Voting by Mail: Let the Fight Begin!

Here we go! All those for making voting so much easier for Americans now have another arrow in their quiver for what they term is “justification” for voting by mail. Their new arrow has a name: “Coronavirus.”

We saw it play out in the Wisconsin Democrat primary election just a few weeks ago. Back and forth from court to court filing lawsuits, filing appeals, the Wisconsin governor weighing in with his decision and another court overturning. Wisconsin voters voted: period. Sure, there were some fears of Coronavirus. But it’s reasonably sure that everyone that voted had their one vote count. I said “one vote” because that has not always been the case. In many lessons throughout American history, people have cheated and have voted multiple times and often have lied and voted as someone else. That’s part of this story we’ll get to in a bit. But we DO know this one thing: Coronavirus IS and WILL be changing everything for at least a good while in the nation. And that probably will include the November election. Buckle up! The fight has already begun.

In recent history, voters in national elections know almost immediately after polls close who is going to be the next president. Electronics in voting have made it easy. But it’s not going to be very easy in November, and it probably will be no easier in any day going forward. Because of a massive increase in mail-in voting in states that are not used to it, the presidential election could take a week or more to be decided. Public officials are just now beginning to grapple with how to prepare themselves and the country for this unprecedented situation.

“It’s a culture shift that’s going to be required,” said Vanita Gupta, president, and CEO of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, in an interview. “We should be prepared to wait at least a week before the results can be certified.”

Gupta, who oversaw the Justice Department’s civil rights division from 2014 to 2017, said her organization — one of the oldest civil rights groups in the country — would work with other groups over the next several months to raise awareness and create an expectation among both voters and journalists that results should not be expected on election night.

“People are going to have to be able to be patient to wait for the results,” Gupta said. “That’s an uncomfortable position for a lot of people. The media’s not used to it. The public’s not used to it.” But, she said, “election officials need to be able to do their job to make sure they are counting every ballot. The danger would be if there is false pressure that gets built-in, and people are disenfranchised because of this false pressure.”

Tom Perez, the chairman of the Democratic National Committee, said that “if we have a vote-by-mail state that is close, I would rather be in a position where everybody’s vote got counted. I think that should be our gold standard, is that everyone who wanted to participate was able to participate.”

“I’d rather get it right than get it at 10 o’clock on Election Day night.”

In my opinion, “Get it right” means “everybody gets one vote to cast — just ONE vote. And we must verify whoever casts that vote has been confirmed to be the person registered and casts that vote legally.”

Vote By Mail Already Exists

Five states currently conduct all elections entirely by mail: Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Washington, and Utah. At least 21 other states have laws that allow certain smaller elections (such as school board contests) to be conducted by mail. For these elections, all registered voters receive a ballot in the mail. The voter marks the ballot, puts it in a secrecy envelope or sleeve and then into a separate mailing envelope, signs an affidavit on the exterior of the mailing envelope, and returns the package via mail or by dropping it off.

Ballots are mailed out well ahead of Election Day, and thus voters have an “election period,” not just a single day, to vote. All-mail elections can be thought of as absentee voting for everyone. This system is also referred to as “vote by mail.”

While “all-mail elections” means that every registered voter receives a ballot by mail, this does not cancel in-person voting opportunities on and before Election Day. For example, even though all registered voters in Colorado are mailed a ballot, voters can choose to cast a ballot at an in-person vote center during the early voting period or on Election Day (or drop-off, or mail, their ballot back).

Generally, states begin with providing all-mail elections only in certain circumstances, and then add additional opportunities as citizens become familiar with procedures. Oregon’s vote-by-mail timeline includes four times that the legislature acted before the 1998 citizens’ vote that made Oregon the first all-mail election state.

All states will already mail an absentee ballot to individual voters who request one. In two-thirds of the states, any qualified voter may vote absentee without offering an excuse, and in one-third of the states, an apology is required. Some states offer a permanent absentee ballot list. Once a voter asks to be added to the list, she or he will automatically receive an absentee ballot for all future elections.

Voter Fraud

Mention those words at a Democrat Party function, and you’ll be immediately tossed! That’s like the proverbial “something ugly got slipped into the punch bowl.” That forces one to ask and try to answer this question: “Why are so many Democrats adamantly for mail-in voting while being just as adamantly against voter ID requirements? But there’s no absolute answer to that. Let’s start with words from leaders in one of those five states who conduct elections totally through the mail: Oregon.

That all sounds so simple, doesn’t it? And voting SHOULD be simple. And, as you just heard, those who so vehemently support mail-in voting, to a person, disavow any claim or claims of voter fraud. If we’ve heard once that, “there is no proof in any federal election on record of there being ‘massive’ voter fraud like Republicans and President Trump claim,” we’ve heard it a hundred times.

Notice that word “massive?” That’s the caveat that allows them to make that argument. But there is plenty of evidence of massive voter fraud. The problem is that states — not the federal government — run all elections. Normally states conduct their own elections in tandem with federal elections. And whether or not Democrats, or any other persons for that matter, want to dispute the existence of systemic voter fraud, they must live in “La-La Land.”

Tom Fitton, the President of Judicial Watch, has on behalf of his company filed numerous lawsuits against states, individuals, corporations and other municipalities for voter fraud. Sometimes the alleged voter fraud can be written-off as accidental — but not very often. Fitton in his research and subsequent lawsuits have found millions of voters and votes that were fraudulent and therefore ineligible to vote or be counted in every kind of election! Why would those on the left simply shrug those claims away and say, “Voter fraud just doesn’t happen?”

Tom Fitton and Judicial Watch have been busy finding places where voter fraud is rampant. You just heard his comments about one million bogus votes discovered in North Carolina. It’s not just in North Carolina, believe me.

Los Angeles County has started the process of removing from its registration rolls an estimated 1.5 million inactive voters who have moved, died or become ineligible to cast a ballot, an effort to comply with federal election law and a court settlement with Judicial Watch. The county, the most populous in the United States, recently mailed notices to the inactive voters in an effort to verify their residency status and whether they are still alive. It’s the first time in 20 years that Los Angeles County has cleaned its voter rolls, having previously interpreted the federal law requiring it as not mandatory.

And then there’s this: we KNOW for certain there’s voter fraud in mail-in voting. We know someone personally who did it!

In 2011, a lady decided to test the system, and so she asked for three voter registration applications from the county voter registration office in her county in Florida. She filled them out, listing three different names — two that she pulled out of her head Rebecca Bugle and Hannah Arendt — and her own name, Margaret Menge. Margaret listed her real date of birth, and made up dates of birth for the other two. On the lines where the application asked for a driver’s license number or last four of Social Security number, she wrote “none” as the instructions said to do if a person has neither of these.

A few weeks later, she got two notices back, saying applications for Rebecca Bugle and Margaret Menge could not be processed because a driver’s license number or Social Security number was not provided. But Margaret also received in her mailbox a new voter information card for Hannah Arendt. On the outside of the card, her mailman had circled the name and address and written a question mark in pencil. But he still put it in the mailbox.

A few days later, Margaret checked the Palm Beach County Supervisor of Elections website, and, sure enough, there was Hannah Arendt, listed as an eligible voter — a person who existed in history, the celebrated author of “Eichmann in Jerusalem” — but not a person who was in existence in 2011 in Palm Beach County, Florida.

Not long after, with an election approaching, she called the Palm Beach County Supervisor of Elections, said she was Hannah Arendt, and asked for an absentee ballot. The employee on the phone asked for a date of birth, and when given that information from “Hannah’s”  initial application — July 20, 1991 — she said she’d send one. The absentee ballot for Hannah Arendt appeared via mail a week or two later.

Margaret called a former Florida secretary of state in 2012 and asked him how was it possible that she was able to do this.

“Well,” he said, “the fact is that they check names of people applying to register to vote against several different databases, but they have no way to check to see whether someone exists.”

That’s just one way people can cheat with absentee ballots. There are many more.

Last year, a political operative working for North Carolina Republican congressional candidate Mark Harris was charged with fraud for directing a group of people to fill out as many as 1,000 absentee ballot requests on behalf of voters — most of whom were unaware the ballots were being requested. These people then collected the ballots and filled them out themselves. Harris defeated Democrat Dan McCready by just 905 votes and, though it was never shown that the number of tainted ballots was enough to account for Harris’s win, the election results were thrown out, and a new election was held. (Republican Dan Bishop beat McCready in a special election by 2,400 votes.)

Also in 2019, a Democratic city clerk in Southfield, Michigan, was arrested and charged with six felonies for falsifying absentee ballot records to say that 193 of the ballots in one election were missing signatures or a return date, when in fact they had both. The correct records were found in the trash can in her office.


Voting in person or mail-in ballots: both seem simple and each in certain circumstances appropriate. But the single absolute in these two voting methods is that when a person in person shows up at a voting precinct, gives their name and presents an ID to confirm they are the same person as registered in the registrar’s voters database, those running that election know a legal voter just cast a ballot.

In a similar case but one using mail-in voting, there is absolutely no way possible for anyone to guarantee the person whose name is on the ballot above their signature is the person who actually “showed up” to vote.

Mail-in voting is a really big deal right now. It’s not so much because of Coronavirus — which is the narrative Democrats are cramming down the throats of Americans. It’s looking as if our pandemic may be mostly if not totally resolved before September 1! That if it happens means the November election should proceed in normal fashion.

But there’s one big glitch in all this: the glitch’s name is “COVID-19.” “If” our pandemic has not disappeared or is not in a status in which voting in person is safe, absentee-balloting is a certainty. And NO state, with the exception of the five states who already have mail-in voting, can possibly be prepared by November. And voting ballots would necessarily need to be mailed a month before.

I just hate to think about how easy it will be for those who wish to cheat in voting find it to be really easy to do so. And, by the way, mail-in voting MUST be done for the 2020 election according to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. She stated weeks ago that any new stimulus bill that the House considers MUST contain a provision for permanent mail-in voting for every state, or she will not give American businesses or the American people one more dime.

I can’t wait for November!


Finally Some Good News

There is so much news coming from not just Washington but all around the world. And it all is applicable and important to us. Why don’t we just highlight a few of the more salient news stories that in the nonstop noise of COVID-19, we just lose track.

Don’t forget that TNN Live starts at 9:00 AM Central. The two-hour show includes live guests and your calls. We would love to have you weigh-in with your thoughts on any subject you hear on the show. But, we’d like for you to let us know all the things you’ve been doing in your off time because of Coronavirus. If you’ve been a good boy or girl, you’ve been social distancing. What have you been doing and how have you been doing it? Call in today and share it will all of us.

The toll-free number is 866-37TRUTH. That’s 866-378-7884. Of course you can watch the show by clicking on the blue link labeled “Listen Live’ just to the right above this story on the home page. Click on it a


It’s about time for some good news! The CDC announced Wednesday that using their guidance requirements some essential workers who have been exposed to COVID-19 but are not showing symptoms can head back to work!

The worker must take their temperature twice a day to make certain they have no fever. Plus, they must wear a face mask on the job and also out in public. Dr. Robert Redfield who is the CDC Director made the announcement from the White House.

The CDC guidance was an effort to “really begin to get these critical workers back into the workforce so that we won’t have worker shortage in these critical industries,” Redfied commented when he made the announcement.” Those essential jobs he referenced are first responders, healthcare workers, food supply workers and more.

Something interesting is that the CDC is “encouraging” employers to take the temperatures of their employees before they start work. Of course, any that show any symptoms are to be immediately sent home. Officials said office buildings should increase their air exchange and increase the frequency of cleaning all common areas.

The days of employees sharing smoke, coffee, and lunch all together in one big room are over for the foreseeable future, too.

No, the CDC doing this is NOT a sign that we are through with Coronavirus. Quite the opposite is true. Remember: as of Wednesday evening we still had 404,000+ cases of the virus. And those are the ones we KNOW about!

So here’s the 50 million dollar question: What does Dr. Fauci say about this? Actually, he stated that if American continue the practice of social distancing as we are now through the end of the month, it will be possible to start pulling back on some of the restrictions at that point. He put it rather succinctly when he said, “That doesn’t mean we’re going to do it right now, but it means we need to be prepared to ease into that.”


FOX News fans are familiar with Dr. Marc Siegel, a frequent contributor regarding health matters. Dr. Siegel just released news regarding his 96-year-old father who is a cardiac patient and had recently been dealing with several respiratory issues. His father was certain he was close to death.

His cardiologist prescribed Hydroxycloroquine in combination with antibiotics and the combination proved effective. Siegel said the NEXT DAY his father got up and was fine.

President Trump has been criticized by many in the media for advocating the drug which has still not been tested fully in controlled laboratory settings for use in severe Coronavirus cases. The media blame the President for “peddling false hopes.”

Even without formal testing, there are numerous cases that HAVE been proven in which the anti-Malaria drug that found the market in 1950 has worked quickly and effectively at attacking COVID-19. Worthy of note is that Dr. Anthony Fauci of the Trump White House task force is skeptical about Hydroxycloroquine until controlled lab testing is complete.


Dozens of people in South Korea who were diagnosed as recovered from the virus have tested positive again after leaving quarantine. Officials state 51 people from Dawgs and the surrounding area tested positive “a relatively short time” after they were released.

The virus was likely “re-activated” according to KCDC Director-general Jeong Eunkyeong. His opinion is that the were NOT re-infected, but that the virus may have gone dormant in their bodies and then re-activated.


What do YOU think?

Many were surprised when on Tuesday, Bernie Sanders announced the suspension of his bid for the presidency. He pretty well knew the die was cast after the last day of primaries proved that IF he had a shot at taking the nomination away from the favorite Joe Biden, it was a tiny shot.

With the COVID-19 pandemic dominating the news and every other part of American life, campaigning came to a screeching stop. That also marked the end of any real chance Bernie may have had to push through to get enough votes to unseat Joe.

Of course, Biden took something of a victory lap immediately following the Sanders statement on national television. And Biden reminded all of Bernie’s supporters that he has a place for them in his campaign. But don’t think Bernie’s done yet.

In his statement on Wednesday, he made a few things clear: he is NOT “ending” his campaign, but rather “suspending” it. What’s the difference? Sanders said he not only plans to keep the delegates through the Democrat Party convention that have committed to him, but he also said: “We want to add to them.” If he, as he says, has no path to the nomination, what’s he going to do with delegates who want him as the nominee and not Joe? Simple: Bernie, because of his socialist policies, will have some power at the Convention regarding what goes into the Democrat Party Platform this year. He certainly wants to fill it with his ideas that encompass several seriously Leftist policies: a $15 federal minimum wage, healthcare for all, some type of wealth confiscation because the wealthy in the U.S. are evil, free college, college debt forgiveness, and the rest you know.

The second reason he’s not releasing those pledged delegates is that with them, he keeps some power. Don’t forget; there are several Democrat primaries still to come. Sanders will still be on those ballots. He has the opportunity to win some, and that might give him some leverage in a Biden Administration that if he withdrew and lost those delegates he probably wouldn’t get.

Bernie Sanders is a pretty smart guy! Don’t sell him short. Remember: in now two presidential elections, Sanders has not only done a “good” job, but he’s also come close to a nominee in both. Though he certainly is much further left than is Joe Biden, Sanders has amassed an army of millennial voters who relish most if not all of his socialist ideas – especially the economic ones. To many of those voters, he’s now an icon. Whatever policies he pushes for in the Democrat Party platform creation, he’s certainly accumulated leverage to have a seat at that table.

Then there’s a Biden Vice Presidential candidate. What do you think that will look like? Conventional wisdom is that he must choose a woman – a woman of color, preferably.

The “likely” list is a short one. Sources within the Democratic Party say that Biden’s team has a list of nine potential running mates they are considering, with the two top contenders for the nod being Sens. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Kamala Harris. Neither has the star power that would be a likely reason for their being chosen, but both are solid Democrats who, though left of center, are certainly more in the vein of assisting Biden to procure that moderate vote.

If you remember, way back last year, Sen. Kamala Harris was our pick for the Democrats to name as their presidential candidate. Our reasoning centered around her being a woman of color, a former California Attorney General, a U.S> Senator who has made her mark before the American public in quite a few televised hearings in which she has staunchly taken on all conservative legislation ideas and has at times been brutal in hearings with pretty much any member of the Trump Administration that comes before her.

Though historically who a nominee chooses as their Vice President running mate is significant, whoever is selected by Biden is a critical choice. Biden illustrates almost daily publicly exhibits some of the “not-so-pleasant” results he has of advanced age. His doing so day after day has put the question in the minds of most Democrats, “If we elect him, can he last until 2024?”

That SHOULD be an easy answer for any presidential candidate. In Joe’s case: not so easy. And that makes his choice of running mates even MORE critical than if he was still a spry 45-year-old Spring chicken.

Could Harris do the job if called on? Could Sen. Klobuchar handle it? That’s a tough one to answer honestly. While both are incredibly experienced, neither has proven their toughness sufficient to comfort the party members that they could handle it if and when called to do just that.

As of now, “Sleepy Joe” is on his own!

Citizenship No Longer Necessary to Vote in the U.S.

Most Americans have looked-on with growing concern as states across the nation are allowing non-citizens the right to vote. There are many reasons for such concerns. Those reasons center on fears of the weaponization of the votes of illegals for partisan political gain. A political party, if able to convince illegals that party can “help” those illegals in some ways sufficient to gain their votes, can gain control   of those votes. If you’ve ever wondered why Democrats from top to bottom of their party fight closing the southern border, resist the revision of immigration laws, hate ICE and Border Patrol agents, and continuously berate those inu Congress who support legal immigration, wonder no more. For Democrats, their immigrant support is about one thing: votes.

There certainly are those in the Democrat Party who have soft hearts for real refugees who are seeking asylum from persecution in their home countries. But the majority of Dems look at each illegal immigrant that finds their way into the U.S. as a potential future vote for the Democrat Party.

Why are Democrats so set on increasing their base in this way? Why do they fight legal immigration laws currently in force while refusing to legislatively work with members of Congress to fix laws that they dislike?


The Democrat Party (and the Republican Party for that matter) conduct massive amounts of continuing research — primarily polling. This polling is to discover what voters think and try to corral as many as possible into the Democrat Party while picking off as many as possible from the Republican Party (That cuts both ways.) Voters who are NOT party-affiliated are BIG targets.

It is apparent that Democrats more than the GOP have launched significant efforts to seize political power across America. Dems are sure that with political power, they are better able to easily control the political processes — ALL of the political processes — in the United States. Dems are no longer content to go with the normal flow of election results every two years. They want permanencypermanent political power.

But here’s their problem: during the last four decades, Americans have become more involved in the political process than ever before. The information that flows from satellite communication, the internet, and the availability of 24/7 news and other information, has captured the eyes and ears of the nation. One would think that is great news for everyone, including political parties. After all, the “whole” truth beamed to Americans from multiple sources should always result in decisions that are rooted in facts. For some, though, facts are often undesirable. And sometimes, plans are implemented to change those facts or at least the perception of what “real” facts are in political matters.

Try as both parties have, in the last twenty years, the percentage of voter-split between Democrats, Republicans, and Independents has barely changed. According to Gallup, in 2005, 29% of registered voters were Republicans, 32% were Democrats, and 36% were Independents. Fast-forward to 2019; It’s 28% Republican, 28% Democrats, and 41% Independents. Considering the two-decade registered voter split, political power remains almost equally divided. Independents hold the balance for victory in every national election. (See the voter numbers in the following chart)

              Registered Voter Split for all U.S. States and the District of Columbia

Non-Citizen Voting: Illegal

Mass immigration has made a significant impact on American electoral politics. Despite the fact that it is a crime for aliens to vote in federal elections, noncitizens and illegal aliens are counted when apportioning congressional districts. This means that areas with large numbers of illegal alien residents gain additional representatives in Congress based on U.S. Census results.

In addition, there is evidence that both foreign nationals who are lawfully present in the United States and illegal aliens have voted in recent elections. Noncitizens have been discovered on voter registration rolls in both Virginia and Pennsylvania.  And the Office of the U.S. Attorney for the Western District of New York recently announced that it charged a Canadian woman with making a false claim to citizenship after she registered and voted in more than 20 elections.

Several past elections – for the presidency and other offices – have been extremely close. Accordingly, ballots cast by noncitizen voters have the potential to improperly alter the outcome of elections. Consider how close the 2000 presidential election was as was the 2016 presidential election. Could the outcomes have been affected by noncitizen voting? The answer is yes.

With the 2020 election fast approaching, the possibility exists that voting by noncitizens could significantly influence the results. Many immigrants’ rights groups contend that noncitizen voting constitutes a harmless misunderstanding of the rules and should not cause great concern. Many feel  it enables individuals whose interests may not coincide with those of the American people to exert influence on our domestic politics. Given the rate at which both the legal and illegal alien populations have grown, the United States should be concerned with ensuring that the electoral power of U.S. citizens is not undermined and with protecting the United States from foreign influence.

In March of 2019 (3/20/2019) we shared examples of verified findings that in the 2016 federal elections several million illegal votes were cast in the U.S. Yet our government refuses to diligently and aggressively prosecute illegal voters with maximum felony sentences for doing so.

Voter ID

The United States does not currently issue any general-use document intended to confirm both identity and citizenship. There have been numerous attempts made to mandate some form of acceptable legal identification for all to use to vote in a federal election. Those on the left have fought vigorously in the courts to keep such a requirement from being implemented. Though the mantra in opposition universally centers around such a requirement being unfair, unnecessary, and racist in nature, most Americans simply shake their heads in disbelief. One cannot fly on a plane, rent a car, apply for or receive federal government assistance, open bank accounts, purchase a car, marry, or enter many buildings without proof of identity. An ID is required for anyone to enter any national Democrat Party meeting or convention and even a called meeting of Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA).

The cries for identification for voters have been ratcheted up by recent actions taken on the part of several states. Knowing that state-issued drivers licenses seem to be the easiest method for personal identification, several states are now allowing licenses for illegal aliens.

Democrats in the New York Senate January 9, 2020, passed a law that would automatically register anyone as a voter when they get their driver’s license, something all illegal aliens can get since December. Senate Bill S6457B, which is in the process of being passed by the Assembly, provides that anyone who obtains a driver’s license in New York state will be registered as a voter by default unless they specifically mark a box waiving membership on the voter roll.

What is disturbing about this measure is that it would de facto grant the right to vote to hundreds of thousands of immigrants who, as of December 2019, can obtain a driver’s license in New York state thanks to a law passed in June. Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed the Green Light Act last year, which allows anyone over the age of 16 to apply for a driver’s license regardless of immigration status, and will also not require a Social Security number.

The Right to Vote

Those that fight so aggressively against Voter ID claim such requirements circumvent the right to vote. What enfuriates millions of legal Americans is the Constitutional guidelines that gave Americans the right to vote and the laws that control voting eligibility are being trampled or just ignored.

“Wait a minute,” you say. “Where in the Constitution is the process of voting guaranteed to every American? That’s a good question.

You may be surprised to learn there is NO specific section of any Article or Amendment in the Constitution that grants or guarantees the right to vote to every citizen. But there are certainly mentions of the right to vote.

The phrase appears for the first time in the Fourteenth Amendment, which says that states shall lose congressional representation “when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime.”

But whatever Section Two of the Fourteenth Amendment means, it really can’t mean that everyone must be allowed to vote. It penalizes states that withhold the ballot but does not require them to grant it. The Fifteenth Amendment, however, does speak specifically of “the right of citizens of the United States to vote.”

In this form, it will appear a total of three more times, each time now protected against abridgment, as an individual right “of citizens,” one that can be enforced by both courts and Congress. Yet courts and citizens remain oddly ambivalent about it; it is common to regard voting as a “privilege,” an incident of citizenship granted to some but not all. The “privilege” over the years has been made dependent on literacy, or long residency in a community, or ability to prove identity, or lack of a criminal past. None of these conditions would be allowed to restrict free speech, or freedom from “unreasonable” searches, or the right to counsel, even though each of those rights is mentioned once in the Constitution. The right to vote of citizens of the United States remains a kind of stepchild in the family of American rights, perhaps because it is not listed in the Bill of Rights.

In the Fifteenth Amendment, the right to vote is not to be “denied or abridged on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.” Note the second verb. Many things might “abridge” a right without “denying” it altogether. Whatever the status of the right as a right, it is apparently strictly protected from any kind of limit — any kind of limit, that is, based on “race, color, or previous condition of servitude.” The target is clear — racial restrictions on voting, or restrictions of the voting rights of former slaves. It is common to describe the amendment as aimed solely at racial restrictions on the right to vote.

Voter ID

This process is claimed by strict Constitutionalists to be one of preserving the privilege of voting by preventing anyone who is not a citizen from voting. As mentioned above, it is a federal crime to vote illegally in an election for federal officials. States that have passed strict voter ID laws find themselves in federal court defending against suits based on discrimination charges alleging that such laws actually “abridge” the right to vote based on race. Somehow their conclusion is that minority people under such a requirement it is discrimination. Why? Because, they say, minorities do not have the same capabilities to register to vote as do white Americans: obtaining drivers licenses, state issued ID cards, passports, etc.

Though those claims are really vapid, liberal courts around the nation in multiple such cases agree with those making these claims. I find it humorous to watch interviews with dozens and dozens of African Americans in multiple cities both large and small that state the racism in this matter is from those who say minorities do not have the capabilities in large to obtain ID’s. 

One 55-year-old African American woman  who lives in New York expressed it best: “It is insulting for anyone to think blacks don’t have ID’s.” She continued, “Think about it: we can’t fly on a plane, apply for social security benefits, Medicaid, federal assistance, buy cigarettes or beer, drive a car, and even go our children’s school without proof of identification.” She concluded with this: “I don’t know a single African American adult that does NOT have a photo ID.”


What should be the ONLY factor that weighs on the minds of any Americans about being able to vote or not is the “LEGALITY” of someone to vote. What IS included in the Constitution is the Rule of Law. In our Constitution, in Congress, and in State House across the country, bills are passed, agreed to as required and signed into law by Presidents and governors. Each of these is part of the process of governing legally — or adherence to the Rule of Law.

To that end, here’s what EVERY American should demand: the enforcement of every passed law in the United States…period. Certainly, everyone has a right to object to any law. But no one has the right to break any law.

There’s a process in the U.S. regarding federal laws, in states regarding state laws, and locally regarding local laws to amend laws, change laws, or doing away altogether with laws the populace desires. That’s part of the Rule of Law. And anyone who breaks any of those laws does so illegally and, by definition, is guilty of breaking the law.

When did it become OK for anyone — anyone at all — to arbitrarily break laws or simply ignore them? Doing so is NOT OK.

And if Democrats choose to fight to allow illegals who enter the country by breaking laws, or to encourage any to vote illegally, they should be held accountable.

One final note: it is the height of anti-Americanism to vote illegally and/or to encourage others to vote illegally. And it’s stupidity for any American to facilitate such actions.

The Media Trump “Bombshell”

“The Walls are closing in,” “We’re at a tipping point,” and “It’s the beginning of the end!” These are the incessant cries from the Leftist Mainstream media in America. And these are not new warnings or new allegations. These began even before the day of President Trump’s inauguration.

So what is this all about? Corruption in the Media.

In our series entitled “Corruption U.S. Government Style,” we promised to give you six certain pieces of proof of existing corruption in the U.S. government. We gave you five, but told you we would give you the sixth “in a few days.” We did tell you the sixth would come from the formerly “unofficial” branch of the government that has been made official by the Democrat Party: the Mainstream Media. One might argue regarding the term “official.” I would agree there has been no formal appointment by the DNC of their media sycophants as part of their party, let alone, no Congressional appointment for them. But what cannot be disputed is the daily precise coordination between Democrats and the Media in messaging. It seems that every network and newspaper that are known for being “Anti-Trump” carry and broadcast the same canned headlines and stories as each other during the same Newsday. It is so common it would be disingenuous for anyone to argue that coordination does not happen. If you are one of those Americans who live in a world void of television news, or if you are one who believes the claims of independence in news and truthfulness of those who present it to us, let’s try to bring you back to Planet Earth!

TruthNewsNetwork could spend hours of your day showing and playing for you actual date and time-stamped examples of these same things happening not just during the Impeachment Inquiry, but since the 2016 election campaign. There exists volumes of examples that confirm what many formerly claimed was nothing more than a conspiracy. It’s real and…

American Mainstream News IS coordinated!

Who’s In Charge?

Naming a person, a group, or an organization as the “Boss” of these coordinated attacks on President Trump would be speculative. I’m reasonably confident I know where it originates, but I refuse to speculate. On this subject, I’ll be just like Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) regarding the whistleblower’s identity: “We must protect the guilty so lies can sacrifice the innocent!” (Of course my speculation there was not real and was emotional: please forgive me.)

It is much easier to determine who is NOT in charge. All of these Trump allegations target a sitting president that was elected by 63 million Americans. That process was conducted legally, fairly, and its results are indisputable. Those results were based not on emotion or opinion, but on the elements of presidential choice alone: an election. That process was implemented by a group of intelligent people who set out to do so with one objective in mind: to craft a government structured entirely to operate at the behest of Americans — ALL Americans. No American has ever been more important than their neighbors or other family members. And any variations of that one fundamental are attacks against the foundation blocks that constitute the United States of America. Those variations are nothing more than the opinions of people who are driven by “self-agendas.” And “Self-agendas” are NOT Constitutionally protected.

It doesn’t matter who is in charge and who — if anyone — is organizing a “messaging process, what matters is that the Media have let Americans down.


In third-world and totalitarian countries, news organizations controlled by the State have had their news justifiably labeled as “Propaganda.” Propaganda is the State’s version of the truth. But it certainly is not. In each such situation, the Media has become a combined messaging entity controlled by the latest messaging entity in each country. And, sadly, it’s true in the U.S. today just like in those third-world countries we referenced.

The Media have:

  • become a propaganda machine for the Left;
  • become a clear and ever-present bias purveyors against all things conservative;
  • A source that is pushing narratives that are ripping this country apart;
  • A reference to promote racism and bigotry where there is NO evidence of such behavior;
  • A source of misinformation and outright LIES without vetting sources or fact-checking stories.

In essence, they’ve stopped telling Americans the truth.

The Media Is Failing At Its Job

They’re supposed to be the 4th Estate, the “checks and balance” for the American people to war against the government growing too comfortable in their inevitable shift towards tyranny. It’s the media’s job to STOP that shift—or at least slow it down—and they’re not doing that.

Trump has called them the “enemy of the people,” and the fact that they’ve chosen sides and refused to do their actual job goes a long way in proving him to be 100% correct. And, unfortunately for them, Americans are FINALLY starting to notice.


  • A recent Rasmussen poll indicates that the vast majority of American voters (including 69% of independents) are angrier at the media than they are at either President Donald Trump or his political opponents.
  • 61% of Americans expressed anger at the media (up from 53% last year) while voters’ anger at the press is also higher than their anger at either President Donald Trump (53%) or his political opponents (49%) and far more Republicans (83%) than Democrats (33%) say they’re angry at the media.
  • More than two-thirds (69%) of unaffiliated voters say they’re angry at the media.

Republicans being angry at the disproportionate bias makes sense. The treatment of the president and all things from the Right is horrendous. The most prominent news outlets in the country all lean to the Left. And the one company that is supposedly in Trump’s corner – Fox News – is only 47% favorable towards the President, while 53% of its reports are negative. So, if anything, Fox News is CLOSER to being fair and balanced towards the president.

It is fair to note that although FOX News is not harmful in their overall reporting of the President, that is NOT Pro-Trump.

So what is news supposed to read like, look like, and sound like?

Real News Defined

“News is information about current events. This may be provided through many different media: word of mouth, printing, postal systems, broadcasting, electronic communication, or through the testimony of observers and witnesses to events. Common topics for news reports include war, government, politics, education, health, the environment, economy, business, fashion, and entertainment, as well as athletic events, quirky, or unusual events. Government proclamations concerning royal ceremonies, laws, taxes, public health, and criminals have been dubbed news since ancient times. Humans exhibit a nearly universal desire to learn and share news, which they satisfy by talking to each other and sharing information. Technological and social developments, often driven by government communication and espionage networks, have increased the speed with which news can spread, as well as influenced its content.”

This definition originates from that bastion of news independence, journalistic integrity, truth, and honesty: Wikipedia. If one performs an internet search to find actual descriptions of News, its purposes, and its abuses, you’ll find that news has never been without bias and personal opinion.If anyone says to youthat “their” news IS 100% truthful, without prejudice, and without political or personal perspective, run away as fast as you can! Why is that? Because we are all people, all human, and all embodied with a brain with which to observe, consume, process and spew to others the consensus of what our minds have prepared from all those elements we have absorbed from outside sources woven into our minds.

We in no way are trying to excuse and or all those in the news media who practice untruthful production and dissemination of news regularly. Most of those abandoned the fundamentals of real journalism long ago. Journalism 101 teaches that regarding news, reporting should contain these elements: “Who,What, When, Where.” Stories passed along to news audiences are to include those elements and nothing more. But there is a problem with doing just that.

Humans investigate, compile evidence with which stories that chronicle those investigation findings are written, someone else may give those stories in a newspaper, television news report, radio news broadcast, or even from a stage. And in each such case, seldom if ever are those details given in a manner held to that “Who, What, When, and Where” template. Personal opinion and personal or business agendas most often color the “news” that is transmitted.

It’s that personal opinion that has become both the opiate and the thunderbolt for those who receive news. News organizations know that and have created an environment in which they can feed the hunger — a specific drug a consumer looks for — to anyone and everyone to keep them committed to that news source for that type of news about that type of subject.

Alas, Truth of stories given to the public is no longer mandatory. What IS compulsory is the inclusion of the personal opinion of the one reporting to not indoctrinate the viewer or listener, but to “persuade” that person toward a particular conclusion that is seldom based on fact.

We’ll close today’s story with a Summary note from actor Denzel Washington. He explains succinctly what has been and is still happening in the news industry. Without saying it, Denzel is portraying the evil of today‘s Mainstream Media and the horrors it is spewing on us all.

We’ve said this many times before but it bears repeating: if we choose to NOT awaken to the plethora of untruthful information flooding our lives and the lives of those around us, we deserve the results we receive from the absorption of it all. What are those results?

We form opinions based on information we digest no matter if true or not. We share those with others who then create their own ideas to share with others. To be  blunt: the Media are being allowed by Americans to paint a new picture of our World each day that has had the truth excised before its dissemination, replaced with opinion and specific narratives the reporting entity or individuals want us to consider as Truth.

Denzel expressed it best:

The Racsim of Sudafed

Do you believe there is voter fraud in federal elections? Have you heard numerous politicians rail against claims by some that there is rampant voter fraud? So which is it: are those who would stake their careers on the fact there is no voter fraud deluded or are those who swear it not only is rampant but that many politicians know it exists and by denying it promote it? Before we finish today, you’ll have your answer.

There you have it: I guess we have our answer. According to President Obama, in his very last press conference as President put the claims of voter fraud to rest. Any news of voter fraud in his words is “fake news.”

  • According to a Pew Charitable Trust report from February 2012, one in eight voter registrations in the U.S. are “significantly inaccurate or no longer valid.” Since there are 146 million Americans registered to vote, this translates to a stunning 18 million invalid voter registrations on the books. Further, “More than 1.8 million deceased individuals are listed as voters, and approximately 2.75 million people have registrations in more than one state.” Numbers of this scale provide ripe opportunities for fraud.
  • In a recent poll of illegal aliens, 13% stated they had previously voted in federal elections.
  • In May 2016, CBS2 Los Angeles identified 265 dead voters in southern California. Many cast ballots “year after year.”
  • North Carolina announced in April 2014 that 13,416 dead voters were registered, and 81 of them recently had voted. Among 35,750 North Carolinians also registered in other states, 765 voted in November 2012, both inside and outside the Tarheel State.
  • South Carolina’s attorney general concluded in January 2012 that 953 people “were deceased at the time of their participation in recent elections.”
  • The Public Interest Legal Foundation recently discovered that Virginia removed 5,556 non-citizens from its voter rolls between 2011 and last May. Among these non-Americans, 1,852 had cast a total of 7,474 illegal ballots across multiple elections.
  • Philadelphia tagged 50,000 voters who had duplicate voter registrations.
  • Texas Secretary of State David Whitley announced his office had identified 95,000 non-citizens who are currently registered to vote in Texas — 58,000 of whom have voted in one or more elections.
  • Political scientist Jesse Richman of Old Dominion University in Norfolk, Virginia, has worked with colleagues to produce groundbreaking research on noncitizen voting. Based on national polling by a group of universities, a report by Mr. Richman said 6.4 percent of the estimated 20 million adult noncitizens in the U.S. voted in that 2016 presidential election. He extrapolated that that percentage would have added 834,381 net votes for Mrs. Clinton, who received about 2.8 million more votes than Mr. Trump.

We could go on and on giving you example after example, statistic after statistic, story after story illustrating voter fraud in America. Examples like a rental car found the day after Florida elections at the Tampa airport with boxes of completed ballots that were forgotten by the renter. Conventional wisdom is that those were to be used to help pick winners.

But even in the face of all these facts, even in the front of all the cases in which actual criminal litigation takes place, and people actually go to jail, the U.S. Department of Justice does nothing to implement a process or several processes to assure Americans that every American of legal age who registers and votes can be confident their vote really does count and that no one is able to cheat by rigging the voting system against them and all other legal voters.

Why does the DOJ sit on its heels about this? We know they’re swamped, finding crimes committed in many other areas that impact Americans and even our government. But in the wake of learning foreign governments are working diligently to influence our elections and these examples of voter fraud given above, yes, the Justice Department realizes the most important and precious thing in our nation that differentiates us from most other countries is our election system. And Americans want it protected.

But do our politicians?

Politically Speaking

The easiest way for politicians today to influence the tide of American opinion is blanket allegations of racism. We see it happen all the time. We will not get into a discussion today on what is and what is not racism. We all know that it’s real and that it is a horrible stain on the historical fiber of our nation. But let’s be clear on this one thing: with all of the allegations by politicians of systemic racism in our elections they allege is to disenfranchise minority voters, where are specific examples they give to Americans that justify those claims? We don’t see or hear of them! Why is that? Because they’re not happening.

Indeed, there are isolated examples of people attempting to impact elections for one reason or another. And when those appear, Americans certainly expect law enforcement to take care of those holding any offenders accountable for their wrongdoing. That said, Americans are tiring of every time someone of another political party wins elections those in the other party start screaming about vote tampering and voter fraud. The simple fix is for local, state, and federal officials to all get on the same page, identify the already identified election fraud and deal with those, but put in place a process to make sure that none happens moving forward. There is no better defense against allegations of voter fraud than “that did not happen because it cannot happen in the American voting system. Our government has instituted a failsafe process to make certain no election tampering can change any votes.”

What’s the holdup for such a system? Unfortunately — in this case, at least, there are not sufficient in number enough Congressional members who are willing to take definitive action to stop voter fraud. I know: it’s hard to fathom that such exists. But it does. Who is it?

Why do you think Democrats have so viciously attacked President Trump and other Republicans for trying to close our southern border? Think about how ridiculous and dangerous their obstinance in implementing closed borders has been. The answer is simple: they want the border to remain porous and actually would prefer if we’d do away with the southern border completely.

Their Reasoning

Democrats have for at least 60 years appealed to minorities — especially the African American community. Democrat leadership has convinced a vast majority of that group that their party is the party that cares for minorities and that Republicans are evil.

In doing so, they paint a version of history that is the opposite of the truth regarding the political support for minority rights in America. In doing so, the Democrat Party has created a narrative that tells black Americans that they owe their votes to Democrats because of Democrat Party policies that those black Americans should know help blacks and other minorities.

None of this is true.

First, Democrats brought slavery to America, built it into a monster enterprise, and did not want it to stop. “That’s not what was taught in history class,” you might say. “We were taught southerners — primarily wealthy Republican plantation owners — fought to keep slavery. It took Democrats from the North to free the slaves in the Civil War against those southern slave owners.”

Yes, southern plantation owners were indeed among many who wanted slavery to remain. But those plantations owners were almost all white Democrats. Just remember this: 300,000 white Americans lost their lives in the Civil War fighting to give slaves their freedom.

But even as the Democrat cries of racism against Republicans through decades, facts prove otherwise:

  • A Republican president led the nation to abolish slavery and not a Democrat Party president. Abe Lincoln made it happen:
  • The Republican Party passed legislation to free slaves against stiff resistance from Democrats.
  • The Republican Party passed legislation that gave blacks the right to vote over intense Democrat angst.
  • A Republican President — Dwight Eisenhower — gave African Americans the right to serve in the American military.
  • A Democrat President, Lyndon Johnson, tried to pass the Civil Rights Act but could not get it done. He had hardly any support from Congressional Democrats. It took a large contingent of Republicans to join Johnson to pass it.

There are many members of a minority that have heard these lies so many times they feel they have but one choice: to accept them as fact. I listened to this first when I was a kid, “Tell a boy he can jump over a barn over and over again until he actually will believe he can jump over a barn.” The same holds true here. But there must be some way we can find a consensus regarding two things: there is systemic voter fraud in almost every federal election, and we must find a way or several ways to build a system to prevent voter fraud.


Let’s get right to it. Please note: this should apply for every voting precinct in the U.S. for every federal election. Because currently national elections are overseen and operated by local and state voting authorities, it will require a federal-state partnership with the two entities working together. Probably, states would piggyback on this federal process to assure their elections are tamper-free. We will NOT discuss logistics or operational details here. These would necessarily be worked out by state and federal authorities. In our opinions, here is what to be failsafe this process must contain:

  • IT security products at both federal and state levels that prevent outside electronic intervention and surveillance;
  • a state central IT clearinghouse that can both view actual elections as they occur and can tally voting results for every federal election in almost real-time;
  • real-time communication from these state election offices with a national clearinghouse run by the U.S. Department of Justice;
  • the ability to police each voting precinct as voting occurs to spot any who attempt on-sight voter tampering;
  • probably the most critical part of such a system is a backup paper ballot system to use if/when any electronic voting system has fatal errors or if surveillance shows voter tampering.

But the most important piece of this process is to protect the entire system in the easiest fashion — the one that Democrat politicians have fought for years: Mandatory voter ID verification for each voter for each time they vote. Seeing or hearing this will make Democrats go crazy! Why? It foils the numerous opportunities to cheat in elections!

Factually it has been proven that millions of voter registrations are incorrect, those registered are deceased, or voters no longer live within the precinct of registration. Using voter ID would end these from impacting votes. But Democrat politicians scream at possible legislation for Voter ID as being “Racist!” That’s their fallback every time. When asked how it is racist, here are the most common reply:

It is unreasonable to expect an African American, only by the color of his or her skin, to be able to procure, hold, and present a photo ID. Primarily, according to the Left, from the Democrats to their allies in the media, Black people, as opposed to Asian Americans and Whites, lack the mental capacity to take a valid photo ID to the polls.

Yes, that is laughable.

I recently watched a news special in which a reporter walked through downtown Philadelphia — a predominantly Democrat stronghold — and randomly stopped black people to ask about this common excuse for Voter ID. To a person, those questioned thought this was incredibly biased and untrue. One young college student put it this way: “I must have an ID for everything — driver’s license, to cash a check, open a bank account, rent a car, board a plane, go to a doctor, or to even go to a Congressional campaign rally! It’s an insult to every black person I know to say it’s too hard for us to get a government ID,” the college student stated.

Further, no person can receive Welfare benefits, Medicaid benefits, unemployment insurance, or even a job application without an ID. There are very few important things we all must do that do NOT require identification — identification that almost all have already.

But the most outrageous requirement for an ID is this: even though Democrats are the ones who trumpet this travesty and have whipped their followers into a frenzy about it for years, one cannot enter the Democrat Party Convention in 2020 without a picture ID!


It’s time for Democrats to stop playing the race card — period — and especially about Voter ID. Voting as someone else in federal elections is a federal crime punishable by fine and imprisonment. Americans can get official ID’s — especially voter ID’s — at no cost from local voting registrar offices universally. And if transportation is a problem, they will arrange to make that happen. There is no justifiable reason for any eligible voter to be unable to obtain an official ID sufficient to vote. And those who say otherwise are lying. Americans need to make ourselves heard to our elected representatives. Congress must pass comprehensive Voter Fraud legislation that begins with Voter ID.

Oh, and that title above regarding racism of Sudafed? No matter your age or color, when one goes to a pharmacy to get the common cold and flu medicine Sudafed, he or she must present an ID. Sudafed is one of the main ingredients used by those who make homemade meth.

But how is that racist? That’s simple: most meth-heads are Southerners — white Southerners. And making those Southerners provide an ID to purchase Sudafed is Racist — because almost all of them are white!


It’s Good for the Goose but NOT for the Gander

Have you wondered what is the purpose of these “impeachment inquiry” hearings not being made live and publicly televised? Remember, the first such hearing WAS televised live with the testimony of Acting Head of the DNI Joseph McGuire. That hearing was a devastating blow to House Democrats led by Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA). Those Dems have been like rabid dogs chasing an elusive and sly old fox, yelping all the time what they commit they will do when they finally run down that fox. But the fox continues to elude those dogs. And the dogs hide their embarrassment for being humiliated again and again. But the fox had done nothing against those dogs anyway.

Democrats have just one opportunity regarding Trump’s impeachment in these hearings. And that is to cherry-pick snippets of witness testimony that when put in Democrat context are purported to be an “Ah-Ha!” soundbite that implicates President Trump in some way. Rep. Schiff has no problem hiding from Americans any of the considerable witness testimony, which they determine is troubling for the Democrat rhetoric which has only one objective: “Impeach 45!”

Why else would Schiff not allow Committee Republicans to have equal time in questioning witnesses, call their own witnesses, cross-examine witnesses, nor allow President Trump’s attorney to participate in these hearings? In any reputable such hearing in U.S. history regarding presidential impeachment, all of the above were considered to be essential for fairness and were allowed by the majority for the House minority members at each impeachment process.

Schiff’s departure from House precedent in former impeachment proceedings has received much criticism from Republicans and many from outside of Washington. Let’s be honest: this is a case in which a duly elected president is being attacked in what is just a faux impeachment inquiry by a political party void of policies to appeal to American voters sufficient to elect their candidate. To make that case, Democrats must hide multiple facts and testimony given by hearing witnesses. There is NO historical precedent for what is playing out each day in Washington.

But let’s pause for a moment and walk across the aisle: to Republicans. It’s common knowledge that the Democrat-led House of Representatives has suspended consideration of any real bit of business to take care of their only legislative desire — impeachment. But what about the Senate? Republicans control the Senate. Why isn’t Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) as chair of one of the most powerful Senate committees having his committee hearing testimony of Eric Holder, Loretta Lynch, Samantha Powers, Susan Rice, James Clapper, John Brennan, even Hillary Clinton and dozens of other Democrats who have each been implicated for felonious wrongdoing during the Obama Administration? It is factual that James Comey lied to Congress on numerous occasions under oath.  Millions of Americans have examined the limited information allowed in the public domain and have reasonably determined there is plenty of factual tidbits there to justify the investigations of all the smoking guns of insurrection being used now and previously to thwart this presidency?

One explanation for Graham’s reluctance is that Senator Graham does not want to embarrass his close friend, the late Senator and former presidential candidate, John McCain. There are many who “know” that McCain actually put the infamous Steele Dossier in the hands of federal authorities. You certainly know that dossier was the piece of “evidence” that instigated the Russian collusion witch-hunt. John Brennan allegedly personally brought that comic book to McCain. That’s the only reason I can fathom for Graham’s inaction other than his possible inclusion in the “never Trump” crowd. I don’t think he’s there. I PRAY he’s not there. That group membership is pretty high in number already.

There are stark differences between the methodology used by Republicans in hearings and that of Democrats. Democrats cringe from the light of transparency they promote as being their # 1 objective. Republicans, unless conducting a hearing with a fully classified status regarding hearing content, always open the hearings to Democrats, the Press, and even to all Americans via television. Why would Democrats in any circumstances not do the same? There should be no demand by Republicans or any Americans necessary to chide Dems into doing so. Transparency in government should be of the utmost importance to them. Why not? There’s something to hide. Try as I might, I can only surmise what their justification could be. I’m certain their reasons (not necessarily justification) are to hide the parts of witness testimony they refuse to allow all of us to see and hear.

Rep. Schiff has earned the reputation of being if not THE most corrupt member of Congress in American history, at least in the top five. Yet he wears that badge of dishonor with pride. He’s never seen a television camera from which he runs, a network microphone to which he will not run, and a lie he may “want” to be justified by some leftist reason that he would not tell. Everything he says and does revolve around his and the Democrat Party’s political desires and necessities to achieve those. Simply stated, “Donald Trump stands in the way of both of those.”

King George III

Do you know who he was? He was the ruthless king of Britain who governed when the weighty decision was made by early American settlers to leave for the New World. What kinds of things did King George III do that were so egregious that hundreds and eventually thousands of former Britts would leave their homeland to immigrate to America?

George III was an elitist, a pure bureaucrat, and a spendthrift. George III taxed colonists without letting them have a representative in Parliament, he created the Quartering Act which stated that British troops would be sent to ‘protect” colonists [From nothing in particular] and that if a troop came to a colonists door then the residents would have to take care of that troop or troops. He also created the stamp act which taxed colonists for every piece of paper they used. The famous “Boston Tea Party” was a revolt by American settlers for the regressive and abusive taxes by George III on tea. Rather than pay taxes, settlers dumped huge amounts of tea in Boston Harbor.

George III refused to allow the freedom of religion. He demanded every Britt be a member of his church. That alone instigated the emigration of thousands of Britts to America to pursue their own religion or the right to choose not to be part of any religion at all.

He demanded that laws for the New World were to be made by Britan’s Parliament. American settlers refused to accept British government rule. Hatred for the tyranny they experienced regarding lawmaking figured dramatically into the decision to fight the Revolutionary War.

George III had dismal human rights violations. He and others in his government did not recognize those in low economic classes in Britain or in America. They refused to give those equal rights with other Britts and many America settlers. And those in America grew to hate the inflexible and most demanding monarch of that century anywhere in Europe.

Donald Trump

I laugh at the depictions by many of Donald Trump as an “Authoritarian,” a “Dictator,” or a “Despot.” He could not be further from the mindset and position which these names denote.

One of the chief reasons for the angst held by Democrats and their press minions is that Trump is too loyal to everyday Americans, their needs and their desires for the government. In fact, no previous American President during the past century has been more committed to working-class middle Americans than has Donald Trump. His commitment is not one of only talking points and lip service. He has issued numerous executive orders to roll-back untenable regulations that crippled corporations so that former U.S. companies that left under the Obama presidency have returned to the U.S., many of which have located in the Midwest — “Middle Class America.” He’s fought for wage increases that are dramatic and verified for the Middle Class. Middle-Class tax relief is dramatic despite what the Mainstream Media report. Economic and job numbers bear-out the truth that under Mr. Trump, the Middle Class in the U.S. are significantly better of financially as direct results of massive job creation and subsequent employment, historic unemployment lows in every segment of the economy and for every economic class of Americans — especially that of African-Americans.

“Authoritarian” government is that which is dominated by “A” person who demands and takes control of all or most of that nation’s operations in every sector. Mr. Trump even while campaigning for the White House made clear his feelings for average Americans. Each of his policies, his executive orders, and job programs have been and are targeted as “what’s best for the American Middle Class.” By any measure, the Middle Class in the U.S. is growing in number as never before, wages are making dramatic improvements when compared to those numbers under Clinton, Bush 43, and Obama, and labor participation is at an all-time high. Americans are working and making good money for the first time in at least a decade.

Who’s In Control?

Regardless of what Democrats scream through their Media minions, Donald Trump is NOT in control of government, has never CLAIMED to be in control, and has always in each piece of proposed legislation during his administration fought for policies, bills, and even laws specifically targeted to help the poorest of Americans and the Middle Class. Leftist pundits continue to scream that wage increases are insignificant and have not made differences for the Middle Class. Those pundits are apparently without reasoning, listening, and/or understanding. Statistics confirm the highest increases in American Middle-Class families’ wages in twenty years if not longer. Those pundits don’t tell us about that. They don’t tell us about any of the myriads of other great things accomplished for the Middle Class under Mr. Trump.


Democrats have always, do now, and probably will continue to put Americans in economic and social buckets which those same Democrats feel authorized to do. Those buckets are NOT the same buckets for everyone. Working Class and Middle-Class buckets hold far more Americans than does the one for America’s wealthy. But that makes no difference to Dems.

Picture a couple of geese swimming in your pond: a male and a female. (They’re called “a goose and a gander” — gander being the male). Besides the obvious — male geese are considerably larger than females — there are noteworthy differences in behavior. The breeding behaviors of geese provide an interesting contrast. Geese are perennially monogamous, meaning that one male and one female form a lifelong pair bond. Like ducks, paired male geese protect their mates from harassment by intruders, but their larger size allows ganders to defend against not only other males but also many predators.

American politics can often be viewed the same way we consider male and female geese. Let’s for the sake of this conversation only consider ganders all as Democrats and geese as Republicans. The ganders are territorial and protective. They need to always be in charge. The geese, on the other hand, are content just doing what they do best and do not worry or fret about other ganders or other geese. Ganders seem insecure. Geese are drastically different from ganders.

Today’s Dems are larger, much louder, territorial and confrontational. One can visualize a male goose (or gander) thrashing about in the water to “strut his stuff” in front of other ganders and even geese to make an impression and also to intimidate. Meanwhile, the geese are quiet, busy with their babies, and are content to simply just get along with all who are in their lives. That picture reminds me of Republicans. While I am a confrontational person who finds it unbearable to allow a Leftist to strut around making allegations and statements as factual without confrontation, I more often than not just shut my mouth and let them do their thing. That doesn’t mean I’m fearful or afraid of confrontation at all. It means that I pick my battles and measure all opponents. Most Republicans operate that way. And Democrats cannot or do not wish to understand.

Maybe it would be better for the geese to act more like ganders. I’m fairly certain President Trump would often like that from Senate Leader Mitch McConnell. But at the end of the day, a goose whether male or female is going to act like a goose or a gander, whichever they are. And not everything is good for both all the time. Sometimes something is “Good for the goose but not for the Gander.” And Ganders cannot and will not always be right and will not always be in charge. The same holds true for the Geese.

I wish today the Ganders — Democrats — instead of hating Geese and all they stand for — the Republicans — would find a way to accept the differences for the common good of the family. But so far it seems that’s not in the Gander Instruction Manual. With that thought in mind consider this: Ganders are big and tough. But Geese control the most important things in that family just like at my house…and your house….and every other American house!


Liberalism vs. Populism

What’s the difference? As we ramp up for the 2020 election, Americans need to know the difference between the two. Why? Because in every 2020 election involving U.S. Senators, House Representatives, and the Presidency, Americans’ choice will be to elect either a Liberal or a Populist. Let’s look at the differences.


Defined by Webster, Populism is “A political philosophy supporting the rights and power of the people in their struggle against the privileged elite.”

That definition pretty much tells the whole story. Before 2016, most often U.S. presidential candidates came from either the Democrat Party or the Republican Party. The Democrat Party for two hundred years espoused policies that were somewhat skewed toward the empowerment of the government regarding political operations which directly impacted the lives of Americans. The Republican Party policies leaned toward giving more power regarding political matters to the People.


Defined by Webster, Liberalism is ”a political orientation that favors social progress by reform and by changing laws rather than by revolution.”

It’s interesting to Google the word “Liberalism” and read the differences in definitions. Liberalism is sometimes described as being a “bottom-up” political process in which the people control their government; of being a political process that promotes individualism with a limited government that encourages citizens to reject an oppressive government. In practice in today’s United States, the exact opposite is true of how liberals view government who, feel anything but that.

Democrats have not accepted that Americans understand what liberalism is. And Americans reject it for the most part. Democrats because of their being “outed” for their socialist-leaning liberal concepts and that Americans are onto that philosophy have stopped calling themselves “liberals” and their political ideology that of  “Liberalism.” Dems adopted the terms “Progressives” and “Progressivism” instead. It’s just the “same song — second verse.” The two are one and the same.

Living the Change

Democrat leadership thought their moniker change would be lost on most Americans. That could not be less true. Americans for decades have looked at Democrats as the party of big government, socialist policies, for less citizen-control of politics in Washington with more dependency on D.C. by Americans with less reliance on state and local governments. In other words, “We know what’s best for you. Just keep electing us and we’ll keep doing for you what we KNOW you need.”

The reality of who the Democrat Party and Progressives are is in our faces every day. And Americans started during the Bush 43 first term paying close attention to government matters and which party (or “parties”) had taken over political processes, and which were and are stealing as much power from the people as they can without the people even understanding what was happening.

The “Trump Factor”

Enter Donald J.Trump. Mr. Trump is two things if there are only two things with which he can be labeled: Conservative and Populist. It has been saddening to watch American voters listen as Elites in politics have labeled Mr. Trump again and again with titles that are demeaning and play into the narrative they have created to describe their political philosophy.  To Democrats, President Trump is a despot, a dictator, a demagogue, an authoritarian and a fascist who is not “of” the people, but says without true meaning what he thinks U.S. citizens want to hear. The Leftists think their philosophy is the only one that is realistic and attractive for the U.S. They now fight to no longer be called Liberals. They want to be considered Progressives. Progressivism is nothing like their political structure. Progressive means moving forward with ideas that are positive and encouraging to individuals and groups. Progressivism as Democrats are using it today is actually RE-gressive. They espouse more control by government, less individualism among the populace, and much larger government with a top-down operating political structure.

It’s humorous to know that in numerous foreign countries, Mr. Trump’s populist ideas have been adopted by many who are already serving in government and others who are candidates running for office. It’s unbelievable that some of those candidates are even calling themselves “Trump Populists” as they campaign while comparing their policies which are similar if not identical to those of Trump.

We need to consider the real differences between today’s Democrat Party (Liberals or Progressives) and today’s Donald Trump G.O.P. (Populism and Populist). What better way than to have a well-known, self-proclaimed liberal and longtime member of the U.K. media to make the comparison between Populism and Liberalism, Piers Morgan?:

The “Difference”

Here’s the reality of the struggle by Liberals to reconcile political life in America with Donald Trump right in the middle of it: he’s an enigma! They have never seen an American politician that has accomplished so quickly as Donald Trump. What are those accomplishments?

  • He promised to lower taxes — he lowered taxes;
  • He promised to rebuild our military — he has rebuilt our military;
  • He promised to get NATO members to pay their fair shares of NATO defense — they have begun to pay their fair shares;
  • He promised to reduce crippling regulations put on businesses during the Obama Administration — he’s done so which has envigorated corporate growth and expansion;
  • He promised to push GDP to 3-4 % — He has GDP between 3-4%;
  • He promised to decrease unemployment by creating thousands of new jobs — U.S. unemployment is at all time lows in every employment segment;
  • He promised to get corporations and companies to increase wages — companies and corporations have raised employee raises far above any in the Bush 43 or Obama;
  • He promised to get corporations keeping billions of dollars of profits offshore to bring that capital back to the U.S. — multiple corporations have done just than creating tens of billions in new operating capital for corporate growth, payroll increases, and expansions.

To sum it up: Donald Trump has done what he promised he would do if Americans elected him as the 45th President. The Left still refuses to accept that.


In a world in which labels are arbitrarily created and passed around by members of the American political class ad nauseum, Donald Trump has those elitists stymied. They have tried all the labels with which they can demean him. None stick. And that drives them nuts.

Trump’s public success is an enigma. In modern history, there is no reference to which any political historian can point and say “Here’s what and who Donald Trump is duplicating with the way he governs.”

Control is the elitists’ political weapon of choice. We’ve seen them utilize that tool of dominance both when in control of both houses of Congress and even when the G.O.P. is in the drivers’ seat. They have an uncanny sense of how to manipulate circumstances to fit perfectly within their talking points and their agenda. And many current Trump supporters are aghast when seeing Republican leadership allow this to happen.

A Conservative rebellion began in the U.S. Middle American voters that started the tide of “Trump Populism” in 2016. That message spread from coast to coast during the first three years of the Trump presidency. It is fueled by the positive results of Trump’s policies. Further pushing the cause is that President Trump is the first president in these Americans’ lives who has stood in the face of political assault, one after another, never wavering, never giving in, and never compromising.

We’ll leave today’s story with the words you just saw and heard from one of the U.K.’s foremost objective yet liberal voice in politics — Piers Morgan. Morgan correctly revealed and demonstrated the current wave of Populism ushered in by Mr. Trump. And every day it looks more and more likely that America’s first 21st century Populist President will get a few more years to implement his campaign promises that Congress refused to implement legislatively plus many more.

Stay tuned. We’ll keep track of his progress in doing so at TruthNewsNetwork.



It’s Groundhog Day — Again!

What’s the groundhog fable? If on Groundhog Day the groundhog emerges from his den and he immediately sees his shadow, he will retreat, and Winter will continue for six more weeks. I don’t know how many days have been American voters’ Groundhog Day. Each day we emerge to see the shadow of Washington on the ground in front of us. So we go back into our lives, and the crud in Washington continues. The only difference is the D.C. crud will undoubtedly last longer than six more weeks.

While the House with a multitude of new scheduled hearings is scratching for anything to fuel Trump impeachment, the Grand Groundhog — House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) — keeps coming out to a microphone saying, “There’s no requirement that we have a vote. We’re not here to call bluffs. We’re here to find the truth to uphold the Constitution of the United States. Doing so is not a game for us. This is deadly serious.” The House Speaker then retreats to wherever it is she stays while nothing gets done for another day, another week, but hopefully NOT another year, in Congress.

Americans know full well what members of the Democrat side of the aisle in the House ARE doing: “Impeachment Inquiry.” But what are House members NOT doing?

“They’re Not Doing Any of This”
  1. The House is NOT taking up legislation to reform immigration law.
  2. The House is NOT a taking up legislation to take care of the Dreamers that are not citizens but are young Americans who were brought to the U.S. by their illegal parents and have lived here — many of them — for years.
  3. The House is NOT taking up legislation to honestly examine and debate options with the intent to complete a border barrier on our Southern border to curb illegal crossings.
  4. The House is NOT taking actions to repair the Healthcare debacle that they with Democrats in the Senate created with Obamacare — a health finance program that without serious editing and revisions will bankrupt America.
  5. The House is NOT taking up legislation to curb the opioid crisis that is killing thousands of Americans each month.
  6. The House is NOT taking up legislation to address the nation’s homeless problem that is concentrated in the largest U.S. cities.
  7. The House is NOT taking up real budget issues with long term projections and agreement on government spending tackling waste with honesty to balance the budget.
  8. The House is NOT taking up legislation to support efforts of the Trump Administration that have proven successful in attracting significant corporations that previously abandoned the U.S. for other countries with more favorable economics. President Trump has shown the restructuring of Obama-era corporate taxing and regulation assists in attracting new business with existing U.S. companies while attracting foreign-based companies to relocate to the U.S.
  9. The House is NOT taking up legislation to tackle the deadly graft and corruption among elected officials and unelected bureaucrats in Washington, D.C.
  10. The House is NOT taking up legislation to assure federal and state elections are operated honestly and without foreign interference.
  11. The House is NOT taking up legislation to eliminate election fraud in all 50 states in spite of assurances by former President Obama that there have been NO frauds committed in previous elections.
  12. The House is NOT taking up legislation to rein-in the unfairness of federal election campaign finance.
  13. The House is NOT taking up legislation to regulate or to altogether eliminate federal lobbying, which would remove much of the financial corruption running rampant among members of Congress and members of special interests.
  14. The House is NOT taking up legislation regarding federal and private partnerships for critical infrastructure programs across the country.
  15. The House is NOT taking up legislation regarding the restructuring of the federal tax system to make it fairer and simpler so that every American contributes at some level with personal and corporate investment in its government operations.
  16. The House is NOT taking up legislation to assist our allies in the Middle East in the development of policies to stem terrorist attacks by ISIS and other organizations.
  17. The House is NOT taking up legislation to assure all international agreements between the U.S. and other governments are treaties that require confirmation by the U.S. Senate.
  18. The House is NOT taking up legislation to correct issues that resulted from the federal takeover of the management of college student loans.
  19. The House is NOT taking up legislation to eliminate some House recesses and shorten others to process more legislation that is passed-over because of session time restrictions.

Here’s the big reason the House is not doing more: their work schedule. (click on the hyperlink to go to the 2019 Full House Legislative Calendar)

If you look through the calendar as compared to yours, here’s how many days in each month the House was in session as of October 15, 2019, and how many workdays they have not worked (“workdays are M-F minus federal holidays):

  • January they were in session 19 of 24 workdays
  • February they were in session 16 of 20 workdays
  • March they were in session 16 of 21 workdays
  • April they were in session 14 of 22 workdays
  • May they were in session 17 of 22 workdays
  • June they were in session 17 of 20 workdays
  • July they were in session 17 of 23 workdays
  • August they were in session 9 of 22 workdays
  • September they were in session 16 of 20 workdays
  • October 1 thru October 15 they were in session 5 of 12 workdays

That means in 2019, of 206 possible workdays (Monday through Friday of each week minus Federal Holidays), the House has been in session so far just 146. That means they worked only 71% of the time they could have worked conducting legislative tasks.

In fairness, these Representatives will maintain that they took time to meet with their constituents in their districts during the year and took time with their families for vacations. No one loves family vacations more than I. But taking one week for a family vacation during each of the two years of their two-year-term seems fair. Allowing two weeks per year to campaign in their home districts while meeting with constituents still means they would have worked 156 days of the possible 206 they could have been in session or just 76% of their time while taking a week for vacation and two weeks for meeting with and campaigning among their constituents in their respective districts.

I agree with the premise that the Congressional job is tough. I agree that being away from home while living in a pressure-packed political environment with weighty expectations for job performance is robust. But they each knew all of this when they chose to campaign for the job.

In my professional career, I have had hundreds, if not thousands of employees. Each of those during their job interview received in writing what their job expectations were, work schedule, and a full list of benefits. Each of those hired was expected to abide by the requirements of their job that were revealed and agreed to when they accepted employment. Why should it be different for members of Congress? How can we expect less and allow less than we do from any non-political employee of our own?

Americans have during the last decade lived in a nonstop news environment. That 24/7 news cycle is the “new” norm. Subsequently, Americans are learning more details of government operations. Americans are now as never before understanding the specifics of accomplishments by our elected officials in passing legislation. Therefore Americans know better than ever how the bureaucracy of Washington D.C. was created and has been perpetuated to facilitate working conditions, compensation, and benefits for members themselves that are not as were intended. Americans are angry.


D.C. is not working. Congressional operations must be changed. Members of Congress must work smarter, harder, and longer in their present jobs. If their Congressional job is too harsh, they should resign.

One might consider that an unrealistic expectation. But we all know to live and work in Washington is harder and more demanding than in Hometown America. That is why just a few can do so successfully. Based on the Congressional favorability ratings of Americans, members of Congress are felt to be less than expected and accomplishing far less than expected by Americans. And Americans who see all that is left unfinished are more than ever demanding changes to be made. Congress must complete those essential tasks that are pushed to the back of the line in each Congressional session and never finished.

If you’ve wondered why the Democrat-controlled House has essentially one agenda only — Impeachment — wonder no more. It is because the Democrat Party has only one plank in their party platform for the 2020 election. If Donald Trump is re-elected, it will obliterate their historical operating methods, shine the light of truth in the Swamp, and expose the waste and lack of fulfillment of necessary tasks by each Congress. They cannot allow that to happen.

Expect the angst, bitterness and vocal haranguing to only worsen the closer we get to November of 2020. Don’t expect much legislative progress either. Democrats refuse to allow Mr. Trump any new legislative triumphs until they hopefully vote him out of office.

In the meantime, expect another Ground Hog Day or two often in the next year or so.


Democrat Hatred For “Trump 77”

Remember the famous chants by Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) in public meetings that started immediately after Donald Trump’s inauguration? It started in something of a benign fashion, but it took off. Now you’ll see small rallies of her supporters screaming at the top of their lungs, “Impeach 45! Impeach 45! Impeach 45!” 

Obviously, Trump is the 45th President of the United States. But Ms. Waters’ chants “Impeach 45” are not really what Democrats are angry about. Certainly, they want him gone. But the “Impeach 45” chant had nothing to do with Donald Trump as president. It solely relates to the number “77.”

What’s the significance of the number “77?”

77: The Perfect Number

Let’s eliminate what is NOT the number 77:

  • 77 is not the number of people in the House of Representatives — 435
  • 77 is not the number of people in the U.S. Senate — 100
  • 77 is not the number of U.S. Supreme Court justices — 9
  • 77 is not Donald Trump’s age when he was elected — 70 (pretty close!)
  • 77 is not the number of voters in the electoral college — 538
  • 77 is not the U.S. interstate highway through Washington (I-95) or Manhattan — I-78 (pretty close!)
  • 77 is not the number of Democrat Party 2020 Candidates — a couple of dozen or so
  • 77 is not the number of golf courses Donald Trump’s company owns — 16
  • 77 is not the number of hotels Donald Trump’s company owns — 11

We could go on and on with this. There are many things that are NOT related to number 77 and Donald Trump. To our knowledge, there is only one number 77 that pertains to Candidate Trump/President Trump.

What is it?

77 was the margin of victory in the electoral college by which Donald J. Trump won the 2016 U.S. presidential election over Hillary Clinton: 304 to 227. (Note: Not all members of the electoral college voted for either Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton: 3 were cast for Colin Powell, 1 for “Faith Spotted Owl,” and 3 for Bernie Sanders)

What’s the big deal?

The answer to that is quite simple: though there are 44 previously elected presidents who won their elections by a larger electoral college tally than did Donald Trump, there is no more historically surprising presidential election electoral college result than that of Mr. Trump. And it set the world on fire — at least all those who voted the other way. But it’s the votes of those 77 that launched a hate-demonstration that began immediately after the election and continues to this day some 2 1/2 years later. Those 77 voters (in the minds of Democrats) attacked the very fiber of the Nation by voting against Hillary Clinton. Those 77 obviously did not understand the historical purpose of the 2016 election. What part of the Nation’s fabric was attacked by those 77? In the minds of Democrats is the automatic right for Ms. Clinton to carry-on with the processes, some that were public, some that were secret — of President Barack Obama during his eight years at the top of the U.S. Government. Apparently, those 77 plus their counterparts who voted the same way felt differently than did Democrats.

But isn’t that what democratic elections are supposed to be about? The angst of Democrats for the choice of those 77 should be levied against all 304 who voted against Hillary Clinton (and for Bernie Sanders, Colin Powell, and “Faith Spotted Owl”) if you support that line of reason. But the will of the people has no necessarily direct relation to any political party — unless the majority of those people feel that party’s specific way. And their preference constitutionally always carries the day. That is as it should be.

If we somehow change that process, so will the process put in place by our forefathers that they carefully and meticulously crafted to lash out against the exact  mob-rule control held in Europe that today’s Democrats support: “the majority rules.” To embrace that is to denigrate, de-humanize, and deprive voters in the minority of even having any constitutional election rights. To embrace that negates the substance of our foundation pillar — that of a Constitutional Representative Republic.

Americans chose the latter and overwhelmingly still do.

I remember watching with my parents on a black and white television the results of the Nixon-J.F.K. election. I remember that the election went the way my parents did not feel was the right way. But instead of adopting today’s presidential candidate’s followers reactions, my parents, their friends that felt the same way along with millions of other Americans gave not a single thought to lashing out at the winner, the process, the Constitution, or the Rule of Law. More than the results of any presidential election, they were committed to our country, its laws, its political processes, its Congress, and its president regardless of party affiliation. My parents both wept as we watched John John Kennedy stand stoically in a stiff salute to the flag-draped coffin holding his father as it rolled by on its way to Arlington Cemetery. That day, that year, that decade, the only thing that mattered about John F. Kennedy to Americans was that he was assassinated. That was wrong — everyone, regardless of party, thought that assassination was wrong. Differ from his policies, many did. But he was still our President. And to all those millions of American patriots who chose another candidate, that’s all that mattered to them, too.

So what’s happened? Compared to all the elements surrounding JFK’s 1960 election victory over Republican Richard Nixon, today’s elections and all the hoopla associated with them are equal to the bombing and aftermath of the atomic bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima. There’s no civility. There’s no reasoning. In debates, the overriding objective of every candidate is to destroy their opponents in front of cameras beaming into 200+ million American homes. It’s seldom about policy positions and applicable facts surrounding those positions. Personal attacks and even non-stop attempts to with “political narrative” that is seldom truthful but always demonstrative and loud, denigrate each opponent in ways that scare to death half of all Americans looking-in. Politicians have either lost the ability to make themselves look and sound a better choice for voters based on policies and instead just make sure every voter knows for certain their opponents are the scum of the Earth.


What did our founding fathers feel about the vitriolic demeanor they felt would sneak into the politics of America? Why did they feel it would do that? It’s because they fought it then and felt we should now:

If we do not learn to sacrifice small differences of opinion, we can never act together. Every man cannot have his way in all things. If his own opinion prevails at some times, he should acquiesce on seeing that of others preponderate at other times. Without this mutual disposition, we are disjointed individuals but not a society.”
~ Thomas Jefferson, 23 July 1801

“The spirit of party opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions.“
     ~ George Washington, Farewell Address, 19 September 1796.

  • We must indeed hang together, or, most assuredly, we shall hang separately.” Ben Franklin, 4 July 1996
  • ”Clean your finger before pointing it at others.” Ben Franklin
  • “Love your enemies, for they tell you your fault.” Ben Franklin

I know, I know: I’m holding out hope for impossibilities in this regard. But what I am absolutely certain of is if Congress does not find ways to bridge differences and work together for the specific needs of all Americans, our nation is doomed to the eventual fate predicted by Thomas Jefferson. And that is that democracies typically fall apart after about 200 years. His was a prediction based on history. Based on that history, the U.S. is about 55 years into borrowed time.

Could this be the beginning of the end? It could be, but it certainly does not have to be. If it is to be Armageddon for America, it will be because of the choice of the American majority to allow it.

Some who are partners of TruthNewsNetwork remember when I predicted before Donald Trump formally declared his bid for president that if he ran, he would win. I did not say that because I’m a partisan Republican hack or that I despised Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton or, for that matter, anyone. First, I am not a Republican or a Democrat. I’m a registered voter not tied to either party. For those of you in Rush Limbaugh’s fairytale city of Rio Linda, California, that means I’m a registered Independent. My prediction was not politically based nor was it politically motivated. I’m an entrepreneur, a longtime company owner of a company I founded in 1992, an employer of many people serving many clients, some large, some small. I have 27 years of working with people — fellow Americans — who come from every walk of life. I’m a lifelong Christian who believes in honesty, integrity, communicating peacefully whenever possible, and caring for the needs of others even when those needs do not align with my perspectives on life and may believe others’ needs may be largely because of their own poor decisions. I honestly felt at the time that Donald Trump was and is that kind of person — well maybe minus several of the above traits I wish he had. But, you know what? When I made that prediction, I did not think that I needed (or even could) vote for Jesus Christ: He wasn’t in the race! Donald Trump was the next best choice for me because I felt and still feel he puts the needs and welfare of his fellow Americans above the two most important things all American politicians need to copy: their personal selves and their personal political ideologies.

In living life every day, politics is really just a small piece of the puzzle that they have to align in their lives each day. And only politicians and political hacks have the luxury of being able to think politics is more than that.

A quick note in closing: Tomorrow — Saturday — you will see our Bullet Points for this week so those of you who are interested in the behind-the-scenes of the most important stories of the week that you may have missed, you can get them in short-form. Sunday, we’ll be right back in the saddle with Ukraine-Gate, Impeachment Gate, and Pelosi-Schiff Gate. Don’t miss any of it!


I’m Sick and Tired!

Ten years ago I created a website titled “” Its sole purpose was to allow me to vent regarding craziness in government and in life in general that had very little if any plausible explanations for existing. After six months or so I discontinued it. Why? Certainly not because instances of craziness stopped or lessened in number. It was because documenting the craziness I saw around me did nothing but give me more heartburn and fury when I recalled and wrote about them! But as much as I’d like, it’s impossible to ignore craziness in the governance of our country. It is never more obvious than in tracking Congressional actions on a day-to-day basis. And this “impeachment inquiry” as House Speaker Pelosi and friends have termed it falls into the category of the same craziness that prompted me to start that website.

There is no doubt that impeachment plays a large and vital role in the U.S. government. It was devised by a group of guys who had just fled a European government in which the ultimate authority was always a King and his cohorts. Honesty, fairness, truthfulness, and integrity were necessary for everyone under that government and its laws — except the King and others of his posse. The average guy on the street who worked hard to just feed a family had to abide by different rules. Our forefathers righted that with the finest and longest-lasting nation’s constitution: ours.

The Constitution sets the framework for 100% of the operations of our government — PERIOD! There are guidelines for every part of government operation. In the case where items pop-up that were not anticipated in the late 1700s when it was written, the Constitution includes provisions for altering the original existing rules. Just as important as are the rules themselves are the rules that govern the process to change those rules. That is called “amending” the Constitution.

My angst today centers around the current House of Representative’s actions initiated regarding impeachment. But it’s not for impeachment itself. It is a result of the process for doing so that has consumed the Nation. We saw it first with the Mueller Investigation. We saw the process of an elite class of people who wrestled control of governing away from the core process from the Constitution that was non-existent in those European governments but necessary for the success of America. Let’s dig in.

The Rule of Law

The Rule of Law is the complete structure of the process of creating laws by and for the people of a nation, implementing those laws evenly across the entire body of its citizens, holding every person in the country governed by those laws equally according to the law, and a process for each time there are disputes by either the government or its constituents to address those disputes fairly and impartially. That’s how our founders came up with the three co-equal branches of government: The Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches, each with specific tasks.

So what’s the problem today? Primarily, one segment of the Legislative branch has seized control of the process for enforcing laws fairly and equally among all Americans. And they are without authority, re-writing the “Rule of Law” as it is set forth in the Constitution.

Make no mistake about it: there have been and always will be disputes among lawmakers and those who live by laws and those who are legally obligated to enforce laws. But it has never been more obvious than it is now. This “impeachment inquiry” initiated in the House by Speaker Pelosi and a close circle of her fellow Democrats is the most egregious example of the abuse of the Rule of Law I have ever witnessed. It is best described in this manner:

  • Ordinarily, when a crime is committed, law enforcement is empowered to and then responsible to find any wrongdoers, then to bring those people to the Judicial branch to be held accountable for their wrongdoing. Of course, the wrongdoer who is guaranteed “equal treatment under the law” is entitled to a legal defense to present evidence and witness testimony that disputes the claim or claims of wrongdoing. The Constitution guarantees that every person is “innocent until proven guilty,” called the presumption of innocence.” 
  • Then members of the Judicial branch — attorneys and/or juries comprised of ordinary citizens randomly selected — examine all the evidence, ask questions and obtain answers, and then reach a conclusion, or a verdict.
  • In the case of proof “beyond a reasonable doubt,” punishment, as defined in applicable laws for that wrongdoing, is meted out and the wrongdoer receives the legal sentence. Sometimes sentences are fines, sometimes jail, sometimes both, and sometime exoneration.

It sounds simple, doesn’t it? The framers of the Constitution purposely made it that way so as to protect citizens against the type of top-down unfairness they had lived under in Europe. The premise is that in a fair society, no government or representative of the government should hold a right that supersedes the rights of citizens over which they govern. That is what has been turned inside out by Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), and other Democrats in leadership in the House of Representatives. What we are witnessing is a copycat — albeit updated historically — of the Salem Witch Trials. What were they?

The infamous Salem witch trials began during the spring of 1692, after a group of young girls in Salem Village, Massachusetts, claimed to be possessed by the devil and accused several local women of witchcraft. As a wave of hysteria spread throughout colonial Massachusetts, a special court convened in Salem to hear the cases; the first convicted witch, Bridget Bishop, was hanged that June. Eighteen others followed Bishop to Salem’s Gallows Hill, while some 150 more men, women and children were accused over the next several months. By September 1692, the hysteria had begun to abate and public opinion turned against the trials. Though the Massachusetts General Court later annulled guilty verdicts against accused witches and granted indemnities to their families, bitterness lingered in the community, and the painful legacy of the Salem witch trials would endure for centuries.

Don’t get me wrong: no one is demanding the burning at the stake of anyone — yet. But the hatred and animus for President Trump has deteriorated daily since the day of the 2016 election. The question that must be asked and then answered is simple: Why the hatred from Democrats for Donald Trump?

The Crime

A crime committed is required to initiate any legal investigation regarding finding a perpetrator or perpetrators who commited that crime, their motives, and the crime’s details. In this case, let’s list the crimes that have been committed that have implicated President Trump that could instigate an impeachment process. Here they are:

  1. He’s not “presidential!
  2. He’s a narcissist!
  3. Democrats don’t like him!
  4. He’s arrogant!

There never was a crime by Mr. Trump or any member of his campaign that had anything to do with him that was discovered by the exhaustive investigative team compiled by Robert Mueller in a 3-year, $30-$40 million investigation!

Democrats in locked-step have sniffed for 2+ years to find some dirt sufficient in content to justify impeachment. The more they investigate, the angrier they get. They cannot find Donald Trump wrongdoing.

The latest ploy on their part is a telephone call between the President and Ukriaine’s President Zelensky. Dems were shocked when President Trump released the full call transcript to the public immediately. We all saw and read it. There was absolutely no wrongdoing by Mr. Trump in any part of that call — period. But that only prompted radical Democrats to turn up the heat. In the aftermath of the transcript release, they have gone wild.

I personally believe they planned on using the whistleblower claim from someone who appears to not be a whistleblower at all based on the statute defining it, but is apparently a plant to implicate the President in the interactions with the president of Ukraine. When they drew a blank on that, they not only didn’t stop with their rhetoric and claims, but they increased the lies about the call’s content and the veiled obstruction actions by our President.

Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff— the two impeachment sycophants —held a press conference on Wednesday in which they laid out a case to justify their actions in their unrealistic impeachment “inquiry.” It was easy to see that in Pelosi’s case, she was rattled in the presser because she struggled in her attempts to chide media members to ask her questions that would show she is intent on other legislative matters besides impeachment. She finally achieved getting one such question asked. All the media wanted to discuss was impeachment.

Not long after that press conference, FOX News reported this:

A spokesman for House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., acknowledged Wednesday that the whistleblower alleging misconduct in the White House had reached out to Schiff’s panel before filing a complaint — prompting President Trump, in an extraordinary afternoon press conference at the White House, to directly accuse Schiff of helping write the document.

It shows that Schiff is a fraud. … I think it’s a scandal that he knew before,” Trump said, as the president of Finland stood at an adjacent podium. “I’d go a step further. I’d say he probably helped write it. … That’s a big story. He knew long before, and he helped write it too. It’s a scam.”


Before I summarize today’s story, let me say this: until further notice, TruthNewsNetwork will present on a specific schedule. There is NO doubt that Democrats are hell-bent on impeachment and will dominate national news each day until the impeachment threats die away just as did their Russian collusion and Trump Obstruction of Justice contrived stories have. Therefore, each weekday until further notice, we will concentrate on all daily news items you may have missed surrounding this impeachment process. Our Saturday headline bulletpoints will continue each week. Sundays we will either post a story and podcast about some other important to you topics OR — if current news demands it — we’ll do another impeachment update. I hope that will asist you in managing your time, knowing how our reporting schedule will go.

To quote President Trump, this impeachment inquiry is nothing but another chapter in the “Do-nothing Democrat Party Witch Hunt.” It’s amazing that the Media still thumb their noses at real news that includes the great progress that has been made in the U.S. in just three years of the Trump presidency opting to cover “dirt” on Mr. Trump that is “dirt” that does not even exist. It makes me ask this question: “Who watches, listens, and absorbs their non-stop fact-vacant news reports? Based on CNN’s ratings, they have fewer than a million evening viewers. That’s one million or less from a country of 350 million people. That’s not a wide reach by anyone’s definition.

Where will this all go? The facts are being revealed hour by hour. Even as you read or listen to this, new information has been revealed that is all relevant to the facts regarding the sham investigation the Democrats keep alive.

Yes, I think (barring some unforeseen upsetting horror about Mr. Trump being released) the House will push through with his impeachment. No, the Senate will absolutely not in an impeachment trial find President Trump guilty of any wrong-doing. But they’ll certainly keep it ramped-up.

As a side note, I have a thought as to why they have pushed this so hard to be initiated and completed in such a short period of time. Aparently the Inspector General’s report on his findings of all of the unlawful and/or unscrupulous spying on the Trump Campaign during the 2016 election is to be released any day. Further, it is rumored to be full of damning evidence on many from the Obama Administration, including former Obama Attorneys General Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch, White House National Security Advisor Susan Rice, several Democrat members of Congress, former CIA Director John Brennan, DNI Director James Clapper, a gaggle of high level FBI and DOJ people, Hillary and Bill Clinton and staff at the Clinton Foundation, and various others. Democrats want the angst against Trump to be at a fever pitch when that IG report is released to distract from the information contained in that upcoming report.

Buckle in: It is already and will only increase in intensity and drama in Washington. It’s going to be a wild ride!