Trafficking: It’s Devouring America

We have always thought of trafficking in its various types happening everywhere in the World — except the USA. Sadly, we are not exempt. Whether the trafficking we talk about is drug trafficking, sex trafficking, or just plain old human trafficking, it not only exists, it’s everywhere, including right here in America.

Before you decide to click out of this story or just laugh me off, why not spend a few moments just to make sure you’re not dismissing a reality. Here’s a word about it from Secretary of State Mike Pompeo:

Those are startling numbers, aren’t they? “Why don’t we hear more about human trafficking?” you may ask. American newspapers rarely cover stories about it, so it can’t be THAT serious.

Nothing could be further from the truth. It’s EVERYWHERE. It destroys lives EVERYWHERE. The fact that we don’t hear or see much about it in the U.S. does NOT mean it is not present.

But if it’s here, why don’t we know about it?

Tomorrow we give you Part I of the two-part Human Trafficking report at TruthNewsNetwork. Some of what you will see and hear will shock you. You will be tempted to think we’ve made it up. You’ll find it difficult to believe who is and has been involved in it — from Washington, D.C. to L.A. and even in Omaha, Nebraska.

Both stories will include documented personal experiences from the perspective of law enforcement officials and also from some of those caught-up in it. Rest assured that your “shock-o-meter” will be going off continuously when you share them with us.

If you want to make sure you don’t forget checking-in for each of these stories and others, scroll to the bottom of the homepage website. On the right you’ll find a place to enroll your name and email address. We promise not to bother you. The only emails you will receive is one each time new stories and/or podcasts are posted. Each email will contain a link that will take you directly to each story: NO SALES OF ANYTHING, NO SPAM EMAILS, GUARANTEED.

We’ll get back together tomorrow!

 

“If I Fall, I Want to Fall Forward:” Denzel Washington

Denzel Hayes Washington Jr. (born December 28, 1954) is an American actor, director, and producer. He has received two Golden Globe awards, one Tony Award, and two Academy Awards: Best Supporting Actor for the historical war drama film Glory (1989) and Best Actor for his role as corrupt detective Alonzo Harris in the crime thriller Training Day (2001).

Washington has received much critical acclaim for his film work since the 1980s, including his portrayals of real-life figures, such as South African anti-apartheid activist Steve Biko in Cry Freedom (1987), Muslim minister and human rights activist Malcolm X in Malcolm X (1992), boxer Rubin “Hurricane” Carter in The Hurricane (1999), football coach Herman Boone in Remember the Titans (2000), poet and educator Melvin B. Tolson in The Great Debaters (2007), and drug kingpin Frank Lucas in American Gangster (2007). He has been a featured actor in films produced by Jerry Bruckheimer and has been a frequent collaborator of directors Spike Lee, Antoine Fuqua, and Tony Scott. In 2016, he received the Cecil B. DeMille Lifetime Achievement Award at the 73rd Golden Globe Awards.

Denzel Washington is an amazing actor. More than that, Denzel is an amazing husband, father, Christian, and leader. Today, Denzel Washington will lead us all by telling us a story that he has told before. But today it is extremely important for what we are watching in our nation.

So here’s what we’ll do: we’ll shut up and step out of the way. Watch this video: “If I fall, I’ll fall forward.” It’s in Denzel Washington’s own words.

Summary

I owned the arena football team in New Orleans for some time. My Head Coach — Pat O’Hara — liked for me to say a word to the 35 football players that showed up for the first day of training camp each year. (That was the ONLY time Coach O’Hara wanted me in front of his team!) I did so, and it was the same every season:

I asked a player to stand and tell us who he was. Invariably, they would stand and say, “I’m so-and-so from Wherever and I’m a Running Back,” or “I’m a Defensive Lineman,” etc. I’d call on 2 or 3 more guys who invariably said the same things. When I had called on a few of those guys, I’d stop that segment and would tell them all this:

“Each of you told us that who you are is a Quarterback, Running Back, Wide Receiver, and so on. I didn’t ask what position you play — I asked you tell us who you are. Most people in the U.S. would have responded the exact same way.

We live in a society today that has taught us all that our identity lies in what our jobs are. We set values for ourselves and for others based on exactly that. And the problem in doing so is that when we lose our role as a football player, we have been conditioned to believe that we are no longer who we thought we were — we’ve been conditioned to fail.”

I finished that conversation by saying this to all those players and our coaches: “Don’t let where you are in your life today determine who you are. Today you’re playing football. There will be only 21 players here the last day of training camp. Those 21 will comprise our active player squad. What happens to the others? Some will find other teams, some will leave football and work in some other field. It is a certainty that every player in this room will someday NOT be a football player. When that happens, you better know who you are, not just what you did.”

“You’re a football player today, but that’s not who you are — it’s what you do. When you stop playing you’ll still be who you are. You’re a man!”

I left them all with a similar thought as did Denzel’s instructions to those University of Pennsylvania graduates. I told my guys this: (and it’s a good thought for you too)

Don’t let where you are in your life today determine who you are. Where you are today is only one stop on the path to where you’re going.

Denzel is right: we’re all gonna fall at some point. But when that happens, we’re still the same people — UNLESS we allow our chosen roles to determine our identity and when we fall, we fall forward.

“I’m Sick and Tired!”

There WAS food on the table last night for dinner. So I’m OK there. The house was clean, dogs were groomed, and I got to watch the last season episode of BILLIONS uninterrupted and the final round of the U.S. Open from Pebble Beach. Normally those would be the things that tick me off. Not this time.

I’m Sick and Tired of Washington D.C.! I’m sure that comes as no surprise to many of you. It makes NO difference if you’re liberal or conservative, Democrat or Republican, from a Red state or Blue state, you’ve got to be frustrated, too. So why don’t we together compile a list of all those things we’re Sick and Tired of?

“I’m Sick and Tired Of……”

Political Favors

There are PLENTY of examples we can point to that expose political favoritism in Washington. We all know about “the bridge to nowhere,” city libraries and highway exits and rezoning of a particular parcel of land. Though sad to admit, all those things are a part of life in the federal government. But sometimes, handing out favors turns into not tangible gifts, but gifts of political power. Let me explain…

Jerold Nadler (D-NY) is the head of one of the most powerful Congressional committees: the House Judiciary Committee. His committee rules on some of the most important legislative items that dramatically impact all Americans. Nadler late June 19, 2019, tweeted this:

My frustration is not with the tweet itself, but with the entire mindset behind it. Nadler represents the 10th Congressional District of New York. Here’s the “geography” of that district: includes parts of Manhattan’s Upper West Side, Hell’s Kitchen, Chelsea, SoHo, Greenwich Village, TriBeCa, the Financial District, and Battery Park City. In Brooklyn, the 10th District includes parts of Borough Park, Kensington, Red Hook, Sunset Park, Bensonhurst, Dyker Heights, and Gravesend.

If you know Manhattan, you know there are a lot of dollar signs behind the account numbers of thousands of the residents of Nadler’s district. That means there is a lot of might and power regarding all things political there. And all those with big bucks and power have great sway over Nadler.

Because of this, instead of simply reading the Congressman’s tweet and thinking, “He’s a good representative and cares much for the African American community and how slavery impacted them as long ago as 400 years and how they still struggle today,” I automatically think this instead: “I wonder which big givers to his campaign, Wall Street power brokers, and wealthy people of color in his district caved to political correctness and ‘suggested’ he make that statement in a tweet?”

It’s not just Nadler — it’s all over the Capitol, in members of both parties, and happens regarding every issue experienced in the lives of all Americans.

”I’m Sick and Tired of the Political Favors!”

Piling On

We’ve seen a large number of really good people get run out of D.C. for the most ridiculous reasons. Some call it “Piling On,” others call it “Scapegoating.

“Scapegoating” isn’t anything new. In Old Testament Israel, two identical male goats were selected: one was to be sacrificed to God, the other was taken by the High Priest who took the sins of the Jewish people and placed them on the second goat, which was then sent into the desert to where the goat would plunge to its death. One of the factors I’ve found fascinating about scapegoating is a theory that people who are scapegoated must behave in a way that those around them believe that they have “earned” the loathing of others. I couldn’t help thinking of Donald Trump and how he has become the scapegoat of the Left for nearly everything—even when he’s not connected to the situation. Unfortunately, the Left doesn’t realize that scapegoating not only wounds the victim but can be devastating to those who commit it.

Remember Minnesota U.S. Senator Al Franken? I liked Franken as a comedian in the SNL early days on Saturday nights. Serving in the U.S. Senate as a VERY liberal Minnesotan didn’t serve him well. Franken was literally run out of D.C. amid sexual “allegations” — not proven truths — several years ago for nothing more than allegations. He became a Democrat Party scapegoat to pacify the “Me Too” movement that has summarily attacked high-profile individuals for sexual improprieties. Though Franken’s allegations were shallow and unproven, he just “seemed” sleazy. That qualified Franken to become Dems’ scapegoat.

The obvious #1 Washington scapegoat is President Trump. History — when the history of the Trump presidency is completed — will detail just how “used” he has been by his opponents. Boy, could we chronicle a bunch of those attacks! But let it suffice to say that the Mueller Investigation that was instigated apparently with NO evidence, NO factual information in every other case necessary to initiate a counter-intelligence investigation is a perfect example of Washington finding someone to use as a scapegoat.

”I’m Sick and Tired of the Scapegoating!”

Random Law Enforcement

We just saw something akin to writing a wrong in U.S. criminal justice. The Clinton Crime Bill from the 1990s (that was pushed through in part by Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton) was a horrific example of “equal justice under the law.” African Americans were targeted by the terms of that law for decades: mass incarceration, laws enforced unequally against them compared to enforcement against Caucasians, horrifically expensive criminal litigation costs and sentences that were outrageously unfair, including “Three Strikes and You’re Out.” The new crime bill just signed into law repaired a huge portion of those criminal justice travesties. But the random enforcement of laws still exists and has simply become the elitists’ way of poking average Americans in their eyes with law enforcement wrongs.

Let’s look at a few.

Immigration Laws. Don’t get me started! Folks, I’m sorry. We have specific laws regarding every aspect of immigration in the U.S. — including illegal immigration. The U.S. legally allows 1 million immigrants into the U.S. with permanent status each year. That equals the total number of immigrants allowed into all other countries in the World each year! Yet, we do NOT enforce immigration laws.

How insane is it to know that each month this year, an average of 100,000 illegals have been apprehended at the southern border. That number does NOT include those that sneak across without detection. Yet Democrats will NOT agree to take any measures the professionals tell us are necessary to stop it. That’s insane!

We all know why Democrats won’t stop it: VOTES. A social media story has been circulating stating that “Democrats in the House of Representatives voted to allow illegals to vote in U.S. elections.” That’s NOT true. But….there WAS a bill that doing so was a part of.

“We are prepared to open up the political process and let all of the people come in,” Rep. John Lewis, a Georgia Democrat and hero of the civil rights movement, told colleagues as he led opposition to the GOP measure.

The 228-197 vote came as part of a broader debate on Democrats’ major legislative priority this year, HR 1, the “For the People Act,” which includes historic expansions of voter registration and access, as well as a major rewrite of campaign finance laws.

The measure would have had no practical effect even if it had passed.  Illegal immigrants  — and indeed noncitizens as a whole — are not legally able to participate in federal elections, according to the U.S. Constitution. But Democrats made it clear they desire to change that!

Drug Laws. Talk about mass chaos. Thirty-three states and the District of Columbia currently have passed laws broadly legalizing marijuana in some form.

The District of Columbia and 10 states — Alaska, California, Colorado, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nevada, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington — have adopted the most expansive laws legalizing marijuana for recreational use.

Those states have done so knowing that possession of marijuana anywhere in the United States violates federal criminal laws!

Does that not bother you? Someone somewhere in the U.S. government made a decision at some point in time for the Department of Justice to allow federal drug laws to be violated at will without any enforcement of federal laws.

There’s no need to go into the why’s about this: we all know. But don’t you think it would be smart and LEGAL for Congress to simply repeal any of the old federal drug laws that make marijuana illegal rather than have police simply wink at marijuana drug users sending them on their way?

Random Enforcement. This one bugs me more than the others. Two guys who committed the same crime, both have the same criminal record, are charged the same, appear before the same judge, and receive totally different sentences though they both committed the same crime! It happens every day in courtrooms of local, state, AND federal courts. Why is that?

Guy #1 has a friend who serves as a Deputy Sheriff who’s sister in the aunt of Guy #1’s girlfriend. That sounds stupid, I know. But it often is that ridiculous. Guy #1 gets a reduced sentence while Guy #2 who knows no one gets the book thrown at him.

“I’m Sick and Tired of Random Law Enforcement Instead of ‘Equal Justice Under the Law!’”

Fact-Checking

I hate them all! Why do they even exist? Of course, it’s because Americans are too stupid, too lazy, and too incapable to do a little research on our own. We MUST rely on the “experts” to check all the facts that are distributed daily in the national news.

Did you know that almost all of the Fact-Checkers are tied to some news outlet or news organization? Of course, they will not tell you that! After all, being a part of a news organization like, The Washington Post, would color the “facts” that are given on any topic seen less truthful, and more biased!

Here are the 10 top Fact-Checking websites as listed by the “experts:”

Politifact– PolitiFact is a fact-checking website that rates the accuracy of claims by elected officials and others who speak up in American politics. PolitiFact is run by editors and reporters from the Tampa Bay Times, an independent newspaper in Florida.  Politifact won the Pulitzer Prize. I don’t know about you, but that in itself is NOT a real recommendation.

Fact Check– FactCheck.org is a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania. They are a nonpartisan, nonprofit “consumer advocate” for voters that aims to reduce the level of deception and confusion in U.S. politics. They monitor the factual accuracy of what is said by major U.S. political players in the form of TV ads, debates, speeches, interviews, and news releases.

Open Secrets– Open Secrets is a nonpartisan, independent and nonprofit, run by the Center for Responsive Politics, which is the nation’s premier research group tracking money in U.S. politics and its effect on elections and public policy. Open Secrets is a source for discovering how much and where candidates get their money. They also track lobbying groups and whom they are funding.

Snopes– Snopes has been the definitive Internet reference source for urban legends, folklore, myths, rumors, and misinformation for a long time. Snopes is also usually the first to report some national or international happening as being factual or not.

The Sunlight Foundation– The Sunlight Foundation is a national, nonpartisan, nonprofit organization that uses the tools of civic tech, open data, policy analysis, and journalism purportedly “to make government and politics more accountable and transparent to all.” Sunlight primarily focuses on money’s role in politics.

Poynter Institute– The Poynter Institute is not a true fact-checking service. Here’s what the experts say about Poynter: “They are however a leader in distinguished journalism and produce nothing but credible and evidence-based content. If Poynter reports it, you can count on it being true.”

Flack Check– Headquartered at the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania, FlackCheck.org is the political literacy companion site to FactCheck.org. The site provides resources designed to help viewers recognize flaws in arguments in general and political ads in particular.

Truth or Fiction– Very similar to Snopes. They tend to focus more on political rumors and hoaxes.

Hoax-Slayer– Another service that debunks or validates internet rumors and hoaxes.

Fact Checker by the Washington PostThe Washington Post has a very clear left-center bias and this is reflected in their fact checks. Their fact checks are excellent and sourced; however, their bias is reflected in the fact that they fact-check right-wing claims more than left.  Otherwise, the Washington Post is a good resource.

Summary

Just to put it in simple terms: “I’m Sick and Tired of Washington D.C.!” The culture of the city is driven by politics, and because of that, Washington has always seemed “dirty” to me — not in the sense of needing a bath, but it seems to always reak of compromise, dirty deals, cronyism, back-alley negotiations, and trying to find new ways to get into the wallets of Americans.

In the 2016 Presidential Campaign, Donald Trump brought up the term “Drain the Swamp.” No name could possibly be more appropriate than that for Washington. Furthermore, as much as he has and is trying, Washington is so dirty and so evil, I doubt he’ll be able to totally drain the Swamp out of D.C. I don’t think any president can.

But, you know what: getting rid of the swamp creatures one at a time is a good way to start. He’s doing that. He’s turned the light on in the kitchen, and the roaches are scattering.

I’m sick and tired of his turning that light on only for one of the swamp critters to reach up and turn the light off! Those Swamp inhabitants sure like to keep it dark!

 

Play

“Perception” or “Reality?”

I watched about 10 minutes of President Trump’s rally in Orlando — enough to know he had a rabid crowd of fans that participated in his re-election campaign launch event. He was on script, seemed to stay on the teleprompter message (for the most part), and simply detailed facts, figures, and percentages. All in all, I must say he did a good job with the support of the ardent Trump fans in attendance.

Later overnight, I saw a tweet from Joe Biden and watched short interview videos with Senators Kamala Harris and Bernie Sanders as they commented on the President and his campaign rally:

“Let’s be clear: President Trump inherited a growing economy from the Obama-Biden administration,” a tweet from “Team Joe” read. “And now, he’s in the process of squandering it.” Former VP Joe Biden

“Donald Trump is looking back behind — in the past. We need to look ahead — forward through the windshield instead of what’s behind us.” Senator Kamala Harris (D-CA)

“Listening to Trump made me feel very much that he is a man living in a parallel universe, a man way out of touch with the needs of ordinary people and a man who must be defeated,” Sanders said. “And I can understand that he attacks me or other Democratic candidates because poll after poll is showing the country that Trump is falling further behind in terms of his ability to get reelected.” Senator Bernie Sanders (D-VT)

Of those comments, I do not see the evidence of any understanding of the current status of the U.S.! And we’re talking about 2 current U.S. Senators and the most recent past Vice President who was before that a U.S. Senator. One would think there would be much knowledge and understanding of the past AND present conditions of every segment of the United States, and that their understanding would include intelligent and coherent remarks about where the U.S. is today and where they each want to lead it going forward. All I heard (and all I hear from the other 2-dozen or so Democrat presidential candidates) is “Trump’s a bad guy who doesn’t understand what the average American needs!” Nothing could be further from the truth!

Misunderstanding

Someone at the top of America’s political leadership heap is either confused or ignorant. That “heap” (for the purpose of this conversation) is the pile of members of Congress and the members of the Executive Branch all rolled into one big pile. In the runup to the 2016 election there were 3 political perspectives being touted:

  1. Democrats wanted bigger government, open borders, smaller military, World citizenship to replace U.S. citizenship, and Single-payer Healthcare.
  2. Republicans who wanted smaller government, closed borders, a reinvigorated military, no illegal immigration, lower taxes, reduced across-the-board regulations, and re-affirmed Americanism.
  3. RINO Republicans who wanted everything to stay the same so as not to make any waves in government to prevent any changes of power going forward.

Today there are still 3 political perspectives being touted:

  1. Democrats who want Socialism, open borders, smaller military, World citizenship to replace U.S. citizenship, and Medicare-for-All.
  2. Republicans who still wanted smaller government, closed borders, a stronger military, no illegal immigration, lower taxes, reduced across-the-board regulations, and continued re-affirmed Americanism.
  3. RINO Republicans who pretty much are afraid to come out of the closet and say what they DO want. All they will say is what they DO NOT want: Donald Trump.

I’m Confused!

Sen. Bernie Sanders livestreamed a surly response to President Trump’s campaign rally, while other Democratic 2020 hopefuls tweeted about it. Besides what he said above, Sanders said this:

“It’s going to take me a little while to settle down because I just had the extremely unpleasant experience of watching Donald Trump in action for an hour and a half. Wow, and that was certainly something,” Sanders uttered to the camera in his low-budget rebuttal. “An hour-and-a-half speech of lies, distortions and total absolute nonsense.”

Sanders said he didn’t blame his supporters for being “discombobulated” after watching Trump – who used the Orlando, Florida, rally to revive some of his greatest hits, even asking the crowd what happened to his 2016 rival Hillary Clinton’s 33,000 emails.

Follow a line of thought with me for a few moments. It’s a takeoff on what Sanders said: “Listening to Trump made me feel very much that he is a man living in a parallel universe, a man way out of touch with the needs of ordinary people…”

To understand what’s going on in the minds of those on the Left, one must understand like Sanders and his followers (and even many of the other Democratic candidates and their followers), their feeling that Trump lives in a parallel universe and is out of touch with understanding ordinary people, to them is the truth!

“Perception IS Reality”

That phrase is the most used phrase in teaching and training salespeople today and has been for decades. To break it down for a more basic understanding: “The truth of a matter is always the Perception that a person holds about that matter. Its REAL truth is immaterial.”

Its usage in a sales setting is to show a salesperson how to create a specific perception in the mind of the sales target of the product or service being sold that the salesperson wants the target to perceive — not what the product or service is actually. As far as that sales target is concerned, “their” reality as created by the salesperson is the ONLY reality that matters. Once created, “THEIR” perception “IS” reality.

Regardless of “Perception,” the truth IS the truth. There are truths from the first two years of the Trump presidency that I think those 3 Democrat Party candidates above and the other 20 or so are missing:

  • Unemployment in the U.S. at record lows;
  • Gross Domestic Product is significantly higher than at any time in the Obama/Biden Administration;
  • Black unemployment at all-time lows;
  • Women unemployment at record lows;
  • Women employed are at record highs;
  • More Americans are employed than ever before in history;
  • 5 million new jobs created in the Trump Administration;
  • Welfare and food stamp enrollment at record lows;
  • Federal revenue at the highest levels in history;
  • Wages are rising steadily;
  • Consumer confidence is soaring;
  • Despite the Biden claim of this economy belonging to he and Obama, statistics don’t show that. GDP in the last 6 months of Obama/Biden was 1%. GDP in the first 6 months of Trump was triple that of Obama/Biden: 3%.

Do you know what’s troubling? It’s not only those 23 Democrat presidential candidates that apparently have lost these truths. So have the members of the Mainstream Media.

Three key mainstream media outlets offered 90 percent negative coverage of President Donald Trump and his administration during their evening newscasts in 2018, according to a report by the Media Research Center (MRC). It’s no secret that mainstream media reporters and pundits haven’t been thrilled with the Trump administration — and the president often rails against the “fake news media” and their biased coverage. But MRC listened to and analyzed evening newscasts from purportedly unbiased networks — ABC News, CBS News, and NBC News — and found the coverage to be “incessantly hostile” midway through Trump’s first term in office.

“At the midpoint of Donald Trump’s first term, the establishment media’s obvious hostility shows no signs of relenting, but polls show this negative coverage has had no discernible impact on the public’s attitudes toward the president,” Rich Noyes, MRC research director, wrote in his report. Noyes noted that roughly 23 million people watched these newscasts each evening. Approximately 28 percent of all airtime was devoted to covering the Trump administration in 2018, for a total of 87 hours — down from 99 hours in 2017.

“The tone of coverage remains incessantly hostile: 90 percent negative, vs. just 10 percent positive (excluding neutral statements), matching the historically bad press we documented in 2017,” Noyes wrote. The evening newscasts’ negative coverage over the last two years ranged from 82 percent negative in April 2017 to 96 percent negative in February 2018.

Here’s a news story from just a few days ago. Read/Listen to this and tell me: what did Mainstream Media have to say about what the former Vice President had to say?

Former Vice President Joseph R. Biden assailed President Trump’s supporters during a speech Saturday at the annual Human Rights Campaign dinner in Washington, lamenting that “virulent people” and the “dregs of society” still had a friend in the White House.

Mr. Biden told an enthusiastic crowd of LGBTQ rights advocates that social conservatives at home and abroad who used religion or culture as a “license to discriminate” were committing a “crime” of prejudice.

“Despite losing in the courts and in the court of public opinion, these forces of intolerance remain determined to undermine and roll back the progress you all have made,” he argued. “This time they — not you — have an ally in the White House.
“They’re a small percentage of the American people, virulent people,” he continued. “Some of them the dregs of society. And instead of using the full might of the executive branch to secure justice, dignity [and] safety for all, the president uses the White House as a literal, literal bully pulpit, callously exerting his power over those who have little or none.”

Tell me this: if Donald Trump (or any other Republican, for that matter) said about Democrats anything resembling what Biden said about Republican supporters, what would the Mainstream Media have said and done? The answer is obvious. They would fight first to BE first to present the story live on every talk show and newscast for 24-48 hours. And then the demands for a presidential resignation would be trumpeted from coast to coast — non-stop!

Today’s question: Why is that?

The Answer

What I am about to say is now no longer just conjecture or conservative blather — it’s the truth. Many on the Right have felt for years that the Mainstream Media have become something of an arm of the Democrat Party. It’s no longer conjecture. Mainstream Media pundits are now confirmed to be an arm of the Democrat Party.

In the early 1920s, newspapers were literally the arm of the political system. Whichever was in control set the tone of newspaper reporting. News outlets fought hard to gain their independence, respectability as being neutral, and actually gained that reputation by the time of World War II. But since the Nixon White House, what has become to be known as the “Mainstream Media” began to move slowly but steadily to the Left. That move became stronger and stronger. Even though reporters at those outlets publicly proclaimed their impartiality in politics, Americans began to notice biases.

Mark Levin in his recently released book “Unfreedom of the Press” calls on numerous examples that overwhelmingly confirm that traditional and mainstream news sources no longer even try to hide their bias. The likes of ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, The Washington Post, New York Times, and, in fact, almost every newspaper in America have gone all-in for the Democrat Party. There are many today who actually believe the Democrat National Committee passes out talking points “of the day and week” to the media army of so-called journalists. There are sadly only a handful of media news reporting entities that maintain any partiality at all. What’s the most concerning thing about this is that all of those publishers, writers, editors, broadcasters, and reporters have begun to wear their Liberal banners proudly and take no measure in their attacks against conservative causes, candidates, and even elected conservatives. They have now achieved what they feel in their minds is the right to no longer report the news. They now control what news is reported, what all news reports mean, and how the public should perceive ALL news stories.

It’s literally now a class of empowered media elites answering to and talking for a political class that feels they are in total control of what the American public think and know about the political system in the United States. AND ONLY THEY HAVE SOME DIVINE ANOINTING TO DO SO!

In summary, it is now common knowledge that going forward — not just in the 2020 elections, but in ALL federal elections for the foreseeable future — conservatives of all ilks will face the same obstacles. Previously, conservative candidates could simply campaign using all resources available for their presenting their proposed policies to the voting public. News sources carried the stories of their campaigns. Editorials would appear with pro and con support and non-support for candidates, but this process has (until the last few decades) been almost fair. But not now, and never again — at least in my lifetime.

Summary

There’s at least one really good thing that Donald Trump brought back to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue: integrity. Yes, he may be loud and may challenge all who nastily attack him. Yes, he brags about his accomplishments while in office. But what he is best known for and what American history will say about Donald Trump is that he like all candidates made numerous promises. What Trump has done that is historical is that he has in 2 years fulfilled EVERY PROMISE he possibly could from his campaign! He failed to produce promised results ONLY for those matters that he could not unilaterally under the Law do so. Congress has failed in every case in which Trump could not achieve promised results.

We’ll close with these 2 questions: What other President in your lifetime can claim to have in 2 years achieved the same or similar promise fulfillment as Donald Trump? Secondly, why would any voter sincerely desire to turn 180 degrees from the tangible positive and confirmed results listed above to embrace any one of those 23 Democrat candidates, knowing that in doing so, the immediate dismantling of the foundation built and used to achieve these amazing results for ALL Americans?

NO other President has accomplished anything close to Trump’s accomplishments in 2 years. And the ONLY reason any voter would vote to end the most amazing season of prosperity and its top-to-bottom massive benefits for all Americans is if they are wittingly incapable of reasoning to comprehend the cost of doing so.

These are the exact reasons why President Trump MUST continue to take his message to Americans the same way he did in 2016. And his message resonates far more effectively now than then. Why? BECAUSE HE HAS RESULTS TODAY WE NEVER SAW IN HIS PREDECESSOR’S 8 YEARS!

 

 

 

Play

“I’m Sorry, Dad…”

I’m sorry, Dad, that you missed most all of my Little League baseball games. You didn’t see me hit my first home run. You didn’t see me throw out a runner trying to steal second base. You didn’t see the walk-off double I hit that plated the run to cinch our City Championship.

I’m sorry you were late getting to our final District basketball game and didn’t see me score 12 points in the first quarter — the most I ever scored in a quarter in high school. You did get there, but by that time in the 4th quarter we had put the other team away and our junior varsity and freshmen were on the floor getting game time.

I didn’t get to play much high school football. My sophomore year it was discovered I had only 1 kidney and doctors kept me out of the game. I’m sorry that you never saw me play my favorite sport in either my freshman or sophomore year.

I’m sorry you didn’t think much of my musical talent. From age 7 to age 14, I had a piano recital once each year. They said I was pretty good playing, but you never heard me play with other students so you could compare.

I’m sorry you were too busy to see me graduate from high school or to even know I graduated 13th of the 630 graduates in my senior class.

I’m sorry that in the 7 years in which I traveled playing in a ministry group that you never came to see or hear us in those several hundred services.

I’m sorry that you walked away from relationships with my children — who were your ONLY grandchildren — and never saw any of them graduate from high school, get married, and never even laid eyes on your only 7 great-grandchildren.

I’m sorry that you weren’t available to be with your granddaughter during her fight with breast cancer, her double mastectomy, chemotherapy, and the night in which at dinner, every guy in the family shaved their heads to show her support in her recovery battle.

I’m sorry, Dad, that you weren’t at the funeral of her firstborn baby girl that died. Today, Emerson — that baby girl — would have been fifteen years old. I’m sorry that I’m pretty sure you never even knew her name. I’m sorry that you didn’t know a children’s center at our church is named “The Emerson Center” in her honor — you missed the building dedication.

I’m sorry you missed every birthday, every school program, every t-ball game, soccer game, football game, baseball game and every graduation of each of your only biological grandchildren and great-grandchildren. I’m sorry you never met any of your great-grandchildren and that I’m fairly certain you didn’t know their names or how gorgeous they are.

I’m sorry you were absent from the Christmas family celebrations we had each year for the last 44 years. I guess you just kept right on missing family Christmases like you did with Mom, my brother and me.

I’m sorry when we lived in South Louisiana and I fell in love with hunting and fishing, bought my own boat, and fished every weekend, you never wanted to go fishing or, during the winter, duck hunting either. I spent many weekend nights camped out on Six Mile Lake and wondered what you were doing when I cooked freshly caught bass on the fire.

But, Dad, I’m NOT sorry about some things, too:

  • I’m NOT sorry I learned to not treat my wife (of 44 years) the way you treated Mother;
  • I’m NOT sorry I learned to pour my life into everything that went along with spending time with my wife and children — dance, basketball, baseball, football, plays, church, camp, and eating together;
  • I’m NOT sorry I missed a bunch of games with “the guys,” golf instead of a baseball game or a dance recital, or staying late at a friend’s house instead of watching Mr. Rogers with our youngest;
  • I’m NOT sorry I never missed a fish fry at my in-laws where all my wife’s sisters and their families were there. We created special memories grabbing a bass filet right out the hot grease, at fresh homemade hush puppies and fried pies and told stories until all the kids fell asleep;
  • I’m NOT sorry that we started a beach tradition that was an annual weeklong pilgrimage with our kids, cousins, and always some stragglers at Destin, Florida. I’m NOT sorry we vacationed together as a family every summer. I remember only a single family vacation with you — one on which you fought with Mom about everything WHEN you were with us at all;
  • I’m NOT sorry that I learned money and work are not everything and that enjoying doing EVERYTHING possible with my own family was and is far more important than working 15 hours a day, always coming home cranky and griping about dinner being cold.

Dad, you DID do something really good for me. And I’m thankful for that one thing if nothing else. You’ve been gone for two years this month and I never had the chance to thank for this, probably the MOST important thing I learned in my life.

You taught how to live a happy life, have a good life and a good family, to love being with them as often and as much as possible. How did you do that?

By living every part of my life exactly opposite of the way you lived yours.

Summary

Some of you reading this will think that I’m cold, unthankful for my upbringing, and just an angry 65-year-old guy who has “Daddy issues.” Before you draw that opinion of me, you need to know a few things:

I dealt with much hurt and anger that I allowed to darken a large part of my life. For a time, that hurt and anger clouded my other relationships. Thankfully, a pastor gave a sermon many years ago that I felt was directed right at me on forgiveness. I’ll share the simple sentence in his sermon that changed my life. This “sentence” actually is one verse of the Lord’s Prayer, which I’m certain you’ve quoted as have I hundreds of times: “Forgive me MY sins and I forgive those who sin against me.”

It shocked me to realize, when I prayed that I was actually asking God to forgive me ONLY “as” — which is defined as “at the same time, to the same degree, while, or only if/when” — I forgive all those who have sinned against me.

To that end, years ago I called my Dad and asked him to forgive me for all the anger and malice I had held against him for decades. He wouldn’t forgive me, because he said I had not ever hurt him. He didn’t understand that Lord’s Prayer importance. But that didn’t matter: I did.

I went to his funeral. The pastor who spoke asked me before if I wanted to say something. I thought about it, but I declined. Why? There weren’t many good things I could have honestly said about my Dad. And the one critically important and life-changing principle I COULD have shared with those there wouldn’t have been understood by most if not all of those who attended.

I owe everything the credit anything and everything that might have ever been good in me, every good thing I’ve ever done, every success I’ve ever had, and 100% of all good relationship in my life to the fact that I consciously made a determination and stuck with it:

“I looked at everything Dad did in his life as it pertained to me and all others in our family AND DID EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE IN MY LIFE!” 

I never got to thank you, Dad, for living a pattern that in some crazy way made my life wonderful!

Thanks, Dad.

Slippery Slope Target: The Constitution

Why the rush to remove monuments, change names of Universities and sports teams all the while denigrating their historical meanings?

Actually, what we are seeing is the fulfillment of Barack Obama’s major campaign promise when running in 2008: “To fundamentally change America.” Think about it: how could one change a nation fundamentally without altering its history? He did not say he wanted to alter the course of America or to change the processes in the U.S. Government. No, he wanted to fundamentally change America.

“Fundamentally” America was structured to operate as the most unique country on Earth. Our forefathers took the best of the political frameworks of European countries and added to it “liberty and justice for all.” They then memorialized that new type of government in the roadmap of roadmaps — the U.S. Constitution. That document and its contents are the fundamental backbones of the United States of America. Sure, people fight over whether or not the framers intended for it to be used in perpetuity as literally written or that it be a “living, breathing,” the process of laws that morph in interpretation to fit the inevitable changes in American life as they happen. But the argument today by some is to alter not the interpretations of the intent of the framers but to actually add, delete, and/or change phrasing and wording of the document.

That seems to be the justification used for the efforts to destroy offending monuments and statues and the removal of slogans and stone markers from places highly visible to the public. Which specific offensive historical reminders should be removed and which should stay? That remains to be seen. Of course, there are many that vigorously object to ANY removal, strictly for historical purposes.

To me, removing, hiding, or changing locations of these pieces of history is not the danger I am writing about. What petrifies me is the slippery slope America is now at the brink of sliding down into an abyss of societal culture never before experienced in America. So far the only thing that has prevented that slide is the strict adherence to the U.S. Constitution and the greatest judicial system on Earth. However, that too is under attack.

The “Intent”

What did the Framers envision the Constitution to be? I think the best way to answer that question is to list the items in Article 1 Section 8 (powers of Congress) and Article 2 Section 2 (powers of the President) of the Constitution. Here is the link:

http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html

Upon reading these sections of the Constitution, most people will be shocked to see just how little power the Constitution gave to the new federal government. The federal government is mainly responsible for dealings with foreign countries such as treaties, commerce, wars., and little else (immigration, coining money, etc.). Yet today, Constitutional “detractors” on the Left want to tear up the Constitution and start from scratch!

We’ve all heard about the Bill of Rights in the Constitution. Those are the first ten Amendments that are simply called the Bill of Rights. Thomas Jefferson and others involved in creating the U.S. Constitution had just after living under a European national government with top-down repressive and totalitarian operations for generations chose to move to a New World and establish a country that worked instead of top-down as a bottom-up governed nation.

The First Ten Amendments were the MOST important parts of the Constitution for those who had memories of awakening every day under that governmental oppression. Those ten amendments were written to make as easy as possible the understanding by all that the American people were creating a federal government that would operate using ONLY THOSE SPECIFIC RIGHTS AS GIVEN TO THAT GOVERNMENT BY THE PEOPLE. No other federal government rights were ever to be used unless and until they were expressly given to the government by the People!

An all-powerful central government had destroyed Western Europe. Those American settlers wanted nothing to do with that lifestyle then and certainly not moving forward in the new nation.

What Did the Framers Actually Think?

Let’s look at their OWN words:

On every question of construction carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed.  —Thomas Jefferson

The first and governing maxim in the interpretation of a statute is to discover the meaning of those who made it.  —James Wilson, in Of the Study of Law in the United States

The basis of our political systems is the right of the people to make and to alter their constitutions of government. But the Constitution, which at any time exists, ‘till changed by an explicit and authentic act of the whole people, is sacredly obligatory upon all. … If in the opinion of the people the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this in one instance may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed. — George Washington

Can it be of less consequence that the meaning of a Constitution should be fixed and known, than a meaning of a law should be so? — James Madison

The important distinction so well understood in America, between a Constitution established by the people and unalterable by the government, and a law established by the government and alterable by the government, seems to have been little understood and less observed in any other country. — James Madison

Our peculiar security is in possession of a written Constitution. Let us not make it a blank paper by construction. … If it is, then we have no Constitution. — Thomas Jefferson

To take a single step beyond the text would be to take possession of a boundless field of power. — Thomas Jefferson

How does all this compare to what some contemporaries in politics had to say about the Constitution?

Living political constitutions must be Darwinian in structure and in practice. Society is a living organism and must obey the laws of life, not of mechanics; it must develop.  All that progressives ask or desire is permission—in an era when ‘development,’ ‘evolution,’ is the scientific word—to interpret the Constitution according to the Darwinian principle; all they ask is recognition of the fact that a nation is a living thing and not a machine. — Woodrow Wilson, The New Freedom, A Call For The Emancipation Of The Generous Energies Of A People

The United States Constitution has proved itself the most marvelously elastic compilation of rules of government ever written.” — Franklin Roosevelt, President

It is the genius of our Constitution that under its shelter of enduring institutions and rooted principles there is ample room for the rich fertility of American political invention. —Lyndon B. Johnson, President

The words of the Constitution … are so unrestricted by their intrinsic meaning or by their history or by tradition or by prior decisions that they leave the individual Justice free, if indeed they do not compel him, to gather meaning not from reading the Constitution but from reading life. —Felix Frankfurter, Supreme Court Justice

This understanding, underlying constitutional interpretation since the New Deal, reflects the Constitution’s demands for structural flexibility sufficient to adapt substantive laws and institutions to rapidly changing social, economic, and technological conditions. — Stephen Breyer, Supreme Court Justice, Federal Maritime Commission v. South Carolina State Ports Authority

I cannot accept this invitation [to celebrate the bicentennial of the Constitution], for I do not believe that the meaning of the Constitution was forever ‘fixed’ at the Philadelphia Convention … To the contrary, the government they devised was defective from the start. —Thurgood Marshall, Supreme Court Justice

It can be lost, and it will be, if the time ever comes when these documents are regarded not as the supreme expression of our profound belief, but merely as curiosities in glass cases. —Harry Truman, President

If we’re picking people to draw out of their own conscience and experience a ‘new’ Constitution, we should not look principally for good lawyers. We should look to people who agree with us. When we are in that mode, you realize we have rendered the Constitution useless. —Antonin Gregory Scalia, Supreme Court Justice

Just talk to me as a father—not what the Constitution says. What do you feel? — Joe Biden, Vice President

The Thread of Commonality

Wow! All of those quoted above — those from the 1700s, the 1800s and the 1900s as well as this century — represent different perspectives and different understandings of the intent of the framers and the actual meaning of the Constitution. But, thankfully, they acknowledge the significance of our nation actually having a roadmap to American governing that is recognized as the greatest in the World.

But there’s on more commonality that runs very obviously through each: Opinion. Yep. Each of those who weighed in with thoughts did so based on opinion — THEIR opinion.

And who among us is any different?

Several things about the framer’s offerings are very obvious:

  • they recognized that they could not foretell the future and therefore could not imagine what legalities their great, great, great, great grandchildren would face but would still need the Constitution for guidance;
  • they acknowledged that events in the future would dictate the necessity of flexibility in interpretations demanded by contemporary and unimagined occurrences in American life at the time of its creation;
  • they knew there would, therefore, be demands for actual editing of their original constitution.

To anticipate exactly how to adjudicate these future certainties they knew was a possibility in the 18th century. They therefore brilliantly included the ability and the process to alter the Constitution. That process is called “Amending.” But because of the importance of the strictest adherence to the blueprint of governing they created, they purposely made the amendment process extremely difficult. Why?

They hated the political process and knew that if allowed, that process would destroy true freedom created by the Constitution. They knew that political partisanship would initiate continuous amending of the Constitution not to better serve the basis of the Laws of the People, but to only satisfy the hunger for political power for the elite. They had lived through that and knew it could NOT be allowed to devour this new nation.

Democracy or Republic?

The cries from partisan political parties for either a Democracy or a Republic for a description of the form of government established by the Constitution have gone back and forth for the life of the United States. The winds of the political party in power have determined which form is desired at the time.

Jefferson and Company knew this would happen. They made clear how the U.S. government would work. And they guaranteed Americans would live in a Representative Republic with the establishment of the Electoral College that governs the process of electing the U.S. “Executive in Chief,” the President and Vice President. Also, states are to determine U.S. Senators: 2 from each state originally appointed by each state’s governor but changed via Amendment to be elected by each state’s electorate, Members that serve in the “People’s House,” Congress, are still elected by voters from each House district in each state.

Today, the political Left doesn’t accept the structure of the Republic, rejecting it for instead a Democratic government. Why? In a pure Democracy, there ARE no federal representatives of the People. Each person gets one vote. That sounds reasonable, right? Consider this:

”IF” the U.S. was a true Democracy, every federal election outcome would simply be what those from the states of California, New York, Illinois, Florida, and Texas voted to be. Election results would be determined solely by the most heavily populated states and their voters’ desires. “Fly-over” Americans would have no say so at all in their government.

Without the Electoral College, Hillary Clinton would be President instead of Donald Trump. That was the choice of the U.S. popular vote when the Electoral College elected Trump in something of a landslide. The same happened in the Bush 43 presidential elections.

Summary

So what’s fair?

That answer is simple: NOT A DEMOCRACY.

Democracy is not freedom. Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to eat for lunch. Freedom comes from the recognition of certain rights which may not be taken, not even by a 99 percent vote.

True democracy is the tyranny of the majority. True democracy is mob rule. Thankfully we do not live in a democracy. We live in a republic. Article 4, Section 4 of the Constitution: “The United States shall guarantee to every state in this Union a Republican form of government….”

And living in this republic means that every voice matters, majorities do not rule, and those with the loudest voices do not automatically win.

The will of the People means ALL the People.

Play

Mueller: “Forget Presumption of Innocence”

Everybody was shocked when Special Counsel Robert Mueller announced he was going to speak to the press on Wednesday. Many more were shocked at the things he said:

Think about this: he stated his team — IF they could declare the President not guilty of allegations made — would have included that in the Mueller Report. What does that actually mean?

Never in U.S. history has any prosecutor ever felt obligated under the law to prove the innocence of someone charged. Mueller is the very first to do so! Based on what you heard and saw above, Mueller has changed the very premise of U.S. law: a charged individual is considered innocent “until” and “unless” he/she is PROVEN GUILTY. According to Mueller, his investigative team, besides not finding Trump guilty of collusion and obstruction of justice, could NOT prove he is innocent either.

I’m not an attorney, but Mueller doing so is either trying to forever change “innocence until proven guilty,” or he takes that position for another purpose. Wanna bet which of those is his reason?

Changing History

Folks, this position was taken by Mueller Wednesday is a first in not just U.S. history, but a first in World History. Throughout every contemporary World government on Earth, the judicial system in each of those countries adopted a presumption of innocence as a foundation. Here is a link for you to use to see the countries who do so:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presumption_of_innocence

Countries like France, Italy, Philippines, China, Poland, Romania, Spain, Brazil, not to mention countries of the European Union and even Russia and every Islamic country in their criminal and civil law as a default presume the innocence of the accused with the burden of proof lying directly on the accuser.

Apparently, Robert Mueller — that bastion of impartiality and upholder of the Law — decided on his own the U.S. no longer believes the presumption of innocence.

Why do you suppose the sudden proposed change in the foundation of Law has been assumed by Mueller?

Assumption Bullet Points

  • Mueller is really after Trump. He couldn’t find hard evidence of guilt so he left the doubt in the air to prompt the Democrat House to begin impeachment proceedings. Honestly, I think this is NOT his reason. Even though he said in his press conference they could not find sufficient evidence to indict the President, he could have simply said, “We are today turning over the evidence that we DID uncover to the House for use in their investigation into presidential wrongdoing.” Congress in impeachment is NOT required to prove criminality on the part of the charged — in this case, President Trump. They merely are required to prove guilt in the commitment of “high crimes and misdemeanors.” (Isn’t that crazy: those two words are nowhere in the Constitution defined — they are totally subjective.)
  • Mueller has been tasked by someone to lay the groundwork for non-stop Trump investigations through the 2020 elections. That’s a plausible possibility in that Democrats running for President — all 23 of them and the DNC — have put forth NO legislative platform, no new ideas on any front, and have given Americans no good reasons for voters to (based on Trump policies and legislative and executive actions Dems claim are all wrong and evil) vote for their nominee in 2020. Once again they find themselves with one thing and one thing only to use against Mr. Trump: impeachment. The timing for making impeachment last through the 2020 elections is perfect. Even though Mueller’s team has exhaustive data, documents, written and recorded testimony of hundreds of witnesses, the Democrat House will slow-play impeachment proceedings so they are justified in “thorough investigations” of their own to assure Americans they have all the facts. It’s comical that Dems were so demanding for all to give Mueller room and latitude to complete his investigation with no interruptions, but then refuse to accept his findings: politics at its worst.
  • Mueller has something to hide and he is kicking this can down the road to distract “this” from everyone until after 2020 — whatever “this” is. As strange as this may seem, this is probably the most plausible of explanations for Mueller’s actions — especially for calling that press conference, making his statement, and, more importantly, taking NO questions! That seems like an effort on his part to send a message to his minions — the Democrats — so they will take action with this cue.

The last listed above is the explanation I feel for Mueller to do what he did. He’s messaged members of the Democrat Party to “circle the wagons” around him because something really serious is about to happen. What can that be? Who will it involve and who or what will initiate it and under what circumstances?

The answers to those will blow your mind! And we’ll get to them in detail after we take this short break at TruthNewsNet.org.

The “Decoy”

Fired FBI Director James Comey, former CIA Director John Brennan, DNI head James Clapper, and others that many say are part of the “Deep State,” have become very vocal in recent days. Comey and Brennan have always had easy access to the media, but of late in social media and Mainstream media television outlets, they are again regular fixtures. And they have become amazingly bombastic and nasty towards Mr. Trump — which is no surprise to anyone. But they’ve turned their vitriol up a notch or two.

Conventional wisdom is that because DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz is reportedly releasing one of his investigations’ reports in the next few weeks, that details in that report will certainly implicate at least Brennan, Clapper, and Comey for wrongdoing in both the Clinton email debacle and in the alleged fraudulent FBI investigation of the Trump Campaign. All three have each been caught in lies in sworn testimony before House and Senate committees. It is probable Horowitz will address those issues and many more. And, of course, there are many others like Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Andrew McCabe, Bruce Ohr, Nellie Ohr, and many more from the Obama Justice Department who probably are in his crosshairs. His first report will tell that tale. But, there’s a second report coming as well.

There are plenty of Americans who feel more and more that additional Obama Administration career politicians were involved in the propped-up FBI Trump Campaign investigation from its inception. Several from the Obama White House staff have already been drawn into the investigation while other big name folks are yet to be mentioned. But certainly, some if not many will be exposed in the second Horowitz report. Many believe those implicated could include Susan Rice (NSA Advisor to Obama), Samantha Power (United Nations U.S. Ambassador), former Attorney General Loretta Lynch, and also Bill and Hillary Clinton. The name Barack Obama has been continually floated by those closest to Horowitz, but it is probable that even if the former president was involved, lower level members of his administration would probably take the fall for any of his wrongdoing. Time will tell.

What role would Bill and Hillary Clinton play in this? And where does Mueller fit into this picture? Hold on to your hats!

Hillary And Bill

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton facilitated the transfer of highly enriched uranium (HEU) previously confiscated by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) during a 2006 “nuclear smuggling sting operation involving one Russian national and several Georgian accomplices,” a newly leaked classified cable shows.

The classified cable released by WikiLeaks was authored by Hillary Clinton’s State Department on August 17th, 2009.  In the cable it states –

In 2008, Russia requested a ten-gram sample of highly enriched uranium (HEU) seized in early 2006 in Georgia during a nuclear smuggling sting operation involving one Russian national and several Georgian accomplices. The seized HEU was transferred to U.S. custody and is being held at a secure Department of Energy facility. In response to the Russian request, the Georgian Government authorized the United States to share a sample of the material with the Russians for forensic analysis.

The cable also states that “Given Russia’s reluctance to act so far, FBI Director Robert Mueller’s delivery of this sample will underscore to Russia our commitment to follow through on this case.”  It continues in stating, “Embassy Moscow is requested to alert at the highest appropriate level the Russian Federation that FBI Director Mueller plans to deliver the HEU sample once he arrives in Moscow on September 21.”

Robert Mueller — FBI Director — was “sent” by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to Moscow to personally deliver a sample of highly enriched uranium (HEU)!

The cable summarizes that, “We regret that the April visit by Director Mueller could not take place due to a scheduling conflict.” and makes a final request that, “We require that the transfer of this material be conducted at the airport, on the tarmac nearby the plane, upon arrival of the Director’s aircraft.”

Now knowing that the Obama Administration and Hillary Clinton hid the FBI investigation into the Uranium One deal, this cable brings on new meaning and leads to numerous questions:

  • Why did Obama and Clinton agree to provide this uranium delivered by Mueller to Russia in the first place?
  • Another question is why did Clinton’s Secretary of State request that FBI Director Mueller deliver the sample of HEU to Russia and why was the transfer in April canceled and postponed to September?

The fact that Mueller needed to perform the transfer should raise numerous red flags.  It’s been widely reported about Mueller’s conflicts of interest with his recent appointment as special counsel in the Russia investigation.

This past week information was reported that prior to the Obama administration approving the very controversial deal in 2010 giving Russia 20% of America’s Uranium through the approved sale of Uranium One, the FBI had evidence that Russian nuclear industry officials were involved in bribery, kickbacks, extortion, and money laundering in order to benefit Vladimir Putin, says a report by The Hill.

Mueller was handpicked by Hillary Clinton’s State Department to deal uranium to Russia.

Summary

What is Mueller attempting to hide? Robert Mueller is really a brilliant individual. We wrote extensively about his personal and business history when he was first appointed as Special Counsel by President Trump. It is important to note that in his past business life, he initiated and was personally involved in multiple “speckled” circumstances in which he took dramatic and questionable actions that were never questioned by anyone! Well, almost no one questioned him. But Texas Republican Congressman Louie Gohmert certainly did. Take a look back at our 4-part series on Mr. Mueller that started on July 28, 2018: “ROBERT MUELLER: UNMASKED Part One.“ 

It’s a simple fact: members of the proverbial “Deep State” — and Mueller certainly is actually a “Charter Member” of that group — are masterful and hiding, covering, and making excuses for the wrongdoings of each other. The Obama Administration was full of them! We’ve mentioned just a few names in today’s story, but know for certain there are dozens more that have a Deep State ID card in their wallet or purse.

Why oh why would the Director of the FBI be tasked by Hillary Clinton — then Secretary of State that had NO authority to dispatch anyone in the FBI to Moscow, especially not the Director — to take that HEU sample to Putin personally? The only answer can be this: Hillary had/has something on Mueller that she threatened to expose if he did NOT take care of that tidbit of necessity to ramp-up the closing of that Uranium One deal! “If” Mueller is as smart as most think he is, and “If” Mueller has the legal mind that most think he does, the ONLY explanation for his doing so was that he owed the Clintons something and they had something on him. Think about it: by taking that trip, he exposed himself as a Clinton sycophant!

In closing, know this: Washington D.C. and those who live and work in that swamp are known as the “quid pro quo” capital of the world. Nothing is done in that city unless somebody initiates it with a threat or blackmail, and in doing so, someone else then owes a favor to the initiator. Mueller in his charade press conference was out there not because he thought it was the right thing to do or that he wanted to do it, he was told by someone who has something on him to do it!

So what happens now? Let’s hope it all ends this way:

  1. Attorney General Barr releases the now unclassified documents that will show U.S. voters exactly what and who initiated the bogus Russia Collusion investigation;
  2. With the release, AG Barr starts letting indictments fly for all those implicated in those documents;
  3. Many of those indicted will “turn” on those above them — their “handlers” — by cutting a deal with the DOJ for immunity or negotiated sentences for their crimes;
  4. Inspector General Horowitz will fill the missing spots with details he’ll be shortly releasing of his investigation into the Clinton Campaign, the DNC server hack, the Clinton email server debacle, and Uranium One and the involvement (if any) by the Clintons and the Clinton Foundation.

I doubt Attorney General Barr is going to let this all drag out. I feel strongly that he’ll push hard for indictments, prosecution, and sentence adjudications. He is a no-play federal attorney who knows his way around an investigation and corrupt political operations. And one other thing: he’s planning on retiring from prosecuting and I don’t think he will let this push his retirement back!

The last thing in this conversation, I hope President Trump will NOT get so angry, tired, and disgusted with the dysfunctional American political system that he decides to simply throw in the towel. Just how many Americans would stay in the line of fire as he has when every day he and every member of his family are denigrated in the vilest ways very publicly, often by people who are supposed to be honest and hard-working government servants? Not very many.

You can say much about Donald Trump. Yes, he is loud. Yes, he bloviates quite often. Yes, he is caustic. Yes, he brags a lot.

But as Deion Sanders once said to Howard Cosell in an interview when Cosell asked Sanders why he bragged so much about his capabilities on the football field. Deion famously responded, “Howard, it ain’t bragging if you can do it!”

Say what you will, but Donald Trump has accomplished a lot for Americans and our nation. Just imagine how much more he would have achieved if the Deep State and Never Trumpers had stayed out of the way?

 

Play

The Federal Reserve: A Necessary Evil

Before the Federal Reserve was founded, the nation was plagued with financial crises. At times, these crises led to “panics” in which people raced to their banks to withdraw their deposits. The failure of one bank often had a domino effect, in which customers of other banks rushed to withdraw funds from their own banks even if those banks were not in danger of failing. Banks needed a source of emergency reserves to prevent the panics and resulting runs from driving them out of business.

A particularly severe panic in 1907 resulted in bank runs that wreaked havoc on the fragile banking system and ultimately led Congress in 1913 to write the Federal Reserve Act. The Federal Reserve System, initially created to address these banking panics, is now charged with several broader responsibilities, including fostering a sound banking system and a healthy economy.

Although the need for banking reform was undisputed, for decades early supporters debated the delicate balance between national and regional interests. Nationally, the central bank had to make it easier to conduct financial transactions between businesses and individuals across regions of the country.

A stable central bank would also strengthen the United States’ standing in the world economy because foreign individuals, businesses, and governments have confidence in doing business within a country that has a responsible central bank and economic system. Regionally, the central bank would have to respond to the local needs for currency, which could vary across regions. A lack of available currency had caused the earlier banking panics.

Another important issue was creating a balance between the private interests of banks and the centralized responsibility of government. What emerged—the Federal Reserve System—was a central bank under public control, with many checks and balances.

Congress oversees the entire Federal Reserve System. And the Fed must work within the objectives established by Congress. Yet Congress gave the Federal Reserve the autonomy to carry out its responsibilities without political pressure. Each of the Fed’s three parts—the Board of Governors, the regional Reserve Banks, and the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC)—operates independently of the federal government to carry out the Fed’s core responsibilities.

The Federal Reserve System was developed and continues to develop as an interesting blend of public and private interests and centralized and decentralized decision-making. As you continue reading, you will learn about the Fed’s structure and responsibilities—what the Fed is and what it does.

Who Runs the Federal Reserve?

At the core of the Federal Reserve System is the Board of Governors, or Federal Reserve Board. The Board of Governors, located in Washington, D.C., is a federal government agency that is the Fed’s centralized component. The Board consists of seven members who are appointed by the president of the United States and confirmed by the Senate. These Governors guide the Federal Reserve’s policy actions.

A Governor’s term is 14 years. It is possible, however, for a Federal Reserve Governor to serve a longer term. For example, William McChesney Martin Jr. served as a member and Chairman of the Board of Governors for nearly 19 years because he was appointed as Chairman to complete another person’s term and was then appointed to his own term.

Appointments to the Board of Governors are staggered—one Governor’s term expires every two years. Terms are staggered to provide the Fed political independence as a central bank, ensuring that one president cannot take advantage of his power to appoint Governors by “stacking the deck” with those who favor his policies. The Board of Governors must be nonpartisan and act independently. In addition to independence, the staggered terms enable stability and continuity on the Board of Governors. The seven Governors, according to the original Federal Reserve Act, should represent the nation’s financial, agricultural, industrial, and commercial interests. Geography is a factor, too, as every Governor must be selected from a different Federal Reserve District. Recently Congress directed that at least one of the Governors have experience in community banking. (In general, community banks can be defined as those owned by organizations with less than $10 billion in assets.) The seven Governors, along with a host of economists and support staff, write the policies that ensure financially sound banks and a stable and strong national economy.

Governors actively lead committees that study prevailing economic issues—from affordable housing and consumer banking laws to interstate banking and electronic commerce. The Board of Governors also exercises broad supervisory control over certain state-chartered financial institutions, called member banks, as well as the companies that own banks (bank holding companies). This control ensures that commercial banks operate responsibly and comply with federal regulations and that the nation’s payments system functions smoothly. In addition, the Board of Governors oversees the activities of Reserve Banks, approving the appointments of each Reserve Bank’s president and three members of its board of directors. The Governors’ most important responsibility is participating on the FOMC, the committee that directs the nation’s monetary policy.

Who’s The Boss?

Jerome H. Powell Heading the Board of Governors are a Chairman and Vice Chairman, who are Governors whom the president of the United States appoints to serve four-year terms. The current Chairman of the Board of Governors is Jerome H. Powell. This is a highly visible position.

The Chairman reports twice a year to Congress on the Fed’s monetary policy objectives, testifies before Congress on numerous other issues, and meets periodically with the secretary of the Treasury. Other Board of Governors officials are also called to testify before Congress, and they maintain regular contact with other government organizations as well.

As the Federal Reserve’s centralized component, the seven members of the Board of Governors guide the Federal Reserve’s policy actions, study trends in the economy, and help forecast the country’s future economic direction. The Governors also participate in monetary policymaking on the FOMC. In addition, the Board of Governors is responsible for regulations to keep the banking system sound and for overseeing the operations of the 12 Reserve Banks.

The U.S. Currency

Did you know that Federal Reserve Banks place the currency you use to make purchases into circulation? Each bill has a number and a letter that denote the Federal Reserve Bank that accounts for that particular bill. For example, a bill with the number 8 will have the letter H (the eighth letter in the alphabet), which means it appears on the balance sheet of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.

For the recently redesigned $5, $10, $20, $50, and $100 bills, the letter and number that identify the Federal Reserve Bank are beneath the left serial number on the face of the bill.

Who Owns the Fed

The Federal Reserve Banks are not a part of the federal government, but they exist because of an act of Congress. Their purpose is to serve the public. So is the Fed private or public?

The answer is both. While the Board of Governors is an independent government agency, the Federal Reserve Banks are set up like private corporations. Member banks hold stock in the Federal Reserve Banks and earn dividends. Holding this stock does not carry with it the control and financial interest given to holders of common stock in for-profit organizations. The stock may not be sold or pledged as collateral for loans. Member banks also appoint six of the nine members of each Bank’s board of directors.

Should the Federal Reserve be Abolished

The answers here are provided under the condition that US monetary policy is reformed, and that means that the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 would be repealed, and other new legislature would then specifically outline the steps to be taken with ending the Federal Reserve, or 3rd Central Bank of the U.S.

The Monetary Act, or Monetary Reform Act, could be enacted by Congress, could reform the monetary system in two basic steps:

  1. Abolish the Federal Reserve by repealing the act authorizing it (Fed Act of 1913), which also has illegally contradicted the Constitutional power given to Congress to coin money and control the supply of money.
  2. Authorize the Treasury to print US NOTES, equal to the value of currency also known as “Federal Reserve Notes,” and also as “dollars,” currently in circulation. US Notes would then become “dollars” as the currency.

Pros:

  • Since the amount of money in circulation is roughly equal to the amount of the national debt, the creation of U.S. Notes as a replacement to “Federal Reserve Notes,” would simultaneously eliminate the national debt (approaching $19 trillion).
  • The elimination of the debt would occur without inflation or deflation since the amount of Constitutionally mandated U.S. Notes printed to replace federal reserve notes would be equal, therefore, the money supply as a currency value would not change (hence, no inflation or deflation).
  • The almost $450 billion dollar interest payments on debt also be gone and so tax revenues that are currently wasted to pay interest could actually be used for say, infrastructure, and other expenses which many believe that taxes “pay for” now, except with the existing system, not all the interest can be paid annually. Therefore, all tax revenues go to just paying interest, and more money must be borrowed as deficit spending (borrowing from banks) to pay off just the remaining interest due, and also cover the federal budgets.
  • The US could cut all ties with the International Monetary Fund, The World Bank, The Bank of International Settlements, ending association with some of the institutions that propagate on-going famine and impoverishment throughout the world, and the unethical domination of already-poor countries that accepted “aid” or “relief” during times of crisis, but then found out that it was money lent to them as debt. This leaves the already worst-off in many countries in an even more desperate state because of intentional destabilization and subrogation results when countries do not or can not pay their national debts.
  • The government would be controlled by the will of the people again, and not a group of independent bankers more powerful than the President, and the Congress. The lender is always more powerful than the borrower.
  • People seem to constantly scratch their heads about why, even though we all know that “change” would be good. And why is it that nothing ever does change, or why is it that government doesn’t seem to serve the interests of the people, the voters, but the bureaucratic machine, and what has to be nameless, faceless others? Why is the US in a state of constant warfare? The actual dissolution of the Federal Reserve would make it abundantly more clear, why it would be beneficial to do so.
  • Abolishing the Fed would put the money, provided for the needs of the people, would be back in the hands of the Congress, which is Constitutionally granted, and an illegal system that contradicts the mandates of the Constitution and the spirit of our national laws would finally be ended.

Consider:

-The Bank of England called in their loans on King George III who then took away colonial money (Colonial script) and forced English coinage onto the colonists with increased taxation. This was the major catalyst for the war for independence.

-Thomas Jefferson ended the First Central Bank of the U.S. as they tried to recharter

-The War of 1812, an almost forgotten war, was the result of the U.S. government’s refusal to recharter another central bank.

-Andrew Jackson ended then Second Central Bank of the US. He was shot at by a “lone nutjob” house painter who missed with both pistols.

-Abraham Lincoln printed Greenbacks to fund the Civil War to maintain the union, and that money was highly successful, with some greenbacks in circulation till the 1970s. He was shot and killed by a “lone nutjob,” John Wilkes Boothe.

-James Garfield staunchly claims that he would not allow for the recharter of another central bank in the U.S. He was shot and died of his injuries a week later by “lone nutjob,” Charles Giteau, basically forgotten (See: The Unforgiven, film, Clint Eastwood, won Oscar for Best Picture).

-In 1913, the Third Central Bank of the U.S. is authorized by the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, which promises full employment, and was signed by Woodrow Wilson (duped), while banking proponents and their shills feign opposition to their own Act as if it was a threat to banking interests.

-John F. Kennedy signs an order to authorize Silver Certificates to replace Fed Reserve Notes. Only weeks later, he was shot and killed by a “lone nutjob,” Lee Harvey Oswald.

-Ronald Reagan appears on national television and claims in his address that the Federal Reserve poses the greatest threat to the future of the United States. A couple of weeks later, he was shot by a “lone nutjob,” John Hinkley Jr.

Summary

The secretive Federal Reserve has remained a mystery for more than 100 years. Reading its history above shows at its creation there was a definite need for it to stabilize the U.S. economy. But it has been questioned for a long time as being essential. In fact, its purposes have been continually questioned by many. It seems to simply be an entity to which the United States Government owes huge amounts of interest dollars to simply for printing currency.

That being said, most financial experts will agree that whether or not the Fed remains useful, it is time for the U.S. to get away from fiat currency and back to a currency that is just a representation of the actual hard, tangible assets owned by the U.S. and its citizens — like gold. For many, a dollar bill is just that: a dollar bill that means nothing.

I was in Zurich, Switzerland the day the Swiss shocked the world and held a press conference to announce their termination of a long-standing practice of pegging the value of the Swiss franc to the value of the Euro. Why? Switzerland owned more gold than necessary to back its issued currency notes — francs — with tangible value instead of setting an artifical value pegged to another currency’s value. Though it rocked the world, it stabilized Switzerland’s currency. In today’s economically up-and-down currency markets, having a currency that itself represents a real asset like gold would give that nation’s citizens confidence in their government and its economic policies.

It’s time we do the same thing here in the U.S.

Play

The Word “Racist” is Racist

The most misused word in American social and cultural interactions today is “Racist” — and that in itself is racist.

Think about it: in using the word racist as an adjective, it is defined as “showing or feeling discrimination or prejudice against people of other races, or believing that a particular race is superior to another;” as a noun is defined as “a person who shows or feels discrimination or prejudice against people of other races, or who believes that a particular race is superior to another.” When used as either an adjective or noun, the term “racist” bears a negative connotation in comparison to other people — maybe even to the person using the word.

In its universal use globally, it is actually a curse word, not a name (noun) or description (adjective). And typically the person(s) using it are doing so to demean someone else or some group in particular by comparison to other people or groups. And using it in any circumstance today is a racial act in simply doing so! How so?

The Vacuum

You probably have never thought about that word and how it is used. It is tossed about as slang — just an afterthought. But it is so impactful, we all need to understand it, its origins, and its purposes.

First, it is not a “stand alone.” In fact, it is impossible for a word this powerful to exist in a vacuum. The word “racist” actually describes someone the user wishes to demean with the word. If/when a person chooses to take all that goes along with that “word,” it becomes a cancer. In fact, it is really nothing but an identifier of its source. Racism did not just pop up of the ground at some farm. It does not originate from a workshop or art studio. It was created by men about men centuries ago. In fact it has almost certainly existed since Man’s beginning. Racism is a product cooked up in a cauldron of humanity that periodically simply spills over into the hearts of men. But what is its source?

When our young children have a fever, we naturally run to the medicine cabinet and grab Tylenol or aspirin to give to the child to reduce the fever. The fever is NOT the child’s problem, rather a symptom of a problem: maybe an infection or a virus. But we act like if we rid the fever the problem is gone. Not so. The term “racist” does NOT define the problem — it defines the symptoms OF the problem. What is the problem? Elitism.

In the Beginning…..

There have always been at least two classes of humans since Creation — at least with the creation of Eve. God created Adam who needed someone with him. That was Eve. No sooner had Eve entered the scene, both Adam and Eve realized they were different. Each liked, respected, and accepted SOME of the differences of the other, but not all. Then the personality traits God embedded in each took over. Each felt superior in certain ways to the other, and vice versa. i.e. Adam felt he was smarter and stronger. Eve felt she was smarter and more enlightened about everything in their world. Eve felt superior to Adam and Adam felt superior to Eve. Their justifications for those opinions: “I’m better just because I’m a man,” or “Just because I’m a woman.” That was the beginning of elitism.

We all know how the World population grew then: the same way it grows now. Before too long there were many more people around. With those people came different physical attributes, intelligence levels, skills and talents, and personalities. Without really thinking about it, class and status and labeling automatically became simply part of life. Perceptually everyone developed an opinion of everyone else. Reality of those perceptions very seldom were questioned. After all, “Perception IS Reality.”

Inevitably groups were formed comprised of those with similarities with which others identified: race, intelligence, like and dislikes, spirituality, etc. Inevitably those in some of these groups felt better, smarter, better looking — all those things that represent human differences. Whether accurate or not, many in these groups sought to assume places of social standing based on understanding and rankings of those differences. These were the first elitists.

Since Adam and Eve, Elitists have always existed and have permeated every culture on Earth, and still do. No matter what society or culture they are part of, they find a way to demand status. Social Elitists assume power and authority over all labels for everyone in their lives. Elitists invented the words “racist,” “racism,” and other descriptive words like “homophobe,” “islamaphobe,” “xenophobe,” and all the other slang and demeaning labels we hear for various social groups in our lives. These monikors devised by Elitists are dog whistles for all those who subscribe to elitist mentality. Often as in the case of the words “Racist” and “Racism,” the labels that are created and assigned are NOT the issues. The spirit of Elitism is the issue. Those who embrace Elitism feel empowered to determine worth, value, and status of everyone, including themselves. And in all this, Truth does not matter.

“Racist” and “Racism” are simply words and descriptive phrases that describe emotions held and named by Elitists to use to selectively demean others. And they can be VERY brutal. Elitists are those who invent and maintain all the negative descriptive words used to label and while labeling demean all those who Elitists hate — whether or not their disdain for those they label is based on any real characteristic.

Examples

  1. “Jay, when did you stop beating your wife?” How horrible for Jay to do that! Guess what: Jay DIDN’T BEAT HIS WIFE!
  2. Homophobe. A very common term elitists use for anyone that disagrees with elitist philosophies — about anything! It does not need to be about homosexuality. You may simply be a Conservative and Liberals label you as a homophobe.
  3. Xenophobe. Anyone who disagrees with the concept of open borders, who believes in LEGAL immigration, who joins the push for border enforcement is labelled by elitists as xenophobic. Forget about law, legalities, and illegalities. Disagree with elitists and you get a label.

The examples are endless. Each can be catastrophic. Elitist labels have destroyed marriages, careers, friendships, companies, and kept some good people from politics and run others out of politics.

Summary

Matthew 12:35 puts this in perspective: “A good man brings good things out of the good stored up in him, and an evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in him.”

There are no racists, supremacists, homophobes, xenophobes, islamophobes, alive today. All those that have been labeled as such are just PEOPLE. Sure, some hold views that are angry, hateful, totally emotional without any intellectual basis. But they each are real people with real thoughts, ideas, characteristics, and value. For Elitists to use their dog-whistle labels to point out to fellow elitists an individual or group to attack, is inhumane, sick, and intellectually demeaning.

Guess what: anyone that calls you a racist, IS a racist! For racism is NOT anything on its on. It is created by a heart of elitism to use to attack others by creating a perception in others that the Elitist is more worthy than the one they are compared to.

The Sin is Elitism and the attacks it initiates.

The Elitist goal: “to make others seem and appear to be less valuable and less important than me.”

 

 

 

“Impeach 45!”

Congresswoman Maxine Waters (D-CA) has been on fire since Donald Trump won the White House in 2016. Just 2 weeks after the Trump inauguration, TruthNewsNetwork predicted the cries of “Impeachment” from Democrats would begin, would increase in their fury, and would result in impeachment proceedings in Congress, especially if they could somehow regain the House in 2018. They regained the House, and impeachment proceedings look to be just around the corner!

Wednesday (May 22, 2019) House Democrats had an early morning private meeting the purpose of which was to discuss the merits of the House moving forward with Trump impeachment. Speaker Pelosi has avoided impeachment discussions. One would think she as the House Democrat leader would be out front in any process to discredit the Trump Administration. But she has been VERY hesitant to do so. Why is that?

Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) was in Congress when the Bill Clinton impeachment took place. Republicans were so anxious to impeach former President Bill Clinton that they ignored what they should have learned from the Nixon situation–that the key to getting rid of a President is to have thorough and open hearings before one even gets to the impeachment process so that the President’s goose is already cooked before impeachment proceedings begin. Republicans rushed ahead soon after Kenneth Star published his report—without any open Senate hearings at all. America was doing well at the time, including the American economy, and most Democrats in Congress thought that the charges against Clinton were contrived. Without a sufficient number of Democrats willing to convict Clinton in the Senate, Clinton was not convicted of those perjury charges and never was going to be convicted.

In addition, the American public was so annoyed at the complete waste of time of the Clinton impeachment process that the Democrats actually gained seats during a midterm while having a Democrat as President, only one of two times in modern history that this has ever happened (the two times in modern history occurred in 1998 after Republican’s failed attempt to convict Clinton and in 2002, post 9/11, under George W. Bush).

Do you think Pelosi went to school on Republicans backlash for going after Bill? I’m certain that keyed her hesitance this time. But with the fury that has been unleashed by her “junior” House members — Omar, Talib, and AOC — who are full-speed ahead for impeachment, Pelosi is in a tough spot.

Add to the fury of the youngsters the overreaching of Jerald Nadler (D-NY) who heads the House Judiciary Committee, and Nancy is facing a dilemma. Remember this: Nadler famously claimed numerous times even before the 2018 elections “there is irrefutable proof of Trump wrongdoing, including collusion with Russia,” and the identical claims of Congressmen Adam Schiff (D-CA) and Eric Swalwell (D-CA), Nadler finds himself in the same spot with Pelosi.

To illustrate the House Democrat dilemma and how convinced of impeachment House Dems are, in March of 2019, Swalwell said in MSNBC he’s ready for President Trump to sue him because he refuses to back down from his public assertions that there was evidence of collusion between Trump’s campaign and Russia.

What’s at Stake For Democrats?

Plenty.

There were 13 Democratic-held U.S. House districts up for election in 2018 that Donald Trump won in the 2016 presidential election. Three of the districts flipped, voting in a Republican representative in 2018:

  • Minnesota’s 1st Congressional District
  • Minnesota’s 8th Congressional District
  • Pennsylvania’s 14th Congressional District

All three races were open seats. Minnesota’s 1st Tim Walz successfully ran for governor, while Minnesota’s 8th Rick Nolan did not seek re-election. Conor Lamb (D) successfully ran to represent Pennsylvania’s 17th Congressional District. Lamb had previously won a 2018 special election to replace U.S. Rep. Tim Murphy (R). This increased the number of Trump/Democratic districts in Pennsylvania from one to two. The districts in Pennsylvania were redrawn after the state Supreme Court ruled that the state’s previous congressional map was unconstitutionally gerrymandered to favor Republicans.

The 13 districts voted for Trump by as many as 30.8 percentage points and as few as 0.7 percentage points.

This may seem meaningless, but it really is important. And this may be the fundamental reason for Pelosi’s hesitation to push forward with impeachment. But there’s more.

The U.S. is booming on every financial front: revenue, unemployment, Gross Domestic Product, 5 million off of Food Stamps, more people employed in the U.S. than ever, etc.

These facts should certainly slow any impeachment discussions. What do Democrats have to offer better than this? Quoting that famous Democrat pundit, James Carville, or “Serpent-Head” as his wife termed him during the Clinton years: “It’s the economy, Stupid!”

What’s at Stake for Americans?

Let’s be honest: Americans tire quickly with all of the arguing and finger-pointing in Washington. Depending on which poll numbers one believes, Congressional members approval ratings among Americans is just 15% or less. Why is that?

Congress gets very little done!

Congress is really good at spending taxpayer dollars. But Congress is really slow at getting legislation passed and over to the President for a signature to become law. And that’s what members of Congress are supposed to do! Wouldn’t it be prudent to find out just what American registered voters think about what’s important for our government? We can do that.

In April, FOX News polled 1004 registered voters about what their most important issues are for the 2020 elections. Registered voters’ issues that impact their votes are as follows (most important to least important):

  1. Immigration/illegal immigration, border security wall: 21%
  2. The economy/jobs/unemployment:  10%
  3. Healthcare:  9%
  4. Climate change/Environment:  6%
  5. Race relations/race issues/police:  5%
  6. Guns/gun violence:  4%
  7. Political corruption/leadership:  4%
  8. Lack of unity/Partisanship/Polarization/gridlock:  4%
  9. Education:  4%
  10. Terrorism/National Security/ISIS: 4%
  11. Donald Trump:  3%
  12. Government spending/budget deficit/debt:  3%
  13. Income inequality/disappearing middle class:  3%
  14. Moral decline:  2%
  15. Social Security/Medicare:  2%
  16. Foreign policy/Middle East/nuclear weapons/war:  2%
  17. Crime:  2%
  18. Abortion:  1%
  19. Taxes:  1%
  20. Opioid addiction/Drugs:  1%

As you can see from the results of this poll, Americans are pretty much in lock step with the Trump agenda with maybe one exception: Climate change. But even without that factored in, far more than half of Americans who participated in the poll do not just support Trump’s efforts across the board as President, but strongly support his agenda. And this is the 2020 Democrat nightmare!

I’ve asked this before during the last two years: “What is the Democrat Party platform? What specifics do they plan on bringing to Americans that would support changing the residents at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue next year?” I’m still waiting for good answers. Until Wednesday, I thought there was only one. But it appears that Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer after their Wednesday morning private chit chat with fellow Democrats, they’ve added a second “platform” idea.

“Let’s Do NOTHING!”

That’s right: immediately after their meeting with fellow Democrats, the pair went to the White House to negotiate infrastructure legislation with the President. However, before heading over to the White House, Pelosi spoke to reporters and gave America the Democrats’ “temporary” plan that they are going to use while deciding if there is enough on which to impeach the President. Pelosi spelled it out for us all: stonewall any meaningful legislation in Congress. And there’s one more thing. Listen closely to Pelosi tell reporters what that “one more thing” is:

According to the House Speaker, “The President is involved in a coverup.”

No explanation…no details…but a typical “drive-by shooter” tactic by the Democrats. What Pelosi did was give the messaging arm of the Democrat Party the talking points to be used by all in the upcoming days when speaking of President Trump. Who is that “messaging arm” of the Democrat Party? CNN, MSNBC, ABC News, CBS News, NBC News, Washington Post, and The New York Times — The Mainstream Media.

No surprise here.

Do you know what’s saddest about all this? American confidence in the economy is at a high far above any in recent years. Wages are rising, unemployment is lower than almost ever, federal revenue is higher than ever, we are not in any foreign wars, international credibility in the U.S. is back after 8 years of NONE, our military is getting stronger after being gutted by the Obama Administration, law enforcement agencies and men and women who serve there for the first time in almost a decade feel this president has their backs. And the Democrats want to stop ALL this progress and take us back to the horrors of 2008-2016.

And they want Americans to believe in their plan?

I’ll end here with this: what’s the definition of insanity? “Doing the same things over and over and expecting different results.”

What would be insanity for Americans at this point? Put a Democrat back in the White House for another 8 years of ObamaGate.

NO THANK YOU!

 

Play