bent on killing others.  Yes, I struggle a bit in accepting that Big Brother is probably dialed in to my emails and phone calls and how that affects my Right to Privacy, and just where the line should be drawn on protecting Constitutional personal freedoms and privacy.  To me intense interrogations of captured terrorists is not only OK, they are necessary so as to stop terrorist killing sprees around the World.  I’m even open to water boarding (which has been done in multiple societies for hundreds of years) under carefully crafted and monitored and documented procedures.  The key reason for any of this para-military intelligence must be to stop indiscriminate killing of people and outright murders.

The “new” type of war in the World necessitates new strategies in fighting those wars.  In World Wars I and II, Korea, and Vietnam the U.S. had identifiable foes within geographical boundaries with Congressional Constitutional declared wars that came with a bounty of laws, rules, regulations, and procedures on how to conduct such actions.  In the “new” war we face opponents not bound by geography, languages, cultures, and varying ideologies. That makes it impossible to declare war, operate military operations against a geographical region and/or government within specific laws, rules, and guidelines.  ISIS is everywhere as are other radical terrorists whose terror has no boundaries or geographical limits.  Be that as it may, we STILL need to protect American citizens against all foes, domestic and international from attacks on person and country.  How do we make that adjustment?

I’m not a politician or a military or intelligence expert.  But what I do know is we do not currently have a set of laws, military and intelligence guidelines or procedures that are sufficient to legally, morally, and ethically take on the international and domestic radical jihadist foes we are confronting today.  And because of that void, our government has deferred to a patchwork of opinions, ideas, and philosophies from multiple sources that are being used, even still in the Trump Administration.   They are NOT working and are not working for multiple reasons.  It was obvious President Obama did not accept the advice of the Joint Chiefs and the then directors of the CIA and FBI.  It is also obvious that not having a carefully crafted plan in place complete with analysis of the enemies, the danger those enemies present, the options available to counter, and a cohesive plan developed from these elements places the US in a very fragile and vulnerable position.  In this environment, the Nation is a sitting duck for a major jihadist attack that could dwarf that of 9/11 and the recent attacks in London, Paris, Manchester, and elsewhere overseas.

None of what I have shared above is new – at least not to me.  But what IS new are my growing concerns of the legality of tactics that have been and are being used by this government to randomly take on our enemies.  No U.S. official – not even this president – has any authority to wage military attacks on U.S. foes – either covertly or overtly – without doing so within the law.  Example:  by what authority did President Obama authorize a drone attack that killed Anwar al-Awlaki — a United States citizen — in Yemen?  Yes, he was a terrorist, a jihadist, a bad guy who had more than once initiated attacks through others against the U.S.  But his death-by-drone was the first time since the Civil War that the U.S. government purposefully killed an American citizen that had not been charged, tried, and/or convicted of a crime, and had (as far as I know) not even broken a law.  Don’t take this as my feeling that al-Awlaki should be alive today or that we should have coddled him or not pursued him or let him continue in terrorism.  BUT THERE ARE NO LAWS WRITTEN THAT DEAL WITH SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES.  And that’s just one example of how the U.S.  government in the Obama Administration unilaterally made life and death decisions with no legal authority (in this case and others) and no consultation with the Peoples’ representatives.  They did so without consideration of the Constitution, U.S. laws, or even with consideration of what repercussions may come from those actions.  President Obama initiated dozens (if not hundreds) of similar drone strikes that have certainly killed bad guys, but in doing so have also killed dozens (if not hundreds) of innocent men, women, and children who happen to be “in the vicinity” of those drone strikes.  By what legal authority have these people been killed?  Many liberals cry about the violations of refugees’ rights afforded them by the Constitution, even though U.S. Constitutional rights are for American Citizens.  I hear no cries about drone strikes that have killed many mostly foreign people without any charges against them.  And one of them was an American killed as ordered by President Obama.  To my knowledge no American has since Obama been killed by drone strikes overseas, but those strikes continue under this Administration and people have been killed in those strikes — hopefully jihadists and not innocent people.  The problem is:  we do not know if that is true.

Certainly the revelations recently about the illegal surveillance and unmasking of American citizens by the NSA and others in the Intelligence Community shines some new light on this critical issue for every American.  But any justified furor over the subtle (and sometimes not so subtle) erosion of the personal rights detailed in the Constitution that were empirical reasons for our forefathers to come to North America and establish the United States is lost in the political noise in Washington D.C.  Political expedience and political correctness are overshadowing the sacred responsibility of our government:  to protect Americans.  Unilaterally monitoring a phone call, intercepting texts and/or emails, and sharing information derived with anyone is a vicious and unconstitutional violation of Americans’ rights.  Congress MUST take action.  George Orwell was not very far off when he penned 1984.  Big Brother is here and is running amuck while trampling on American rights.

Regarding unilateral actions of the government in addition to those of privacy, the bottom line for me is this:  even Bush 43 went to Congress for authority to attack Iraq.  We could spend all day discussing whether we should have or should not have, but that’s not at issue in this discussion.  Because international and domestic wars have changed so much, our leaders should as quickly as possible draft a strategic plan with detailed procedures on how to operate in the current jihadist environment, craft laws that pertain to this environment, pass those laws in a Congressional open forum, and put them in place.  To not do so will continue the wanton killing of whoever is the “jihadist of the day” that U.S. officials (including the president) decide needs to be killed.

One more thing:  to allow the current process to continue only gives credence to its continuing as a viable option.  And as an American, I do not want any politician having the right to kill me without any criminal charges, trial, and verdict that legally gives them the right to do so.  Nor do I want someone listening in to my telephone calls or reading my emails unless the authority to do so was obtained through a thorough and evidenced judicial process.  Anything other than this is anti-American and must be stopped.

 

“You Got me Going in Circles…..”

“You Got me Going in Circles” was a great song from the group The Friends of Distinction from the late 60’s.  It’s much more appropriate in 2017 in describing the c–p going on in Washington D.C.

Today the Senate Judiciary Committee spent a couple of hours on the most part hounding Attorney General Jeff Sessions about a bunch of c–p.  (I’m not Republican and you can tell I’m not Democrat because I’d never use any word that starts with “f”  like their leadership is now prone to do at any moment.  I apologize for the “c” word in the last two sentences)

For 11 months the alleged Russian interference into U.S. elections and any and all those that may have had any part of it have been investigated by the FBI.  As of today, the FBI and the other intelligence agencies have presented NO evidence showing there was any Russian election tampering, although they unanimously agree that there were Russian attempts to impact our 2016 election.  Think about that:  almost daily the NY Times and Washington Post print a “Russia” story that all make unsubstantiated claims of Russian collusion with someone in the Trump organization that all come from “unnamed” or “anonymous” sources that all have to do with rigging the election to get Trump in the White House displacing Hillary.

There are a few glaring conclusions that MUST be made here:  1)  there either is NO Russian influence in our elections that affected elections in any way, or  2)  there was verified interference by the Russians that has been unearthed and verified, and the Intelligence Community has done nothing about it for some unknown reason or those findings have been buried, or 3)  the U.S. Intelligence agencies are so inept none has any idea if or what may have happened.  It is so ridiculous to keep floating the “Russia” balloon when there is no hard evidence — only here-say from unnamed sources.  So……the narrative switches to Obstruction of Justice.  That gets former FBI Director Robert Mueller on board as a Special Counsel to do what:  investigate!

So what’s going around in circles?  Investigations and the disregard of necessary investigations.  There is so much irony in what is playing out in D.C. today.  Think about this:  today the same Senate committee that heard testimony from Eric Holder, Barack Obama’s first Attorney General, in which he was caught lying, charged with lying to Congress, and walked with no penalty.  Further, he illegally perpetrated the completion of Fast and Furious in which the government sold guns illegally in Mexico to try and track, infiltrate, and arrest Mexican drug lords.  In that process, several U.S. agents were murdered.  Even with that illegality, nothing happened to Holder.

Holder’s replacement Loretta Lynch, during a Justice Department investigation open into criminal matters regarding Hillary Clinton, met with Bill Clinton who was an obvious potential witness in, and a possible target of, that criminal investigation.  If there is such a thing as Obstruction of Justice, that qualifies.  Further, she instructed James Comey to basically look the other way in the Hillary investigation, and there is communication between her and the DNC in which she committed to — if the investigation got too “hot” — intervene to make sure nothing nasty happened to Ms. Clinton.  Think there may be some further Obstruction there?

James Comey superseded the authority of the office of FBI Director and publicly told America that HE had made the determination that there was no need to prosecute Ms. Clinton because the FBI found “no intent on Hillary’s part to do anything illegal.”  He said that in spite of two facts:  the FBI does NOT make a prosecution determination on any criminal case — the FBI only investigates and cannot prosecute, that’s what the Justice Department does; and violation of the law that Comey indirectly referenced in his speech does not require the proof of intent Mr. Comey said the FBI could not find in the investigation.  Breaking that law is a felony.

James, James, James.  He admitted he leaked to a friend for the friend to leak to the NY Times about that mysterious memo he wrote after meeting with President Trump.  The FBI Director leaked indirectly to the press!   Based on his continual testimonies to Congress, his several press conferences, and his “leaking” testimony, I am convinced he either leaked multiple times himself or he was responsible for someone else leaking the almost constant unsubstantiated stories to the press.

Then there’s Congress.  This is where the “circle” ends — if a circle can end at all.  If you saw any of Tuesday’s hearing it was as if the Democrats had never heard anything about anything that Comey and other Intelligence Agency heads had stated about their findings in the Russia investigation, especially as it pertains to the Trump organization.  Attorney General Sessions was far more accommodating and polite to the Senators than I could have been.  They continually impugned his honesty and integrity and badgered him like children — the same Senate Committee that allowed former A.G. (Holder) to literally get away with allowing U.S. agents to get killed in an illegal Justice Department gun running operation.

Why are the Democrats and their Media “Hounds of Hell” so persistent in their cries of first “Russia, Russia, Russia,” and now “Obstruction, Obstruction, Obstruction?”  It’s simply to keep President Trump and the American people under wraps.  Even though significant improvements have been achieved by the Trump Administration in many, many areas of government, Democrats keep showing Americans some shiny nickel to distract them from the good things happening daily.  They literally don’t care about their #1 job in D.C.:  legislation.

I encourage the acting Attorney General to initiate a full scale investigation into the wrongdoing of Loretta Lynch.  I encourage the acting A.G. to initiate a full scale investigation into the wrongdoings of the Clintons and the Clinton Foundation.  While doing so, he needs to look into the recently confirmed illegal unmasking of American citizens whose identities have allegedly been discovered during legal interception of communications of foreign persons for their purported illegal actions.  Oh, why not take a look at James Comey, especially since he admitted under oath he had made the personal decision to leak a confidential memo that was the property of the Justice Department and therefore classified which is a felony?

How do these Democrats get to walk, speak, and do anything they choose in total abandon of the responsibility they bear in these matters?  Who is it that gives them implied immunity for committing felonious acts one after another?

Don’t be confident that we will get a really honest investigation from Robert Mueller and his team.  Every attorney he has brought in so far is a Democrat, DNC contributor, and one worked for the Clinton Foundation.  Jeff Sessions recused himself from investigations of anything to do with the 2016 election campaigns because doing so MIGHT be a conflict of interest for him.  Mueller and each of these attorneys should do the same.  Do you think there may be reasons for Mueller’s stacking the deck?

Meanwhile, Congress while not at a standstill are doing a lot of wheel spinning.  Congress needs to get to work doing the Peoples’ business instead of what they are doing, like the cat in this video:

https://youtu.be/w1wAT8vBPbI

Congress needs to stop going round in circles.

Obstruction

The Alt Left seem to have segued in their craziness from charges of collusion leveled against the President for purportedly assisting the Russians in “affecting” the 2016 election to “Obstruction of Justice.”  What’s laughable is that even if it was discovered that the President DID collude with the Russians, there is no law against collusion, therefore exonerating President Trump (or anyone else for that matter) of any crime.  In that case, impeachment cries would fall on deaf ears.  They were unsuccessful in getting to collusion.  Now they have turned the corner and have settled on allegations of Obstruction of Justice.  In fact, one Congressman from Texas said this:  “I have drafted articles of Impeachment against Donald Trump and WILL file them at some point for his Obstruction of Justice.”

There IS Obstruction going on in Washington D.C., but not what you are thinking, and certainly not what Congressman Al Green (D-TX) is thinking.  More about that in a few moments.

What is Obstruction of Justice?  The crime of obstruction of justice, in United States jurisdictions, refers to the crime of obstructing prosecutors or other (usually government) officials.  Generally, obstruction charges are laid when it is discovered that a person questioned in an investigation, other than a suspect, has lied to the investigating officers. However, in most common law jurisdictions, the right to remain silent can be used to allow any person questioned by police merely to deny answering questions posed by an investigator without giving any reason for doing so. (In such a case, the investigators may subpoena the witness to give testimony under oath in court, though the witness may then exercise their rights, for example in the Fifth Amendment, if they believe their answer may serve to incriminate themselves.) If the person willfully and knowingly tried to protect a suspect (such as by providing a false alibi) or to hide from investigation of their own activities (such as to hide their involvement in another crime), this may leave them liable to prosecution. Obstruction charges can also be laid if a person alters, destroys, or conceals physical evidence.  Obstruction charges may also be laid in unique situations such as refusal to aid a police officer, escape through voluntary action of an officer and refusing to assist prison officers in arresting escaped convicts.

Obstruction can include crimes committed by judges, prosecutors, attorneys general, and elected officials in general. It is misfeasance, malfeasance or nonfeasance in the conduct of the office. Most commonly it is prosecuted as a crime for perjury by a non governmental official primarily because of prosecutorial discretion.  (Wikipedia)

So where with the President is their opportunity for charges of Obstruction of Justice?  When the Alt Left Media went nuts for several months about Russian collusion, it led to their ignorant claims of Obstruction.  That was dispelled.  When they realized they were barking up the wrong tree, they switched trees and went to James Comey looking for “Obstruction” assistance.  When the famous leak went public that the President (according to Comey’s leak) had NOT been told three times that he was not the subject of the Russian investigation (that Comey dispelled in his testimony last week), the Media foamed at the mouth looking forward to seeing Donald Trump in handcuffs for his Obstruction.  Then, of course, the President’s statement that Comey had told him three times that he was NOT being investigated was confirmed by the former FBI Chief in his testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee.  You could feel all the way from D.C. and New York the shock and major let down the Media collectively felt with Comey’s admission.  They wanted Trump.  And they still do.

Enter Attorney General Jeff Sessions.  The latest “Trump Camp” leaked accusation is that Sessions (who is about to testify voluntarily before the Senate Intelligence Committee) had a meeting with the Russian Ambassador that he failed to report in his questionnaire he completed prior to his confirmation as A.G.  Even before Sessions testifies and answers questions from Senators about that, the Media have him lying, obstructing justice, headed to jail for that crime, and that the President asked Sessions to not include all meetings in his documents, therefore committing (in unison now) “Obstruction of Justice.”

The Liberal Left can think of nothing but getting rid of Donald Trump.

There IS Obstruction of Justice in the wind.  However, the Left is ignoring it.  Maybe they don’t want to talk about it because it’s not by the President or Jeff Sessions.  Sure there are a lot of ways that Hillary Clinton could be blasted with Obstruction charges, but hers are not as obvious as this one.  Of course the Obstruction that is so obvious but has been so ignored is that by former Attorney General Loretta Lynch.  And she obstructed not once, but at least twice.  How?

Loretta Lynch

#1   That famous leisurely held tarmac meeting at Sky Harbor Airport in Phoenix with Bill Clinton.  How could that meeting possibly be Obstruction of Justice?  The Attorney General of the United States knew that elsewhere in the Justice Department a criminal investigation into the actions of Hillary Clinton — Bill’s betrothed — was in full swing.  Part of that investigation included the Clinton Foundation.  And Bill Clinton was a material witness in either matter.  Who in their right mind thinks that the two spent 45 minutes on that plane talking about grandchildren and golf?  Those two — even with Bill Clinton’s long winded stories — could have completed that conversation in 10 minutes.  They obviously were discussing the HRC investigation by the Comey FBI.  That is the only thing that makes sense.  Will we ever get the real answer to that?  Maybe not, but if I was Mueller, I’d put the former A.G. under oath and grill her about that meeting.  There’s someone out there who knows the truth.  (Secret Service were on that jet)

#2  That almost as famous admission by former FBI Leaker James Comey that Loretta Lynch instructed him to downplay the Hillary investigation, drop the term “investigation,” and simply call it a “matter.”  She knew it was a criminal investigation!  Why would she want it to not be called that?  Quid Pro Quo.  How so?  Who appointed Loretta Lynch to serve as the Attorney General for the Eastern District of New York?  Bill Clinton.  Where is the office of the Attorney General of the Eastern District of New York?  Above the offices of Bill Clinton AND the Clinton Foundation AND the Hillary Clinton Campaign!  And remember:  she had been on the tarmac in what she thought then was a secret meeting.  Not so secret now — and definitely Obstruction of Justice.

Will anything happen to Ms. Lynch?  Probably not.  It is very unusual to go after an Attorney General that way.  Add to that she is female, African American, and a Democrat and she’s pretty safe, D.C. status quo politics being what they are.

So the Left — even thought they should ratchet the rancor down — will continue to spread the words, “Guilty of Obstruction of Justice.”  And they’ll aim that cry at the President, the Attorney General, the President’s son-in-law, former NSA Director Flynn, Steve Bannon, and whoever else they think will help their cause.  Their cause?  To keep Americans from hearing and seeing the truth — the truth about the already considerable accomplishments of this Freshman politician named Donald Trump.  The Alt Left in America feel that by ratcheting up the noise and allegations against the President that Americans will listen to them and ignore the truth.

It’s amazing to me that Liberals have so little regard for the intelligence of Conservatives.  And they despise those they claim to represent.  The Alt Left Democrats and Socialists who were sent away in November with their tails between their legs as of yet still have not accepted the truth:  Americans are pretty smart.  We get them…we understand them…and we don’t want them governing us.

They may not realize this, but all their noise and constant screaming about Obstruction of Justice could see its way into the front page headlines.  CNN may actually be starting a newscast soon with a lead story about charges of Obstruction of Justice in D.C.  But that story is probably not going to be about Donald Trump.  When it happens, (if it happens) it will be about a Democrat…or two Democrats…or maybe even three.  We are about to see exactly how honorable the former FBI Director now Independent Counsel Robert Mueller is.  And all this noise has the spotlight on him.  We know what happens when the lights come on in the Swamp:  the critters scramble for cover.

I’d Rather Be…….?

“The grass is always greener.”  How many times have you heard that.  Or “You never know what you have until it’s gone.”  Life is full of sayings that seem only appropriate AFTER we’ve made a mistake…or two.

Fathers Day is a week away.  All of us wouldn’t be/couldn’t be reading this if we didn’t have a father.  Some of us have great fathers — some, not so great.  Some have great father memories for their father is no longer with us.  May and June are reflective times of year for we celebrate Mothers Day and Fathers Day in those two months.  No doubt every mother and every father deserve at least a day a year for us to honor them.  My mother is gone, a victim of Alzheimer’s — the worst disease on Earth because it steals everything we hold the dearest.  My father is still alive although we have had no personal relationship for 25 years.  (God knows I’ve tried!)

I don’t throw stones and don’t want any thrown at me.  What I do know is that the Bible teaches us to “love our father and mother,” and to “honor those who have authority over us.”  That pretty much sets the threshold of Christian responsibility for us all.  We’re the ones that make it complicated.

Today as you prepare to celebrate Fathers Day 2017 in whatever way you choose, I encourage you to hug your father if you can, call your father if you can’t hug him and he can take phone calls, and if your relationship is not one of those, spend some reflective time of thinking about “good” father things.  One thing I encourage you NOT to do is bring up or dwell on any bad memories about Dad this week.

I’m really into family.  Mine ended for me at age 16.  It was then that I made a life commitment to myself, future wife, and future children that nothing would be allowed to break up my family after marriage and kids.  43 years later it hasn’t.  For those who have experienced the same or worse family destruction than I did at 16, I encourage you to spend this week pondering the good parts.  For all of you contemplating creating your own family, already in your own family, or looking to get in another one, remember this:  the first institution created by God was the family.

Oh, and if you can, start spending a little more time with Dad if he’s still with you.  He may be old and crotchety, he may belch, snort, and break wind.  He may forget your name and dress like a homeless guy who lives “in a van down by the river,” remember:  he’s still “Dad.”  Honor him.  Tell him you love him.

One of my old bosses (who was a Dad but is gone now) asked me one time:  “Who’s coming to your funeral?”  I thought for a moment and then replied, “My family and friends.”  His response was, “Then invest your time, effort, and energy in those folks, not so much everyone else.”  Great words of wisdom.  For you today, my words of wisdom are in this song below by Pentatonix.  When I watched and listened to it, I thought of my Dad.  Maybe you will too.

 

“Comey-Gate:” What’s Next?

Do you think it’s high time for the House of Representatives and the Senate to get off their duffs and get back to what they are hired to do:  Legislate?  Sure, they also have to monitor other branches of the government, agencies, and foreign entities to some degree, but what the substance of their jobs is is to create new laws to operate every facet of America.  In all the (now confirmed) hype about “Russia-Trump collusion,” real working in D.C. was put on hold.

There is some good that has come from all this hype:  the light of truth has shined into D.C. and exposed much of the graft and corruption that has for some time permeated our Government.  For a long time past administrations have at least allowed the corruption to continue if, not added it to it, which has allowed a boldness to spread through the “corruption community” to weave itself into the fabric of U.S. Government.  Americans realized a year or two ago there is corruption there, but not how deep and wide it is.  Lately more and more has been unearthed and exposed.  And Americans are nervous.  How could their government in the greatest country on Earth be so vile?

The exposure of NSA contractor Reality Leigh Winner and her subsequent arrest and charges of treason will hopefully quell some of the American nervousness about the government.  But that must be only a start.  If any American Presidential Administration could possibly withstand the continual and intense backlash from those corrupt politicians, contractors, appointees, and employees who fear the entry of truthfulness and transparency into Washington politics, it is the Trump Administration.  Moreover, his campaign promises to Americans to do just that if elected gave Americans some hope that it could be done.  And since his election his already accomplished promises have filled the nation with hope that there may be a swamp cleaning for the U.S. in the making.

So what should happen now and next week?  Headed into the weekend, here is my list of what and how our government needs to get rolling — sort of downshifting into a lower, tougher gear to really make a major impact:

  1. Every federal investigative agency needs to attack the open investigations quickly:  finish the Russia one,  expose and fully prosecute all leakers,  open and attack an investigation into Hillary Clinton wrongdoings,  investigate James Comey for his lies under oath, dereliction of duty as FBI Director, and potential obstruction of justice stemming from various actions he took including leaking privileged and classified information;
  2. The House and Senate need to quickly and loudly complete the repeal/replace of Obamacare, get it negotiated and implemented;
  3. The House and Senate need to quickly and loudly complete, negotiate, and implement tax reform;
  4. The House and Senate need to quickly and loudly complete, negotiate, and implement their road map for a southern border wall with Mexico;
  5. Forget about executive orders.  The House and Senate need to pass a bill (that the President will sign) that will initiate a temporary ban on immigration from terrorist countries (which will pass court muster because it will be a law passed by Congress) while creating a highly visible realistic and thorough vetting process for EVERY immigrant who comes to the U.S.  It needs to be thorough and have nothing to do with religion;
  6. President Trump needs to have his Administration nominees ALL approved by the Senate and put in place immediately;

What should President Trump do while others complete 1-6 above?  He needs to continue doing what he has been doing while the World has done nothing but focus on all the things the far left Media in the U.S. want Americans to see that have nothing to do with the reality of the accomplishments of this president in the short time of his presidency.  They include massive job creation, attraction of overseas companies to the U.S., badly needed infrastructure improvements, strengthening the military, including military members’ morale, reaching out, meeting with, and finding consensus wherever possible with foreign leaders to rebuild relationships with the U.S. torn apart during the Obama Administration while making clear to enemy governments America’s position on differences between them and the U.S. that will not be allowed.  That’s a pretty good start for the next few months.

What should the media do?  Simply, they need to quieten their arrogant slandering of the Office of U.S. President and its inhabitant and report the news.  And for or a change, they need to tell the truth simply giving us facts without filters.  They need to discard their self-assumed air of superiority and disdain for the opinions of Americans — ALL Americans, not just those liberal — and, for a change, listen to and trust Americans just like this President did, which won him the election.  They need to simply acknowledge PUBLICLY that Hillary Clinton lost the election, not because of collusion or the FBI or the internet or James Comey, but because she was a bad candidate that was rejected by Americans who could just not find a way to reconcile having her as the first female President.  That’s a pretty good start for the next few months.

If the above does not happen during the next few months, I strongly suggest to President Trump that he play his “trump” card (pun intended).  What’s that?  He needs to call a joint session of Congress in which he speaks to them and America at the same time saying the following:

“During the run-up to the 2016 election, I campaigned promising Americans that when elected, my Administration would do the following:  repeal and replace Obamacare, stop immigration from terrorist countries until a realistic and effective vetting system was put in place, build a wall between the U.S. and Mexico to secure our southern border, give Americans a massive tax cut while reducing the out of control spending of the American government, drastically cut the regulations of Government that have crippled small businesses and stifled growth for years, and restore the faith of other nations in the United States while assuring our enemies that the United States will no longer allow any countries to slaughter its citizens while we implement any/all processes necessary to wipe ISIS of the face of the Earth.”

President Trump’s Joint Session with Congress

He should continue, saying, “I and others in my Administration have worked with members of Congress where possible to put these specific plans in their hands to pass specific bills for me to sign into law just as I promised I would do during the campaign.  That’s why you elected me.  But as of today, Congress has either refused or delayed doing their jobs to complete these very important tasks as was promised during the campaign by not only me, but by many in Congress as they ran for their election.  I have done legislatively all I can do:  planted the specific seeds for each of these presidential promises to Americans in Congress from which they promised Americans to grow the specific programs and policies necessary to get these jobs done.  These are in the hands of the House and Senate and have been for some time.  Americans know who has the ball.  What are you going to do with it?”

If President Trump does that, one of two things will happen:  we will see an immediate bevy of legislative accomplishments in each of these areas signed into law and put into action, or we’ll see a bloodbath in the 2018 mid-term elections that will result in a fruit basket turnover in Congress as voters will most definitely “drain the swamp” for the President.  They will NOT blame him….and they shouldn’t.  

Pinocchio on Capitol Hill

What a zoo!  Former Director Comey auditioned for what he certainly hopes will be a feature Hollywood film, a best seller “tell all” autobiography, or maybe a Broadway Musical.  There can be NO other reason for his testimony today.  That was proven in his 7 page soliloquy he released the day before his testimony.  Think about that:  why would a fired federal department leader volunteer to speak to the Senate Intelligence Committee but only in a public setting?  Only one reason:  to get public exposure.  (In my conclusion  below I’ll pull this and other elements together)  Who else on Earth writes memos like Comey?  Every guy I know when keeping notes from meetings does just that — “Notes.”   Comey, on the other hand, wrote not just what was said, but included complete conversations with President Trump, including quotation marks and EXACT sentences as voiced!  How odd is that?  (Looked like the first chapter of his book to me)

In his testimony today Comey made five pretty outrageous claims.  Here they are below with my comments after each in italics:

1. Comey said he was fired because of the Russia probe

A couple of points here:  if he thought that was so, he had a fiduciary responsibility to file an immediate report with the Justice Department giving such dramatic national intelligence to authorities along with any evidence he had of that wrongdoing.  That in itself if true would be obstruction of justice by the President.  If that claim made by Comey is true, Comey’s not reporting it to the acting Attorney General in itself could be considered to be obstruction!

2. Comey took notes because he thought Trump might lie

I love this one.  The first meeting between the two was requested by Comey.  If Comey actually thought President Trump would lie about content of their private meetings why would such a brilliant attorney and distinguished law enforcement agency head actually roll the dice and not have someone in the room with them?  And why would he meet one on one with the President all the other times?   Why would he do that?  CYA.  (for those in Loma Linda that means “Cover Your A–)  He had to have bullets in his gun that would support anything negative that “might” happen later regarding President Trump as it would pertain to Comey.  And as sneaky as Comey is, he knew he could always pull the grammar school ploy and say “I thought he would lie on me.”

3. Comey says he was ‘defamed’  by Trump and White House

I am not an attorney.  I cannot weigh in on the legal basis of “defamation” in this case.  But I do know one thing:  the President did Tweet some un-complimentary things about Mr. Comey.  I personally think (from what I’ve learned about Comey) some of them certainly are true.  I don’t know about the others.  “Defamation” is a legal term that has legal penalties and remedies attached to it.  Mr. Comey certainly has the legal right to take every legal action at his disposal if he indeed was “defamed” by the President AND the White House.  Wait a minute:  you cannot sue a sitting President for civil matters, which defamation is.  Uh Oh:  Comey will have to sue the White House.  Uh Oh:  who IS the White House?  Oh No!  Comey’s up a creek without a paddle.  “If” he was (by the letter of whatever statute in D.C. or federal law determines available remedies to Comey) defamed, whatever basis for such a suit would have to include proof of damages.  What damages would such statements made by the President cause to a fired FBI Director?  Would they prevent him from getting his FBI Director job back? 

4. Comey says he helped leak accounts of his talks with Trump to get a special counsel appointed

This in itself reveals just what a little bitty man the 6’7″ James Comey is.  Some of his conversations with the President were privileged.  By his own admission today, at least one of the things he leaked was CLASSIFIED!  That is illegal — a felony!  Comey as Director had a moral and fiduciary responsibility to speak directly to the Justice Department if for any reason anything that happened on his job would rise to the level of needing a special counsel appointed.  If he really felt that way, why did he speak to someone (like the news media) rather than speak to an intelligence professional in the line of applicable law enforcement who could instigate special counsel action immediately?  Why:  because he likes gossip — his actions prove that.  And he is so arrogant and elitist he felt surely that even if he obstructed justice or illegally leaked classified information, his buddies in the Justice Department would surely give him a pass.

5. Comey said the FBI knew Jeff Sessions would recuse himself — but won’t say why

Once again Comey reveals what type of man and what type of American he really is.  In open testimony today before the Senate Intelligence Committee and on national television to Americans, he made this statement, knowing that it would do nothing but fuel more angst and speculation.  Who does he think he really is?  Isn’t it illegal to shout “fire” in a crowded theater?  That’s exactly what he did here.

After today I understand exactly why Donald Trump fired James Comey.  Comey’s actions post firing confirmed that he is a selfish, self serving, egotistical narcissist himself who just like his former boss — Hillary — cannot accept consequences for their actions and summarily reject any responsibility for any wrongdoing.

My summary comments are below, but here is a release today that clearly sums up exactly what happened today on Capitol Hill.

Marc Kasowitz, personal attorney of President Trump:

“Contrary to numerous false press accounts leading up to today’s hearing, Mr. Comey has now finally confirmed publicly what he repeatedly told the President privately:  The President was not under investigation as part of any probe into Russian interference.  He also admitted that there is no evidence that a single vote changed as a result of any Russian interference.  Mr  Comey’s testimony also makes clear that the President never sought to impede the investigation into attempted Russian interference in the 2016 election, and in fact, according to Mr. Comey, the President told Mr. Comey “it would be good to find out” in that investigation if there were “some ‘satellite’ associates of his who did something wrong.”   And he did not exclude anyone from that statement.    Consistent with that statement, the President never, in form or substance, directed or suggested that Mr. Comey stop investigating anyone, including suggesting that that Mr. Comey “let Flynn go.” As he publicly stated the next day, he did say to Mr. Comey, “General Flynn is a good guy, he has been through a lot,” and also “asked how is General Flynn is doing.”   Admiral Rogers testified that the President never “directed [him] to do anything . . . illegal, immoral, unethical or inappropriate” and never “pressured [him] to do so.”  Director Coates said the same thing. The President likewise never pressured Mr. Comey.   The President also never told Mr. Comey, “I need loyalty, I expect loyalty” in form or substance.   Of course, the Office of the President is entitled to expect loyalty from those who are serving in an administration, and, from before this President took office to this day, it is overwhelmingly clear that there have been and continue to be those in government who are actively attempting to undermine this administration with selective and illegal leaks of classified information and privileged communications. Mr. Comey has now admitted that he is one of these leakers.

Today, Mr. Comey admitted that he unilaterally and surreptitiously made unauthorized disclosures to the press of privileged communications with the President.  The leaks of this privileged information began no later than March 2017 when friends of Mr. Comey have stated he disclosed to them the conversations he had with the President during their January 27, 2017 dinner and February 14, 2017 White House meeting.  Today, Mr. Comey admitted that he leaked to friends his purported memos of these privileged conversations, one of which he testified was classified.  He also testified that immediately after he was terminated he authorized his friends to leak the contents of these memos to the press in order to “prompt the appointment of a special counsel.”  Although Mr. Comey testified he only leaked the memos in response to a tweet, the public record reveals that the New York Times was quoting from these memos the day before the referenced tweet, which belies Mr. Comey’s excuse for this unauthorized disclosure of privileged information and appears to entirely retaliatory.  We will leave it the appropriate authorities to determine whether this leaks should be investigated along with all those others being investigated.

​In sum, it is now established that the President was not being investigated for colluding with the Russians or attempting to obstruct that investigation.  As the Committee pointed out today, these important facts for the country to know are virtually the only facts that have not leaked during the long course of these events.   As he said yesterday, the President feels completely vindicated and is eager to continue moving forward with his agenda with this public cloud removed.”

My Summary

Comey seeks attention.  He bathed in the spotlight he lived in while FBI Director.  It devastated him when fired by the President and he had to somehow make himself look innocent and not responsible for the firing.  Additionally, his propensity to lash out at those who disagree with him fueled his anger to get back at the President.  So he did.  But what he failed to realize is that Donald Trump is NOT a politician, has dealt daily throughout his professional life with people just like Comey.  And the President has no problem with letting Jimbo have his moment in the sun making unsubstantiated claims and conducting his drive-by shooting antics.  And the President just let him do it.  Why?  Because there’s NO THERE THERE.  And President Trump knows the “truth will out.”  That process has begun.

Now watch the talking heads get really close to exploding!

By the way:  Comey did not write those notes he referenced today after his meetings with the President.  He wrote them AFTER he volunteered to testify before the Senate.  (I got that from an “anonymous” source)

The Day Journalism Died

I am pretty sure that you are just as startled as I on an almost daily basis to see, hear, and read news reports about scandals in the White House, investigations of President Trump, his Presidential Campaign members, his family, his businesses, presidential appointees, and the list goes on and on.  Bad news is nothing new.  Reports of investigations and scandals are nothing new.  What is unprecedented in U.S. journalistic history (until recently) is the methods used by today’s “journalists” in reporting the news, and — most shocking — the methods they use in reporting the news.  It is actually not reporting the news, it’s “filtering” the news.

I was a Journalism major in college.  I wrote a column in the weekly university newspaper.  It was a “column,” not a news section.  A column is not  comprised of hard news.  It is comprised partially by applicable and current content of various interests, but is wrapped with the opinions of the columnist about those various interests.  That is no longer the case today.

We have had the National Enquirer and The Globe and other grocery store rags for many years.  We all at least sometimes glance at them when checking out.  We want to read about Kim Kardashian’s justifications for shooting topless pictures, the latest fad diets, why Tom Cruise looks so young (the “real” Tom was spirited away by aliens and replaced by a robot), and Jennifer Aniston is still in love with Brad Pitt.  These are not newspapers or magazines or in any way news.  Granted today’s news is often really news.  But American Journalism known for a couple of centuries as being impartial, professional, courteous, honest, adherents to the rules of Journalism in their news reporting, and simply giving the news in factual format to Americans through newspaper, magazine, radio and television, and online is NO MORE.  Journalism died.

Once bastions of the news industry like the Washington Post, New York Times, NBC, ABC, CBS Television have all seemingly joined the producers of the grocery store checkout fodder with their “reporting.”  No longer do they report the news, giving us simple facts about all things news worthy.  This generation of American journalists have taken ownership of HOW the news reaches us — not by what news distribution process it gets to us, but they now tell us exactly what each news tidbit means, what the source of those tidbits meant when whatever incident occurred that prompted the news story, and how and what we are supposed think and feel when they give us the news.

To make this process worse, news companies whose revenues are all driven by distribution, ratings, average quarter hour listenership/viewership, and what their competitors are producing are routinely and uncharacteristically hiding the fact that they no longer are giving us news and allowing Americans on our own to draw our own conclusions.  In my hometown newspaper, it is a common practice for reporters at the top of stories to have a small picture of themselves when they report.  Maybe for financial reasons, maybe for journalistic dishonesty reasons or some other reason, it has become common to have reporters also write editorial pieces that are disguised when published to look exactly like news reports:  same little picture at the top of the story.  In the “former” Journalism world, reporters were not the same people as those who wrote columns or editorials.  Those people where not “reporters,” they were “columnists.”  And, of course, journalistic integrity dictated that any editorial content was identified to the audience members so there would be no misunderstanding.  (Believe it or not, every opinion is not necessarily the right or truth — they’re most often someone’s individual ideas)  In our paper we often have sports reporters post a story that looks likr their news stories, but it is a column instead.  Occasionally I have seen they will put the word in really small type below the picture that says “Opinion.”

Television news makes print media look like a church picnic.  And television news hasn’t just changed, it’s morphed into a creature from a world far away.  Honesty and integrity are gone.  Formerly it was common for reputable news organizations to demand not just one verified source for a story, but two independent sources.  Today we don’t ever hear about sourced stories.  Why?  Hardly any of them are from identified sources.  Almost every story — especially all those about American politics — are from “unnamed” or “anonymous” sources.  In real journalism, that would never have been accepted.  In the 60’s and 70’s, a reporter or editor that ran with a story from “unnamed” or “anonymous” sources was immediately shown the door.  Today’s journalistic ethics — especially in national newspaper and television news — is non-existent.  The driving force for everything published:  find some dirt on somebody important, no matter true or false.  Make it juicy.  The purpose:  ratings, circulation, beating the competition to the marketplace.  It is so comical that now — especially in television news — many network stories are actually stories that are originated by other networks to simply make sure they didn’t get scooped.

So what day did Journalism die?  Tuesday, November 8, 2016, marks the day:  the day of the 2016 presidential election.  The death was a slow one.  It actually began its downward spiral somewhere in the previous year when it became apparent that the likely GOP candidate was probably going to be Donald Trump.

So what was the impetus for the Journalism “Death Spiral?’  News producers, show hosts, newspaper reporters and editors, one day several weeks after the first debate realized something that scared them to death:  Donald Trump actually said what he meant, had no care or concern for political correctness, was wealthy and therefore could and would run a financially independent campaign, and would NOT pander to the media.  Imagine that:  a national political candidate THAT WAS NOT FOR SALE!  The media collectively went into a coma — for a VERY short while.

It did not take long for those who controlled the studio cameras and microphones, the printing presses, and internet news to find a way to get a grip on this renegade politician that was about to turn their D.C. party wagon upside down.  They had to find a way to destroy Donald Trump BEFORE the election.  So they individually and sometimes collectively began to do anything, say anything, and write anything to discredit Mr. Trump.  It made it even worse when they discovered the one thing that sent Donald Trump to the White House:  he and his honest, blue collar message resonated to the Heart of America and in the hearts of Middle Class Americans.  Even though most would never be in a position to experience his massive wealth, most could much more readily identify with his brash, loud, bombastic, and arrogant persona than they could with the wealthy, insolent, arrogant, elitist and dismissive demeanor of Hillary Clinton.  Hillary had a long and ugly public reputation.  Trump did not.

The attempted take down began.  He of course won the election and immediately and systematically began to do something surprising to D.C. and to Americans:  he began to fulfill his campaign promises.  Middle Class Americans fell further in love with “The Donald.”

But the media had not and have not given up.  The volume of their rancor is more deafening today, more unsourced today, more nasty and untruthful than ever before.  I will not waste your time to chronicle examples of the blatant disregard for the truth in stories, but we all know day after day, story after story — all nasty and negative about the President — are being exposed as untrue.  And that drives the politically correct media into even deeper anger and despair.

Where do we go from here?  Honestly, our only option is to let this all play through.  Let them scream and shout and write and broadcast whatever they want to give to us.  They think Americans are stupid and incapable to discern truth from fable and fact from fiction.  They still believe the media are necessary to interpret the news to us because we cannot do it ourselves.  And day by day they are seeing example after example of how Middle America is catching on to their evil methods and dishonest “reporting.”  They are drowning in their cesspools of dishonesty and are being exposed quicker and quicker than before.  The light is coming on.  The cock roaches haven’t all scrambled for cover, but it is beginning.

Journalism as we’ve know it really did die November 8th.  There’s a new version of Journalism developing.  This journalist hopes and trusts that genuine, honest, integral reporting will come back to the industry.  I trust Americans to see facts and interpret facts without any filters whatsoever.  So does this President.  I suggest that instead of watching evening news, interviews, talk shows, etc. with fear in your heart you trust in one thing:  your fellow Americans.  We are NOT stupid.  We are intelligent humans who on the most part have a strong understanding of the truth.  And we demand it from our leaders and those who give us the facts of the day for us to know.  That’s what the media is to be and is to do….period.

In the meantime, join me in sitting back and watching the roaches scrambling around the kitchen.  I am agreeing more and more with the President that the New York Times, the Washington Post, CNN, MSNBC, NBC, CBS, and ABC are “Fake News.”  It’s going to be fun to watch them scramble for some credibility.

Make no mistake:  they have NONE now.

Foreign Policy and Foreign Aid: Had Enough?

I ask this question in light of the way dozens of countries now view the U.S.:  think we’re snobs, don’t like capitalism or the free market, resent U.S. success in finance, do not like our politics (especially President Trump’s), don’t like our representative republic governing structure, and most feel we owe them something.  So how much interaction with all of the foreign rancor about “all things U.S.” should we “need” to live with?  And who decides that?

    London Mayor Sadiq Khan

Typically the State Department is the front line of everyday dealing with foreign governments.  Then the job falls to the face of the nation:  the President.  State guys (and girls) are the “rubber meets the road” folks for the U.S. — the worker-bees.  Politics and politicians come next.  That where it gets pretty dicey.  Enter London’s mayor.

There is no doubt that the U.K. is the number 1 closest ally of the U.S.  London being the largest city and the capitol of the U.K. plays an important role in the U.K. — U.S. relationship.  The Mayor — Sadiq Khan — is Muslim and as such has found it easy to put and maintain separation between himself and President Trump.  In January of this year, Khan insisted Trump’s state visit to Britain be canceled after the US President attempted to impose a travel ban on Muslim nations — a policy that he labeled “cruel and shameful.”  (Strike 1 on Trump).  Then the recent attack on London Bridge brought more divisiveness between the two.  In the immediate aftermath of the attack, Khan said there was “no cause for alarm” when referring to a visible increase in police activity on the streets of London.  President Trump’s response (on Twitter no less):  “At least 7 dead and 48 wounded in terror attack and Mayor of London says there is “no reason to be alarmed!”  Then U.K. Prime Minister May said this:  “I think Sadiq Khan is doing a good job and it’s wrong to say anything else — he’s doing a good job,” May told reporters after a general election campaign speech.  She of course voiced her support of the mayor of her country’s largest city.  That’s one of many examples of how even in the relationship with our strongest ally feelings from foreign countries and governments for America and Americans  is in many cases not good.  And when government leaders have bad feelings for the U.S., that flows to their citizens.

I have spent a good bit of time in the past year in Switzerland, Italy, and southeast Asia.  In Asia feelings for the U.S. are fairly benign, but in Switzerland — not so much.  The Swiss on the most part literally look down their noses at us.  They hate our politics and disdain our successes.  In their minds everything they have or do is better than those same things in the U.S.  Italy is not much better and Italians are more vocal about their negative feelings.  The Swiss will not accept U.S. dollars.  They don’t even accept Euros.  (They pulled their currency value away from being pegged to the Euro value 1.5 years ago and they want only Swiss francs).  In Milan — just a short train ride from Zurich — they will not accept dollars OR francs.  They want only Euros.  You probably like me remember when you could leave the U.S. will a wallet full of hundred dollar bills and have a good time spending it with really good exchange rates in most other countries in the World.  Not so anymore.

These are just a few examples of how our nation is liked universally less and less.  Did you know there are a number of countries today that will NOT allow people with American passports to enter?  And that list is growing every month.  All of this (and much more) begs the question:  why does the U.S. spend so much money in foreign aid when often the countries that receive it cannot stand us?  Any idea of how much we spend?  About $45 Billion last year.  In addition to those taxpayers funds, an additional $70 Billion in foreign aid is paid out annually by U.S. foundations, religious organizations, universities, private individuals, and private and volunteer organizations.  That’s a whopping $115 Billion U.S. dollars paid to — in many cases — countries that don’t like anything about the U.S., except the money.

Afghanistan received $4.6 Billion;  Israel $3 Billion; South Africa $526 million;  Nigeria $525 Million;  and so on.  There are some shocking recipients, at least to me:  Egypt $1.75 Billion;  Jordan $1.2 Billion;  West Bank/Gaza $1 Billion;  and even Russia received $465 Million!  (That’s from a Barack Obama/Hillary Clinton State Department)

Certainly a chunk of these funds are considered necessary for foreign countries and their citizens who — in many cases — are receiving necessary foreign aid for healthcare, food and clothing, housing and other necessities in times of traumas of all kinds.  How much?  I don’t know.  But I’m certain it’s not a large part of that $115 Billion being paid.  And I’m certain a large part of those funds could deservedly find their way to American causes internally to help millions of U.S. citizens for a multitude of issues rather than paying it out to people who cannot stand us.

Regarding foreign policy:  no doubt it is a necessary evil.  There’s an appropriate saying:  “Keep your friends close and your enemies closer.”  Keeping open lines of communication with foreign governments in many ways certainly eliminates many potential world issues before they even happen.  But there are a couple of things that are NOT being considered by our government in determining exact foreign policy:

  • “They don’t like us.”  I know that’s not the case for every country.  And we need to communicate.  But trying to continually conduct policy based on a globalist mentality is nuts.  The U.S. is the greatest country in the World.  And we do not need to remind them of that.  They know that.  In fact that fuels a large portion of the dislike for us.  In many cases regarding those countries that hate us the most:  let them deal with their issues themselves and when (and only when) they call us for help, guidance, and assistance should we reach out.
  • They abuse our relationships.  We all have a friend or family member that likes to hang around, loves coming to our homes, going out to eat with us, sharing vacation time when possible, but they never offer to pick up the check, pay for the hotel, rental car, or beach condo.  It is pretty obvious there are a bunch of countries that treat us as the “rich relative” in every way.
  • Our government seems to never (or seldom) provide anything in foreign policy with a quid pro quo.  Foreign policy should be a two way street.  And I’m not saying we tell them “We’re not going to help you in policy matters with other countries until you help us in policy matters.”  I’m saying we should look closely at the assistance our foreign policy partners give us with other countries as we help them.

The recent trip taken by President Trump to the Middle East and Europe was an example of good and fruitful foreign policy.  His days in Saudi Arabia were a classic example of how foreign policy should work:  they wanted him there as compared to the previous president.  He honored them and their culture while making the desires and expectations for their actions in countering Islamic terrorism were made clear.  (“Quid Pro Quo”)  Cementing our good relationships with Israel, then to NATO, Italy, and Sicily proved to many who had been skeptical that Donald Trump understands real foreign policy and how it works.

I know this is a very touchy issue.  And it seems that everyone in D.C. has a “pet” country they want to help and assist.  But we need to act just like airline passengers are instructed to act if there’s an in-flight loss of pressurization:  “Put your mask on first before helping someone sitting next to you with theirs.”  We need to get our house in order before we start cleaning anybody else’s house.  And ours is NOT clean…..yet.