Category: President Trump’s Actions

“Doral-Gate”

October 19, 2019

It could not get any worse: the President is trampling on the Emoluments Clause of the U.S. Constitution!

Wow. Just think of it: Donald Trump signed a contract to host at HIS resort property in Miami — “Trump Doral” — the upcoming G7 Summit. Everyone knows it is illegal for a president to politically enrich themselves purposely by using the office of the Presidency to create any financial gain for themselves. Mr. Trump owns Doral! What did he think when he signed that contract?!?

Emoluments Clause of the Constitution

The emoluments clause, also called the foreign emoluments clause, is a provision of the U.S. Constitution (Article I, Section 9, Paragraph 8) that generally prohibits federal officeholders from receiving any gift, payment, or another thing of value from a foreign state or its rulers, officers, or representatives. The clause provides that: “No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States, and no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.”

The Constitution also contains a “domestic emoluments clause” (Article II, Section 1, Paragraph 7), which prohibits the president from receiving any “Emolument” from the federal government or the states beyond “a Compensation” for his “Services” as chief executive. The common purpose of the foreign emoluments clause was to ensure that the country’s leaders would not be improperly influenced, even unconsciously, through gift-giving, then a common and generally corrupt practice among European rulers and diplomats.

How dare the President think he would get a pass from his obligation under that clause in the Constitution and contract with the G7 to host that world gathering? Hotel rooms, meeting rooms, food, and services cost money. Those international diplomats with security and support staff will pay Trump Doral for their visit! That’s unconstitutional and, of course, is an impeachable offense!

You will probably be surprised to know that there are already several lawsuits filed against President Trump using as their purpose and legal support the Emoluments Clause in the Constitution. Those were filed immediately after his election in 2016. There is an excellent and comprehensive analysis of these cases and how several state and federal courts have already ruled on those. This specific analysis is written in legal language and certainly is not in the format I prefer: “Executive Summary.” I’m a bit slow, and it takes pictures with explanations to help me understand intricate legal issues. I am attaching the three-page analysis of existing Emoluments litigation against President Trump. Here’s a link: https://truthnewsnet.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/The-Emoluments-Clauses-Litigation.pdf

Feel free to examine it yourself. For those of you like me who prefer the “executive summary” version of the intricate and court-tested legal opinion of these, here it is: “There’s No There There!”

So why the uproar? There IS much uproar.

How about a swim to cool-off at Trump Doral?

Here’s the take of House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY): “The Administration’s announcement that President Trump’s Doral Miami resort will be the site of the next G7 summit is among the most brazen examples yet of the President’s corruption. He is exploiting his office and making official U.S. government decisions for his personal financial gain. The Emoluments Clauses of the Constitution exist to prevent exactly this kind of corruption. The Committee will continue investigating, litigating and legislating regarding these matters—including pressing for answers to our prior requests about the G7 selection process—but we will not allow this latest abuse of power to distract from Congress’ efforts to get to the bottom of the President’s interference in the 2020 election.” 

And it’s not just Democrats. The FOX News Legal Contributor — former Judge Andrew Napolitano — weighed in: “He has bought himself an enormous headache now with the choice of this. This is about as direct and profound a violation of the Emoluments Clause as one could create,” Napolitano told Neil Cavuto on Fox Business. Napolitano also pointed to Mick Mulvaney’s insistence that Trump would not “profit” from hosting the G-7 Summit at Trump Doral in Florida.

“Most respectfully, Mr. Mulvaney’s focus on profit, while it may make sense in the economic world, is not what the Framers were concerned about,” Napolitano said. “They were concerned about a gift or cash coming directly or indirectly to the president of the United States, even if it’s done at a loss. Now, the president owns shares of stock in a corporation that is one of the owners of this, along with many other investors. He also owns shares of stock in the corporation that manages it. So those corporations will receive a great deal of money from foreign heads of state because this is there.”That’s exactly, exactly what the Emoluments Clause was written to prohibit,” he said.

Let me analyze for you my perspective from spending much time reading and researching the Emoluments Clause and how it impacts President Trump. I have also spent a few hours reading the linked legal analysis and courts’ findings in litigation against the President since his election. I have much respect for Judge Napolitano and his experience. In full disclosure, I hold NO respect for Rep. Nadler, who, with Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) in my opinion, are the bookends to Democrat Party and “Deep State” corruption in Washington. But, Nadler chairs the House Judiciary Committee, so I must say as a Christian “Render to Caesar that that is Caesar’s.” (That means to respect the office Mr. Nadler holds)

After my research and those existing court decisions, my finding is that Trump Doral hosting the G7 summit is NOT in any way a violation of the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution. 

But I’m just a blogger/podcaster. What do we know? The Democrats always know more than others about pretty much everything. Once again, they know more than we do. And they are screaming — LOUDLY.

So what basis is there for the Noise?

The Noise

I know this will come as a surprise to you, but the Emoluments Clause uproar is just one more link in the Impeachment Debacle that Democrats have forced on the American public. They’ve tried so many things to rid themselves of Donald Trump. None have so far been successful. Why? Because there’s been no impeachable offense on the part of the President that support his impeachment.

First, it was Russian Collusion. Then Conspiracy and Obstruction of Justice. Those were just the tips of the iceberg. There are plenty more: 91 more, to be exact!

Do you think I’m kidding? Heck no. Democrats have floated allegations of Trump impeachable offenses that so far number 94. Want to see what they are? Click on the following link that will take you to a page listing those. Then for complete details of each, you can click on the number of that allegation and see complete details: https://lists.grabien.com/list-things-democrats-have-said-trump-could-be-impeached

Summary

With those two attachments and your looking and reading their contents closely, your Saturday is full of essential information. I hope it’s not too much for you to process. After all, it’s Saturday with college football! But I wanted to illustrate to you how voracious these Democrats are to get rid of Mr. Trump. I have only been able to surmise why they are so deadset to impeach him. Do they not interact with American voters who are in their lives experiencing the fruits of the improvements in the nation that are results of Trump’s accomplishments? Do they think that Americans are dumb and cannot watch the national news and examine products from liberal and conservative news sources and determine on their own which are legitimate and which are providing us the news organization’s perspective and not merely the news that we can use to assess the reality of what has happened? I do not understand.

                         A little Golf?

This is NOT solely a conservative issue. This is NOT solely a liberal issue. This is an American political issue that has become an information war. “DoralGate” is simply the latest arrow in the quiver of liberalism that the anti-Trump proponents grabbed that might be the right ammunition to exterminate the 45th U.S. President.

By the way: DoralGate might be number 95 in their list of impeachment justifications. But it will not be the last. There’s another 15 months in President Trump’s first term in office. At the present rate, Democrats could run that number up to 200 impeachment reasons!

One more thought: How would Democrats feel if the President said this to the G7 partners regarding their stays at Doral: “We’ll comp the hotel rooms and meeting rooms for your entire contingency. Just pay for your food and tip the help.” Do you think that would pacify the anti-Trump Democrats and never-Trump Republicans? Probably not. Remember their continuing mantra: “Facts don’t matter. We believe in ‘Symbolism over Substance.'”

In closing, let me pose just one question to you: Do you think that maybe the President purposely put this G7 deal together knowing the amount of uproar from the Left it would initiate? If so, who would be surprised? The President is really good at carrying around that sharp stick and pokes his political opponents consistently. I think it would be hilarious if that’s what he’s doing. More uproar, more noise, and more drama between Donald Trump and the Left.

Nothing more needs to be said.

Play

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

It’s Groundhog Day — Again!

October 17, 2019

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) https://truthnewsnet.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/2019-House-Schedule.pdf

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.

Summary

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.

Play

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Democrat Hatred For “Trump 77”

October 4, 2019

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.

Summary

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!

Play

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

“Impeach 45!”

September 26, 2019

This is the political rally mantra of Representative Maxine Waters (D-CA): “Impeach 45! Impeach 45! Impeach 45!” Those have been her cries since the election of Donald Trump. They initially fell on deaf ears: not so much now. Yes, we’re there!

House Speaker Pelosi announced the House has initiated “a formal Impeachment investigation.”

What is that?

There’s no Constitutional authorization for a “formal Impeachment Investigation,” no House rules allowing a Speaker to unilaterally launch any action involving the entire House. That requires a full vote of the House on the floor. There is no authority for any House Speaker to launch unilaterally a joint investigation using all six of the applicable House committees. Yet Pelosi has done it, all the while obliterating Constitutional instructions for initiating impeachment AND ignoring jointly passed House rules.

Remember this: in this House of Representatives, there have already been two formal votes on motions made to begin “real” impeachment proceedings. Both motions failed miserably in House votes. For that reason, Pelosi decided to ignore the Constitution AND jointly approved House rules. “I’ll just pander to Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and ‘The Gang’ and start this thing myself.” So she has!

Here’s how impeachment is supposed to occur:

In The House of Representatives

An impeachment proceeding is a formal process by which a sitting president of the United States may be accused of wrongdoing. The articles of impeachment are the list of charges drafted against the president. The vice president and all civil officers of the U.S. can also face impeachment. The process begins in the U.S. House of Representatives, where any member of the House may make a suggestion to launch an impeachment proceeding. It is then up to the speaker of the House, as leader of the majority party, to determine whether or not to proceed with an inquiry into the alleged wrongdoing.

Next, the House Judiciary Committee will investigate; there is no time limit placed on their investigation and a likely public hearing would be scheduled at the discretion of the committee chair to vote on the articles of impeachment. A simple majority of the members of the committee would have to vote in favor of approving an article or articles of impeachment in order to proceed to a vote by the full House. The House Judiciary Committee currently consists of 24 Democrats and 17 Republicans; 21 votes in favor would be necessary.

In The U.S. Senate

The Senate is tasked with handling the impeachment trial in which there is a higher threshold that must be reached in order for an impeachment to go forward. What that means is that in the Senate, a higher percentage of the body has to vote in favor of conviction than in the House of Representatives. In the House, a simple majority is needed, and in the Senate, they need a two-thirds majority or 67 percent.

If the Senate fails to convict, then the president]will have been impeached but not removed. Presidents Bill Clinton and Andrew Johnson are examples of this. In neither Clinton nor Johnson’s Senate trials was a two-thirds majority reached. According to the Constitution, at least two-thirds of the Senate have to concur to convict and remove the president from office. Once the president is removed, the vice president typically succeeds him or the normal course of the line of succession will be followed.

While the Senate trial has the power to oust a president from office, it does not have the power to send a president to jail.

Where We Stand Today  Regarding Impeachment

As mentioned above, two House motions have already been voted on in the House, the first in December of 2017. In that vote, an unexpected large number of Democrats voted in favor to launch impeachment proceedings against President Trump, revealing the growing agitation among liberals to remove him from office. The House, however, voted overwhelmingly 364-58 to table a resolution from Rep. Al Green (D-Texas) laying out articles of impeachment against Trump, with four Democrats voting “present.” “Tabling” a resolution means simply a vote against the motion.

All Republicans voted with 126 Democrats to defeat the resolution. Those Democrats included Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-MD), who announced ahead of the vote they would vote against the effort. They cited the ongoing investigations by congressional committees and the FBI special counsel. “Now is not the time to consider articles of impeachment,” Pelosi and Hoyer said.

The second bill to impeach the President occurred two-and-one-half months later, on January 19, 2018. Every Republican again voted against the bill, but twelve Democrats changed their votes to “Yes.”

Obviously, neither bill passed so no House impeachment process was implemented. If the majority of House members approve the articles of impeachment, those articles will go to the Senate where each article will be considered separately. (In President Clinton’s impeachment, the House considered four charges separately against him. He was impeached based on the agreeing on two of the four: his conviction for lying under oath, and also for witness tampering). At the presentation conclusion, a vote will be taken regarding confirmation of each of the impeachment articles. As mentioned above, two-thirds of the 100 U.S. Senators would have to vote in favor of at least one of the charges against him approved by the House before that would occur. The Senate would then immediately remove the President from office.

How Did We Get Here?

If you’ve been on the back 40, you may think this is all brand new. No way. As shown above, House member Al Green (D-TX) offered a bill to initiate impeachment December 2017. But way before that, Democrats in Congress had already sowed “impeachment seeds” for Trump impeachment. That actually began before Trump was even inaugurated — he wasn’t even President!

That freshman House member just said he would support the impeachment of Donald Trump: that was January 18, 2017 — three days before Donald Trump was even sworn in as President!

There has been an underlying thread through everything the Democrat members of Congress have done since 2016. That thread is to somehow, in some way, use every tool they can find to drive this man they hate from office. They have proven they’ll do anything. And in doing so, at least so far they have been unsuccessful. They ignore the dozens and dozens of accomplishments by this Administration for the sole benefit of Americans. I won’t waste your time by listing them all here. You know what they are: Americans from every economic, social, racial, ethnicity, country of origin and no matter of what age can easily (if they choose) peer through the fog of deceit wafted into the air by angry Democrats to cloud Americans’ vision and see what Donald Trump has accomplished for them, their families, and their fellow Americans. And you know what? Don’t listen to or believe me, find out for yourself. The truth is there. The problem is that most Democrats and others even further left politically don’t want to see or accept that truth. And they don’t want anyone else to see. They want more than anything for Donald Trump to fail — even so desperately that some are publicly sharing their hopes that the economy will crash on Trump’s watch!

Rep. Al Green (D-TX) who filed articles of impeachment against Donald Trump, twice voiced Democrats struggle with “all things Trump” best when he said this: “We cannot beat him at the polls. So we must impeach him!” That statement summarizes the Democrats plans.

The Latest

The telephone conversation between President Trump and Ukraine’s President Zelenskyy has been Democrat’s apparent “final straw” necessary for Speaker Pelosi to give-in to her Socialist mob segment and to start an “official impeachment inquiry.” She announced it in a public appearance stating that contents of that Ukranian telephone conversation made it happen. She did this before anyone — Democrat or Republican — even knew the substance of the call. (You know the whistleblower story and its details regarding the call. We won’t go through it again)

What’s craziest in this bizarre Pelosi action is that the President had stated he would release the transcript of the call the next day so all could know its contents. I find it incomprehensible that Pelosi would put any chance of Democrats winning the White House and even the Senate in 2020 in jeopardy simply to launch her inquiry without first knowing the call’s contents. But she did. The call transcript was released, its contents were benign — nothing like Democrats had demanded would confirm impeachable Trump wrongdoing. Mr. Trump purportedly pressured the Ukrainian President to investigate former VP Biden and his son, all the while holding Congressionally approved financial aid to Ukraine hostage if Zelenskyy did not restart that investigation. The transcript proved those things didn’t happen, no demands of any kind were placed on Zelenskyy, and there was nothing in the call but several company presidential topics the two discussed.

(Here’s the call transcript. Click on the link to download. Feel free to share it)

https://truthnewsnet.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/427409665-Ukraine-Call-Transcript.pdf

Pelosi and Democrats are sunk!

I will stick my neck out here and say that two things are now certain: the House will go through the impeachment process now — they have no other choice. And, Donald Trump — who I think was going to win the 2020 race anyway — will win in a landslide!

Americans see through all this hoo-hah. And the more Democrats scream and holler and blame and allege through “anonymous sources” and “a highly-placed source,” the more Americans who may have been on the fence because of non-stop allegations of Trump wrongdoing are seeing that Democrats are NOT doing what they all promised to do. They are trying to foil the so-far successful attempts of a never-before politician to bring truth, common sense, hard work — without any political perspectives or objectives — to put in place as many (and hopefully all) of the promises to Americans he made in his campaign for which he was elected. Democrats have never seen that before…and they cannot and will not stand for it!

I’ll close with this: “Quid Pro Quo”

We’ve said often at TruthNewsNetwork that very often when any politician screams loudly about something a political opponent is doing, they often are guilty of doing that very same thing themselves. It happens that way more often than not. I have looked closely to find out if there was any quid pro quo going on regarding the Ukraine that could fit into that scenario. And guess what? I found some:

In May of 2018, Sens. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) and Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) wrote a letter to Ukraine’s prosecutor general, Yuriy Lutsenko, expressing concern at the closing of four investigations they said were critical to the Mueller probe. In the letter, they implied that their support for U.S. assistance to Ukraine was at stake. Describing themselves as “strong advocates for a robust and close relationship with Ukraine,” the Democratic senators declared, “We have supported [the] capacity-building process and are disappointed that some in Kyiv appear to have cast aside these [democratic] principles to avoid the ire of President Trump,” before demanding Lutsenko “reverse course and halt any efforts to impede cooperation with this important investigation.”

“Donald Trump pressured Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden and his son Hunter so it would throw dirt on Trump’s chief presidential 2020 rival!” These three senior Democrat Senators had themselves done exactly what they are accusing Donald Trump of doing!

By the way, the Constitution’s “take care” provision requires the president to ask any foreign government — in this case Ukraine — to investigate potential corruption in their country that may reach into ours. In this case, that would V.P. Biden’s mafia-like withholding of defense dollars unless Ukraine fired the prosecutor investigating Biden’s son’s corrupt energy company.

It’s a long time until the 2020 election. And this bogus impeachment process is intended by Democrats to perpetuate a cloud of question over Donald Trump sufficient to cause former and current Trump supporters to vote for the Democrat 2020 candidate. I’m pretty sure this current tactic will fail. But don’t be tempted to sigh in relief: they never give up and will not here. There are plenty of opportunities for Democrats to toss out more “fake dirt” on Mr. Trump again and again before election day. And I promise you, They Certainly Will!

Play

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

????? Gate

September 24, 2019

You put a name in front of the word “Gate.” We’ve had many since Watergate. There are plenty that have gone on during the Trump presidency. And there’s another one at the top of every news story now. Here’s a quick recap:

  • RussiaGate:  That one began with the infamous Steele dossier that supposedly chronicled salacious activities on the part of then Candidate Trump and others in his campaign that involved working with the Russian government to collude on actions to destroy Hillary Clinton’s chances to win the 2016 presidential election. There were plenty of players in that debacle, most of who were in senior positions in the Obama Department of Justice — specifically the FBI. Then FBI Director James Comey seemed to spearhead the collusion farce in conjunction with former CIA Director John Brennan, DNI Director James Clapper, and a plethora of second-level officials at the FBI and the DOJ.
  • ObstructionGate:  When it became obvious there was no meat on the bone in Trump Campaign collusion with the Russians, Trump-detractors shifted to his actions that were “obvious and blatantly” Obstruction of Justice. Those included Trump’s efforts to remove Special Counsel Robert Mueller who led the charge in the entire post-election investigation which included collusion obstruction, and conspiracy. This investigation is yet complete, not because of loose-ends regarding the President, but because of Inspector General and Federal Attorney investigations of alleged wrongdoing by those who were out to get President Trump and were planting false information regarding Mr. Trump, hoping in doing so to prompt impeachment proceedings.
  • CohenGate:  Michael Cohen — longtime business and personal attorney for President Trump — was caught up in the Mueller investigation and a parallel investigation by the Southern District of New York Federal Attorney’s office. In that investigation, some irregularities were uncovered  Eventually, Cohen was indicted, pleaded guilty in a plea deal, and is now in jail. In open court, Cohen acknowledged that he violated campaign finance laws by paying hush money to two women “in coordination with and at the direction of a candidate for federal office.” That candidate was obviously Mr. Trump. Trump denied the allegations and no evidence was found to corroborate Cohen’s claims. But there’s another part of CohenGate: Buzzfeed News reported that President Donald Trump directed Michael Cohen to lie to Congress–under oath–over negotiations with Russia about a Trump Tower project in Moscow during the 2016 campaign. If found to be true, Trump detractors claim his doing so could amount to several obstruction of justice charges.
  • EmolumentGate: This is a tricky legal quagmire that could take years to undo in a court of law (and it bears noting that the standards of evidence in a criminal court vs. a trial in the U.S. Senate are worlds apart), but basically, Trump’s ownership of businesses in foreign countries puts him in violation of a Constitutional clause that prevents him from earning money from foreign sources while he’s President. President Trump obviously owns scads of companies and properties in foreign countries. His opponents claim his being President affords opportunities to parlay his office to intice foreign companies and governments to conduct business with his entities in return for favorable consideration on matters that could directly or indirectly push business activities to his properties. It’s a longshot, but EmolumentGate is one possible allegation for his impeachment from the “High Crimes and Misdemeanors” verbiage of the Constitution.
  • SharpieGate:  Yes, this refers to the track of Hurricane Dorian which attacked the southeast and east coast of the United States with torrential rain, flooding, and devastatingly high winds. The Trump controversy in this (SharpieGate) resulted from the President showing in an interview the projected path of Dorian through the southern U.S. that included part of the state of Alabama. Trump haters went nuts. They actually began reporting that in doing so, the President was proving claims of his “likely” mental deficiencies since no official government map of Dorian’s projected paths included such a jaunt through Alabama. However, it came to light later that the NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) had actually issued projections of Dorian with a 5% chance Bama would be impacted. The President had seen that projection and included it in his map by marking it with a Sharpie.

We could go on and on listing other examples of ????? Gate claims against President Trump. It’s pretty obvious (at least so far) that Mr. Trump has gotten angry at the non-stop attacks against him, lashed out in anger sometimes when those attacks are made, and as most Queens successful businessmen will do, verbally attacked those who make unverified and unsupported claims against him. But I don’t think his doing so is evidence of “Treason, High Crimes and Misdemeanors,” which are prerequisites for the impeachment of a President.

So what’s going on?

I think you know: from the top-down of the political class in Washington, almost to a person they hate Donald Trump. Why? Mr. Trump represents in every action he takes, every word he speaks, every rally that he attends, the direct opposite of “quid pro quo” in Washington that has become a society unto itself. And that society has its own sets of rules, regulations, morays, values, and operating procedures which Donald Trump from the beginning of his campaign until today ignored.

This group does not consist of Democrats alone. Among its numbers are a large group of Republicans who have been given a name themselves by Trump’s ardent supporters. They’re called “Never-Trumpers.” These consist of Republican career politicians who have been part of the Washington D.C. societal class for decades. They detest President Trump because Mr. Trump refuses to play the game of D.C. politics by “The Rules.”

“The Rules” are the do’s and don’ts of serving in a national elected office or even in an appointed position in the federal government. Here’s how it is supposed to work:

  1. D.C. is not about which political party is in control. Everyone knows that the White House and Congress will be controlled by one political party in the majority for a while, then the opposing party will win control and maintain it for a while.
  2. That fact dictates that both parties find ways when in the minority to work closely with members of the other party so as to not make waves and anger the opposition. They all know the other party will win control sooner at later: “Quid Pro Quo.” So, they pacify constituents of their own party by offering and sometimes even passing legislation that supports positions of the minority party. “We’re trying, but without control of government we just can’t get legislation passed and signed into law that we want.”
  3. Why do they do that? The most important thing about being a career politician is to understand keeping the status quo the status quo. What’s the meaning of that? Formerly D.C. was all about money. Now it’s all about power. Whoever controls Congress and the White House pretty much has all or most of the political might. Of course, with that, they control federal dollars. But they control so much more.
  4. When those in the majority lose control because they have diligently maintained a balance that carefully “looked” to their constituents that they accomplished some good things did NOT upset the opposition. Then when they become a minority, they’ll be treated the same way.

Summary

Do you think the laundry list above of the “Gates” will be the only ones during the Trump presidency? Absolutely not! The latest was opened up in the last few days by a report from “unnamed sources” (surprise, surprise!) that purports that a federally protected whistleblower from an Intelligence agency filed a claim of wrongdoing against Mr. Trump. The claim is that on a phone call between President Trump and the president of Ukraine, Mr. Trump pressured the Ukrainian president to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden for his unethically (and illegally) pressuring the Ukrainians for the benefit a company owned in part by Joe Biden’s son Hunter Biden. And, supposedly, the allegation is that during that phone call, President Trump threatened to withhold foreign aid from the U.S. for Ukraine that had already been approved by Congress. If true, this would be a blatant example of the violation of the office of president and certainly would be sufficient to initiate articles of impeachment by the House.

Since that story first appeared, it, just as has every other previous story of impeachable Trump activities, began unraveling, one layer at a time. At the writing of this story, it has been reported and confirmed the whistleblower was not present on that call and someone just said Mr. Trump had done so. Further, when the claim was made, the Department of Justice in its determination if the DOJ should forward the claim to Congress, the Inspector General when reviewing all of the supporting information said the claim did not “meet the standards required to involve the Congress because there was a lack of evidence.”

I forgot about something: this is another “Gate” claim against Mr. Trump. We’ll call this one “UkraineGate!”

I’ll summarize this quickly: Does anyone believe that these impeachable claims against Donald Trump are over? Don’t be so foolish! As long as he serves in office, whether it’s until January of 2021 or January of 2022, the claims against him will continue. No matter how good is the American economy, no matter the U.S. gets along with its allies around the world, no matter how denuclearization talks with North Korea and Iran go, no matter if the illegal immigration dilemma is or is not resolved, the members of the Establishment Washington D.C. political society will continue to push actions to remove Donald Trump from office. Why is that? He spoiled their gravy train! As long as he is in office, their ability to control the U.S. at every level has been if not removed, seriously diminished. They will not stand for that. Their taste of power in Washington and their all-consuming thirst for it to continue will drive this ship to ultimate victory in which they regain control. Should that not be fulfilled, they will do anything to try to regain it, even at the cost of crashing the ship — the United States of America — on the rocky shores of devastation.

“The State acquires power…and because of its insatiable lust for power, it is incapable of giving up any of it. The State never abdicates.”

That’s sad: the power doesn’t belong to the State or those who serve in it. The power of government in the United States has always, now, and in the future belonged to the People.

Play

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Trump: Most Honest President Ever?

August 24, 2019

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Summary

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

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

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

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

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

Baltimore is Burning

July 31, 2019

Baltimore IS on fire — and it HAS been for some time. We’ll get into specifics in a moment that bears this out. The last few days have found the President and Baltimore resident Congressman Elijah Cummings going after each other in the press. And it’s ugly.

It’s ugly, not because Democrats and their communications arm — the Mainstream Media — pipe in and all in unison cry “Trump is a racist! His attacks on Rep. Cummings and the city of Baltimore are racist! He’s a racist…..”

Racism is NOT Baltimore’s problem! Or is it?

The “Problem”

Baltimore’s problem is not unique. In fact, large cities across the nation face the exact same problem. The problem is NOT that they need more money. The problem is the money they have that comes in total from taxpayers is NOT being used wisely. AND THERE’S NO ACCOUNTABILITY FOR THE WASTE AND CORRUPTION THAT THOSE DOLLARS FUND!

The Problem’s Source

The source seems to be the plethora of money from the Feds to help Baltimore fix itself: fix its high crime rate, raging unemployment, incorrigible public education, homelessness, corruption in local government, etc. Baltimore’s political leadership can cry “foul” as loud as they want against the Trump Administration, but those cries fall on deaf ears. The federal government has buried Baltimore in free taxpayer dollars. And it began with President Obama.

Free Money

President Barack Obama said, ”Massive investments in urban communities could make a difference right now.” Maryland Rep. Elijah Cummings said, “We have to invest in our cities and our children.” And House Democratic Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, who also represents Maryland, said, “But we’re going to have to as a country invest if we’re going to have the kinds of communities we want.”

But the idea that we haven’t been “investing” in Baltimore is nonsense.

Federal and state money poured into the city for decades. From fiscal years 2003 to 2013 (the last year for which these reports are available), Baltimore received at least $2.4 billion in federal assistance and another $1.8 billion in state aid. The city also received roughly $1.8 billion in federal stimulus money. And this doesn’t count the billions of dollars received directly by the people who live in Baltimore through various social welfare programs.

Yet nearly a quarter of the people in the city still live in poverty, 65 percent above the national level. We’ve clearly been throwing a lot of money at poverty in Baltimore with very little (if any) positive results.

Part of the problem, unsurprisingly, is that the city does not make very good use of the money it receives.

Under Obama, Baltimore received $9.5 million in federal funds to deal specifically with the city’s growing homeless problem. But according to an audit by the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the city did not properly monitor the homelessness funds, paid providers according to a preset formula rather than actual expenditures, lost track of money in several instances, and paid city staffers based on estimates, not the actual time they spent on grant activities. The city ended up having to repay nearly a third of the money. Not to worry, though: Baltimore expects to receive another $20 million+ in homelessness assistance from the feds this year and EVERY year.

Similarly, the city may end up having to repay a federal education grant designed to help the city’s poorest schools, after an audit by the Department of Education found that much of the money was actually used for dinner cruises, makeovers, and meals.

And a new audit of a city program to help low-income families with heating and energy bills found that nearly 20 percent of payments were unsupported by paperwork, and others had missing or incorrect information. Some bills were paid multiple times, while still other payments were made to families that didn’t live in the city.

But it’s not just a question of waste, fraud, and abuse. Even when the money was spent as intended, it has done little good.

Remember that $1.4 billion in federal stimulus spending? $1.4 Billion: how many thousands of jobs should that have created? Well, according to the government’s official website Recovery.gov, that spending generated just 64 permanent jobs. (you do the math)

The Washington Post reported how the federal and state governments spent more than $130 million rejuvenating the Sandtown area in Baltimore where Freddie Gray was arrested. Barely half of the working-age population is employed, according to a recent report from the Justice Policy Institute and the Prison Policy Initiative. The neighborhood lacks a supermarket or a single restaurant, not even a fast-food outlet. More than 60 percent of people over 25 have less than a high school diploma, and almost half of current high school students are chronically absent. Life expectancy is 10 years lower than the national average.

Baltimore spends $16,578 a year per pupil in schools, roughly 52 percent above the national average, and the fourth most of any major city. The majority of that money comes not from the city itself but from the state and federal governments. Yet more than a quarter of Baltimore students fail to graduate from high school. Fewer than half of Baltimore high school students passed the last Maryland High School Assessment test. SAT scores for Baltimore students are more than 100 points below the national average.

Why do we think it will be any different this time if we simply throw more money at the problem? Worse, the focus on spending more money distracts us from those things we know actually do lift people out of poverty.

There are few better routes out of poverty than a job. Fewer than 3 percent of those working full time live in poverty. Yet Maryland has one of the most anti-business tax and regulatory climates in the nation. And Baltimore adds its own layer of excessive taxes and regulatory bureaucracy.

Education reform is another key to lifting people out of poverty. Drop out of school and you are likely to be poor. Graduate from college and you won’t be. Yet, Maryland radically restricts parental choice and teacher accountability.

And any effective anti-poverty program will try to reduce out-of-wedlock birth and single parenting. Households headed by a single mother are more than five times more likely to be poor compared with married-couple families, but in Baltimore two-thirds of the births in the city are to unmarried mothers, and almost 60 percent of households are headed by single parents. Yet our welfare system continues to discourage family formation.

Of course, we need to do something to lift the people of Baltimore and other struggling cities out of poverty. But that something is not continuing to throw good money after bad.

Baltimore’s Current “Numbers”

Real estate: The median home value in Baltimore is $113,500, according to Zillow. Baltimore home values have declined 3.2 percent over the past year and Zillow predicts they will fall 4.2 percent within the next year. The median list price per square foot in Baltimore is $144, which is lower than the Baltimore-Columbia-Towson Metro average of $190. The median rent price in Baltimore is $1,400, which is lower than the Baltimore-Columbia-Towson Metro median of $1,650.

Jobs: The unemployment rate in Baltimore city was at 5.10 percent in May. Compare that to Maryland state’s 3.8 percent unemployment rate in June, while the national average sits at 3.7 percent.

Income: The typical household income in Baltimore was $46,641 in 2017, while the average family in the U.S. saw annual earnings of $57,652, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.

Poverty: According to Census Bureau data, the poverty rate in Charm City came in at 22.4 percent in 2017, compared to the national average of 12.3 percent.

City leadership ranking: Baltimore ranked as No. 129 out of 150 — (or 21 spots from the bottom of the list) — in WalletHub’s list of 2019’s best- and worst-run cities in America.

Crime: The city also took the No. 3  spot on 24/7 Wall Street’s recent list of the most dangerous cities in America. The No. 1 spot went to St. Louis, Missouri, while Detroit, Michigan took the No. 2 spot.

Retail sales per capita: In 2012, Baltimore rang in $5,871 in retail sales per capita, compared to the national average of $13,443, according to the Census Bureau.

The Cummings/Trump Feud

It has been brutal! It is no secret that Rep. Cummings as head of the House Oversight Committee has steadily attacked President Trump personally and professionally since 2016. Mr. Trump ratcheted up the feud last week with a series of tweets excoriating the deplorable conditions in Baltimore placing the blame squarely on the shoulders of the MD Congressman. It’s not surprising that Cummings has continually fired back in like kind.

But what is shameful is that the allegations made by the President were not original. In fact, Trump’s statements of Baltimore being “rat-infested,” and in “horrible condition” have been previously touted by numerous others in politics — and not Republicans — several of which are Maryland resident politicians. In fact, the Baltimore mayor (who recently resigned) stated herself that the city was rat-infested. Of course, Democrats and members of the Mainstream media immediately turned Trump’s criticism of Baltimore into pure racism. Why? Cummings is African-American, so any criticism of any kind of him professionally, the city of Baltimore or the state of Maryland could certainly be driven only by racism, right?

But here’s a word for Mr. Cummings, all other Democrats, and Baltimore residents and politicians: Baltimore IS burning! It’s on fire with racism, crime, poverty, poor public education, healthcare, much homelessness, and government waste and corruption.

Summary

Let’s end this today with a topic that is political, personal, divisive, and controversial at best: Racism. The cries of “Racist” have been hurled at President Trump nonstop over his very visible public attacks against the conditions in Baltimore. Of course, he has labeled as primarily responsible Baltimore’s leading federal advocate and resident, Representative Elijah Cummings. The Democrat heavyweight wields significant power in D.C. He’s Chairman of the House Oversight Committee which supervises pretty much every department in the Executive Branch of government. And in his gun sights has been this president who Mr. Cummings detests vehemently and never misses an opportunity to tell those on the other end of a network microphone and tv camera. Cummings didn’t just recently start his Trump attacks. And they’ve been extraordinarily crude and derisive since the 2016 election.

Naturally joining Mr. Cummings in his cries of racism against this president are most Democrats in federal and state offices and, of course, the fawning media. And this topic is what we will close this story with today.

Elijah Cummings and the rest of American Democrats are either innocently or purposely missing what’s really going on in this spat between Trump and Cummings. And what’s going on has NOTHING to do with racism. Further, it is beyond disingenuous for Cummings, all these Democrat presidential candidates, House and Senate Democrat leaders, and EVERY Democrat who has joined in the mob cries of racism. Why is that? Pay close attention to what we are saying:

  • First, Mr. Trump is by far not the first to reference the rat infestation in Baltimore. In fact, Baltimore’s mayor — an African American female — stated just months ago she could smell the rats infesting the city;
  • Secondly, Mr. Cummings in all of his hate-filled attacks against President Trump has NEVER sought actual and real and specific federal government assistance. In fact, in the Freddie Gray demonstrations-turned-riots, Baltimore made very clear they did not want federal help. And regarding additional federal financial support, Cummings has been virtually quiet. Why is that?
  • It could be because Department of Housing and Urban Development regional administrator Lynne Patton appeared just days ago on Fox News and took note of just how much federal money has been steered into Cummings’ district, which is nearly 53% percent black.“President Trump has given $16 billion in 2018 alone to Elijah Cummings’ district in federal grants,” Patton explained. “We have given more money in homeless funds to Baltimore than the last administration. We have given more money in ‘community development grants.’”Patton then asked, “What are you actually doing with the money so that it benefits residents in the community for once instead of deep-pocket, crooked politicians?”

It’s blatantly clear that what is being heard from the White House about Baltimore certainly CANNOT be initiated by racism. Say what you want about the President’s tweets, his “in-your-face” response to the myriad of personal and political attacks from all sides, screaming about his insistence for federal law enforcement persons to do exactly what they are supposed to do: enforce the law! By the way, every one of those federal lawmakers — EVERYONE — with one hand raised and one on a Bible pledged to support and defend the Constitution — which is the laws of the United States that members of Congress crafted, agreed to, and were signed into law.

How is it OK for ANY of them to want laws of the country to NOT be enforced! And should they not expect this president — ANY president — to see to it that those who serve in the Department of Justice do just that: enforce U.S. laws? These 2020 Democrat presidential candidates are to a person advocating for illegal immigrants AND American citizens to violate existing federal laws. And many of them actually serve in the House and Senate where any laws they don’t like and think should NOT be enforced can be changed!

The problem today is not Elijah Cummings and is not Donald Trump. And it’s NOT racism. No, Donald Trump is NOT a racist. He has a fifty + year business reputation that dramatically evidences exactly the opposite. And think about this: one of the certainties in the life of every bigot and racist is that they not only verbally attack people of other races vehemently, but their attacks are also always the denigration of them specifically because of their skin color. Trump has NEVER done that. And for anyone that disagrees, feel free to send me specific examples — quotations and/or video proof — and we’ll certainly post it here with an apology.

So what is the problem?

When people scream that others are racists without citing specific examples that prove their allegations, what they are doing IS the real problem! Racism IS a serious problem. There are many ways to deal with it. And screaming ad nauseum that someone is a racist is NOT one of them.

But it comes to this: “If” Mr. Trump is a racist, why would he authorize his Department of Urban Development to invest $16 billion in Baltimore for its many issues in just one year? Secondly, if he IS a racist, nothing anyone says will change that.

In case you’ve forgotten, here are the 3 Websters definitions of racism: The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others; Discrimination or prejudice based on race; The belief that each race has distinct and intrinsic attributes.

Go ahead: send some specific examples that prove Mr. Trump is racist.

In the meantime, do you want to know what really is wrong in Baltimore? The cause certainly is not money. The cause is poor planning, poor leadership, and virtually NO accountability for local and state government. How else can a city receive several billion federal dollars specifically to address those issues followed by $16 billion more and achieve NO POSITIVE RESULTS?

Rep. Cummings, other Democrats, and the Media can cry “Racist!” all they want at the President. But they’re saying that does not make it true. And even if it IS true, how does that cause all the crap in Baltimore? It’s been happening for many years before a Trump presidency.

(I apologize: I said “all the crap” and should have said “all the rats” instead. Sorry!)

 

Play

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Reagan or Trump: Flip a Coin

July 3, 2019

Trump and Kim Jung Un have now been together face-to-face three times. The third meeting was a bit strange, certainly unconventional, and absolutely showed the World that the North Korean leader is pretty desperate to continue down the path of “getting along” with the leader of the United States — in this case, Donald Trump.

Trump detractors’ heads have been spinning, they’ve all been spewing green vomit, and their non-stop attacks of the President are escalating every day. Their crushing crescendo has drowned out any tidbits of good that might have resulted from that short back-slapping get together between those two leaders. Trump adversaries don’t care at all about facts. Their cries are NOT founded on facts, but are directly tied to their one and only political perspective: “Trump is Evil.”

This all reminds me of the press and political treatment of President Ronald Reagan. In fact, Reagan’s treatment by politicians (both Democrat and Republican) and by members of the press are eerily similar.

  • Reagan could do NOTHING right;
  • Reagan did EVERYTHING wrong;
  • Reagan HATED the poor and American minorities;
  • Reagan cared only about the Rich;
  • Reagan was a stupid politician;
  • Reagan was a cowboy that spurned conventional governing.

Does any of that sound familiar?

Reagan and the Press

They hated him, pure and simple.

Journalists — TRUE journalists — are politically neutral in their reporting and take pride in keeping readers, viewers, and listeners from ever knowing what their political persuasions are. Honestly, before 1980 (when Reagan was elected) journalists were fairly successful at hiding their politics. But with the election of the movie star/governor from California, all that journalist independence and integrity in reporting was immediately in the trash.

Want some examples?

“I used to say I thought if you were down on your luck and you got through the Secret Service, got in the Oval Office and said, Mr. President, ‘I’m down on my luck,’ he would literally give you the shirt off his back. And then he’d sit down in his undershirt and he’d sign legislation throwing your kids off school lunch program, maybe your parents off Social Security, and of course the Welfare Queen off of welfare.”
— ABC’s Sam Donaldson, who covered the White House during the 1980s, on Good Morning America, June 11, 2004.

“All of us who covered the Reagans agreed that President Reagan was personable and charming, but I’m not so certain he was nice. It’s hard for me to think of anyone as nice when I hear him say ‘The homeless are homeless because they want to be homeless.’ To my mind, a President should care about all people, and he didn’t, which is why I will always feel Reagan lacked soul.”
— UPI White House reporter Helen Thomas in the July 1993 Good Housekeeping.

“At the end of his presidency, a great many people thought he’d made the wealthy wealthier and had not improved life particularly for the middle class.”
— Peter Jennings talking to co-host Charles Gibson on ABC’s Good Morning America, June 10, 2004.

“Despite the accolades lavished upon Reagan since his death — for ending the Cold War, for restoring the nation’s optimism — his many detractors remember him as a right-wing ideologue beholden to monied interests and insensitive to the needs of the most vulnerable Americans.”
…
“Elected on a promise to slash taxes and crack down on freeloading ‘welfare queens,’ Reagan depicted government as wasteful and minimized its capacity to help people, ideas that survive today. Reagan also dealt a blow to organized labor by firing the striking air traffic controllers, and appointed Antonin Scalia, still the Supreme Court’s most conservative jurist.”
…
“Reagan’s weakening of the social safety net by dismantling longtime Democratic ‘Great Society’ programs arguably vexes his critics the most. By persuading Congress to approve sweeping tax cuts for the wealthy while slashing welfare benefits and other social services like the federal housing assistance program, Reagan was blamed for a huge surge in the nation’s poor and homeless population.”
— Beth Fouhy in an AP story headlined: “Many Still Troubled by Reagan’s Legacy,” June 9, 2004.

CBS’s Morley Safer: “You talk about a vision, and it’s some kind of abstract, vague idea. Did his [Ronald Reagan’s] vision include extraordinary deficits? Did his vision include cutting of the budgets for education and a back of the hand in terms of public education?”
Larry King: “History will not be kind to him?”
Safer: “No, I don’t think history particularly will be kind…I don’t think history has any reason to be kind to him.”
— CNN’s Larry King Live, June 14, 2004.

“After eight years of what many saw as the Reagan administration’s benign neglect of the poor and studied indifference to civil rights, a lot of those who lived through this week in Overtown seemed to think the best thing about George Bush is that he is not Ronald Reagan…There is an Overtown in every big city in America. Pockets of misery made even meaner and more desperate in the past eight years.”
— ABC’s Richard Threlkeld reporting from a section of Miami where there had been riots, on World News Tonight, January 20, 1989.

“Senator, don’t you believe, a lot of people do think that the ‘80s were an excess, which a lot of people got richer and people got poorer, and it’s now fair to redress that balance?”
— Sam Donaldson to Robert Dole on This Week with David Brinkley, Feb. 21, 1993.

“In the greedy excesses of the Reagan years, the mean income of the average physician nearly doubled, from $88,000 to $170,000. Was that warranted?”
— Bryant Gumbel to Dr. Richard Corlin of the American Medical Association, March 31, 1993, Today.

Reagan/Gorbachev

Reagan inherited a pretty nasty foreign policy mess in several countries — none bigger than that of the U.S./Soviet Union nuclear weapons arms race. Reagan — though no foreign policy expert — knew that Soviet Russia was the biggest danger the U.S. faced. He immediately set out to try to find a way to make peace with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev. They held three historical meetings: the first in Geneva, the second in Reykjavik, Iceland, and the third in Washington D.C. I will not give you the U.S. media reports that followed each of the Gorbachev-Reagan meetings for the sake of your time. But know this for certain: the media excoriated Reagan for everything he did and didn’t do in planning for and his actions at each meeting. Reagan could do NOTHING right! (Exactly like Trump/Kim meetings as portrayed in today’s media)

In preparation for the Reykjavik meeting, unknown to the Americans Gorbachev prepared and presented a series of nuclear proposals regarding denuclearization by both Russia and the U.S. He did so because he wanted to catch Reagan by surprise. It worked. The Americans were planning intense meetings to find common ground, but not nearly the same common ground as the Russian contingency offered.

Gorbachev feared Reagan’s “Star Wars” plan called “SDI,” or “Strategic Defense Initiative.” The Soviets felt that if “Star Wars” was implemented, it would give the U.S. total defensive nuclear dominance over the Soviet Union both domestically and in Europe. Gorbachev insisted that “if” the U.S. completed and implemented the SDI, it would NOT be activated for the next 10 years. Reagan refused to accept those terms and abruptly left Iceland without any meaningful agreement with Gorbachev nor any future plans to meet again. (Trump took similar action leaving Vietnam abruptly from his meeting with Kim)

Of course, the rest of that story is historical. Gorbachev came to Washington later to continue negotiations. Finally, President Reagan made a trip to Germany and made this historical speech in which he sent a direct message to Gorbachev:

Not long after Reagan’s nuclear negotiations with Gorbachev and this speech in Berlin, the demise of the Soviet Union began, and the Berlin Wall came down.

The U.S. Media Weigh-In with Politicians, Too

No doubt the similarities between Reagan and Gorbachev’s relationship have been compared to that of Trump and Kim Jung Un. That’s not saying that Gorbachev and Kim have personal similarities, but the conditions surrounding U.S. presidential meetings with a foreign leader over nuclear arms issues are VERY similar in nature.

Also, Trump in Vietnam walked out of his second meeting with Kim in a similar fashion as did Reagan in Iceland.

What other similarities are there? Democrats and The Media!

  • A spokesman for leading Democratic candidate and former vice president Joe Biden blasted Trump for “coddling” Kim “at the expense of American national security and interests.”
  • Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), who enjoys the second strongest following among the 2020 presidential aspirants, said the president was “squandering American influence on photo ops and exchanging love letters” with Kim.
  • Senator Bernie Sanders, almost next in popularity to Warren, said the move had “weakened the State Department.”
  • Samantha Vinograd, who served on the national security council under President Obama: “By shaking hands with Kim Jong Un at the DMZ with no preconditions attached, he’s really signaling that his metric for success at this point is the status quo, which is no long-range missile tests and no nuclear tests, but North Korea keeping its nuclear arsenal,” she said. Then she stated, “Kim has no reason to denuclearize, but every reason to push Trump for what he’s wanted all along, phased sanctions relief. North Korea under Trump is a normalized, nuclear power.”
  • Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer said on Twitter that while Trump and Kim met, “North Korea continues to build nuclear weapons. Another typical Trump ‘show.’”
  • Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota said “We’ve seen a history here,” she said. “Donald Trump announces these summits and nothing really comes out of it.”
  • Despite the fact that there were four North Korean nuclear tests under President Obama and only one under President Trump, (none in almost 2 years) and Obama gave everything away to Cuba for nothing, Sunday’s editions of ABC’s Good Morning America and NBC’s Sunday Today rushed to declare Trump’s historic meeting with Kim Jong-un at the DMZ to be nothing more than just a photo op. “[T]his was the dramatic headline, the dramatic photo that the President wanted. He’s a great showman. He pulled it off. There’s just no question about that,” proclaimed ABC chief anchor and Clinton lackey George Stephanopoulos. Stephanopoulos argued that there were no political or substantive outcomes from Trump’s previous talks with the North Korean dictator.
  • There was an echo on NBC where host Willie Geist asked political director Chuck Todd: “Is there a plan from the Trump administration or was it a photo op?” Todd hinted at it being just that, noting: “The last two ended up looking as if they were photo ops in the end. We thought they could lead to something, but they didn’t.”

Summary

Here’s the question that everyone in the media is afraid to ask or answer: Is Donald Trump another Ronald Reagan? You know what: he just might be. Trump really liked Reagan. The two met several times and got along well. But that was long before Donald Trump ever became a politician. It’s humorous that both ended up with entertainment careers immediately prior to becoming politicians: Reagan as California governor after a Hollywood acting career, Trump as U.S. President after a short but very successful television stint.

Do the similarities stop there?

It’s fairly obvious that the Socialist Democrat Party and their communication arm — the Media — hope the current Reagan/Trump comparisons are short-lived. They cannot bear to think that Donald Trump might just pull-off a successful political career! His doing so would certainly complete the self-destruction of the floundering Trump-hating sycophants at MSNBC and CNN. There’s just too much money behind the Washington Post and the New York Times for them to disintegrate. But that’s NOT the Trump objective.

Donald Trump sincerely wants only an American success story full of wins for the American people!

He has NO political agenda other than that. And it drives the Left insane.

Here’s one last comparison of the two: Ronald Reagan’s most famous speech took place in front of a wall in Berlin in which he cried, “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!” Democrats and their media henchmen cringe at the thought of Donald Trump ever being able to in McAllen, Texas or San Diego, California stand before network television cameras and say, “What do you think about this recently completed border wall between Mexico and the United States?”

Uncanny similarities between Reagan and Trump, don’t you think?

Play

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

“We Are the World, We are the People….”

June 12, 2019

Here we are: two years+ into the Donald Trump Presidency and STILL the United States media do not give this guy any credit. They  everyday still throw allegations of wrongdoing, insults regarding his hairstyle, the way he speaks, his skin color, his Queens accent — pretty much in every way a country’s media could demean someone. And when they do it, they laugh and snarl, kind of like they did shortly before Donald Trump announced he was actually running for president in 2016. They started laughing and making fun of him then. They haven’t stopped.

But things are a bit different now: Donald Trump has a political history. No, his political history is not one of his personal foreign policy accomplishments — at least no accomplishments from BEFORE he became President. His “pre-White House” political history probably exists only with his record of the hundreds of thousands of dollars he has contributed through the years to local, state, and national candidates whom he supported. Several of those contribution recipients have donned the Democrat mantle of “presidential candidate” and are on the campaign trail for their party’s nomination to take their former “contributor” — Donald Trump — head-on in 2020. And none have very nice things to say about him — but they took his money!

There’s a bit of irony there, don’t you think?

Let’s face facts: this President gets very little support in the U.S., Of course, the ardent Trump supporters in the United States support him. And contrary to how the State Media portray this president, most understand facts and numbers and know what he has done for the country in 2 years. But also, those “Trumpsters” still cannot reconcile the fact that the American Media — NY Times, WaPo, MSNBC, CNN, CBS, NBC, ABC, Huffington Post — give President Trump no credit for the economy, foreign trade, millions of new jobs, low unemployment across the board, more people employed than ever, etc. Almost daily there is a collective “SMH” you can almost hear across the nation. (For those of you in downtown Manhattan and San Francisco, “SMH” means “Shake My Head.)

Here’s what we’re going to do today: we’re going to take a look for yourselves at something as simple as Google, do a search, and see what’s important to the media in the U.S. and across the “Pond” regarding this President. It begins with his popularity overseas, takes a look at the domestic and European media portrayals of Mr. Trump’s just completed visit to the U.K., and then we’ll complete today’s offering with a story — a really GOOD story — about “Bubba” from Texas. And Bubba will help explain what the American State Media are missing about Donald Trump. Let’s start here:

Google

Take just a moment and Google this: “What is President Trump’s world favorability number?” I took that challenge, and here are some of the results I found:

“Trump is even more unpopular in Europe than he is in the U.S …”

“Trump’s Approval Rating Is Even Lower Globally, and He’s …”

“How Popular Is Donald Trump? | FiveThirtyEight”

“Trump Approval Worldwide Remains Low Especially Among Key …”

Notice the stories that Googles’ algorithm popped up with this specific search that had NOTHING to do with Europe. So President Trump’s favorability is low in some countries overseas. And according to media pundits in the U.S., that’s a really big deal. Meghan Markle spurned the President during his recent trip to Britain to celebrate the 75th anniversary of D-Day. Though an American by birth, she is now a married member of the Royal Family. Certainly, she was not a Donald Trump fan when he ran for president. And, certainly, members of the British press made very little about the comments made about the President and his response to hers.’ But not so across the Pond! America’s press went nuts with constant negativity about President Trump and details of his trip. Some even made fun of Melania and her attire!

Isn’t it a strange world in which the U.S. media would lambast the President while he makes a trip to the U.K. to join European government leaders and hundreds of World War II veterans celebrating the 75th anniversary of D-Day? Think about it: if the United States had not led the storming of Omaha Beach that day, most of Europe would probably be speaking German today. And the U.S. may have been also.

President Trump was actually applauded in the U.K. press. Not so in the U.S. Here’s a screenshot of a YouTube search with the search term “U.S. Media attacks of President Trump.” It may be too small for you to read, but basically, I’ll summarize the search findings: every story that comes up with THAT search sentence — rather than a video or story about the U.S. media’s attacks of this president — is about a video and/or story of PRESIDENT TRUMP ATTACKING THE MEDIA!

Are you surprised?

Wanna take a look at the headlines from the other side of the Pond — from European news outlets?

“Trump’s U.K. Visit Unites the British” 

“Trump’s UK Visit: Trump, May discuss special alliance between the U.S. and the U.K.”

Nile Gardiner: Pres. Trump’s U.K. Visit Possibly His “Most Successful” State Visit

Here are the headlines about the Trump U.K. trip from U.S. Media outlets:

“Ignorant Donald Trump Remarks in Ireland Force Irish PM’s Clarification” (Rachel Maddow via MSNBC)

“Jeremy Hunt Calls Donald Trump a ‘Controversial President'”(Jeremy Hunt: RT )

“Day 1 Of Donald Trump Gaffs” (RT)

“Trolling Calling: Trump Gets ‘Baby Blimp’ Treatment In London”  (MSNBC)

“President Donald Trump Causes Controversy In UK Visit”  (NBC News)

“Trump an ‘enemy of democracy,’ London protestor says | Trump’s U.K. Visit 2019 (CNBC)

Who Cares?

Let’s cut right to the chase: does anyone in America really care what people in Switzerland, Belgium, Turkey, Russia, or Lichenstein think about President Trump or any U.S. president? I know Barack Obama made it clear he wanted all of us to join all of “them” and become “Citizens of the World” instead of U.S. citizens. I would like for everyone to send me a $100 bill tomorrow, too. But just as certain I am that I will receive no $100 bills from anyone if I asked, I am certain none of us are going to become “Citizens of the World.” Donald Trump does not care to be the “President” or “King” of the World, either. I’m pretty sure Barack Obama would have liked that, though.

So why does anyone here care at all how the British or French or German media feel about President Trump?

It’s kinda like this for me: I love my wife. We’ve been married 44 years. Yes, her paint’s faded, her windshield has a few cracks in it, and her tires are constantly going flat. But you know what? I really like her THE WAY SHE IS! And, quite honestly, I don’t give a rip about what anyone else thinks about her, I think I’m going to keep her. Why? BECAUSE I LIKE WHAT SHE’S DONE AS MY WIFE, MOTHER TO OUR CHILDREN, AND NONNIE TO OUR 6 GRANDCHILDREN.

And I don’t care what anyone else thinks — especially not someone who lives in Zimbabwe!

Here’s what they’re all missing:

  • Does anyone think a stupid guy from Queens could turn a stake from his father into several billion dollars if he was stupid?
  • Does anyone think that same guy could build an enterprise from nothing into being the employer of several hundred thousand Americans and maintain it for 30 years?
  • Does anyone think that stupid guy could create and personally produce (while starring in) a multi-year #1 network television show?

Zig Ziglar is probably using that example in his career building seminars as an example of what someone — ANYONE — is capable of achieving if they only try and never give up.

The Leftist Media (and the Leftists in Congress) are just hacked off because — first of all — he beat their Star in her run for the White House in 2016. Secondly, they feel the way they feel because they do not understand how he operates, what his governing intentions are, and they certainly don’t understand this one thing about him: he makes promises and he KEEPS promises! They are not accustomed to seeing that in any national politician.

So they just stand back and throw rocks at him. Their fundamental premise is this: “He’s dumb, he’s stupid, he doesn’t know anything about politics, and we do. He simply needs to sit down, shut up, and let us tell him what to do and how to do it just like we have in the past.”

Donald Trump is NOT going to ever do that!

The Finish: Bubba

His name was Bubba. He was from Texas but he was in New York City and he needed a loan, So he walked into a bank in the Big Apple and asked for the loan officer.

He told the loan officer that he was going to Paris for an international redneck festival for two weeks and needed to borrow $5,000 and that he was not a depositor of the bank.

The bank officer told him that the bank would need some form of security for the loan, so the Redneck handed over the keys to a new Ferrari. The car was parked on the street in front of the bank.
The Redneck produced the title and everything checked out. The loan officer agreed to hold the car as collateral for the loan and apologized for having to charge 12% interest.

Later, the bank’s president and its officers all enjoyed a good laugh at the Redneck from Texas for using a $250,000 Ferrari as collateral for a $5,000 loan. An employee of the bank then drove the Ferrari into the bank’s private underground garage and parked it.

Two weeks later, Bubba returned, repaid the $5,000 and the interest of 23.07. The loan officer said, “Sir, we are very happy to have had your business, and this transaction has worked out very nicely, but we are a little puzzled. While you were away, we checked you out on Dunn & Bradstreet and found that you are a distinguished alumni from the University of Texas, a highly sophisticated investor and multi-millionaire with real estate and financial interests all over the world. Your investments include a large number of wind turbines around Sweetwater, Texas. What puzzles us is, why would you bother to borrow $5,000?”
The good ‘ole boy replied, “Where else in New York City can I park my car for two weeks for only $23.07 and expect it to be there when I return?”

Moral of the story: “just because he does things a little bit different than you do doesn’t mean he’s stupid! Just look at the results.”

Play

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Mueller: “Forget Presumption of Innocence”

May 30, 2019

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

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

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

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

Changing History

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

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

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

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

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

Assumption Bullet Points

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

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

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

The “Decoy”

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

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

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

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

Hillary And Bill

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Summary

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

Play

Podcast: Play in new window | Download