Bullet Points August 31, 2019

This is our regular Saturday feature in which we bring you bullet points of the top happenings of the last few days. Feel free to read the short summary. Following each is a link to a complete story expanding the short summary. Feel free to click on the link if you wish more detailed information.

  • Hurricane Dorian is dominating the U.S. news. And by Friday evening, Dorian had thankfully skipped Puerto Rico and set its sights on Florida. It appears that Dorian by the time it enters Florida will be a killer. By Friday mid-morning, most gasoline stations were out of gas, big box stores’ shelves were stripped of water and other hurricane necessities like batteries, flashlights, plywood, waterproof tarps and sandbags. As of this writing, forecasters have mapped three possible paths for Dorian two of which give a large part of Florida a possible escape from the most serious parts of the storm. For more details click this link: https://apnews.com/e923b7f405894d79a7112d8f47f4b4c1
  • In other hurricane news, the Trump Administration announced a couple of days ago the transfer of several hundred million Homeland Security dollars from disaster relief to funding of southern border security necessities. Democrats immediately took to print, internet, and airwaves to excoriate the President for deleting disaster relief funds as Dorian was set to pummel Puerto Rico. Of course the Island territory when hit would need many billions of dollars for relief. In spite of learning Dorian missed Puerto Rico altogether, Democrats ramped up their angry attacks, forgetting that such transfers of money within government agencies is common and that Obama transferred almost twice the amount as Trump in Homeland Security. For more details click this link: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-administration-will-divert-disaster-relief-funds-to-us-mexico-border-enforcement-prompting-outcry-from-democrats/2019/08/27/ba20dd30-c903-11e9-be05-f76ac4ec618c_story.html
  • The stock market has soared under Trump’s deregulation, tax cuts, and increased jobs and low unemployment. Trump opponents have for a while been hoping to see a marked financial downturn to purposely initiate a recession! If that happens they are certain voters would blame Trump allowing them to send a Democrat to the White House in 2020. Financial “experts” point to a little-know “inversion” (that has not even happened) as a sign of certain recession. And, by the way, the stock market made immediate rebounds all week long as a result of “real” news and not fear and innuendo. For more details click this link: https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/stock-market-today-yield-curve-inversion-triggers-recession-fears-2019-8-1028446749
  • Which story do we believe about the G7? If you watch CNN or MSNBC, you will see foreign policy experts tell the stories of how President Trump failed miserably in everything he did in interfacing and negotiating with our G7 partners. FOX News, The Wall Street Journal and other more conservative news outlets while not declaring any victories for President Trump reported on specific things that actually happened at the G7, one of which was an unexpected massive new trade deal with Japan. C-SPAN — a not very conservative news outlet — weighed in here: https://www.c-span.org/video/?463636-1/7-summit-closing-news-conference

IG Comey Report: Damning

In spite of the fact that DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz issued a scathing report of fired FBI Director James Comey’s actions as Director, the insolent Comey took a victory lap or two on Twitter. Millions of Americans were shocked that after such an exhaustive and vile report the Department of Justice stated that even though Horowitz made a referral to the DOJ for a criminal prosecution, the DOJ will not prosecute Comey for any of this.

There are many points worth mentioning today — and we will. But first, please take the liberty of downloading and perusing for yourself the Horowitz Report in total:

https://truthnewsnet.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/423671596.pdf

There are numerous observations that we can make after skimming the lengthy report. Let’s look at a few bullet points:

  • No prosecution. There are several possible explanations for the DOJ declining to indict Comey. First, according to Horowitz, Comey’s sharing memos to the media did not expose classified documents in an unauthorized matter. Prosecuting Comey for those wrongdoings could easily short-circuit possible future prosecution for worse actions (see bullet point below for details). 
  • The “Hillary” factor. 18 U.S. Code 793 (section f) was the law that Comey stated in his press briefing in which he exonerated Hillary Clinton for mishandling classified information was violate by Comey himself! It is called the “Gross Negligence” clause in criminal law referencing control of government documents:     “(f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, codebook, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer, Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.” This is the exact clause referenced in his original notes regarding the Clinton affair in which he edited two words — “gross negligence” — about her handling government communications. Why? Gross negligence is a felony! His exoneration of Hillary meant he had to change the verbiage to NOT indict her.
  • The DOJ. Here is what most legal experts feel is the DOJ reasoning for not prosecuting Comey for these infractions. Horowitz is still to release his report on FISA misdeeds which probably will be more critical to Comey since he signed the first of those launching the Trump investigation of Russian Collusion. Each FISA warrant renewal (and the original) used as a fundamental basis the Steele Dossier which has never been proven to contain truthful information. It has been discovered that Comey misrepresented in the signed FISA that it had been verified when he knew for certain it did not. That in itself would be a felony for swearing in a signed application that information contained had all been verified as an accurate representation of the facts.
  • Comey’s public testimony subsequent to his firing, his several Congressional hearings in which his testimony was in conflict with other testimony he gave as well as that of Andrew McCabe led most to believe he was covering for someone, some group, or himself. He dug a hole with those conflicts. This report did nothing to lead anyone to believe he was an innocent party to wrongdoing in the FBI and Special Counsel’s investigations. But most glaring were his tweets posted immediately after the release of the Horowitz report:

DOJ IG “found no evidence that Comey or his attorneys released any of the classified information contained in any of the memos to members of the media.” I don’t need a public apology from those who defamed me, but a quick message with a “sorry we lied about you” would be nice.

His second tweet:

And to all those who’ve spent two years talking about me “going to jail” or being a “liar and a leaker”—ask yourselves why you still trust people who gave you bad info for so long, including the president.

The Department of Justice Dilemma

It is common practice for a new Justice Department with a new Attorney General in a new administration to walk slowly about prosecuting any members of the outgoing administration. It has happened in U.S. history, but only rarely and only in the cases of egregious wrongdoing of members of the outgoing administration. Attorney General William Barr is at best in a tenuous situation in looking at any wrongdoing of the Obama Administration. Wisely he handed off the DOJ “look-see” for Obama folks’ possible criminal activities to Inspector General Horowitz and Connecticut Federal Prosecutor John Durham. Barr in doing so put some distance between the investigations and his direct staff to thwart the certainty of cries from the Left should any criminal activities be uncovered that would result in criminal referrals. Durham is deep into his investigation as is IG Horowitz in the more expansive investigation of ALL DOJ occurrences regarding the Russia/Trump investigation: FISA warrants that actually started the surveillance process of the Trump Campaign, and subsequent actions by the DOJ and Mueller’s team.

There is plenty more to come in upcoming days as Horowitz wraps up Part 2 of his DOJ/FBI investigation. And no one knows how deep into this matter is Durham. But plenty of issues have been unearthed that are dramatic, telling, and startling about the Obama Department of Justice and the way it operated. Comey’s actions were just the tip of the iceberg.

The fact that an environment could even exist as was obvious in the Obama DOJ and FBI is frightening. That those folks involved created and perpetrated an atmosphere that was lawless, political, and full of people driven not by the enforcement of U.S. laws and legitimately seeking out those who broke those laws, but driven by their own personal and political agendas is unfathomable. And fired FBI Director Comey illustrated some of that disdain for honesty, the rule of law, and the American people in his two tweets shown above that he published just minutes after today’s release by Horowitz. Yes, it is true that the DOJ declined to prosecute him for these infractions. But Comey proved what we at TruthNewsNetwork have felt for almost three years — that Comey is simply a politically partisan hack dead-set from the beginning to take Donald Trump out. And he was nearly successful.

What’s scariest is that not only did Comey skate from possible legal action for these wrongdoings, he is escaping prosecution for the same infractions for which he excused Hillary Clinton! Think about it: a former U.S. Senator, then Secretary of State, then almost elected president of the United States got off scot-free as did those in her campaign who Comey gave unilateral immunity for any of their wrongdoing — all of any wrongdoing even before they were sworn and testified!  By the way, none of them were sworn for any personal testimony, including Hillary. Comey stated her’s was “an interview.”

How does this happen in the Department of Justice in the greatest country on Earth? Will it happen again? And, more importantly, why does the U.S. DOJ let the likes of Hillary and Comey walk away with no accountability for the same actions committed innocently by a U.S. sailor who was thrown in jail?

Don’t forget: General David Petraeus lost his career because a woman with whom he was having an affair was given a file with government information. Petraeus agreed to that to keep from going to prison. Yet Comey lied and lied some more, leaked government information to the press, let Hillary and her staff get away with malfeasance and criminal acts in the dozens, and feels patriotic for doing so.

What has the U.S. government come to? What needs to be done? Can anything be done?

In our summary below, we share some final thoughts. But before that, Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) had some thoughts to share to FOX News today immediately following the Horrowitz report release:

Think about General Michael Flynn who is about to be sentenced for misrepresenting the truth to the FBI. Have you heard how that happened? Comey actually bragged about it publicly! Comey said that normally the FBI to interview any White House staff member they must negotiate all the terrms and conditions of such an interview, sometimes for months. He decided to simply send a couple of agents to the White House to interview Flynn. Flynn agreed and talked with them. Even though those FBI agents knew Flynn should have a personal lawyer there for the interview, they did not tell Flynn that! Flynn thought it was just a conversation. Contents of that conversation is what Flynn is facing jail for. He lost his home and all of his retirement just to pay his legal bills for this charade perpetrated by Comey.

The statement about the Horowitz report says it better than anyone else could:

 

James Comey is a proven liar and leaker.  The Inspector General’s report shows Comey violated the most basic obligations of confidentiality that he owed to the United States Government and to the American people, “in order to achieve a personally desired outcome.” Because Comey shamefully leaked information to the press—in blatant violation of FBI policies—the Nation was forced to endure the baseless politically motivated, two-year witch hunt.  Comey disgraced himself and his office to further a personal political agenda, and this report further confirms that fact.

Is there no justice in the Department of Justice?

Wake up, America. The Deep State is REAL!

Play

Dems Quiet: What are They Up To?

It’s quiet in D.C.: not just because members of Congress are home on vacation or campaigning. It’s quiet because other Democrats are in their bunkers mapping out battle plans.

No, I’m not speaking of Democrats that are running for president. I’m speaking of Democrat “worker-bees” who are deep into preparations for impeachment. Yes, Donald Trump’s impeachment is front-and-center again for the Democrat Party. They’re not just talking about those plans: yet. When will they go public with their latest Trump conspiracy allegations? Not until the time is perfect and the political landscape is ripe.

Make no mistake: one of the greatest political success stories in Washington D.C. is how united and on-message members of the Democrat Party have become. They may have varying opinions in politics while campaigning. But when it’s time to draw swords and wade into battle with Republicans, no one in political history has ever been so accomplished as is this Democrat Party. Not only are they (on the most part) young and energetic, they always stick together — especially once a common foe is identified. Enter Donald Trump — their foe.

Before we detail the angst Democrats hold against Mr. Trump, let’s talk about Democrat leadership.

Democrat Party Bosses

In this battle to get rid of Donald Trump, House and Senate Democrat leaders are the obvious ones to lead the charge to battle. But have you noticed that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer have pretty much disappeared? These two are always in any Democrat/G.O.P. war on point at least in front of television cameras detailing the unified Democrat attack plan. Neither has showed-up anywhere of late. What’s that all about?

We’ll probably know that answer very shortly. Both the House and Senate have been on staggered summer vacations and will be back in session soon. You can bet the Trump attack will escalate to deafening levels.

Meanwhile, the communications arm of the Democrat Party — the Media — are in full swing in their unified Trump attacks. Have you heard the latest? Trump is mentally deranged and a mental danger to us all!

CNN and MSNBC hosts have gone crazy themselves the last two days pointing out numerous examples of Trump’s “losing it.” But their memories are short or they think ours’ is. Just a little over a year ago the same media pundits spent many hours drawing examples of proof of Trump’s mental issues then. I guess his intelligence and mental prowess quickly jumped for a bit. But, he’s lost it again!

Donald Trump

They hate him. Why? Their plans for the White House were dependent on the blonde from New York living there. When Hillary Clinton fell short in her bid for the presidency, the party fell short of finding the missing critical elements necessary for their liberal government takeover attempt. Hillary just screwed things up.

But what made their failure even more damning was the HRC loss to the orange-hair mogul from Queens. His beat-down of the odds-on favorite Hillary Clinton left not just egg on her face, it lit the fires of hatred that are driving Democrats to a frenzied pace to put whatever elements are necessary to drive Trump back to real estate in New York.

First they put Comey and Company on the task of framing Trump et al for Russian election collusion. There was no evidence there. Then it was obstruction of justice. Nope, he’s clean. Then the fall-back was racism — something they knew they did not have to prove was real. Painting the perception of racism of the President and members of his campaign would be sufficient to drive him from office. That didn’t work either.

What’s next? The “Trump” card (pun intended) is the big “I” word: Impeachment.

Wait: it was proven there was no election tampering and no obstruction of justice by Trump or members of his campaign. On what basis is there any provable actions by Mr. Trump that rise to “high crimes and misdemeanors,” what is necessary to successfully impeach a president? None come to mind. But having solid and real actions by Mr. Trump that rise to that threshold is NOT necessary. Democrats are in luck!

It dawned on some bigshot Democrat that no actual evidence of presidential wrongdoing is necessary for impeachment. It’s the old “symbolism over substance” concept. No smoking gun or formal testimony riddled with holes and/or innuendo is necessary. All that is necessary is “reasonably believable” evidence of high crimes and misdemeanors to impeach a president. And even though no such evidence has appeared, you can bet they have something more than just “in mind,” they have it ready to roll into witness subpoenas.

Gerald Nadler (D-NY)

I should apologize here. I caste Rep. Nadler some time ago as nothing more than just a Congressional professional or, in Southern terms, an “empty suit.” After all, he never practiced law after passing the Bar. He’s been nothing in his professional career but a politician. There are two strikes against Nadler: 1 is as a lawyer. Secondly is law school. I’m certain Nadler has financial backing to send him to great colleges from which he was put in the perfect spot for a political career. And that’s exactly what happened to him.

Nadler revels in his chairmanship of the House Judiciary Committee. It probably (in this political environment at least) is the most powerful House committee. It’s where any impeachment action must be initiated. And Nadler has made it abundantly clear for over a year that President Trump’s illegal actions that cry for Congressional impeachment are well documented. In his words, “They’re in plain sight.” But try as they have, no one in the media or fellow Congressional member can get from Nadler exactly what things that evidence justifying impeachment includes.

Trump impeachment is now something that two-thirds of Americans do not think is warranted. Democrats should do a bit of historical research on this one. Republicans by most accounts lost their bid to upset Clinton in 2002 because they so aggressively pushed through impeachment proceedings against Clinton when Americans in large were against it. Americans have long memories when it comes to politics.

Word leaked yesterday that it is apparent that Nadler’s committee had already begun preliminary impeachment research even before the Mueller Report was completed and released. This apparently happened even though Nadler on numerous occasions claimed that nothing regarding impeachment has been initiated.

Pelosi and Schumer have both publicly stated they favor “at this point” not impeaching President Trump. However, both made it clear that “if” findings indicate there are grounds of high crimes and misdemeanors as required by the Constitution, they would emphatically support impeachment.

Wait a minute? 2.5 years, $30 million taxpayer dollars, thousands of subpoenas, millions of pages of evidence, hundreds of sworn testimony, and no evidence of Trump wrongdoing and they still “have evidence” of Trump’s impeachable actions? If they do, Trump needs to face the music as should all guilty of government wrongdoing. But if Nadler’s wish it for truth in the matter, and if as he says there is absolute evidence of impeachable offenses, why hasn’t that evidence been brought forward to substantiate impeachment proceedings and a trial in the Senate? The only reason for that is there must be no evidence that supports impeachment!

Summary

Let’s be frank: doesn’t Congress have a plethora of legislative issues that should be handled instead of chasing another impeachment rabbit for two years? I can think of a few: immigration law, federal law enforcement, illegal drug epidemic, government spending, foreign trade, corruption in government, etc. Why should we expect Congress to act on any of this? Simple: because that’s what elected members of Congress are elected to do!

Let me remind you of this: I predicted some time ago on this website that President Trump will be the subject of impeachment proceedings in the House. And the House possibly can harvest enough votes to get an impeachment finding sent to the Senate to hold an impeachment trial. I doubt if that happens there will be any impeachment success. But that really is not critical to Democrats. All they care about is holding questions of Trump wrongdoing up in the air to get them to the 2020 elections. Maybe then enough Americans will have that question about Trump in their minds to entice them to vote for a Democrat presidential candidate. Remember: they desperately feel the sense of urgency to hold the House, retake the Senate, and, of course, the White House.

Many on the Right are tempted to write Democrats off as being in chaos. Don’t get caught-up in that reasoning. In my lifetime no political party has ever been as adept as these Democrats at unifying around a common foe, getting on the same page from which to campaign, and their unification of vitriol for a president. Democrats are really good at messaging — much better than Republicans. And if they stay their course, they may upset Trump in 2020.

But here’s the catch: they have no good options to put before Americans! The closest they can come in a palatable Democrat they can run to beat Trump is Vice President Biden. And he’s a lost cause.

Face it: the 2020 White House bid is as of now pretty much a sure thing for Trump, “if” he doesn’t do anything really stupid or nothing serious from his past shows up. And even then, there may be enough Americans who have watched the amazingly wonderful accomplishments made by this White House.

Thanks for looking in.

Share your thoughts! America depends on it.

“Medicare for All:” Where Are the Details?

Why haven’t any of the nearly two-dozen Democrat presidential candidates who are daily screaming on the campaign trail about the absolute necessity of “Medicare for All” given us a PowerPoint presentation showing exactly what we will get with their single-payer program? More importantly, why haven’t they used that same PowerPoint presentation to show us exactly what it will cost and how we will pay for it? The answers are simple: “The Government will pay!” Sure…

We found out a long time ago when a person already in office (and especially one already in office who wishes to remain in office) promises one of the myriads of government goodies we’ll all receive if they remain-in or get voted-into office never gives us any of the details because they don’t want us to know the details! That certainly is the case with Medicare for All. But guess what: we have the proof of what Medicare for All as proposed already in Congress will include. Wanna see? Straight from the horse’s mouth:

Single-Payer/Medicare for All Details

First, and probably most important is that it would wipe the healthcare payer slate clean and create an entirely new program of funding healthcare.

If it became law, Sen. Bernie Sanders’ bill would move 325 million Americans into a new health insurance program. Gone would be Medicaid, Medicare (as we know it), private coverage like Blue Cross and employer-sponsored insurance.

Currently about 74 million people on Medicaid (23 percent of people covered in the U.S.) are using healthcare, and the doctors and hospitals caring for them are losing lots of money. It’s not unusual for a medical provider to lose between 22 and 40 cents on each dollar’s worth of care they deliver to the 74 million people on Medicaid. If we moved the entire country to Medicaid payment levels, we would expect a lot of medical capacity to disappear, virtually overnight. And you can imagine the effect that would have on safety, quality and accessibility.

A Medicaid for all plan would be impossible because of cost for services to implement. Why? With reimbursement levels so low, even decent healthcare providers would run from that profession. We’d have to find another plan that might be more palatable to the industry.

Replacing these payers would require a single government entity that we would all be enrolled into (no choice about it) and is designed to replace our current healthcare experience with a risk-free, premium-free, deductible-free, copayment free, co-insurance free, out-of-pocket cost-free experience. In this proposed system referred to as “Medicare For All” you could access healthcare whenever you want without paying a dime.

So it we really wipe the healthcare cost slate clean as well except for those paid in total or in part by the government. It would mean the federal healthcare entity that would be charged with operating Medicare for All would have to find $3 trillion dollars for year one of the program and that amount would increase slightly each year going forward. Where would that $3 trillion come from? From government revenue paid to the government in taxes. So how are the current dollars spent on healthcare costs distributed between government, private insurance, and self-pay?

  • Private insurance premiums paid by individuals, families, and employers pay all the medical costs for those insured plus 31%. That 31% goes to partially fund Medicare and Medicaid costs.
  • Medicare employee and employer payroll deductions pay for 89% of providers costs.
  • Medicaid provider costs are 100% paid by federal and state governments.

It is important to note that only 9% of uninsured patient bills ever get paid, which means providers are required to underwrite 91% of those costs. These number seem pretty bleak and comprise a mighty hill that must be climbed in this healthcare finance debate. Maybe that’s why none of the candidates are talking about these details!

How Do We Pay For Medicare for All?

Know this for certain: there’s a reason none of the candidates have in any way broached on this subject during campaigning. No matter what solution is offered, its reality is horrible for American taxpayers.

If private insurance were removed, then all that money you are paying in premiums, deductibles, co- pays, coinsurance and max out-of-pocket costs would have to be converted into taxes so the federal government can keep healthcare going for all 325 million of us. All the money will become a tax — on you, on your boss and on every transaction you ever make. You could end up buying healthcare every time you buy anything else. And you can forget about the massive pre-tax benefits everyone who gets healthcare from their job enjoys today. That’s $250 billion a year that you and your employer save in taxes now that would also be converted into taxes and collected.

Who reading this today relishes the thought of us paying the federal government to not only fund but to manage our entire healthcare system? I shudder to think that would ever happen. I don’t know of a single entity on Earth more inept and more corrupt in handling tax dollars AND managing any operational processes than the federal government! As you contemplate the federal government running all of healthcare, factor into your thinking these quotes from a report by the Government Accountability Office on our existing government-funded healthcare, just so you can see how their OWN scorekeepers think they are doing today:

On Medicaid:

“With estimated improper payments totaling more than $36 billion (9% leakage) in federal dollars in fiscal year 2016, CMS needs to improve the effectiveness of its program integrity efforts to help identify and prevent improper payments, such as payments for non-covered services or services that were billed for but never provided.”

On Medicare:

“…it is clear that fraud contributes to Medicare’s fiscal problems. More broadly, in fiscal year 2013, CMS estimated that improper payments… were almost $50 billion (9% leakage).”

Summary

Here’s what NO one is talking about: we do NOT need to replace or even repair our “healthcare.” What needs to be tweaked is our “healthcare funding system,” leaving actual healthcare alone. By messing with the structure of the entire system will almost immediately destroy the amazing healthcare in the U.S.

So what can we do? What should we do?

We published a detailed plan in two parts titled “The ONLY Fix for Healthcare that will Work” in two parts on July 19 and July 20, 2017. I encourage you to take a few minutes and go back and read these.

In short, it’s certainly time now for these Democrat candidates to explain details of this concept as well as the concepts floated for the “Green New Deal” and free college tuition as well as government paying for all outstanding college debt. The candidates should never e too busy to explain details on anything and everything they promise.

There are some that will cringe when I say this: Donald Trump from his campaign promises has delivered more in his first two years in office than has any other president in U.S. history. That still gives no pass to him or any other 2020 candidate from giving Americans details of their proposals.

One thing we are slammed with by these single payer proponents is “It works in Scandinavia, so why can’t it work here?” Denmark is their “poster” system for single payer healthcare and overall socialism to which they point. While you’re considering all this, consider this about Denmark:

A school teacher in Denmark makes about $61,000 a year.  In Denmark all education is free.  Doctors and hospitals are free to use and students get paid to learn.  

Denmark’s minimum income tax rate is 40%.  National sales tax there is 25% plus there are government assessed duties and fees.  Gasoline is $10 a gallon.  The purchase of a car is taxed by the government at 180% of the selling price.  A car that sells for $20,000 in the U.S. costs $40,000 in Denmark.

Denmark is the highest taxed nation in the World — taxed an average of 80% of every dollar earned.  Danes have the highest personal debt in the World.  Few own cars or homes.  Anyone who makes over $80,000 a year pays a personal tax of 68%.  Most Danes with higher earning have either found ways to evade the tax or have left the Country, taking companies they own with them.

Denmark’s suicide rate for the past 5 decades has averaged 20.8 per 100,000 people, with a highest rate of 32.  The American suicide rate has averaged 11.1 during the same 5 decades and has never exceeded 12.7.  More than 11% of adult Danes — supposedly the happiest people in the World — are on antidepressants.  Everyone wants the American dream.  In Denmark’s Neo-communist economy, no one will ever own or accomplish anything.

”’Medicare for all’ is not Socialism. We’re just talking about healthcare now,” they respond. Honestly, one requires the other to even have a glimmer of a chance to work.

In their world, $100,000 in income from a job means you get to keep $10,000: that $800 a month.

I’m not ready for that. Are you?

Trump: Most Honest President Ever?

There are hundreds of articles that have been written and published illustrating just how big a liar is this President. In fact, national periodicals like Newsweek and USA Today have published lists of Donald Trump’s lies. In fact, doing so has become something of a cottage industry. People just want to prove just how evil this guy is and in doing so prove to Americans that no guy like this should be in the White House. After all, America is better than that and therefore is better than Donald Trump. Take a look/listen to several examples:

Don’t get me wrong, I don’t like lies of any kind. After all, a lie is a lie. There’s no such thing as “a little white lie.” A lie is as much an absolute as is a truth. It’s simple: a woman can’t be “kind of” pregnant. Pregnancy like truth and lies is absolute.

But in the understanding of the current White House resident, it is important to know that while Donald Trump stretches the truth and may even as his opponents shout, tell an occasional lie. But here’s something that two years into his first term in office has become fairly clear: Donald Trump may be remembered as the most honest president in modern American history. That seems like a direct conflict with info in the previous paragraph. But there’s more than just what’s in the headlines.

It is true: Trump lies quite a bit. He said that he “enacted the biggest tax cuts and reforms in American history” (actually they are the eighth largest) and that “our economy is the strongest it’s ever been in the history of our country” (which may one day be true, but not yet). In part, it’s a New York thing — everything is the biggest and the best.

But when it comes to the real measure of presidential truthfulness — keeping his promises — Trump is a paragon of honesty. For better or worse, since taking office Trump has done exactly what he promised he would.

  • Trump kept his promise to move the U.S. Embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, something his three immediate predecessors also promised yet failed to do. He promised to “crush and destroy ISIS,” and two years later he is on the verge of eliminating the Islamic State’s physical caliphate. He promised to impose a travel ban on countries that he saw as posing a terrorist threat, and after several false starts, the final version of his ban was upheld by the Supreme Court. He promised to punish Syria if it used chemical weapons on its people, and, unlike his immediate predecessor, he followed through — not once but twice.
  • Trump pledged to nominate Supreme Court justices “in the mold of Justice [Antonin] Scalia,” and now Neil M. Gorsuch and Brett M. Kavanaugh sit on the high court. Trump also pledged to fill the federal courts with young, conservative judges, and so far the Senate has confirmed 146 — more than any recent president at this point in his administration.
  • Trump vowed to pass historic tax reforms and signed the first major overhaul of the tax code in three decades. He vowed an unprecedented regulatory rollback, with a strict policy to eliminate two existing regulations for every new regulation. In his first year, he achieved $8.1 billion in lifetime regulatory savings and achieved an additional $9.8 billion in his second year.
  • During the campaign, he told African American voters, “What do you have to lose? . . . I will straighten it out. I’ll bring jobs back. We’ll bring spirit back.” On his watch, African American unemployment reached the lowest level ever recorded, and his tax reform included a little-noticed provision creating “Opportunity Zones” to try to revitalize struggling towns and inner-city communities.
  • Trump promised to cancel President Barack Obama’s Clean Power Plan, withdraw from the Paris climate accord, approve the Keystone XL and Dakota Access pipelines, and open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil exploration. He fulfilled all of those pledges.
  • On trade, he kept his promise to withdraw from the Trans-Pacific Partnership and impose tariffs on steel and aluminum.
  • He also committed to renegotiating NAFTA and the U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement — and recently signed new deals with Mexico, Canada, and South Korea.
  • He committed to imposing tariffs on China to force it to open its markets and stop its theft of intellectual property — and is following through on that pledge. Whatever one thinks of Trump’s trade policies, he is doing exactly what he said.
  • The president pledged historic increases in defense spending and delivered.
  • He pledged to bring back manufacturing jobs, and manufacturing jobs are growing at the fastest pace in more than two decades.
  • He pledged to sign “Right to Try” legislation to give dying Americans access to experimental treatments, and did.
  • He pledged to take on the opioid epidemic and  signed a sweeping bipartisan opioids package into law.

Where Trump has failed to keep promises, such as building the wall or repealing Obamacare, it has not been for a lack of trying. Only in a few rare instances has he backtracked on a campaign pledge — such as when he admitted that he was wrong to promise a complete withdrawal of U.S. forces from Afghanistan and reversed course. I’m glad he did.

But whether one agrees or disagrees is not the point. When Trump says he will do something, you can take it to the bank. Yes, he takes liberties with the truth. But unlike his predecessor, he did not pass his signature legislative achievement on the basis of a lie (“If you like your health care plan, you can keep it ”) — which is clearly worse than falsely bragging that your tax cut is the biggest ever.

The fact is, in his first two years, Trump compiled a remarkable record of presidential promise-keeping. He’d probably say it’s the best in history — which may or may not end up being true. It’s too soon to tell.

Summary

I haven’t kept a scorecard and I don’t have a “Trump-o-meter” to record any Trump untruths. Does he lie? I’m sure he does. Does he “embellish?” Absolutely. But one thing you need to consider: sometimes (and pretty often) he says things to simply drive the Media nuts! As you know, he cannot stand the mainstream media and the way they operate. He knows that no matter what he says they will demonize him for not being truthful. He loves to divert them by “throwing them a bone” every now and then to simply keep them lathered in their certain daily nastiness toward him and all those in his life. Why would he do that? He knows that if he keeps their attention, they will spend time and newspaper ink assaulting him and not others in his administration and his family. Besides that, he certainly gets a regular chuckle at their expense knowing that he got ‘em!

Try as they have and will, they have been unsuccessful in bringing him down! How is that? These — who are representatives of the elitists in every sector of American life — have not succeeded in even scratching his crusty exterior. And every time they attack him, he lobs a grenade right back at them. And his doing that further enrages them.

Will he be remembered in history as “the most President ever?” Who knows. Often in politics truth is NOT an absolute. Even saying that is preposterous. Believing it as I do is unfathomable.

While Donald Trump may not be the most truthful American president, there’s a really good shot at his American presidential legacy may be that of the most successful American president.

I can hear them gnashing their teeth. After all, it’s not fair: the Media hold an exclusive on making any president successful. The Donald is NOT their choice.

Let Me Build It

A few years ago it seemed like every half-hour a television commercial appeared that told us how unsafe and messed up the foundations were on our houses. This company was THE expert on taking care of all foundation problems, making them good as new.

I never understood why so many foundations were obviously inadequate or inferior. It wasn’t for several years that I learned in the region in which I lived, pretty much all the soil was fairly shallow. Directly beneath the topsoil was clay — plain old red and slippery clay. And that clay was ten to fifteen feet deep. And clay is NOT supportive of anything — especially concrete. Therefore, concrete foundations — which are the staple of most homes in Louisiana — were susceptible to failing structurally because of the poor sub-foundation of clay.

But what’s the big deal of a few cracks from a shifting or settling foundation? The house is built on top of it so no one will ever see those cracks. Unfortunately, when a foundation cracks and settles, so do walls, and ceilings, and floors. Poor foundations directly impact the entirety of the house — even those parts that never directly touch the foundation. 

It doesn’t matter what we build, for it to be strong and last, it’s got to have as its start a good foundation — one that is firm, stable, and adequate to support what is built on top of it, and free of breaches and cracks. 

Foundations are really important: for everything on which we plan to build — even countries.

The United States of America

It’s a pretty safe bet that the U.S. needed (and received) pretty substantial foundation when its construction was initiated. How else could it still be the greatest and strongest nation on Earth 250 years after it was built? That speaks well for the foundation that has held this “building” intact for so long. But let’s not kid ourselves: the foundation of the U.S. has developed a few cracks. I doubt the cracks are products of foundation settling — the foundation was anchored not by clay, but by impenetrable rock. The cracks that are showing up are coming from above — from things that are weakening the foundation from the top. Let’s think through together what are some of those things cracking the foundation of the nation.

  • Creation and Perpetuation of Class. People always have been different. And the U.S. has been known for two centuries as the “Melting Pot” —  the country where people of all races, ethnicities, religions, and political perspectives are not just allowed but are welcome. Early Americans certainly recognized the differences in people. No, there never has been any legal requirement for one group of Americans to treat others a certain way. But our forefathers purposely made equality and fairness a critical and key element of our foundation. They ran from inequality and class that permeated Europe from which they fled. Today, however political elitists have picked up that class establishment mantra of the Europeans. And those elitists have grabbed the exclusive right to determine which classes of people there are, who are included in each class, and the rules and permissions for all those within each class. Elitists — primarily Democrats — have long prided themselves in having the corner on diversity and acceptance of all. They have made a 180-degree turn on that policy. This abrupt about-face in their policy created the first crack in the U.S. foundation and is one that will be difficult from which to recover.
  • The Rule of Law. Forget about it. One key reason for early settlers rush to leave Europe was to establish somewhere a new country in which government could and would be required to provide equal justice for all. They had for generations been victimized by a top-down legal system that was established and maintained by and for elitists on the backs of everyday citizens. Often those who enforced those laws arbitrarily chose to enforce or ignore enforcement, enforce them in ways contrary to what those laws stated, and often simply ignored some at will. In each case, enforcement or lack of enforcement were arbitrarily determined by elites. The European practice of authorities ignoring existing laws has found its way into American life. Both civil and criminal justice systems in the U.S. definitely favor those Americans who are politically connected at the expense of those who are poor and middle-class citizens. It’s sad to say this, but in my state of Louisiana, it is reasonable to say that if one has good political connections, it is possible to escape prosecution for murder! It may cost a significant amount of money, but it is VERY possible. The drastic changes in the rule of law have resulted in dramatic cracks in the nation’s foundation.
  • Truth and Journalistic Integrity. There’s no better way to describe this than to simply say: Journalistic integrity in the U.S. is GONE. The lines between news and gossip have been virtually obliterated. When American read, watch or listen to the “news,” they must step back from what they are seeing and hearing to make a determination of which of it if any is true. It is unfathomable to think this could ever happen in the U.S. For any country to be free, fair, with a government controlled by the people, communication between all members of that society MUST be honest at all times. However, today’s media have for the most part gone all-in on political perspective in reporting. Seldom are news stories anything other than editorial perspective. Editorial perspective IS important, but just to present alternate ideas about issues. Presenting those perspectives as realities that all should automatically believe are factual is dangerous. And the media doing so is severely cracking the nation’s foundation. News is so important as truth for citizens, our forefathers included in the Constitution a guarantee by the government that there will always be the ability for all to present facts AND opinions freely in the press. The difference today? Media are negligent in differentiating for Americans what is truthful and what is an opinion. Blurring what is presented in the media is an all-out attack against the tenets of truth in Journalism that are critical elements of our foundation.
  • Representative Republic. Yes, that’s what our government in D.C. is supposed to be and how we are supposed to be governed. That IS the way it was established. But through 200 years, it has morphed into being a group of lawmakers who do far more than just make laws — they “govern” us, picking and choosing how to govern often outside the principles and processes set by our forefathers. And they have the authority to do so. Where did that authority come from? They are our lawmakers; they make and change laws, rules, and regulations controlled by our government. We choose who they are going to be. What they do is regulated somewhat by the Constitution and existing laws. But they in Congress have unilateral power to change them if they don’t agree with them or to simply ignore them — which is most often what they do. Don’t get me wrong: members of Congress are certainly on the most part operating constitutionally in their legislative actions. But functioning 100% in the direct fulfillment of the wishes of their constituents simply does not exist. They have the legal ability to legislate however they choose once they take office. So they do! Often their doing so has little or nothing to do with their campaign promises. And if legal, there’s nothing constituents can do about it until the next election. So they have unfettered power in legislation for at least two years for members of the House of Representatives, six years for Senators. Personal enhancement in place of enhancement for the districts and states they represent is fairly common. How do I know that? Very few members of both Congressional chambers leave office not significantly more well-off than they were when they first took office. It’s a fact! That ability and the fact that they so readily take personal advantage of their political power has severely impacted the strength and voracity of the nation’s foundation.

Summary

We could tire you by continuing to illustrate the deficiencies in America’s foundation. Every day its weaknesses grow from these attacks and others. How long we can continue without a major overhaul is unknown. It’s true that historically most countries have disappeared because of weak foundations. Two hundred years has been the benchmark for successful countries to hit before imploding. We’re fifty years beyond that mark. Can we somehow right this ship before it’s too late? Fortunately, we as voters have the ability to take action — with our votes.

Louisiana’s current governor one year before being elected visited me with his wife at my office. We talked for over an hour. John Bel Edwards is a Democrat Party rising star: he gave the nomination speech for Barack Obama at the Democrat Party convention before the 2012 election. He is a dynamic speaker as is Obama. But in that speech and in my office he stated things and made promises that he has ignored. His doing so apparently is not a problem for him. Why? That’s what politics are about! “Saying what you mean and meaning what you say” apparently no longer have life in our political system. But they ARE effective at destroying the foundation of our country.

It matters not if Democrat or Republican, Americans need to hold our elected officials accountable — especially for those specific issues detailed above. But I challenge you to find some others for yourself. To repair our foundation and stop future attacks on it, educating ourselves on truth is critical. It’ll be a hard task, but we’re up to that task. We owe it to our children and grandchildren. But we owe it to each other and we need to pay that price TODAY.

A Democrat 2020 Win = Armageddon

This is NOT a “scare-everybody story.” This is a “wake-up” story. There are many American fundamentals on the line in the upcoming 2020 election. I’m sad to say very few Americans know what’s at stake. What IS at stake? The very structure of the United States of America! First, let’s look at those structural elements of the U.S. that are already under fire. Then we’ll discuss what those changes if implemented will do to usher in Armageddon.

“Armageddon” is defined as the site or time of a final and conclusive battle between the forces of good and evil. Mine is a pretty dire prediction. While I believe there will really be a spiritual Armageddon initiated by God against Satan to end life as we know it, I believe the U.S. is facing one today — yes, life as we know it in the United States. How soon we could see it is yet to be determined. Who will initiate it? Political zealots who are bent on the destruction of the historical America that has brought us to where we are today. Who are these zealots? Political far leftists that comprise in part today’s Democrat Party.

I know: it “takes two to Tango.” No doubt the war in which we’re living is full of participants, many of whom do not pledge allegiance to the Democrat Party donkey OR the Republican elephant. There are many options and many different participants. But there are very specific indicators who point to crazed Democrat zealots who are incensed that they do not have leadership in America. And, yes, that stems primarily from the circumstances in 2016 that put Donald Trump instead of Hillary Clinton in the White House.

When John McCain lost his bid for president in 2008, there certainly were tens of millions of American voters who thought he was a certain winner. The same held true in 2012 when Mitt Romney could not eliminate a second Obama four years in the White House. But in neither election aftermath did Obama opponents take to the streets in anger and actual hatred for the election winner. With the Trump victory, left-leaning zealots immediately began demonstrations that included physical threats for the president and his family. Singer Madonna even at a rally cried she was even thinking about blowing up the White House. Actor Johnny Depp even commented in a public gathering that it had been a long time since a presidential assassination. He quipped that it may be time for that today.

Those may seem quite benign, just blowing off steam and sadness for seeing their favorite candidate handed a surprising election loss. But that’s just the tip of an iceberg. Beneath those antagonistic rallies across the nation lies extreme disdain not just for Donald Trump, but even for those who voted for him. Frequently we hear politicians damning Trump supporters. And it’s not just that he was elected, but the demonization of 100% of the support for any of the policies he supports. Mr. Trump picked up the cause of Pro-Life, Second Amendment Rights, stopping illegal immigration, and canceling hundreds of federal government regulations. He pulled the U.S. out of the Iran Agreement and the Paris Climate Accords which drove the Left crazy. And they’re not upset or angry about any of this, they’re crazed for his doing so. I must say in my 66 years I have not seen the vitriol, hatred, and threatening atmosphere in the nation but one other time: the Vietnam War. But on many fronts, today’s potential war landscape is closer to complete — much closer than we ever were during Vietnam.

Let’s face facts: in most areas of life in America, things are better today than they were in 2016. Specifically, the American economy in every sector has zoomed to previously unanticipated levels. And all of those speak directly to the lives of Americans.

No, the economy is not the only important thing in the lives of Americans. But those finding jobs they couldn’t in 2016, pay increases, profits soaring that turn into new jobs, bonuses, expansion, which all lead to a critically important element for us all: happiness and hope.

Illegal immigration: Fuel for this War

Somewhere, the immigration debate has gotten far off course.  After the last Democrat’s presidential debates, every Democratic candidate appears ready to admit illegal entrants without historic restrictions; harbor them in sanctuary cities; pay their health care with tax dollars (federal and state); permit displacement of lower-income Americans from affordable housing, and tolerate growing homelessness created by unmitigated mass economic migration.  None of this fits American history, rule of law or sovereignty. And a large segment of Americans feels this is a definite affront to the U.S. Constitution and the Rule of Law while other Americans seem to not even care. Remember: many historical wars are initiated by controversial laws with which a country’s populace differ on their enforcement: like our immigration laws.

First, candidates and mainstream media consciously omit, diminish or ignore a basic distinction in US law – between legal immigration, which is permitted at different levels, based on country of origin and individual, and patently illegal immigration.   The distinction is important, yet purposely blurred.

This fundamental distinction – about which no one wants to speak – is key to resolving the larger debate. From enforcement of U.S. visa laws to naturalization and citizenship, if the distinction between legal and illegal is not acknowledged and enforced as written, then for all intents and purposes – U.S. immigration laws do not exist.

Actually then, the Democratic presidential candidates, beyond pushing mass government control, higher taxes, socialized medicine, federally defined and paid higher education, and shutting down fossil fuel production, are promoting lawlessness in the area of immigration.

Let’s be specific.  Today, in the United States, we have laws permitting presence in the United States under differing circumstances.  We have laws that distinguish between legal and illegal presence, between employer-sponsored visas (H1B), independent work visas (EB-1), investor visas (EB-5), PhD visas (EB-2), presence by birth to foreign parents, presence by green-card lottery, and upon legal residence for five years, application for citizenship.  These are laws, meant to be enforced.

By opening the flood gates at our southern border to lawless entry, Democrats not only render meaningless our asylum laws — requiring proof of a specific, objective “well-founded fear of persecution” to the individual by the country of origin’s government — and mock refugee laws, but we ignore the entire legal framework for visas, residency, legal employment, and potential citizenship.

Here is the rub:  Democrats are effectively saying –  “Laws do not matter, just come and we will hide you, house you, pay for your health care, shield you from federal law enforcement, permit your crimes to go unreported, and not deport you.”  Under such circumstances, exactly where is respect for the rule of law?  Nowhere, as these Democratic candidates are effectively throwing out US law.

Second, think for a moment about what a “nation” is.  Without borders, a plot of land and people have no claim to nationhood.  As early Americans knew, immigration would eventually grow and require restriction – and the restrictions would require enforcement, to preserve our sovereignty.

We forget that our founders left Europe to escape an environment of elite lawlessness by governments. Equality for all citizens and protection for all citizens was their objective: “A Nation of Laws,” and “Equal Justice under the law.” That has always included Immigration laws. As New York statesman Governor Morris argued at the Constitutional Convention, “every society from a great nation down to a club has the right of declaring the conditions on which new members should be admitted.”  Incidentally, he wrote the Preamble to the Constitution, was a signatory to the Articles of Confederation and the US Constitution.

His point is plain – then, and now.  While our Constitution grants the power to Congress “to establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization,” restrictions on immigration are required for nationhood. As one constitutional scholar noted: “The people have delegated to Congress the power to fix the terms under which America will consent to an immigrant become a member of the American political community,” who, when and how.  This implies legal limits, and it guarantees no right of entry.

American citizens elect leaders to make and enforce laws, pursuant to the Constitution.  These laws only matter – and civil society only truly exists – if they are enforced.  The federal government determines who will be admitted, when and under what conditions.  Immigrants cannot – under any circumstances – legally impose themselves on our political community, particularly in the ignoring of express laws.

Yet here come these promise-anything, give-away-the-nation candidates, indifferent to history, law and logic, apparently untroubled by rising social, political, economic and moral costs imposed by their de facto “open borders” policy, an invitation to illegals to violate U.S. law.  To a one, these Democratic candidates are complicit in advancing lawlessness, knowingly or recklessly upending rule of law.

How can any of them seriously desire to take an oath of office to be President of the United States, solemnly swearing to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States” and federal laws, while knowingly advocating lawlessness?  Who would trust any of them to protect us?

One can debate motives – whether the aim is to empower a growing mass of illegal aliens to vote for Democrats who buy votes with public money, or another hard-to-discern motive – but the bigger question is how any candidate can advocate lawlessness while seeking the presidency.

Summary

To put a point on it:  Someone – and in 17 months it will be the voters – need to hold these bold advocates of lawless immigration accountable.  Laws, borders, sovereignty, and enforcement either matter, or they do not.  Most Americans believe they do, and that this is what civil society is about.

It is actually reasonable to believe that this lawlessness being promoted by these Democrat presidential candidates could if implemented formally and continued “could” lead to some type of internal war — maybe not with tanks and fighter jets, but with National Guard units and Marshall Law. And if that should develop, who could rule out an Armageddon?

There are plenty of other strange legal, political, and economic theories being advocated, but if we cannot agree that laws matter, that rule of law counts, that enforcing federal immigration laws is central to our existence as a nation, who are we?

More precisely, who are these people who fight to lead – if they do not believe in our laws, liberties, limits and protecting lives of American citizens?  Simple questions often produce sobering answers.

Will we see an Armageddon if a Democrat wins the White House? Who can say? One thing I’m certain of: Americans do NOT want a nation without laws.

Play

New Gun Laws: ”Red Flag”

We’ve seen it happen again and again: a mass shooting lights the fires for new and more intense gun laws — again. “We must do something to stop these murders!” Sadly, these cries are for political purposes only and have never resulted in any meaningful actions. 

There are several hindrances to an overhaul of gun control laws, the chief of which is the Second Amendment, which guarantees the right for private citizens to own guns. Yes, there are many who refute that the Amendment says that. Be that as it may, the U.S. Supreme Court when ruling on several cases has confirmed that perspective of the legality of the Second Amendment.

Another roadblock for gun control advocates is that private citizens in America own tens of millions of guns. How would any new laws — if any would pass muster when weighed against the Second Amendment court findings — address the issue of those numerous guns already legally in the hands of Americans? Would we implement some mandatory roundup of all the guns? Can you imagine the civil war that such an attempt would initiate? Most American gun owners understand that our forefathers when crafting the Second Amendment did so to guarantee citizens personal protection, not against foreign enemies, but against the American government should it ever wage war against its own citizens!

Red Flag Laws

Certainly in the wake of the two most recent mass shootings in El Paso, Texas and Dayton, Ohio you have heard the demands for this “new” method to stop gun crimes: “Red Flag laws.” What are they and how would they work?

Red flag laws, sometimes called extreme risk protection order laws, allow a judge to issue an order that enables law enforcement to confiscate guns from individuals deemed a risk to themselves or others. Since the Parkland, Florida school shooting, at least two dozen states have considered enacting similar laws in their states. In Vermont, a red flag law has already passed the both the Senate and House.

Red flag laws are a fairly simple process. Depending on the state, family members or law enforcement can go to court and seek an order that would allow police to remove guns from the individual’s home and restrict their ability to purchase firearms. The person seeking the order must first fill out a form providing evidence of danger to others or self, then the court holds an expedited hearing. If a judge agrees that the individual is a threat, their guns will be removed for a temporary period that can last from a few weeks to a year.

Here’s the rub of red flag laws for many Second Amendment advocates: one can easily imagine how subjective this process would be. Subjectivity means that different judges in different parts of the nation considering this process for different people under different circumstances would be responsible to curtail a person’s Second Amendment rights not for violating that law, but upset some people sufficient to convince a judge that the person was a danger to people around them.

It’s easy to imagine horrors that certainly WILL result from red flag laws at the federal level. Just consider this one thing: there are far too few judges at every federal level to timely and judiciously process cases before them now. Add a few million more each year to their docket and we’ll see justice watered down and more innocent people being deprived of their constitutional rights.

So what downside might there be — in reality — if a federal red flag law would become law? One policeman (who chose to remain anonymous) gave the following scenario of one red flag notification processed in America:

It’s a Sunday night and your family has all gone to bed. You let the dogs back in and lock the deadbolt like you do every night. All the lights are off now except a couple of night lights scattered throughout the house leaving that dim glow throughout your home. It’s bedtime and work and school are going to come early in the morning. You crawl in bed, kiss your wife and drift off to sleep being thankful for the air conditioning that allows you to pull that heavy quilt up over your shoulder despite the fact it’s still 85 degrees outside. A few hours pass…

2:00 AM Monday morning and your wife taps your leg and says, “Baby I heard something outside.” As you sit up in bed you hear the dog growling in the living room and you know something isn’t right. You grab that trusty 870 shotgun and head into the living room. Your wife grabs her 9mm pistol and heads down the hall to the kids rooms just like you have rehearsed. “Good boy” you say as you enter the living room, trying to calm both the dog and your wife just as splinters fly across the room and the front door flys open. “Oh crap!” As you shoulder your weapon and send a load of Buck shot across your living room and see the perpetrator fall in a heap. Before the “Thank God!” can even run across your brain, you see a second man coming in the door and you fire again. This time you hear the pop of your wife’s 9mm as she joined in the fight. It has to be those damn meth heads from down in town! Just then you are consumed by a wall of bullets as you see multiple muzzle flashes from just outside the door and you realize something isn’t right. You turn to yell at your wife to “Get Down!” just in time to see her take a load of buckshot to the face and her brain matter splatter the wall behind her. You feel the burning as 5.56 caliber bullets riddle your body. One clips your spine as you’re scrambling away and paralyzes your lower body. The last thing you see before you bleed out is a SWAT guy from your local PD holding your teenage daughter on the floor with a knee in her back as she screams and cries because she just watched her parents being murdered.

Why did this happen? You’re no criminal. You’re a Conservative and an honest family man. Your wife is a school teacher and your daughters are on the honor roll. Why did this happen?

Two days ago, you and your wife went down to welcome the new neighbors to the community. Your wife made them some of her “world- famous” cookies and you invited them to church on Sunday. Later that afternoon, you got a friend request on Facebook from your new neighbor, which you gladly accepted. They seemed a little odd, but in the few minutes you talked they seemed pleasant enough. The next day while you and your family sat in church, your new neighbor scrolled through your Facebook profile. He saw that “Trump 2020” post and got infuriated. See, he’s a staunch liberal and he hates your kind. The next thing he sees are the hunting pictures you took last fall when your daughter bagged her first buck. Now he’s seething with rage because he is wholeheartedly against the “slaughter of innocent animals.” Next he sees your post from the last range day with your buddy and sees those scary black assault weapons on the table and that does it! He has to do something about the racist domestic terrorist living next door. He picks up the phone, calls the local Sheriffs Office and reports you as a threat under the new Red Flag law. The Sheriffs follow their Standard Operating Procedures and conduct a no-knock warrant because you have now been denied due process and you are considered guilty until proven innocent.

Now you, your lovely wife and two deputies have been killed for nothing. Your daughter will have absolute hell for the rest of her life. She will never be that successful person you dreamed for her to be because of the mental tragedy caused from seeing her parents murdered. The local newspaper will report that you were killed after firing on and killing two deputies and that “over a thousand rounds of ammo and 22 guns were confiscated from your residence”.

Those two deputies were just following orders. They left behind families as well and had served their community for over a decade. They didn’t know you were a stand-up guy with a great family. They weren’t allowed time to investigate things under due process. They were told you had threatened your neighbor and were out in the street waving an AR15 around.

This is the reality of Red Flag gun laws.

Summary

Some will accuse me of giving an unrealistic example of a “possible” not “probable” red flag scenario. But let’s be honest: what would prevent such a hypothetical becoming a reality? Some will say, “Well, at least we made certain a few more guns were taken off the street and two Americans who were subject to rashly grabbing guns and firing at cops won’t be doing that anymore.” That certainly would be true. But these two people were denied a normal “due process” — which is “innocent until proven guilty” — even though the law supporting the red flag process would have been followed. The bottom line though: they both would have died in no way breaking a law. 

There are plenty of federal laws. Let’s enforce them! And, by the way, there is very little managed in the political system that cannot be managed better in the private sector. Why not add these to gun crime law enforcement:

  • Create neighborhood interaction groups who would create circles of neighbors who would “watch” all that goes on in their neighborhoods. Make local law enforcement responsible for interfacing with every other member of their community. If/when strange elements appear in neighborhoods, take them to law enforcement folks.
  • In each neighborhood, include a local policeman and a mental health professional who volunteer to teach methods of watching for criminal propensity in others and how to report any to law enforcement.

These two things if not the permanent answer would be a great foundation to a system that would involve all Americans in keeping America safe. And it would be doing it without giving our government tens of billions more tax dollars to keep us safe. What a novel idea: let’s let Americans act like Americans!

We’ve got to something, and what we need to do is NOT something that will get logjammed in a bureaucratic process. It’s time for Americans to take charge of our towns and cities away from big government and take personal responsibility.

It just might work.

Divide and Conquer

Why is it that more and more people just don’t get along? I don’t think I’ve ever seen it this vile. That’s just in what we “see.” I can only imagine how nasty it is behind the scenes. We’ll get to politics in a moment. But division and nastiness don’t begin there.

I really don’t remember my age when I first noticed people taking sides. It was even before kindergarten. But it was when I started school that I began to notice there were kids that were better than me — at least that was what I was told. Betty’s Dad owned a big company which automatically made Betty better. Tom was from a prominent Catholic family. In south Louisiana where I grew up being prominent AND Catholic was a big deal.

When youth baseball began, I was only seven. Since I was the youngest, I was stuck behind the plate at catcher. Everyone knows catcher is one of the toughest positions on a baseball diamond. And catchers can make great plays to win games AND catchers can blow plays that cost the game. I don’t remember a single great play I made at catcher. Naturally, my teammates let me know how inadequate my play was. My ball reputation played out at school. My “rep” dropped a few notches the next school year.

The older I got the “better-than” or “less-than” stigma changed addresses and schools, but it never really changed. If anything, it heightened. By the time I got to college, I had determined that there were people that had more than I did, guys that were better looking than me, and girls that in no way would ever consider dating me. Yes, it was tough at first. But I soon realized that to live in this world and find happiness, I had to find a way to not only accept myself but to find ways to get along with other people. No matter how wealthy, how popular, how good an athlete, how good a student, and how attractive a person is, to make it in life we each must find ways to successfully interact with others. But how does one do that?

First, realize and accept that everyone is different. It’s ridiculous to continually try to be someone for one person while having to change and be someone else for another person. The secret to staving off that dilemma: find people with whom you relate on various levels and that you have similarities on which you are comfortable. Accept that and build on those similarities.

Guess what: it works!

Adult Nastiness

It didn’t get better the older I got. Fellow workers and friends all seemed to prioritize friendships based on “desired” personal realities than realities alone. Example: a good friend wanted to befriend a wealthy guy in town. The wealthy guy was hung-up in a circle of other wealthy people. But my friend was committed to breaking into that group. So he faked a bunch of wealth. He bought things he couldn’t afford: a Rolex, Armani suits, a fancy car — you get the picture. He took trips that he couldn’t afford. And all he accomplished with those efforts was a whole lot of debt. There was really no incentive for the members of the circle he wanted to penetrate to let him do so. As far as they were concerned, he didn’t bring anything to the table.

Truth: to work with people to get anything done, one must find commonalities and similar interests. But it goes much further. Even if commonalities are there, both sides must be willing to and want to share those commonalities with each other!

That does not mean one must agree with everything other people believe to be friends and get along. What it means is each must share a willingness to ignore others’ differences, respect others’ right to have differences, and push through those differences to build a relationship based on commonalities all the while accepting the differences of each other.

Sounds simple, right? Nope: Politics!

Politics

I’m uncertain who made the rules of politics in America. Our forefathers penned the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, but they didn’t write the official book of politics. No one wrote an official book of politics, and there are no certain rules that govern politics. But there certainly are those who act like they not only know all the do’s and don’ts of politics, they determined all those rules. And in that lies the rub we face today.

Political discourse in the U.S. today is not based on commonalities and finding ways to work within differences. Fortunately for Americans, it did that formerly. No doubt there were serious and even lethal disputes in the 1700s and 1800s. But there were far more differences worked through with often long and loud debates, screaming matches and even threats. There was even once a famous duel. But, on the most part, early American political leaders found ways to if not put away differences, work within differences for the common good of the nation. And thankfully it worked. Today is a different story. Political differences have changed the discourse of Americans.

In the last decade, we have watched the rapid decline of any desire of political leaders to work together with party opponents to craft and implement rules, laws, and policies that work for the good of America. Examples of this are immigration, Second Amendment rights, Free Speech, Right to Life and Abortion, foreign policy, economic policy, pretty much everything that is critical to everyday life for all Americans. When and how did it begin? That I don’t know. But somewhere in that process, former President Obama evidenced his position when in a public disagreement with Republicans said this: “Elections matter.” He was referring to the fact that more Americans voted for his reelection in 2012 than did for Mitt Romney for president. In other words, “the other side can want what they want, but we won. The winning means we don’t have to consider what anyone else thinks or wants, we’re just going to do it our way.” He didn’t really say that, but his actions then and after showed that is what he meant. And in the Trump presidency, more and more evidence proves that in politics, consensus on any and all political matters probably is not going to be found most of the time.

In fact, politicians have perfected a new way of interacting with each other in Washington. Neither political party has an exclusive on this process, but Democrats have certainly perfected it. It’s called “Divide and Conquer.”

How It Works

First, truth left the Capitol a long time ago. Oh, it’s there, but it’s hard to find and seldom seen. It’s been replaced with “political correctness.” I could give you example after example of how it’s used, but you already know what I’m referencing. When the President says something that others do not like and therefore do not accept, they’ll trumpet that he said something else entirely or they’ll scream to hills what his meaning in saying it was. And his purported meaning almost always is, “He’s a racist!”

Name-calling is a common American art of deflection. But there have always been people that fall easily for it. Remember as kids when someone claimed that Susie had a crush on Johnny and Johnny was a nerd? By the end of recess, everyone at school was calling Susie a nerd because she had a crush on Johnny! That certainly simplifies what I’m talking about, but it illustrates today’s subject. To reach a desired objective without the truth, one must rely on pure emotion AND convince others to fall in line with the lie, or Divide.  I promise that at my school when Susie was labeled a nerd because she liked Johnny, if Susie could ever shake that nerd tag it would take a long time.

I don’t know how many times since the 2016 campaign I have heard Donald Trump called a racist. For one to believe that, one would be required to dismiss 50+ years of very public daily Trump interactions with hundreds of thousands of people from all over the world. Certainly, in that career any racist would have sowed his oats of racism again and again: he couldn’t possibly not do that. And if he did, there would be hundreds of those offended standing in line at the courthouse filing suit against the billionaire, especially abused employees. Have you heard of any? Nope. Why is that? Because Mr. Trump has lived a life of evidence that he is not a racist. In fact, his life shows just the opposite! Leaders in the Minority community have even given him humanitarian awards for being such a help and guide in the African American community. They stood in line to be with him at public events of all kinds — people like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. But they all stand far away from the President today. Being friends with Donald Trump would mean you’d be a friend with a racist.

But that’s not enough. It’s not sufficient for the Left to attack President Trump as a racist. Now the cries are against all Americans who voted for him.

White supremacist “foot soldiers” perceive President Donald Trump’s rhetoric as “subliminal orders in their head,” warns MSNBC’s national security analyst Malcolm Nance. In an interview with MSNBC’s Hardball during a segment on the massacres in El Paso, Texas, and Dayton, Ohio, Nance claimed mass shootings in the United States are fueled by far-right, white supremacist ideology by shooters who want to eliminate liberalism. Trump is fostering a culture that facilitates white supremacist terrorists, Nance argued.

“These people feel that they are the foot soldiers and executors of what the disenfranchisement that the white race is feeling, and Donald Trump is giving them subliminal orders in their head,” he said. “They are no different than the mobilized, self-starting, self-radicalized terrorists of ISIS here in the United States and Europe, who take cars and drive down streets. It’s just that they have a permissive environment in which they can get firearms and go out and attack their perceived enemies.”

The push to Divide moves ever forward. Certainly, there’s a messenger, OR someone who controls the message AND the messenger of Division. Who could that be?

Well, the Left-leaning mainstream media would be a great place to start, right? How about the New York Times — that bastion of journalistic integrity that still calls itself “America’s premier news source.”

Dean Baquet, the executive editor of the New York Times, said recently that, after the Mueller report, the paper has to shift the focus of its coverage from the Trump-Russia affair to the president’s alleged racism.

“We built our newsroom to cover one story, and we did it truly well,” Baquet said. “Now we have to regroup, and shift resources and emphasis to take on a different story.”

Baquet used the gentlest terms possible — “the story changed” — but the fact is, the conspiracy-coordination allegation the Times had devoted itself to pursuing turned out to be false. Beyond that, Democrats on Capitol Hill struggled to press an obstruction case against the president. The Trump-Russia hole came up dry.

Now, Baquet continued, “I think that we’ve got to change.” The Times must “write more deeply about the country, race, and other divisions.”

“I mean, the vision for coverage for the next two years is what I talked about earlier: How do we cover a guy who makes these kinds of remarks?” Baquet said. “How do we cover the world’s reaction to him? How do we do that while continuing to cover his policies? How do we cover America, that’s become so divided by Donald Trump?”

Summary

So where’s the “Conquer” in the “Divide and Conquer?”

That’s what they’re all promised will happen! All of the Trump-haters from every news organization, political party, people in office, Democrats, Republicans, and Independents alike seem to all take their cue for political beliefs from the propaganda distributed by the New York Times and its informal satellites around the nation. All of them are convinced that even if not true, a majority of Americans will believe what they are telling Americans if they tell it over and over again. Democrat Pary leadership have realized there is no hope for a Democrat Senate, White House, and probably the House unless they are successful in their very obvious ploy to destroy any shred of credibility which Donald Trump possesses. And when they’re through, their prayer is their propaganda will destroy him, his family, and each and every Trump supporter in the country.

How sad is that? How could anyone — especially leaders in Washington charged with shaping every segment of America and supposedly doing so at the will of Americans — be so consumed with hatred for one man they would abandon the foundation of the U.S. and all it stands for, the millions who have lived fruitful and constructive lives here through several centuries and who have done the same for millions of those overseas, and launch some campaign to destroy this one man!

That indeed would put the “Conquer” in place they lust for.

I don’t know why they’re doing it. Do they fear something? Do they so hate what Donald Trump stands for that they would almost in unison find devious ways to run him out of office? Or do they simply hate the fact that they may be being exposed for feeding their flocks the lies of propaganda that are good enough to pacify those lambs while they feast at the table of luxury and power in Washington they have crafted on the backs of their flock?

I’m not sure. But one thing of which I am certain: Americans are not asleep. Americans understand far more than D.C. thinks we do.

Maybe that’s what they’re afraid of. Maybe we’re the fly in the ointment of that war to dethrone Trump of which they’re certain they will win.

We’ll see.

 

 

 

 

Play

Bullet Points August 17, 2019

This is our regular Saturday feature in which we bring you bullet points of the top happenings of the last few days. Feel free to read the short summary. Following each is a link to a complete story expanding the short summary. Feel free to click on the link if you wish more detailed information.

This is good for a Starbucks Saturday morning with a caramel machiotta. Enjoy!

  • Certainly not the most important happening in the U, S. but definitely one of the top attention grabbers. The latest is that the Medical Examiner issued an official cause of death: “Suicide by strangulation.” But that official notification resolved nothing: speculation on the “real” cause of death has morphed into fake news stories that are abundant along with conspiracy theories that run the full gambit from jail-murder to a secret agent type of assassination. You can take a closer look here: https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/16/us/jeffrey-epstein-autopsy/index.html
  • Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) topped the news the last few days regarding her feud with the nation of Israel. A Congressional group is making an official visit to Israel in which Tlaib and Ilhan Omar (D-MN) were both a part of. Both have been very vocal about their personal animus for Israel certainly impacted by the Muslim faith. When their itineraries were delivered to Israeli authorities to make preparations for their various meetings, neither had scheduled any or allotted any time for meetings with Israeli counterparts. They only wanted to go to the West Bank. Their invitations were promptly withdrawn. Tlaib publicly stated her intentions were to visit her ailing grandmother. On “humanitarian” purpose Israel granted her the opportunity to visit her grandmother. Tlaib them promptly denied that invitation. More here: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/rashida-tlaib-backs-off-plans-for-israel-visit-citing-oppressive-conditions/
  • Friday morning rush hour was altogether halted when two pressure cookers were simply left in two different New York subway stations. A third pressure cooker was found moments later in another subway station. The entire system was shut down while NYPD determined none were bomb threats. Speculation abounds. Although Mayor deBlasio said there were no suspicions of any further threats, many recalling the Boston Marathon bombing that resulted in death and maiming of innocent bystanders are ignoring the Mayor’s consolation and are wanted the extensive investigation to find who “lost” their pressure cookers. More here: https://nypost.com/2019/08/16/pair-of-pressure-cookers-shut-down-lower-manhattan-subway-station/
  • The stock market jumped on the financial merry-go-round this week. Many cry its 800+ point one-day losses foretells a stock market crash. Others say it was simply a correction. But there are many on the right who feel a coordinated medial messaging plan was to convince the nation IS on the path to a recession so as to favor Trump’s opponent — ANY supporter of his — in the 2020 election. The market in the last couple of days has recovered almost all of its earlier losses and seems to be kicking again. More here: https://www.lombardiletter.com/stock-market-crash/20656/20656/
  • In head to head polling in a FOX News presidential poll, Donald Trump loses to the top four Democrat candidates. This and other polls have spurred much speculation — much of which understandably centers around the 2016 dismal polling that even on the morning of Election Day showed Hillary Clinton soundly defeating the now President Donald Trump. Some believe the current massive angst by the Left Media against Mr. Trump has resulted in probable Trump voters to either avoid polling calls or lying with fear of being branded as being one of those “deplorables.” More here: https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/457645-fox-news-poll-shows-trump-losing-to-biden-warren-sanders-and-harris
  • We pulled almost all of our troops out of Iraq and Syria because “Isis is dead.” Maybe not so. It appears that ISIS is re-tooling in northern Syria. If that’s true, the U.S. and the rest of the West may be in trouble again. More here: https://nationalpost.com/news/world/isil-is-building-a-new-caliphate-from-inside-a-syrian-refugee-camp-and-the-west-has-no-plan-to-combat-it