Harvey not Today’s Only American Catastrophe

As horrible and tragic as are the non-stop stories we hear about those struggling to survive in Southeast Texas and Southwest Louisiana as the rain falls and water levels rise, there is another tragedy unfolding in Washington D.C. Do you remember in that famous “wrap-up” press conference in which former FBI Director Comey made these remarks: “Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences.” I remember well the uproar from millions of Americans at Comey’s statement, primarily because the law Hillary Clinton was investigated for breaking has NO provision for “intent,” rather violation of any part of the law is a clear criminal violation that put American National Security at risk. In his speech he detailed dozens of violations of that law.

Fast forward to the Senate confirmation hearings of now Attorney General Jeff Sessions as he recused himself from heading any Justice Department action of possible prosecution of anyone regarding alleged irregularities in the election, PLUS he would not involve himself in any investigation of the Russia collusion with the Trump Campaign if there was ever one initiated. Because there was such an uproar at Comey’s actions, and even though Sessions recused himself from election investigations regarding President Trump, it was expected that the Justice Department would take another look at the evidence accumulated in the Clinton e-mail probe referenced by Comey and determine whether or not to re-open that case. Americans are growing angry at the apparent reluctance of the Attorney General to take that action.

Fast forward to yesterday: “The FBI turned down a lawyer’s request for the release of FBI files from Hillary Clinton’s “Email Gate,” faulting the lawyer for not providing enough proof “that the public interest sought is a significant one.” How is that possible? Here’s the reply to that question by David Hardy of the FBI after denying the FOIA request by attorny Ty Clevenger: “You have not sufficiently demonstrated that the public’s interest in disclosure outweighs personal privacy interests of the subject,” Hardy said to Clevenger in a letter on Monday. “It is incumbent upon the requester to provide documentation regarding the public’s interest in the operations and activities of the government before records can be processed pursuant to the FOIA.”

Members of Congress are incensed. Americans are going crazy. How could any official in the FBI possibly conclude there is “no public interest” in the release of those Clinton FBI investigation files? Former Director Comey revealed in his press conference there were multiple examples of violations by Clinton of the law protecting the handling of classified documents and information. There are many hypotheses of why Comey did not recommend that the Justice Department impanel a Grand Jury to consider criminal charges against the former Secretary of State with that piece of evidence alone from Comey. The front runner of American answers is that Obama holdovers in the FBI are selling out to protect Hillary Clinton.

More than possible prosecution of Clinton for such wrongdoing, this action by the FBI’s David Hardy illustrates just how detached bureaucratic Washington D.C. is from the American public. No legislator or Intelligence Department employee could even consider holding those files if there was one shred of loyalty there as well as a sense of responsibility to the American People. Washington D.C. is full of those who in large care nothing about what Americans and American voters think about D.C. nor what those voters purposes were when electing federal officials. Political appointees and department hires are even worse: they care for nothing but maintaining their lucrative jobs that many come with lifetime benefits.

Thankfully there are still some who are in Washington to serve rather than “be” served. And those are the ones shocked the most at this FOIA request rejection. Attorney Clevenger in his FOIA request specifically asked for all documents resulting from a September 6, 2016 referral to the Justice Department from then-House Oversight Chairman Jason Chaffetz, a Utah Republican. At the time, Chaffetz asked the department to “investigate and determine whether Secretary Clinton or her employees and contractors violated statutes that prohibit destruction of records, obstruction of congressional inquiries, and concealment or cover up of evidence material to a congressional investigation.” The FBI response: On Aug. 8, the FBI asked Clevenger to detail why the public would be interested. “If you seek disclosure of any existing records on this basis, you must demonstrate that the public interest in disclosure outweighs personal privacy interests,” the letter stated. “In this regard, you must show that the public interest sought is a significant one, and that the requested information is likely to advance that interest.”

Today former Congressman Chaffetz is incensed. Today he blasted the request denial as pure political nonsense. In a summary of his words, he reminded all that those documents are NOT private or personal documents of Hillary Clinton. They belong to the American People. She was Secretary of State when those were prepared and sent. If there is any classified information in those documents, standard procedure in a FOIA request is to redact the portions that are classified and release the rest. According to Chaffetz the request by Clevenger alone is enough to “demonstrate the request is in the public interest.”

But Chaffetz took this conversation one step further. And that step has opened to Americans the door to just how corrupt the Intelligence Community is — at least in part. When he served as Chairman of the House Oversight Committee, his committee requested release of those documents as well as all documents pertaining to Benghazi. In his words, Congressional subpoenas in D.C. are meaningless and often ignored. They carry no real weight or authority. The FBI ignored all those requests.

This morning on Fox and Friends, Chaffetz was asked if there is any remedy or “higher power” for Clevenger to appeal to for the purpose of overriding Hardy’s denial. Chaffetz showed just how corrupt D.C. is by explaining that any appeal of such request denial goes to — you guessed it — the Justice Department! Of course the Justice Department is the department who denied the FOIA request for production in the first place. Chaffetz personally took the matter up with Attorney General Sessions who quickly told Chaffetz the A.G. could NOT intervene because of his recusal from investigating anything relating to occurrences during the 2016 election.

Summary

There are millions of emails, scripts of conversations, notes from meetings, pictures, payment receipts, plans for government actions, and emails all being held by the records department of the FBI that document past and current investigations. The people who participated in all those events that resulted in those records worked for (and some still do) the American public. And with the exception of classified information that if released would jeopardize national security, the American Public owns the information in those documents. Through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) process for just these cases, those documents should be released. But the American government — OUR government — only cares about taking care of their own and stopping any waves that could possibly expose the hidden details and facts underneath.

I am ashamed that so many of the GOP members of the House and Senate either quietly or blatantly are resisting legislation they campaigned saying they would support and for which voters elected them. I am ashamed that our Attorney General handicapped his capability to fulfill his job in his Senate confirmation hearing when he recused himself from Clinton investigations and the Trump Campaign Russian collusion matter. The A.G. is the one who must initiate and manage those cases!

Yes, maybe Hillary will walk on this one. Maybe all those allegedly guilty of multiple criminal infractions during the Obama Administration — some of which have already been identified — may get away with their crimes. But Americans are paying close attention to how all of these are handled. No matter how the Leftist media portray their nastiness of President Trump and the way he runs this government, Americans know the truth and see the results.

There’s an election next year. I’ll bet Americans will watch closely the end of this Congressional session and the session in 2018. And if ANY legislators running for office have misrepresented their positions or lied to voters in their districts with broken promises, you can bet Americans will send them packing. If Washington is going to work — if the U.S. is going to work — going forward, honesty and integrity must return to the Capitol. And they must re-inhabit the Justice Department in which all those appointed and hired each took an oath to uphold the laws of the United States and to protect the Constitution.

They better get started.

Here’s the Face of the “New” Democrat Party

After the cataclysmic Hillary Clinton defeat by political neophyte Donald Trump, the Democrat Party awakened to a fact that many Americans had known for years: the Democrat Party had become the party of the elite west and east coast wealthy, and had become the directors of all things political reported by elite Media minions daily to the American public. And — even worse — the Party had totally disregarded EVERY important issue of the American middle class, who they had once championed. In fact, for years the Democrats had assumed they had middle class voters in their pockets.

Not only was Hillary’s loss disappointing and embarrassing to them, the 2016 election and those special elections afterwards with those humiliating losses by the Dems in each further illustrated their dismal standing on a national level. Those voting losses are in addition to the state and local elections that nationwide the Democrats had lost year after year after year. Some “brain surgeon” at the DNC finally said, “We probably need to find a new face to replace the faces of Bill and Hillary on the DNC campaign materials.”

With that realization, one would expect Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Barack Obama, Dianne Feinstein, Uncle Joe Biden, and other high profile Democrats to immediately scour their party to find someone who could don the hat of leadership among the Dems and quickly right the ship. Unfortunately they have failed to find someone palatable who owns some credibility with everyday Americans. During their frantic search for that person, they decided in the Democrat Party credibility vacuum to try something novel to distract left-leaning Americans: Identity Politics. (When I was a kid we called that “name calling”) They still haven’t found the person to bear the Dem mantle, but they have successfully stirred things up, and that’s being kind!

Here’s how it works with them: THEY own all the power to label people; THEY label people; THEY determine what people are allowed to say and do that will not draw their wrath; THEIR wrath is reserved for those who are not flaming liberals; THEY brand all those who disagree with the Leftist cause “Nazi,” “White Supremacists,” “Facsists,” “neo-Nazis,” “homophobes,” and “Islamaphobes.” And if any politician does not publicly express their personal outrage at the “group of the day” the Leftist are attacking, and do not express that outrage quickly enough or angrily enough (as determined by the Leftists), they are immediately labeled as members of one of those “groups.” Example: Donald Trump.

Take the riot at Charlottesville. Forget about the truth about the President’s history about the KKK, Nazis, and White Supremacists. As far back as the 1990’s on numerous occasions he blasted those and other extremists for their domestic terrorist and extremist acts and philosophies. After Charlottesville, the only thing that mattered was the instant messaging by the President that did not meet the Left’s criteria. Their expectation was that he should have — regardless of the lack of evidence at the time of his message — blamed ALL that happened in Charlottesville only on the racist extremists. Their furor resulted in his being pummeled by their media lapdogs. Then when he “corrected” his statement the next day to try and placate them, what he said enraged them further. Why? He made the mistake of not only blasting each of the racist groups by name, making it clear that none of their bigotry, hatred, and violence would be accepted or allowed in today’s America, he made the mistake of saying there were violent protestors on BOTH sides and there was plenty of blame to go around.

The Lefties I listed above — Pelosi, Obama, Feinstein, Biden, Chumer — all came out bashing the President for what he said. (remember the talking points of the Left: “Don’t ever let the truth get in the way of a good sound byte or story”) In a subsequent press conference, the President doubled down on his holding not only the White Supremacist groups guilty for the riots, he once again blamed the Leftist rioters. With that the Establishment GOP leaders could choke back their glee in silence no more. THEY began blasting President Trump. Paul Ryan, Jeff Flake, and John McCain joined many from across the aisle in piling on President Trump.

Democrats are very good at drawing quotation marks around every incident in which they feel Republicans (and especially the President) are guilty of anything they determine is racist, whether it is or not. And always they cry for the guilty Republican to recant whatever the racist statement made or apologize for whatever racist act was committed. Is there ever any quid pro quo? NEVER!

Just in case you missed it on the news, watch this video. (It’s only 1:34)

https://youtu.be/S33HVduI474

The Washington Post for the very first time got it right by finally calling out Antifa as perpetrating violence. Americans have known for months after watching the Berkeley riots in April, riots in Philadelphia, Baltimore, Portland, and Charlottesville that Antifa is NOT “anfti-fascist” as they claim, but are trying to muzzle those who want to speak in public. What they want to say Antifa refuses to allow. So they initiate violence wearing hoods and masks so their identities cannot be made and therefore prevents their arrests for their illegal actions.

I have carefully listened and watched for the leaders of the Democrat Party — Pelosi, Schumer, Feintstein, Obama, Biden and others — to call out the Leftists that are very obviously conducting coordinated and well funded and planned demonstrations intentionally intended to turn violent, and doing so in the name of anti-fascism to quash free speech with the fear they instill in others by their violent actions. The Dems remain closed mouth. Why is that?

Antifa is the new face of the New Democrat Party!

If you feel that thought is unrealistic or extreme, think it through. Can you ever remember the leaders of the Democrat Party being too shy to claim the moral high ground in any contentious matter they ever faced in D.C. or anywhere else in America? Never! Historically when they are quiet about anything, their quiet confirms their support or at least benign acceptance of what happened.

If you find it difficult to believe that Democrat leaders could be in agreement to have these radicals as the “keepers of the Democrat brand,” consider this: they have lost so much legislative and executive political party integrity in the nation, they need something significant to tip the scale far to the Left — much farther than ever seen — to attract Millenials who they see as the only hope for saving true Liberalism. They’ve set the stage with Leftist, liberal education in high schools and colleges, hundreds of Obama appointed Liberal federal judges, labor unions given unfettered power to feed Leftist campaigns with millions of dollars. These all together prop up a pure Leftist, Socialist utopia that they have  used to convince Millenials that utopia can exist IF DEMOCRATS REGAIN POLITICAL CONTROL.

Summary

How do they win? One way they have pretty much already won: they have convinced millions of Millenials theirs’ are the answers to all of life’s problems: free education, guaranteed wages, free healthcare, and welfare, and a government that takes care of everything and everybody. Leftists know what’s left that is necessary for utopia can only come through brute force and intimidation. Enter the new poster children for the Democrat Party: Antifa. Do you think any normal American can possibly feel comfortable going to a Free Speech rally knowing that thugs with sticks, bats, shields, pepper spray and sometimes even knives might show up to attack those who speak? Certainly not. So what happens? Grab a history book and read about how the two Antifa objectives I mentioned above worked very well in Hitler’s plan as he stealthily took control of Germany.

Think about it: Hitler would have taken control of all of Europe and eventually Asia if Stalin had not turned it on and simultaneously determined HE wanted control of Europe. Stalin stopped the Nazi takeover of the continent.

Antifa is not new to the political landscape. They’ve  been around for 100 years! They know from history how to accomplish all they have set out to do. What better way to achieve success than to have a bunch of America’s prominent Democrat leaders inaudibly give their permission for this Antifa intimidation?

Remember, I’ve said this over and over again: politically it’s no longer about money — it’s about POWER. And Antifa’s been pretty powerful in dominating the conservatives they have attacked, haven’t they?

It’s Tuesday: What’s Happening?

Stupid question, right? There are so many things going on in the U.S. not to mention the World. I thought we today would simply touch on several of those:

Houston/South Texas

I was born in Pasadena, Texas, a suburb of Houston. I have relatives who live all through the area. My father passed away a month ago and lived in Seadrift, Texas, a sleepy little fishing town 15 miles from Rockport which has been labeled as the epicenter of Hurricane Harvey’s U.S. arrival. As bad as the damage was in the Rockport area, (which resulted primarily from wind damage) Houston (as forecasted) is suffering from the deluge rather than from the wind. Houston area flooding is epic.

I wondered how long it would take before the media would instead of focusing on search and rescue efforts, the heroic actions of those participating in the process of getting people to safety, and dissemination of information critical to the south Texas residents, start playing the blame game. My wait was short-lived. In a morning press conference  by FEMA, one reporter went straight to the “who’s to blame?” question. Director Brock Long to his credit immediately changed the narrative from blame to “let’s get people taken care of before we blame” discussion. I have seen and heard multiple media outlets call this hurricane and flooding aftermath the greatest natural disaster in U.S. history. I disagree. Although natural disasters are all horrific, those with major loss of life are more horrific than those without. Even though financial losses in south Texas will surely be billions of dollars, apparently loss of life has been small. Hurricane Katrina on the other hand saw more than 1000 Louisianians die at the hands of the storm. I am NOT saying Hurricane Harvey is not catastrophic. I am only saying thank God more people have not died.

As a footnote it has been admirable how the President initiated pro-active plans for federal agencies to get involved in Houston far before Harvey came ashore. He has continued his personal engagement in the process throughout, day and night since it began. Not only did he engage well before the onset, he is visiting the area today to see first hand how bad it is. To prevent interruption of the recovery efforts in the Houston area, his plans are to go to the Corpus Christi area where Harvey came ashore but without the significant water problems that Houston is experiencing.

I hope all will instead of loading the partisan political attack guns during this travesty instead load their prayer cannons and send those prayers for all those in the Houston area toward Heaven. While at it, send a dollar or two to the Red Cross or Franklin Graham’s Samaritans Purse not-for-profit to physically help those directly affected by Harvey. As an alternative, Houston Texans (of the NFL) defensive star J.J. Watt began a charity funding page for Houston flood victims that today has already raised 3/4 of a million dollars. NBA star Chris Paul ponied up with $50,000 to the Watt fund. Whichever/wherever you give, please give. The link to the J.J. Watt funding page is https://www.youcaring.com/victimsofhurricaneharvey-915053.

Berkeley

Antifa is at it again. This weekend, back at Berkely, Antifa members clad in their familiar black and camo outfits and masks carrying sticks, clubs, and shields showed up on the Berkeley campus to “protest.” Their faces hidden behind black bandannas and hoodies, about 100 anarchists and antifa— “anti-fascist” — members barreled into a protest Sunday afternoon in Berkeley’s Martin Luther King Jr. Civic Center Park. Jumping over plastic and concrete barriers, the group melted into a larger crowd of around 2,000 that had marched peacefully throughout the sunny afternoon for a “Rally Against Hate” gathering. Shortly after, violence began to flare. A pepper-spray-wielding Trump supporter was smacked to the ground with homemade shields. Another was attacked by five black-clad antifa members, each windmilling kicks and punches into a man desperately trying to protect himself. A conservative group leader retreated for safety behind a line of riot police as marchers chucked water bottles, shot off pepper spray and screamed, “Fascist go home!” All told, the Associated Press reported at least five individuals were attacked. An AP reporter witnessed the assaults. Berkeley Police’s Lt. Joe Okies told The Washington Post the rally resulted in “13 arrests on a range of charges including assault with a deadly weapon, obstructing a police officer, and various Berkeley municipal code violations.”

And although the “anti-hate” and left-wing protesters largely drowned out the smaller clutch of far-right marchers attending a planned “No to Marxism in America” rally, Sunday’s confrontation marked another street brawl between opposing ends of the political spectrum — with violence. We’re just puzzled as to why people consider violence a valid tactic,” Berkeley resident Kristin Leiumkuhler, 60, told SFGate. She, like others, had turned out with neighbors for a peaceful rally but left when things got ugly. “We felt disappointed and surprised by how many people were not in any way discreet about being with antifa — in fact being very bold and prepared to be violent.”

The Washington Post finally showed some honesty about what Antifa is all about. If you remember, I have consistently called Antifa out (Antifa stands for “anti-fascists”) who cloak their intentions with their anti-fascist claims while literally practicing Fascist ideals through violence. Even thoug the Post called Antifa out in a fashion, labeling them as “attackers” and described their violence without blaming conservatives that were there, we will see if they will continue to tell Americans the truth about the terrorists as the Fascist group continues to block those who try using their right to Free Speech on various campuses to peacefully tell their side. By their actions — not their verbal claims — Antifa truly combines the worst of Hitler and Stalin in the way they are publicly attacking free speech advocates. Heretofore the Liberal Left Media have given them a free pass allowing them to get away with using that name and by labeling those they lash out against as “far right.” Free speech advocates trying to peacefully protest that are attacked by Antifa thugs are “far right?” Come on, Man!

San Franciso

I’m not going to talk politics here. I’m going to tell you about a San Franciso 49’er Wide Receiver named Trent Taylor, number 81. He’s small — REAL small. But he is tough — REALLY tough. He is almost like a son to me, a graduate of Evangel Christian Academy in Shreveport, Louisiana, and Louisiana Tech University. And he is REALLY good! He is a rookie slot receiver and punt returner. And he is taking the Bay Area by storm. In addition to having an amazing smile and catchy personality, he is an amazing football player. In Sunday night’s pre-season game against the Minnesota Vikings he did not play as receiver until the second half. Quarterback C.J. Beathard threw him 3 passes and he caught all 3 for good gains. He was punt receiver on 3 punts — two were called “fair catch,” and 1 he returned for about 6 yards. He’s all of the above but probably one of the quickest route runners of all NFL receivers. I recommend you watch him in the 2017 season. Has he made the 49 ‘er team yet? Nope. Will he make the team? Yep. How do I know that? I have Faith. But it’s not just that: San Fran’s head coach Kyle Shanahan was all over Trent as a draft pick. Don’t get me wrong: Shanahan is not going to keep any player that doesn’t prove he’s good enough for the 49’ers. But his eye on Trent means that the WR will get every opportunity on the field in training camp to confirm the head coach’s conviction that Trent is a really good receiver with a really good NFL future. Watch him. The 49’ers play the Chargers Thursday night at 9:00 PM Central. Again, he’s number 81 and plays the slot receiver position. Watch the game and let me know what you think.

Summary

Houston is dominating the current 24-hour news cycle. Isn’t that refreshing! I guess President Trump is no longer getting his marching orders from the Kremlin or surely THAT would be dominating the news! Seriously, there is very little in life worse than losing your home and your possessions. Losing a child or parent is MUCH worse, but thankfully that has been rare in Houston. But if we pause for a minute and think about how many Americans in just a few hours have had their lives changed forever by Hurricane Harvey, we will understand how erratic and unsure life often is. Take a moment and look around your home and all you have. Look at your spouse and your kids and grand kids if you have some. Think about the tragedy it would be “IF” you lost some or all of those in a flood that you thought was just going to be an exaggerated rainstorm.

Want some advice? Take a moment today to kiss your spouse, squeeze your babies and kiss them on the cheek, and tell them that you are thankful for their being in your life and that you love them. I know, I know: telling someone you love them is not loving them. But tell them you do anyway. That will at least get them to start thinking about it. Maybe then they’ll give you the benefit of the doubt as you being SHOWING them you love them — “IF” you haven’t already been doing that.

BE thankful: an attitude of gratitude goes a long way to making people feel good about you, AND making you feel good about you. And there’s nothing wrong with that.

 

Joe Arpaio: Criminal?

In case you did not hear, President Trump issued his first pardon since becoming President: former Maricopa County Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio. Arpaio was convicted in federal court of Criminal Contempt. His criminality? Disobeying what was reportedly a very vague judicial order issued by a federal judge instructing Sheriff Arpaio to NOT enforce federal immigration laws in apprehension by his offices of illegal immigrants with subsequent transfer of those to federal authorities for deportation. On the surface the sheriff’s actions seem reasonable and totally acceptable. But not so to federal judge Susan Bolton.

Background

Sheriff Arpaio was accused of instructing his officers when making traffic stops to verify the immigration status of those who they stopped. If verification of their identity and immigration status showed they were illegal, officers detained them and the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Department and turned those illegal immigrants over to ICE for prosecution. A Class Action suit was filed against the Sheriff’s Department claiming that these arrests and illegal immigration deportation actions were violations of the Fourth Amendment by not providing due process for those arrested. In the highly charged illegal immigration atmosphere along the southern border, Arpaio’s actions in these arrests and ICE referrals was met with major public outcry by open border proponents. Concerted efforts were initiated to stop the colorful sheriff from these immigration law violations that led to several court actions, including an order issued by U.S. District Court Judge Murray Snow on December 23, 2011. In that order, Snow told the Sheriff’s Department to stop detaining illegal immigrants unless deputies had probable cause they broke “state” laws unrelated to immigration. Arpaio’s officers continued detentions and ICE referrals of illegals. On May 24, 2013, Snow ruled that the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO), and Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio violated the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and committed acts of racial profiling against Hispanics. In June of 2017 a 4-day trial was conducted by U.S. District Court Judge Susan Bolton in which Arpaio was found guilty of Criminal Contempt for ignoring the 2011 Court Order.

Case Oddities

There are several unsettling details of this case that every American needs to pay close attention to. The first unsettling — and very obvious — thing about this case is that the Sheriff and his officers were chastised for identifying and detaining those who were guilty of being in the United States illegally. Most Americans feel that law enforcement officers that when hired swore to enforce the law should not be stopped and certainly not penalized for doing just that by detaining illegal immigrants. In some way two federal judges felt that in doing so, 4th Amendment rights of those illegals were violated. That is unconscionable and certainly will find its way into the purview of the U.S. Supreme Court for clarification.

Secondly, Judge Susan Bolton on Wednesday, July 28, 2010 (after hearing arguments of three lawsuits involving an Arizona law about police checking immigration status for those they stop or arrest or suspect are in the country illegally called Arizona Law SB 1070),  issued a ruling blocking small portions of that Arizona law, writing that “requiring police to check the immigration status of those they arrest or whom they stop and suspect are in the country illegally would overwhelm the federal government’s ability to respond, and could mean legal immigrants are wrongly arrested.” Judge Bolton wrote: “Federal resources will be taxed and diverted from federal enforcement priorities as a result of the increase in requests for immigration status determination that will flow from Arizona.” Then on September 5, 2012, Judge Bolton cleared the way for police to carry out the 2010 law’s requirement that officers, while enforcing other laws, may question the immigration status of those they suspect are in the country illegally. This part of the law has been called the “show me your papers” provision. (Note: Her clearing the way for those police actions happened 9 months AFTER her counterpart, Judge Murray Snow, issued his court order for the Sheriff’s Department to stop such apprehensions) But it only gets stranger.

Judge Bolton whose court section is in the same courthouse as her fellow judge Murray Snow held Arpaio’s trial with NO jury. Multiple witnesses for the Defense presented to her very clear evidence of the conflict presented by her subsequent order clearing the way for police to carry out those actions. Judge Bolton found that the order by Judge Snow, who sits on the same Arizona court, clearly said something that it did not even say: that the MCSO was prohibited from turning illegal aliens over to Border Patrol or ICE. Every witness in the case testified that the order was not clear, even though Judge Bolton and her fellow judge say so. Numerous law enforcement agencies also continue to do this. In fact, the DOJ now goes after agencies that refuse to do this.

In Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 42, Section 3, it states the following: “(3) Trial and Disposition. A person being prosecuted for criminal contempt is entitled to a jury trial in any case in which federal law so provides and must be released or detained as Rule 46 provides. If the criminal contempt involves disrespect toward or criticism of a judge, that judge is disqualified from presiding at the contempt trial or hearing unless the defendant consents.” Judge Bolton broke this law by not allowing Sheriff Arpaio a jury by trial as the law plainly guarantees a defendant charged with Criminal Contempt. Judge Arpaio and his attorney specifically requested trial by jury that Judge Bolton denied. The verdict determined and rendered solely by Bolton will certainly be reversed for the jury request refusal and also on the grounds of lack of evidence to corroborate such a verdict. Bolton sentenced Arpaio to jail.

Danger for Arpaio

During his extensive career in law enforcement, both at the federal and state level, Arpaio was responsible for putting numerous criminals behind bars. He was best known as being tough on drug offenders of all kinds as well as illegal immigration offenders. Mexican drug cartels were often targets of the Sheriff who broke up innumerable drug trafficking projects putting hundreds of cartel members behind bars. He was hated by incarcerated lawbreakers. You may remember the press he received for requiring all those incarcerated to wear pink jail outfits, refused television privileges, and fed prisoners bologna sandwiches. He felt criminals convicted of felonies deserved serious requirements in jail for committing serious crimes.

Because of the “payback” by drug cartels that would almost certainly result in Arpaio’s murder if/when he would be locked up, and because of the very obvious political prosecution of Arpaio and the ridiculous trial, President Trump pardoned the former Sheriff to the chagrin of those on the Left. The Media firestorm began in earnest immediately upon the release of the news of the pardon. And they continue to cry “fowl” for the President’s pardon. Their cries have even reached to their using the “I” word again: Impeachment. In fact, there’s a professor who maintains impeachment is not only possible, but should occur.

Professor Martin Redish argues in the New York Times that this particular pardon ought to be deemed constitutionally invalid. He contends that it offends the Due Process Clause because the only effective redress for those whose rights were violated by then–Sheriff Arpaio when he defied the court’s injunction is a contempt sanction, and voiding that sanction with a pardon both neuters the judicial power to enforce constitutional rights and deprives Arpaio’s victims of relief. Even professor Redish admits that this is a novel theory, and with respect, it simply won’t fly.

Seriously! Presidential pardons have been issued by every President in modern history. And although many Americans despise the process of releasing prisoners, the practice is protected Constitutionally and usually is initiated shortly before the President leaves office. In Arpaio’s case, the impending danger to the 80+ year old former sheriff led the President to issue his pardon now.

By the way, here are the numbers of pardons made by some previous Presidents:

  • Obama absolved the sentenced of 1,937 convicts during his two terms in the White House, granting clemency to more people convicted of federal crimes than any chief executive in 64 years
  • Bill Clinton: 396
  • Ronald Reagan: 393
  • George H. Bush: 74
  • George W. Bush: 189
  • Lyndon Johnson: 960
  • John F. Kennedy: 472
  • The most by any President: 2819 by Franklin D. Roosevelt
  • Donald Trump: 1

Summary

Do you get the sense that now more than ever we are seeing a huge divide growing larger between the Conservative and Liberal mindsets in the nation? Those on the Left more than ever want total control over everything political in America. Somehow they have found a way to arbitrarily determine what laws and rules must be adhered to by all and which can be ignored: this rather than simply maintaining that 250 year old process of demanding adherence by all to every duly passed law. Not only can laws be broken, who determines who can break which laws with impunity and with no regard of accountability must come only from the Leftist Politically Correct.

McCarthy-ism is alive in America. Be really careful if you’re a Conservative of any kind: they don’t like you!

Unfit To Serve

Oregon Representative Earl Blumenauer called for a review of constitutional procedures to remove a president from office, stating it did not consider the mental or emotional health of a leader.  “It’s not normal behavior. I don’t know anybody in a position of responsibility that doesn’t know if they’re being rained on. And nobody I work with serially offers up verifiably false statements on an ongoing basis,” he told The Hill.

Minnesota Senator Al Franken told CNN “a few” Republican colleagues had also expressed their concern as to whether Mr Trump is mentally fit to hold office. 

California Representative Ted Lieu has announced plans to introduce legislation that would require the presence of a psychiatrist or psychologist in the White House. “I think it is a legitimate issue to raise. I am not a mental health professional, so I don’t know in terms of any sort of medical expertise on this. But I do see and hear the same things that other people see and hear, and a lot of people have concluded that what’s going on is not normal. So what do I do with that as a member of Congress?” he said. “Anyone who can launch 4,000 nuclear weapons in minutes absolutely should be questioned on any matter related to their physical and mental health.”

Former Intelligence Department Head James Clapper on CNN this week claimed that he has serious doubts about the President’s mental capacity and clarity to serve — the same James Clapper that lied over and over to Congress while under oath.

Rep. Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said Sunday that he and his colleagues are increasingly concerned about President Donald Trump’s mental fitness. “There are some serious issues,” Schiff said on CNN’s “State of the Union,” adding that “the pressures of the job may only get worse.”

This is what some have said about the mental capability of Donald Trump to serve as President of the United States. Please note the following: None are psychological professionals; none offer any specific examples that point to alleged mental incapacity of the President; their talking points are identical and obviously are literally talking points given by the same source for these Democrats to “feed” the public through the media.

What’s REALLY scary is the conversation about the 25th Amendment to the Constitution that is now occurring in Leftist circles in D.C.:

“The 25th Amendment was created after the assassination of John F. Kennedy, when people in government realized that the Constitution was pretty good at dealing with the possibility of the death of a president. That’s what vice presidents are for. But the Constitution was not well-equipped for another scenario, which was a president who, in Kennedy’s case, had he lived from a gunshot wound, was comatose perhaps. There was no legal way for the duties of the office to be discharged by anybody else, so the government would be paralyzed. And so in 1967, they introduced this amendment which created under Section 4 a pretty remarkable set of legal capabilities. And what it says is that if a president is determined to be mentally or physically unfit, unable to discharge the duties of the office, then he or she can be removed. And the determination about whether or not the president is unfit, that can be made by the vice president and the Cabinet.

So if a majority of the Cabinet secretaries – and a majority eight people – if they decide that the president is showing the signs of instability, is really not able to do the job, all they do is write down on a piece of paper, and they give it to the leaders of the Senate and the House. And at that point, the president is no longer legally endowed with the same rights and legal authority, particularly over the nuclear arsenal, that he or she had before. But a president can object.”

Please know that the American Psychiatric Association (APA) protocol means medical professionals should not diagnose individuals they have not personally treated. Please note that NONE of the above members of Congress are “medical professionals” and therefore none are members of the American Psychiatric Association as Psychiatrists or Psychologists. Yet ALL take the liberty to report to Americans they “know” with some certainty that President Trump has mental capability issues that are dangerous to his serving as President.

Thoughts

Can you imagine a scenario in which Leftists in Washington would actually try to kick Donald Trump out of the White House? Do you now understand how clueless elected Leftists (and some G.O.P. lawmakers) have no idea what governing America at the Federal level is about? Do you understand that these named above and others have NO intention of abiding by the Constitution of the United States in their jobs as lawmakers, rather taking their personal liberties to denigrate an American who happens to be President, hoping to discredit him with Americans? What is laughable is that they really think Americans for the most part agree with them! Who is delusional in this scenario?

Follow this thought: they feel President Trump has mental issues that warrant his removal. Because of that perception of the President’s mental incapacity they have justification for NOT performing their legislative duties until some law or occurrence results in the removal of the President at which time they can resume their continual fleecing of Americans. They honestly believe that a majority of Americans share their radical and un-American views and would support such a move!

There are so many nuances in their scenario that are unthinkable. Think of this: they really believe that such actions are necessary and that Americans would accept such unilateral actions. And what is worse, it makes no difference to them that Americans chose Donald Trump to serve as President, and in doing so turned Hillary Clinton away from what she and all Dems felt was HER place not the People’s place.

They continue to ignore voters and what voters thought and did in the election. They simply do not care about Americans.

There are some really good things about these revelations: 1.  They and their intentions have been exposed.  Americans are now on point to watch for any actions that would tie directly to any attempt the  removal of the President. I do NOT think Americans would stand for it. In fact I am certain that what we witnessed in Berkeley as Antifa tore the town apart in a promoted “demonstration” against fascism that quickly turned to violence and rioting would pale at the uprising that we would see in the wake of any attempt of his removal; 2) The Democrat Party would if this happened see the biggest bloodbath next year at election polls since Hubert Humphrey’s trouncing in his bid for the White House. And that would be just the beginning.

Why are they doing this?

Simple: they lost in 2016 because of voter disdain and mistrust of their candidate AND they abandoned middle class Americans during the previous 8 years and offered NO plans for the middle class during the 2016 campaign. They are struggling to put a face on the Democrat donkey that Americans will accept and even possibly identify with. So far in 2017 they are offering Americans nothing but the same old empty rhetoric. In doing so, Democrats continue to expose their disdain for middle class Americans and the DNC personal and party elitism that the core feel they actually earned under President Obama. Why they want to maintain the arrogance, elitism, and contempt for Americans that he brought to the White House is a mystery to me, but he brought it and they still hold it up. Americans hate it.

Suggestions

Here’s a novel thought: Candidate Trump gave a laundry list of his targeted accomplishments if elected. After the election he set his mind and might on accomplishing each and every one. Yes, he was a bit foolish to swallow the line of the Establishment Republicans in which they promised him AND voters they would fall in line behind him as they legislatively passed all necessary to facilitate those promises to voters. So far they have on the most part stymied his and American voters’ agenda. Even with the limited legislation Congress has passed this year, the nation already sees in numerous areas dramatic improvements that directly impact middle class pocketbooks. Do you think there may be one, or two, or three, or four legislators that (for their constituents) think it might be prudent to support the President’s ideas — maybe just 3 or 4 to see if he’s right — and pass the necessary legislation to put those in action? Why has that not already happened? Do you think they are so self absorbed and so confident that their efforts to keep voters blind to their real agendas have gone undetected? And do they really feel Americans will forget?

The Bottom Line

As a businessman that knows what it is to struggle to make payroll, to pay taxes, to watch profits disappear after paying fees, employee benefits, matching Medicare and Social Security withholding, steadily climbing overall operating costs, I KNOW that his ideas will work. Democrats just don’t want to accept that increasing taxes does NOTHING to stimulate an economy. Status Quo members of Congress do nothing but force those in the private sector to bow to the government elitists most of whom are attorneys whose very existence is predicated on crafting legislation to perpetuate the “money train” of Congress — taxes —  while daily gorging at the trough of D.C. quid pro quo while crippling the middle class?

Epilogue

I can’t wait to see what desperate tactics the Left craft next to divert the attention of Americans from the horrible job they are doing in D.C. I hope they are not so arrogant as to try and remove the President. If they go down that road, I will change my past published prediction list to include an overwhelming conservative majority for the 2019 Congressional session.

ESPN Multi-national Litigation

Just reported: “A senior Chinese ancestral family this morning filed a defamation suit in Federal Court in the Southern District of New York against ESPN and its parent company Disney. The suit alleges that actions taken by ESPN have seriously and irreparably damaged this family that has maintained a significant historical place in China for several thousand years. Millions of Chinese citizens bear this ancestral name that has become a national brand for use in commerce in all types of industry, commercial and private enterprise — both domestically and internationally. Actions taken by ESPN have severely impacted the value of that name/trademark.” The suit asks for the Court to award $15 Billion plus costs plus punitive damages to be determined by the Court. Further, litigants have requested fast-track action by the Court to try this case with a jury as quickly as possible to mitigate any additional damages.

Chief spokesman for the family, James Lee gave this statement after the suit was filed: “It is unconscionable for a major American corporation that has prided itself for being culturally, socially, and morally a bastion of fairness and impartiality to (with no legal or substantive basis) defame our Family who has for centuries represented our nation in domestic and international interaction with the nations of the World. This punitive action by ESPN is an assault on our Family at its foundation and has caused irreparable damages. We demand ESPN pay for their attack. We have asked the Court to intervene and order ESPN to cease and desist in these arbitrary and capricious activities while this matter is being resolved.”

Certainly by now you realize such a suit was NOT filed in New York. It probably should have been. Why? Because in the current environment in the U.S. with political elitism and correctness driving the political narrative that is thrust in our face every day, Robert Lee — the ESPN Asian American football announcer that was bumped from their upcoming broadcast of the University of Virginia football game — is the victim of this elitism and political correctness. What did he do wrong? Nothing. But his is the price that historically has been paid by those who are forced to bear the brunt of political correctness in numerous countries when it takes over. And it is taking over the U.S. today.

Here’s the biggest problem with Political Correctness and Political Elitism: it NEVER goes away. Why? Because its elimination is NOT the objective of those who are using it. They only want the power to continue its use to perpetuate their control over the American political system. As long as they are able to control the narrative they maintain power. With power, they control EVERYTHING!

The outcry against White Supremacy and the KKK did not just recently appear. That outcry and rage has existed for decades — so much so that the current KKK membership numbers a few thousand when it formerly included millions. Why? Americans when educated to the substance of Supremacy, disdain its racist extremism.  That has eroded their numbers and diminished the impact of what remains. However, ramping up the outcry against Supremacy fits the plan of the politically elite to help fuel the fire of their control. Millennials who were not yet born when America was installing the much more racially civil society that replaced Supremacy, are reacting to the Left’s cries against that part of racism that was put away during 1970’s and 1980’s America. They want it back. Please do not misunderstand me: there is still MUCH racism in America, but far less than when Martin Luther King, Jr. gave his famous “I have a dream” speech. Racism is still here and we have much to do to ever eliminate it. But the current “version” of Supremacy elimination does not fit the narrative of these elitists. They have chosen to pour more fuel on the fire of racism in America.  That has ratcheted up the atmosphere of hate to the chagrin of most Americans. And for the the elitists, their plan is working so far.

Let’s be honest: how does tearing down Confederate monuments improve racism? It doesn’t. In fact it acts as that fuel I just mentioned to further ignite the fires of racism and keep them blazing. So why — if the goal is to get rid of racism — would these demonstrations-turned-riots be continued when their results are so certain to be violence? Easy answer: to further enhance the division in America using the hate in racism as the tool. In doing this, the political elite increase their power and control.

Let’s be honest again: if one thinks through the inevitable course this will take if it continues to escalate, the results for America will be historical and tragic. Where does this politically correct train go? Does it ever stop? Let’s think that through.

There is NO historical model from World history that parallels that of the U.S. Its 245 year history is unique. We cannot therefore discuss a direct comparison. We can, however, extrapolate what America “might” look like in 60 to 70 years IF the present political correctness continues on its present course. Example?

There is a legitimate legislative move in Louisiana to replace every Confederate monument, park, building name, etc. with an identical monument, park, building name, etc. of “Britney Spears.” Sure, Britney is a pop rock hero from Louisiana. But can you imagine the chaos making those changes would bring? Imagine if that happened. There would almost surely be a group of people that feel Britney as a role model is un-American and disgusting for any of a number of reasons, and will begin cries against those monuments, etc. and demand their removal. Who gets honored next? I don’t know who Edgar Martin was, but there is an elementary school in Lafayette, Louisiana named “Edgar Martin Elementary.” There is probably someone alive (and maybe thousands) who feel Edgar Martin was a racist or a member of some other disagreeable group and demonstrate for the removal of his name.

We have watched as those in the name of political correctness/elitism have attacked colleges and universities, professional athletic teams, high schools, businesses and individuals, regarding what is classified by the attackers as being “Racist” for their names, mascots, logos, creeds, founding documents, even school songs. The professed hope for these attacks was to stamp out bigotry and racism attached to those individuals and entities. But the reality is no bigotry or racism in any of those instances has been removed. If there was any in the first place, demanding its removal does anything but result in its removal. But what it does in every such circumstance is do exactly what we are seeing now in Charlottesville and other towns and cities: dramatic hate and anger increases, violence, and division as almost all Americans are hoping and praying for love and unity and especially racial healing in our nation.

However, that small group of political elitists have been able to successfully maintain their choke hold on the power to goad Americans into racist brawls. Watching and listening to then Candidate Donald Trump proved to them that their hold on that racism button would be removed if/when he became President. They united and fought hard to keep that from happening. After his election they took it to another high level and daily stoke the fires of hate, anger, and bitterness in those in America they know will listen and respond. The environment this has created has stifled any real sense of accomplishment as the Media refuse to focus on good things opting rather for talking about horrific things. And of course responsibility for all those fall at the feet of the President.

A lawsuit by a Chinese family named Lee against ESPN for removing an American/Asian announcer from the broadcast booth at a southern University football game is NOT true and ridiculous.  It hasn’t happened….yet. But it is no more ridiculous than the thought that removing statues of any kind will make any type of positive impact on racism in America. That will only increase the racial divide, anger, and racism.

One of my daughters had a classmate in college from Japan. She had no idea that World War II was started with the bombing of Pearl Harbor by the Japanese. Japanese history books taught her that the U.S. had aggressively started the war by attacking Japan. Printing that in Japanese history books did NOT change history. Doing so simply revised one version of the WWII story. Changing mascot names, preventing prayers in school, removing Ten Commandments from courthouse walls, tearing down monuments and statues might change a version of events someone may print or tell. But doing so will NOT change history. But the process now in place that is part of the unrealistic hopes to change history has failed and that failure will continue. It is only another chapter in American history that tells the story of how silly historical revisionists are to believe that altering history is possible. Too many Americans know the true history of the United States — both its good and bad. Most Americans believe in what this country stands for and how it stands as a lighthouse of fairness and goodness to its citizens and those of other countries. They also recognize that the current attacks on those reminders from the past are not substantive and are not happening for any purpose other than to create hate and anger to further divide Americans. And most Americans don’t want that and summarily reject that just like most Americans hate racism of every kind.

 

 

 

Hate Speech

Hate speech is speech which attacks a person or group on the basis of attributes such as race, religion, ethnic origin, sexual orientation, disability, or gender. We have seen hate speech used again and again throughout modern history, but never in the U.S. as we see now. Is hate speech actually protected speech under the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment?

“Congress shall make no law . . .  abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.” What does this mean today? Generally speaking, it means that the government may not jail, fine, or impose civil liability on people or organizations based on what they say or write, except in exceptional circumstances. Although the First Amendment says “Congress,” the Supreme Court has held that speakers are protected against all government agencies and officials: federal, state, and local, and legislative, executive, or judicial. The First Amendment does not protect speakers, however, against private individuals or organizations, such as private employers, private colleges, or private landowners. The First Amendment restrains only the government. The Supreme Court has interpreted “speech” and “press” broadly as covering not only talking, writing, and printing, but also broadcasting, using the Internet, and other forms of expression. The freedom of speech also applies to symbolic expression, such as displaying flags, burning flags, wearing armbands, burning crosses, and the like. The Supreme Court has held that restrictions on speech because of its content—that is, when the government targets the speaker’s message—generally violate the First Amendment. Laws that prohibit people from criticizing a war, opposing abortion, or advocating high taxes are examples of unconstitutional content-based restrictions. Such laws are thought to be especially problematic because they distort public debate and contradict a basic principle of self-governance: that the government cannot be trusted to decide what ideas or information “the people” should be allowed to hear.

There are generally three situations in which the government can constitutionally restrict speech under a less demanding standard.

1. In some circumstances, the Supreme Court has held that certain types of speech are of only “low” First Amendment value, such as: Defamation, True threats, “Fighting Words,” Obscenity, Child Pornography, and Commercial Advertising;

Outside these narrow categories of “low” value speech, most other content-based restrictions on speech are presumptively unconstitutional. Even entertainment, vulgarity, “hate speech,” blasphemy (speech that offends people’s religious sensibilities), and violent video games are protected by the First Amendment. The Supreme Court has generally been very reluctant to expand the list of “low” value categories of speech.

2. The government can restrict speech under a less demanding standard when the speaker is in a special relationship to the government. For example, the speech of government employees and of students in public schools can be restricted, even based on content, when their speech is incompatible with their status as public officials or students. A teacher in a public school, for example, can be punished for encouraging students to experiment with illegal drugs, and a government employee who has access to classified information generally can be prohibited from disclosing that information. Pickering v. Board of Education (1968).

3. The government can also restrict speech under a less demanding standard when it does so without regard to the content or message of the speech. Content-neutral restrictions, such as restrictions on noise, blocking traffic, and large signs (which can distract drivers and clutter the landscape), are generally constitutional as long as they are “reasonable.”

Let’s be realistic: hate speech is tearing the Nation apart right now. And one of the biggest problems with it is who defines what is hate speech. Technically “hate speech” in itself is non-political, but those on the Left and those on the Right politically sure characterize it that way. And many on either side of the political spectrum claim moral superiority that gives them the authority to determine what is and what is not hate speech. Obviously, each side claims what the other is saying is hate speech. In the end we fall into that conundrum which has actually put us in the deep divide in which we find ourselves.

Throughout U.S. history we’ve seen attempts to legislate and control what is called “hate speech” by various groups and individuals. Sometimes in demonstrations gone bad violence occurs. In the Kent State riots in 1970, the Ohio National Guard killed 4 Kent State students and 9 others were seriously injured when students demonstrated against the Vietnam War. As you can imagine, some of the people there were against the Vietnam War, others were in support of the War. Peaceful demonstrations included emotional speeches and verbal interactions between the two sides and the National Guard that escalated and escalated. What was called “hate speech” evolved into violence and death. We know now that the government cannot regulate hate speech.

So what do we do? Instead of trying to legislate or choke hate speech, we should encourage it. “Are you crazy?” you may ask. No, let’s think this through:

What is the seed that almost always is guilty of giving birth to violence? Hatred. What is the seed of Hatred? Fear of the unknown. How do we as a nation get a handle on getting rid of Hatred? We must get rid of the unknown. And how can we do that? That answer is simple: Let the haters speak!

Not knowing something does not mean a person is stupid. When that person does not know something, has the resources to turn to for getting a true answer so as to learn the truth and then does nothing about it, that is stupid! Wait a minute: there’s no manual on the shelf that is titled “How to Identify and get rid of Hate Speech,” is there? But there IS a tried and proven method for doing that already in existence and has been for hundreds if not thousands of years. It’s Communication.

In today’s world, we are struggling to rid our nation and the world of hate speech. The problem begins with defining what hate speech is, then gets even bigger when we try to determine who has the right and authority to determine what is hate speech and what is not. In spite of what pundits and members of the Media and members of the Government want us to think, the only people who can identify hate speech and do anything about it are American People! And there’s no way for this process to happen without hearing from those from the various sides of a conflict, from Americans through listening to each side of any issue, and then making a determination. In fact, that’s the example of true “Free Speech.”

College campuses have for decades been the incubator for facilitating this to occur in Free Speech Zones. Free Speech Zones were created and initially operated centuries ago in Ancient Greece. In the 70’s when I was in college, there was a dedicated spot on my college campus at which anyone could come to and speak on any topic he or she desired. Other students were encouraged to listen politely, then ask questions and make comments when appropriate. This was a common practice. What else was common was for conversational discourse to occur which ultimately resulted in understanding each other’s positions on a specific topic. In the big scheme of things, these understandings led to the dispelling of the unknowns in the minds of college students participating in those conversations. Clarifying unknowns killed the fear which did away with the hatred. True, not everyone agreed with each other at that point. But what did happen almost every time were conversations about specifics with very little or no spewed venom, screaming at each other, and definitely no violence. It worked then…it will work now. The problem has been we have seen multiple groups with one goal in mind and one only: to silence the opposition at all cost, when in reality the only way to clear this air is to LET EVERYONE TALK! What happens is when people speak — including “hate speakers” — their true positions are exposed. That open discourse is NOT conducive to any physicality and certainly any violence. Such dialogue may not suffice to bring others to one’s side, but what it WILL do is take a large portion of the negativity out of the conversation. Hatred can only exist in an environment of fear of the unknown.

Want an example of how allowing the speaking out of Hate Speakers can dramatically erode hate and anger? At the height of the existence of the KKK, the group claimed 4 million adherents. Most Americans preferred to never hear from KKK members because most Americans were sickened by the KKK. Their activities were well documented. When other Americans heard from the KKK and learned the substance of their racism and proposed solutions, those Americans were turned off. Subsequently through the years the KKK took a big hit in membership. Recently a study showed KKK membership had dropped to less than 3,000. Why the dramatic drop? When the light of truth is shined on something evil, most people will walk away from it. When evil’s reality is hidden, people are prevented from obtaining facts and therefore simply don’t know. That evil will survive and will grow unless it is revealed to the masses.

As hard as it may be to think about, taking the self appointed, self righteous Alt Left “Hate Speech” police out of the equation and allowing real Hate Speakers to share their philosophies with Americans is the only certain way we will ever do away with Hate Speech. Americans as a rule are NOT racist, NOT homophobic, and NOT bigoted. Let’s trust Americans to hear the details of White Supremacists are all about. Then let’s trust Americans to determine for themselves what is and what is not Hate Speech. If we do that, the hate filled atmosphere choking our nation will simply melt away.

Knowing the truth results in decisions based on truth rather than emotion. Let’s stop trying to quash free speech and let those from every political ilk tell their stories. Let’s trust ourselves and fellow Americans to make the right choices for our country based on hearing facts and drawing conclusions from evidence and not just from emotional allegations as is happening now. It will work — it has very successfully before.

 

 

Back in the U.S.S.R.

Before we get started with this discussion, please click on the link below and watch and listen to the YouTube vido:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrtnnLor2UM

Lennon and McCartney of the Beatles wrote that song during the “Cold War” when the key political players at the time were the Soviet Union and all of the Western World — primarily the U.S. I remember when the song came out how horrible I thought it was to glorify a government and country steeped in Communism with its citizens devastated by the heavy weight of totalitarianism. Of course I missed the point of the song: the lyrics had nothing to do with Communism! In fact, they simply tell a story of the writer re-uniting with a girl — a Soviet girl:

“Oh, flew in from Miami Beach B.O.A.C.
Didn’t get to bed last night
On the way the paper bag was on my knee
Man I had a dreadful flight
I’m back in the U.S.S.R.
You don’t know how lucky you are boy
Back in the U.S.S.R. (Yeah)

Been away so long I hardly knew the place
Gee it’s good to be back home
Leave it till tomorrow to unpack my case
Honey disconnect the phone
I’m back in the U.S.S.R.
You don’t know how lucky you are boy
Back in the U.S.
Back in the U.S.
Back in the U.S.S.R.

Well the Ukraine girls really knock me out
They leave the West behind
And Moscow girls make me sing and shout
That Georgia’s always on my mind

Oh, show me around your snow-peaked mountains way down south
Take me to your daddy’s farm
Let me hear your balalaika’s ringing out
Come and keep your comrade warm
I’m back in the U.S.S.R.
Hey you don’t know how lucky you are boys
Back in the U.S.S.R.”

(I left some of the “repeated” phrases out for  brevity)

Little did two of the greatest songwriters in history know there was prophesy in their lyrics. How so? Without even knowing what– other than meeting that girlfriend was at stake — they were going “Back to the U.S.S.R.” The prophetic message in the song is that it seems today that we are headed back to the U.S.S.R., and not to see an old girlfriend.

In that famous debate during the 2012 Presidential election, the debate moderator asked each candidate what the greatest threat to the U.S. was. Mitt Romney said it was Russia. The famous debate line came from Barack Obama when he said regarding Romney’s answer, “Governor Romney, the 70’s want their foreign policy back.” It was a humiliating comeback and stuck in the minds of many. The only truthful part of that Q & A was Romney’s answer naming Russia as America’s greatest threat. It was true then and has been confirmed multiple times in the past year or so. And the confirmation I am referring to is not the apparently bogus claims by many that President Trump’s campaign colluded with Russia to help defeat Hillary Clinton.  It has been revealed that there were actually Russian devices installed on U.S. voting machines to purposely change votes. The Obama Administration knew of this and kept it hidden since 2010. But it hasn’t stopped there.

Karl Marx was the father of totalitarianism in Russia that later was termed “Communism.” Those in the Free World scoffed at Communism and the Communist State, but there had to be some good reasons for it after being established that Russia eventually became the second strongest country on Earth. It happened because the People not only allowed it, the majority of people encouraged it. Let’s quickly look at some of Marx’s fundamentals:

The ten tenets of Marxism/Communism after the Foundation is set. (The foundation is total Government control)

  • Central banking system (the U.S. has a central banking system)
  • Government controlled education (though states operate public education systems day-t0-day, the federal government sets all the fundamental rules)
  • Government controlled labor  (the U.S. Government through the NLRB — National Labor Relations Board — sets all the rules for starting and operating labor unions and oversees all labor policies for every employer in the U.S.)
  • Government ownership of transportation and communication vehicles (transportation is private though heavily regulated by the federal government. All broadcast frequencies are controlled by the FCC — Federal Communications Commission — whose board members are all political appointees. Broadcast operations rules and guidelines are devised, implemented, and enforced by the FCC and have become extremely restrictive in every way)
  • Government ownership of agricultural means and factories (Government now controls agriculture by controlling agricultural land ownership and regulating crop rotation and water rights. The EPA cripples both agriculture and manufacturing with severely restrictive environmental regulations that stifles growth and costs companies 20%-30% of revenue in fines and operational regulations)
  • Total abolition of private property (private property rights are some of the few individual rights left, however through eminent domain, the Feds can seize any property deemed necessary to the public good)
  • Property rights confiscation (See above)
  • Heavy income tax on everyone (U.S. corporate income taxes are in the top 3 highest in the World. Those taxes through goods and services pricing by those corporations trickle into the marketplace and come from Americans’ pockets)
  • Elimination of rights of inheritance (almost 50% of the value of estates are confiscated now by the Government when we die through the federal “Death Tax”)
  • Regional planning (Major pushes exist for no immigration laws, no borders, and determining all immigrants have freedom to come to the U.S. with no restrictions)

See any similarities to 2017?

But the most egregious similarity to Marxism we are watching play out is the concerted efforts by the Left to regulate and control and in many cases do away with free speech. No doubt many in the Democrat Party and Leftist groups like Antifa and Black Lives Matter would dearly love to see the First Amendment severely abridged if not totally repealed. How else can they explain their all out war against those with opposing viewpoints who try to speak in public settings? Antifa claims to be “anti-fascist.” If they really were anti-fascist, they would use their power and efforts to assure those conservatives who they block from speaking on college campuses get to speak. Truly, Antifa is a “pre-Marxist” anti-free speech group lying to those who will listen.

Summary

I am NOT a conspiracy theorist. But if it quacks and waddles it is almost always a duck. What we are seeing today from the Left parallels much of the Karl Marx tenets of Communism and also parallels what our parents and grand parents saw in Europe in the rollouts of fascism, Naziism, and Communism. Hitler and Stalin were Marxist students and used those same tenets to establish their versions of Communism. Leftists are praying that Millenials in the U.S. that have been inundated by teachers and professors with the “supposed” goodness of totalitarianism will ignore the necessity of research and study of what Marxism and Communism did to the European people and how it was created. An entire generation has turned from the tenets of American democracy that permeated our country for two centuries. Simply because their parents believed in it and lived happily in it caused them to turn away and begin to listen to teachers and believe what they hear without question. It is happening everywhere in the U.S. everyday.

What we must do is cry for Free Speech to be salvaged. The reason Antifa, BLM, and other Socialist groups are so desperate to keep conservatives from speaking is they know if Millenials listen and compare messages, they will lose support as conservatism will do what it does: empower people with the Truth.

While we do that, please understand we WANT groups like the KKK, White Supremacists, and other Right Wing groups to have their voices and be allowed to speak their minds. Why would I say that? History proves that the more they speak and are heard by Americans, their numbers decline and support and supporters fade away. When the truth is heard, explained, and discussed, it always wins. An example is there at one time were an estimated 20 million KKK adherents in the U.S. Today that number is tagged at 8,000! “The Truth wll Out.”

It starts today in grammar school. One school system in Georgia has an elementary history book titled “The Peoples History,” referring to the history of the U.S.S.R. I will bet you 80% of the parents of those students have no idea about that and its importance. The other 20% know what it is, are apathetic about it and just roll with the punches.

We better wake up, or we’re gonna be going “Back to the U.S.S.R.” really soon.

 

 

Weekend Life Lessons

Lesson #1

A sales rep, an administration clerk, and their manager were walking to lunch when they found an antique oil lamp. They rubbed it and a Genie popped out. The Genie said, “I’ll give each of you just one wish.”
“Me first! Me first!” said the admin clerk. “I want to be in the Bahamas driving a speedboat, without a care in the world.” Puff! She disappeared.
“Me next! Me next!” said the sales rep. ” I want to be in Hawaii, relaxing on the beach with my personal masseuse, an endless supply of Pina Coladas and the love of my life.”
Puff! He disappeared.
“OK, you’re up,” the Genie said to the manager. The manager said, “I want those two back in the office after lunch.”

Moral of the story: Always let your boss have the first say.

Lesson #2

An eagle was sitting on a tree resting, doing nothing.
A small rabbit saw the eagle and asked him, “Can I also sit like you and do nothing?” The eagle answered, “Sure, why not.”
So, the rabbit sat on the ground below the eagle and rested. All of a sudden, a fox appeared, jumped on the rabbit and ate it.

Moral of the story: To be sitting and doing nothing, you must be sitting very, very high up.

Lesson #3

A turkey was chatting with a bull. “I would love to be able to get to the top of that tree,” sighed the turkey, “but I haven’t got the energy.”
“Well, why don’t you nibble on some of my droppings?” replied the bull. “They’re packed with nutrients.”
The turkey pecked at a lump of dung, and found it actually gave him enough strength to reach the lowest branch of the tree. The next day, after eating some more dung, he reached the second branch.
Finally after a fourth night, the turkey was proudly perched at the top of the tree.
He was promptly spotted by a farmer, who shot him out of the tree.

Moral of the story: Bull poop might get you to the top, but it won’t keep you there.

Lesson #4

A little bird was flying south for the winter. It was so cold the bird froze and fell to the ground into a large field.
While he was lying there, a cow came by and dropped some dung on him. As the frozen bird lay there in the pile of cow dung, he began to realize how warm he was.
The dung was actually thawing him out! He lay there all warm and happy, and soon began to sing for joy. A passing cat heard the bird singing and came to investigate.
Following the sound, the cat discovered the bird under the pile of cow dung, and promptly dug him out and ate him.

Morals of the story:
(1) Not everyone who poops on you is your enemy.
(2) Not everyone who gets you out of poop is your friend.
(3) And when you’re in deep poop, it’s best to keep your mouth shut!

Note: Feel free to share. Enjoy!

Dan

“How are you going to fix this?”

It was amazing to me as early today I watched television news, flipping from channel to channel to see the latest on the terrorist attack in Spain. I was shocked (even thought I shouldn’t have been) when I got to CNN only to see Chris Cuomo blasting a guest for alleging there were illegal and horrendous acts committed at Charlottesville by others than the KKK White Supremacist gang. Seriously? Is this what America has come to? Fifteen people died in a Spanish terrorist attack and authorities are still trying to find the murderer. Every other news network in the world is giving minute by minute updates and information on the attacks in Spain, and CNN chooses to have their morning anchor scream at an invited guest, “The sky is falling, the sky is falling!” rather than report the news. I will not even respond to Cuomo’s idiotic, untruthful, and unsubstantiated claims and comments about where the fault lies for the three deaths in Virginia. I don’t think Donald Trump: was there, ordered the demonstration, permitted the demonstration, wore a hood, carried a shield or club, or drove the car that killed Heather Heyer or had anything to do with a police helicopter crash. And all the Leftist Media members want to focus on one thing and one thing only: “Trump did not condemn ONLY the Supremacists, and he did not do his condemning soon enough or vehemently enough!” Does it shock anyone but me that the national experts on news instead of reporting ALL the news would shade what they give to the public based totally on their perspective? I’m certain very few are actually shocked. Why? Americans are growing numb to the Liberal news outlets not reporting the news — they are “telling stories” that they want Americans to see and hear instead of the news. It is very obvious in 2017 that their #1 desire is to discredit the President by creating and feeding their narrative promoting an illegitimate mandate to impeach the President. Their quest for that begins with convincing Americans that the President has done, is doing, and will do things that warrant impeachment. They know that Constitutionally there can be no Presidential impeachment for any thing other than “high crimes and misdemeanors.” They, however, feel with THEIR power and THEIR strength, they can cry “fire!” loud enough and long enough to convince Americans — including members of Congress — that President Trump is guilty of “high crimes and misdemeanors.” And they lie, give false reports with fake “anonymous” and “confidential” sources so as to frame their narrative as the only “real” and “just” and “correct” narrative to have.

I have a novel suggestion: let’s let Americans ask the Media one simple question, “What should President Trump do instead of (insert the ‘gripe of the day’ they have against the President here)?” Would you not love to see and hear Wolf Blitzer explain exactly what the President should do to stop a nuclear holocaust between North Korea, the United States, and the other countries that would be forced to take sides? Or maybe Morning Joe could tell Americans exactly what Putin did to rig the 2016 election and why Obama did nothing to try and stop it even though he knew about it a couple of years before the election? And what would Joe do to stop whatever election interference there is? Shepard Smith: what should President Trump do to stop terrorists from coming to the United States? How and why should he do that instead of what is currently in place? Chris Matthews, tell us how President Trump should stop the runaway national debt and how that is even possible without severely curbing government spending and/or raising taxes on the Middle Class? Chris, how would you stem the tide of murders in Chicago?

You get my point: “IF” the Media had a history of reporting the news, no one would give a thought to asking them for answers to questions like those above. But they quit reporting the news LONG ago. Today they are not comfortable unless they make themselves PART of the news. They stroke each other — even across network and newspaper borders with competitors — confirming the analysis of others simply to give to the public a false sense of credibility for their competitors, knowing they will receive the same confirmation when they present their fake analysis. Many Americans continue to fall for the ploy. How is it possible that the American public would be so naive as to continually fall for this unprofessional and disgusting practice of cheating the public?

The simple answer to that question is in looking at American life today as compared to the “today” of our parents and their parents. “Today” then was extremely different. Regarding news: the hometown newspaper was the primary source of news Americans used to stay plugged in to the happenings in the U.S. In the evening, most had one favorite newscaster from the three lone television stations available to retrieve that day’s news wrap-up: ABC, CBS, and NBC. There was NO cable, satellite, or internet news available. It all came in print, AM radio, or local newspaper added to the network television news broadcasts. Our parents and grandparents simply took for granted what they read, saw, and heard were facts. We know today that was not necessarily true. How?

The way we learned was with the almost daily addition of some new news outlet on satellite television or radio, an internet news site, a blog, cable television independent news operations, and online newspapers that all have multiple editions throughout each day and night. The buffet of news for Americans every day contains pretty much what any American could possibly want to see or hear in news. And each comes from a source that has a particular slant they hope to achieve with what and how they present to the public. Pretty much all have a story to tell. And NONE simply report the news to Americans and let Americans interpret meaning of those news stories to the nation and to them in their personal lives.

I was devastated when I heard that Dan Rather lied in a news story and got caught. He was Walter Cronkite’s replacement when Cronkite retired from CBS News. Cronkite was the one guy in the 60’s and 70’s that when he spoke, everyone listened, knowing whatever he said was “Gospel.” With what we’ve learned from today’s “news” environment, I’m pretty certain Cronkite and Rather had a particular slant in their reporting. But we did not have any “other” news sources that could possibly give us a different perspective to use to determine the validity of what Cronkite and Rather gave to us. We just took them at their word:BIG mistake.

Because of the “instant news” capability today, and because of the hundreds of competing news sources, Americans have become lazy in analyzing news. Our lives are so busy our parents and grand parents would be amazed that we are able to get anything accomplished! Because of technology primarily, we expect “instant” everything — even our news. And because we are so busy, we are too busy to spend the time necessary to ferret out the truth in what we hear from “news” sources. Those in the news know that. And they take advantage of that. Most in the news share a liberal tilt and therefore cannot resist the temptation to shade their news toward that personal liberalism in which they live. Americans in their hurry and hustle listen and watch the news they’re exposed to that really is not news but simply the newsperson’s opinion. We all tend to believe the news that we hear and see everyday, especially when it is consistent. Until FOX News, there was NO conservative news source. Until FOX, conservatives could only rely on the few newspaper columnists who shared their ideals, and those few conservative radio hosts they could find. Rush Limbaugh came along in the late 80’s and turned the liberal media on their ears. Since then it’s been catch-up for the Liberal media. It’s been comical to watch how they hate Rush, but over and over again fail to emulate him, though they try.

 Man & Woman killed in this drive by shooting

Mickey Slaughter — former NFL Quarterback for the Denver Broncos and longtime Offensive Co-ordinator for Louisiana Tech’s football team — taught me a term that fits all of the news folks described above, especially when it comes to ONLY painting “their” perspectives into the news they report in ways that usually only fit the narrative they choose and not necessarily an honest one. That term is “drive-by shooters.” Think about it: usually when there’s a shooting, it is between at least two people who have ought with each other. And it usually happens in a yard or inside a house as a result of a confrontation. The shooting that is the hardest to forecast, monitor, and even stop are drive-by shootings. Why is it so difficult to prepare for those? No one knows exactly why they occur until after they occur, don’t know when they are going to happen, and often don’t know who is involved in them until afterwards, and sometimes never know that at all! The same holds true for the “drive-by” news people.

I am sick and tired of Liberal reporters, show hosts, commentators, Senators and Congressmen and Congresswomen, and political “gurus,” who spew these broad criticisms of President Trump and his agenda with no revelation of what the President should have done instead of or not done anything at all. Drive By’s don’t get involved in the actual fight. They simply pass by and lob an opinion or allegation into the crowd with no explanation for their doing so and certainly no     suggested solution for whatever resulted in their “shooting.” It’s really easy to stand on the sidelines and shout insults at those participating in the game. So New York Times, Washington Post, Chris Matthews, Shepard Smith, Anderson Cooper, Chris Cuomo, and Morning Joe: it’s time to put on your Big Boy pants and act like real men who know what they’re talking about. Why not start earning those big salaries you all have and report the news? “If” you are going to editorialize, disclose that to your readers and viewers BEFORE you spew that venom. And for a change, why not explain why you feel the way you do and tell the world what YOU would do instead of what others did that you are criticizing? Don’t you owe your readers and viewing audiences some real factual information and perspective? Certainly Americans can take your opinions and will willingly do so IF you honestly disclose facts. When bloviating with opinions, why not stop talking down to your audience? Liberal elitism is by its nature pretty much “in your face.” Soften the blow of that a bit by talking “to” Americans rather than talking “at” Americans.

“Just because you think your opinion is right does NOT mean you are right. And just because you think something is wrong does NOT mean it is wrong.” We know that. It’s time you accept that too and start acting like adults.