Today we do an Audio Podcast. I am certain you will enjoy this — it’s a layered analysis or summary of 5 of the political “hot spots” in our Nation as of today. Every American needs to consider these and — more importantly — reach a conclusion about each that they are comfortable in their understanding. Please feel free to share your thoughts either in the comments section below or to me at dan@dnewman.org. Your privacy is guaranteed! Thanks for “listening” in!

More Gun Laws or Repeal the 2nd Amendment?

If you’d like to listen to the audio version of this story rather than read it, scroll to the bottom of the story, click on the audio link, and you’ll get the story in total. Thanks for listening in!

Short answer: Neither.

In the wake of the “mass” shootings in recent past years, many Americans are once again clamoring for gun control. Their cries are chiefly the result of emotional angst and are principally based on that anger, fear, and shock rather than reason.What needs to be done? Who needs to do it? What will it look like if a way is found to stop similar shootings? And is some type of gun control the answer? If so, can it be done, what needs to be done, and who needs to do it?

We will first discuss the specific areas of concern and potential “fixes” in the gun control conversation. At the end of this, we will summarize with the answer: OUR answer.

Background Checks

Most will agree there are holes in the gun purchase background check system that has allowed many to slip through the cracks. The process could simply be made more efficient, more timely, broader in obtaining more information on each applicant, and could be expanded to include the legal private sale of guns and even sales at gun shows.

Mental Health issues are a consideration that should be part of the background checks process, and MUST be an intricate piece of the gun purchasing process that includes the direct involvement of mental health professionals and law enforcement experts. But what changes should be made to the application process for this to be included? Remember: the HIPPA law protects the privacy of the medical records of all Americans. A HIPPA release would be required with each application if any health circumstances would be included in the gun purchase application.

New Gun Laws

Every time there is a mass shooting in the U.S. — especially a school shooting — gun control advocates repeat their demands for new gun laws — sometimes even gun confiscation. We have heard their justifications for new laws over and over again, but even with massive demonstrations, nothing legally ever gets done to address these shootings. Why is that?

There are MANY gun laws in force at the federal, state, and local levels that are obviously ineffective. Why pass new ones? Which ones would work if passed?

For the sake of this conversation, consider how many gun laws there are today. For many years, gun advocates have spouted the number 20,000 gun laws at federal, state, and local levels combined. Even President Reagan used that number. There is NO verification anywhere of that number or ANY number of the combination of federal, state, and local gun laws. What we DO know is there are many.

Alan Korwin, who co-wrote “Gun Laws of America” with Michael P. Anthony, has added up 271 federal gun statutes, but says all of these numbers are fairly meaningless. He has written an essay on his Web site addressing the question of how many gun laws exist, and whether this is even the proper metric in the first place. “If the goal of the laws is to outlaw crime, then there are enough, because all these luridly promoted acts of infamy involve many laws being violently broken…. Ask if there is sufficient ‘crime control,’ and everyone seems to agree there is not,” Korwin wrote.

If one assumes there are several hundred more gun laws today at state and local levels to add to these 271 Korwin stated (even if THAT number is accurate), there could easily be 600 gun laws in effect in the U.S. You can bet that all those laws on the books comprehensively include just about any gun issue one could imagine, and in total should with their enforcement regulate in every way ownership and use of every type of gun.

There are 30,000 reported deaths annually in the U.S. from gunshots. Here’s the breakdown of those 30,000 as reported by the FBI for 2016. (And the Center for Disease Control states that number is 33,000+, not 30,000):

• 65% of those deaths were by suicide (19,500);
• 15% were by law enforcement in the line of duty and deemed “justified;” (4,500)
• 17% were through criminal activity, gang and drug related or mentally ill persons; (5,100)
• 3% were from accidental gun discharge. (900)

So technically, “gun violence” is not 30,000 annually, but drops to 5,100. Still too many? Well, first, how are those deaths spanned across the nation?

• 480 homicides (9.4%) were in Chicago
• 344 homicides (6.7%) were in Baltimore
• 333 homicides (6.5%) were in Detroit
• 119 homicides (2.3%) were in Washington D.C. (a 54% increase over prior years)

Total Gun Confiscation or of Certain Types of Guns

Gun confiscation will never happen in the U.S. as long as our government is in its present form. There are too many legal protections against that occurring. But there are many from the Left that would love nothing better than for the government to take away all guns from American citizens and abolish private gun ownership. Their justifications for doing so are primarily these:

  1. We have law enforcement protection. No individual needs to have personal guns;
  2. Too many guns means it’s too easy to access guns to kill people;
  3. No one is safe as long as someone else has legal access to guns that might be used to kill;
  4. Do away with guns and that will do away with mass shootings.

I will not take the time to counter each of the above arguments. I will just say American gun confiscation will never happen.

But what about laws to prohibit certain types of guns  — like “assault rifles?’

First, let’s make one thing clear: the most popular rifle termed by the Left as an “assault rifle” is an AR-15. “No one needs a military style fully automatic rifle,” gun control advocates maintain. “No one can hunt with those. Why should they be legal?” Here are answers for those:

  1. ALL fully automatic weapons were removed from legal private gun ownership decades ago with rare exceptions. The AR-15 and similar styled rifle or a typical handgun to be legal, that gun must require the shooter to squeeze the trigger once to fire one shell. To fire again the trigger must be pulled again. That’s “semi-automatic.” A fully automatic weapon — like a machine gun — allows the shooter to pull the trigger one time, hold it down, which allows the gun to fire continuously until the trigger is released or the gun magazine that holds bullets is emptied. THIS STYLE OF GUN HAS BEEN ILLEGAL FOR SOMETIME FOR USE AND/OR OWNERSHIP BY ALL BUT THE MILITARY, LAW ENFORCEMENT, AND IN RARE CASES SOME GUN COLLECTORS AND MUSEUMS.
  2. An AR-15 is semi-automatic. It is NOT an “assault rifle.” That term actually applies to the military version of the AR-15 used only by the military and law enforcement. That version is a M-4 rifle;
  3. Most handguns are actually semi-automatics. Far more gun murders are committed with a semi-automatic handgun than with an AR-15;
  4. “What is the purpose of private use of hi-capacity magazines that hold sometimes several dozen bullets? Surely those could be used only for mass shootings.” Imagine a police officer in a gun battle with one or several criminals. Seldom is the setting of such a situation where each stands perfectly still out in the open at a distance of 5-10 yards while any shooting takes place. Seldom are the parties involved in such shootings calm and collected and steady when they aim and shoot. For self defense, military, or law enforcement use of semi-automatic guns does the first or second, third or fourth, and sometime subsequent rounds hit the mark, stop the perpetrator, and protect the shooter. Being able to fire as many as 10-15 times if necessary in such a situation is the purpose for the production of hi-capacity magazines for semi-automatic weapons.


How can we legitimately curb the gun violence including mass shootings? Let’s include the following:

Background Checks most assuredly should be toughened and broadened. There MUST be inclusion of mental health information of the applicant that MUST have a mechanism for FBI application processors to be able to quickly access those health records for applicants. Private and gun show gun sales should also require the same background check. How successful would this be? There’s no way to tell for certain, but several mass shooting perpetrators of the last few would have been prevented from gun purchases if such a system existed.

New Gun Laws No new gun laws — federal, state, or local — need to be passed and enacted. We need to begin to enforce EVERY CURRENT GUN LAW! Let’s face it: criminals don’t care about gun laws and will never abide by them. But immediately enacting on every law enforcement level a mandatory enforcement of every gun law would accomplish several things: 1) initiate a real deterrent for criminals, for they would experience real consequences for their illegal acts. If every gang-banger, drug lord, and drug dealer in Chicago knew for certain that if caught with an illegal gun they would be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, the huge number of violations would certainly decrease;  2) by aggressively pursuing, capturing, and prosecuting all those who break gun laws will remove a large number of people from the streets. That in itself is a very successful way to stop gun crimes; 3) Fear of consequences for criminal gun law breaking that is currently non-existent would immediately impact the social sub-cultures that are primarily responsible for a large majority of gun crimes. This would destroy that sub-culture.

The point is that there are — insert number here — laws on the books that address anything illegal that anyone can do with a firearm. Having that number of laws, plus one, isn’t going to make anyone safer. What will make everyone safer is if we enforce the laws that we have on the books now.

Gun Confiscation That cannot legally happen. Former Supreme Court Justice Stevens recently suggested repealing the 2nd Amendment that gives Americans the right to “hold and bear arms.” Doing so would require a two-thirds vote of Congress plus 38 States to formally approve any such action.

George Washington added his personal thoughts to the importance of the 2nd Amendment with this: “A free people ought not only be armed ad disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.” Americans for the foreseeable future will retain the right to own guns.

How do we stop senseless gun violence? It will take a combination of things: broaden gun ownership applications and make private and gun show sales applications mandatory; Mandate all law enforcement professionals aggressively attack criminal gun activity of every type — including maximum sentences for convicted violators; stop the senseless media lies about types of gun crimes, Media use of weapon terminology that is misleading to the American people, and maybe most importantly, instead of demonizing groups like the NRA, embrace and expand their educational programs that have taught millions of Americans the responsibilities of owning and using firearms, how to shoot, and personal defense. AND STOP THE FOOLISHNESS OF “GUN FREE ZONES!” Almost all mass gun shootings have taken place in gun free zones. Criminals love gun free zones, because they know they will face no opposition no one else will have a gun in those zones!

But the most important two things that MUST be done to curb this violence is for EVERYONE to begin to speak “to” each other and not “at” each other. Listening and really hearing those with opposite views on this matter and finding ways to bridge any gaps to find commonalities that all can work together to accomplish is critical. ALL must stop the politicization for political advantage: Democrats AND Republicans. A Mom or Dad who just buried their high school junior who was shot at school doesn’t care about political party affiliation or any political narrative desired by any class of gun control or gun advocate.

All that matters is creating an American environment to protect innocents while stopping illegal possession and use of firearms of every kind. We must stop threatening actions that will never be taken. And we must stop the hypocritical threats of such actions only when there’s another mass shooting.

“If” we together don’t work with ALL of the above elements to attack this horror that now is repeating itself more and more, we are doomed to repeat our history again and again. Who will pay that price? Primarily innocent children.

Enough is Enough!











Intelligence Corruption: The Final Chapter

If you’d like to listen to the audio version of this story instead of reading it, scroll to the bottom of the story and click on the audio link. Enjoy!

No doubt we could probably go on and on with “new” chapters about corruption in Intelligence agencies in our government. But let’s wind this series down with a look at James Clapper, Susan Rice, and Samantha Powers. I warn you: this “look at” is pretty sleezy.

Susan Rice

Rice served as the 24th United States National Security Advisor from 2013 to 2017. She was formerly a U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations. She served on the staff of the National Security Council and as Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs during President Bill Clinton’s second term. She was confirmed as UN ambassador by the U.S. Senate by unanimous consent on January 22, 2009.

                Susan Rice

Ms. Rice is probably best known for two scandals during her NSA tenure in the Obama Administration: she appeared on every Sunday morning news talk show immediately following the Benghazi attack that resulted in 4 American deaths, including that of American Ambassador to Libya Chris Stephens. It was obvious to all her appearances that Sunday were to trot out an Obama Administration narrative that led Americans to believe the Benghazi attack was prompted solely by an internet movie that originated in the U.S. that was anti-Muslim. That story was not only debunked, but it was learned that Rice knew before making those appearances that the story was false.

The second known incident of corruption Rice participated in was at the end of Obama’s second term. In the Fall of the 2016 election and President Trump’s January 2017 inauguration, Rice as National Security Advisor requested the unmasking of American citizens by the NSA, purportedly for security reasons other than for political purposes. (Unmasking of Americans caught inadvertently in NSA surveillance of foreign persons is illegal for political purposes) In multiple interviews and stories, Rice steadfastly denied  she even had any Americans unmasked, then changed her story to say she never had any unmasked “for political purposes.” It was later learned she lied in both of those situations.

Congressman Devin Nunes (R-CA) stated the following in an interview: “I have seen intelligence reports that clearly show that the president-elect and his team were at least monitored,” the House intelligence chairman said at the time. “It looks to me like it was all legally collected, but it was essentially a lot of information on the president-elect and his transition team and what they were doing.” Nunes went on to claim that the information was spread across a number of agencies and had “little or no apparent intelligence value.”

On that same day, Rice in an interview with PBS’s Judy Woodruff:

Woodruff: We’ve been following a disclosure by the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Devin Nunes, that in essence, during the final days of the Obama administration, during the transition, and after President Trump had been elected, that he and the people around him may have been caught up in surveillance of foreign individuals and that their identities may have been disclosed. Do you know anything about this?

Rice: I know nothing about this. I was surprised to see reports from Chairman Nunes on that count today.

Rice lied.

James Clapper

Clapper is a retired lieutenant general in the United States Air Force and is the former Director of National Intelligence. A career intelligence officer, Clapper has held several key positions within the U.S. Intelligence Community. He served as director of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) from 1992 until 1995. He was the first director of defense intelligence within the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and simultaneously the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence. He served as the director of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) from September 2001 until June 2006.

             James Clapper

Clapper probably was best known for lying to Congress and getting caught. There is stiff Congressional insistence that he face charges for an admittedly false statement he made to Congress in March 2013, when he responded, “No, sir” and “not wittingly” to a question about whether the National Security Agency was collecting “any type of data at all” on millions of Americans. About three months after making that claim, documents leaked by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden revealed the answer was untruthful and that the NSA was in fact collecting (in bulk) domestic call records, along with various internet communications. In an apology letter to lawmakers, however, Clapper said he gave the “clearly erroneous” answer because he “simply didn’t think of” the call-record collection. Numerous lawmakers insist charges be leveled against him: “No one is above the law. Officials who commit perjury or lie to Congress should be held accountable,” Texas Republican Rep. Blake Farenthold told U.S. News by email.

The former head of the DNI has since leaving that office turned into a very public and very insistent anti-Trumpster. In doing so he is the darling of Leftist Media outlets because of his open disdain for the President.  “I lived through Watergate; I was on    active duty then in the Air Force; I was a young officer — it was a scary time,” said Clapper. “I have to say, though, that I think if you compare the two, that Watergate pales, really in my view, compared to what we’re confronting now.” Clapper said the “egregious and inexcusable” manner in which the Trump Administration removed James Comey from office reflected a complete disregard for the independence and autonomy of the FBI. “I am very concerned about the assault on our institutions coming from both an external source — Russia — and an internal source — the President himself,” he said.

He wasn’t through there. Clapper does not attack just the President, but members of Congress who in his mind in any way support the President. Enter Congressman Devin Nunes (R-CA) when Nunes released the famous memo his committee compiled showing intelligence abuses by the Obama FBI. Clapper called the memo a “hit job” designed to attack the FBI and the Justice Department.

“Well I think this is a hit job, more or less, to attack the FBI, attack the Department of Justice and inferentially, or by extension, the Mueller investigation,” Clapper told CNN. “I think the whole point here was to discredit all this.”

Clapper characterized the memo release as a “drive-by shooting in the interest of defending” President Trump, and said House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-CA), is acting as an “agent of the White House.”

Samantha Power

Power is an Irish-born American academic, author, political critic, and diplomat who served as the United States Ambassador to the United Nations from 2013 to 2017. She in her career as a journalist won a Pulitzer Prize in 2003 for her book A Problem from Hell: America and the Age of Genocide

She was a senior adviser to Senator Barack Obama until March 2008, when she resigned from his presidential campaign after apologizing for referring to then-Senator Hillary Clinton as “a monster.” Power joined the Obama State Department transition team in late November 2008. She served as Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Multilateral Affairs and Human Rights on the National Security Council from January 2009 to February 2013 before her appointment as UN Ambassador.

            Samantha Power

Power in 2016 was ‘unmasking’ at such a rapid pace in the final months of the Obama administration that she averaged more than one request for every working day in 2016 – and even sought information in the days leading up to President Trump’s inauguration, multiple sources close to the matter told Fox News. Two sources, who were not authorized to speak on the record, said the requests to identify Americans whose names surfaced in foreign intelligence reporting, known as unmasking, exceeded 260 last year. One source indicated this occurred in the final days of the Obama White House.

The details emerged ahead of her testimony before Congress on Capitol Hill. She is one of several Obama administration officials facing intense scrutiny for their role in seeking the identities of Trump associates in intelligence reports – but the interest in her actions is particularly high.

In that October 2017 testimony to the House Oversight Committee behind closed doors,  she claimed others in the intelligence community used her name obtain this unprecedented unmasking. According to the Committee Chairman Representative Trey Gowdy, her only defense was “It’s not me it’s my subordinates.”


Why would Susan Rice make those television appearances with the same story on the same day that were untrue? Why did James Clapper lie to Congress, and why is he still long after resigning from his position attacking on a political level AND personal level the President over and over? Why would Samantha Power serving as U.N. Ambassador even NEED to have any American unmasked — and to have HUNDREDS of Americans unmasked?!?!

The answers to those 3 questions is not 1 answer, but several. And NO answer is that “It was part of my job and duty when serving the American people.” Most feel these 3 people are just a few of a myriad of individuals from the Obama Administration that have stealthily carried out a hit campaign to not only denigrate this President, but lay enough negative groundwork to create a perception of corruption of this President to lead to an impeachment or to push him to resign from the exhausting onslaught of attacks that never stop.

I will close this series of some of the Obama Administration corruption (and we have barely scratched the surface) with this: why hasn’t the current Attorney General filed any charges against any of these three for their obvious and blatant and serious actions that violated multiple federal laws? You can be certain that if any one of these 3 was Republican, they would already be in jail, convicted of multiple federal crimes. A.G. Sessions, where are you?

One last thing: you can bet in the coming days there will be numerous new revelations of massive corruption from the 8 years of government before the Trump inauguration. How do I know? There are 19,000 sealed indictments that have been obtained in federal district courts around the U.S. against undisclosed individuals and entities with undisclosed charges JUST SINCE OCTOBER 31, 2017! What are their details? They are sealed indictments — no public disclosure of any details are allowed.

Oh: if any of these indictments were against Trump, the Trump Campaign, or government conservatives, you can bet there would have been immediate and thorough leaks to the press and the press would be all over them on air and in writing.

Who do you think are the charged in these sealed indictments?

I can’t wait!


An “Omnibus Letter to the President”

If you’d like to listen to this letter to President Trump rather than read it, scroll to the bottom of the page and click on the “Audio” link. We are posting this in written form so it can be shared as wished. Enjoy!

My Letter to President Trump

“Mr. President:

Today is a sad day in American history: partially because you signed into law a bill that will increase the budget deficit one more trillion dollars in your first 2 years as President,  (that’s a total so far of $2 Trillion) partially because of broken promises to Americans by GOP members of Congress during their 2016 campaigns, and partially because in doing so, the American government has confirmed long-held suspicions of many Americans. For quite some time most in the U.S. have felt that Congress does NOT represent the will of the People, but rather represents their own personal selfish ambitions fulfillment.

The Senate under Mitch McConnell scoffed at following through on the terminating of Obamacare as each GOP candidate campaigning in 2016 promised. (You too promised the “repeal and replace” of Obamacare) Most promised to stop Planned Parenthood funding. On your watch, promises were made to take legal steps to stop Sanctuary Cities’ prevention of federal prosecution of illegals. Your #1 campaign promise (and message to Congress since your inauguration) has been “do not bring me any spending bill that does not include full funding for the border wall.”

Each of these promises was either forgotten or ignored today.

Mr. President, blame can certainly be laid at the feet of GOP members of Congress. But you as a CEO of multiple international companies have known and have practiced “the” fundamental principle of corporate management: responsibility for bad choices, bad policies, and bad outcomes lies solely at the feet of who allowed these things to occur. Americans have only one place at which to aim their blame for today’s legislative financial boondoggle: the White House. You, Sir, are America’s CEO, America’s consummate deal-maker, by your own words a great negotiator. Today you failed in all those.

The World watched as you struggled to get through today’s press conference in which you announced signing the Omnibus bill into law. You valiantly tried to explain the reasons for its implementation. But those explanations rang hollow to most Americans. Mr. Trump, most of us who live between the west and east coasts in 2015 and 2016 heard your campaign promises, believed your commitment to their fulfillment, and gleefully watched in the early months of your presidency as you pushed through on many. You stood strong in the face of Democrat leaders Schumer and Pelosi. You hit home runs in the games of foreign policy, massive job creation in the U.S., bringing billions of dollars in corporate profits from offshore back to the U.S., slashing crippling regulations, getting Neil Gorsuch a seat on the U.S. Supreme Court, and putting ISIS on the run. In less than a year in office, you had given long missing hope back to Americans that under your guidance and leadership we could together really “Make America Great Again.” Today’s Omnibus law dashed that hope in most all of us.

I have long distrusted Congress and the White House inhabitants of the last few Administrations. Everything in government had been structured to guarantee that all federal actions were for the benefit of those in government at the cost of Americans NOT in government. Very little legislatively made business sense. As an entrepreneur and creator of a company that is 26 years old, I recognized the gleam in your eye when you first made your declaration to run. After all, you know how it feels to struggle to make payroll, to calm an angry client or customer, to meet deadlines, to lose high level corporate managers and need to replace them, how to balance a budget, and how unfair the American tax system has been to individuals and small businesses. You know how to work a room, negotiate a deal, and to close a massive real estate purchase or sale. In my mind and heart, you were certainly “The Guy.” I believed that so much that in August of 2015 — just 60 days after your formal announcement of your White House run — I wrote and posted a story declaring that you would win the White House in November 2016. And I was laughed at for that prediction.

Mr. President, today I am no longer certain that the trust and confidence I put in you was not misplaced. I could easily jump on my high-horse and say something stupid like, “I’d never do that…I’d never go back on my word…” No one knows exactly what circumstances led to your decision today. I hurt for you as you tried to explain your reasons for signing the bill into law. I’ve seen similar anguish many times in my company — never in good situations. This is a bad one. And it might be a fatal one.

I am not sure you will be able to recover politically for what tens of millions of Americans feel was your betrayal of their confidence and support — their belief in you and your promises. I have watched, listened, and read all day as Americans from every walk in life (including some from Congress) expressed their shock, horror, and disbelief that you would turn away from most of those things for which you received their support.

I cannot, just like no one else can, say you will be unable to recover from this. I can just speak for myself:

As a lifelong Christian who prays daily, I have each day of your presidency prayed for you personally. I will continue that practice. I have steadfastly supported you in the face of massive criticism for my support. I have continued that support in the face of some things you have said, tweeted and done that have been personally offensive to me. I certainly care about my President’s past, but only as that pertains to his leadership today. And after all, who among us hasn’t made mistakes?

Sir, I will continue my prayers, support, and hope for your success. However, your success that I hope for is NOT for you personally, but for you as our nation’s leader and the leader of the Free World.

In the balance of your service and residence in the White House, I pray you will find and implement demonstrative measures to right the wrongs that were levied on Americans with this law today. We need hope for the future you promised to bring to the United States.

May God bless You, and May God Bless the United States of America.”

Postponement Of Chapter of “Corruption” to Discuss Congressional Corruption Seen Today!

If you’d like to skip the written story here scroll to the bottom and simply click on the Podcast link and hear the story instead. Enjoy!

Apologies to all our members. This is supposed to be an installment detailing Intelligence Department corruption. Today’s chapter (which will be published tomorrow instead) talks about the NSA, DNI, individuals like former Obama White House National Security Director and UN Ambassador Samantha Powers.

The “Latest” Congressional Boondoggle

Today we need to weigh in on the pending boondoggle in D.C. that is the largest financial boondoggle in U.S. History: they are calling it “The Omnibus.” What does that mean? Instead of each House of Congress separately over a period of time creating a budget template, debating specifics, presenting and debating amendments, talking with voting constituents to get ideas, then reaching consensus in the respective chambers and reconciling the House and the Senate versions into an exhaustively researched and debated budget, these Congressional members simply sent 4 leaders into a room — 2 from the House and 2 from the Senate — to discuss a MASTER bill that included EVERYTHING! There was NO individual introductory, debate, discussion, or individual Congressional input. These 4 developed a 2200 page bill that they showed to NO ONE until 6:00 Wednesday night! There is no way a single member had time to even read the massive legislative bill yet alone understand any part of it. And just 12 hours after seeing it for the very first time, the House was forced to vote on it Thursday morning. The Senate must pass it before Friday night so as to have the President sign it into law before — guess what — THE GOVERNMENT SHUTS DOWN!

Let me ask you, our faithful readers a few questions:

  • There are 535 members of Congress. How is it reasonable in any scenario for 4 of the 535 elected Congressional members to determine what should and what should not go into a $1.3 Trillion bill? (By the way, that bill if signed into law will last only until the Fall, will create by itself an additional $1 Trillion deficit increase in these few months?
  • How many of you are OK with just a few of the elements that we know so far that include fully funding (with our federal tax dollars) of Planned Parenthood, Sanctuary cities, building a tunnel between Manhattan and New Jersey, and allocating just a bit over $1 Billion to start the border wall when $25 Billion was DEMANDED by the President for his willingness to sign any budget deal?
  • Are you comfortable with Congressional leadership forcing votes on this incredible expensive bill just 12 hours after first showing it to anyone? That sounds a bit like Pelosi’s famous “We must pass this law before we can find out what’s in the law” statement about Obamacare.
  • Are you a tad upset with the President who first maintained he would veto any budget bill sent to him that funded Planned Parenthood, funded Sanctuary cities, and did NOT include money for increased southern border security AND fully funded the border wall? House Speaker Paul Ryan visited the White House on Wednesday and reportedly talked the President into accepting this spending monstrosity.
  • Does it bother you that just 90 of the Republicans part of the GOP controlled House of Representatives voted against the measure on Thursday while 145 voted for the Bill? (In the interest of informing our readers from around the nation and around the World, click on the following link to see the complete detail of the vote of every member of the House on House Bill 1625)  https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h127
  • Does the hypocrisy of the GOP House members who voted “Yay” on this bill shock you at all — especially in light of the fact that virtually NONE of them when campaigning for the 2016 election/re-election to their Congressional seat gave even passive support of Planned Parenthood, voting against the border wall, fully funding Sanctuary cities, and doing so without even taking time to read the content of the 2200 page bill. I can honestly say that I doubt if ANY GOP House member stated support of any of these when campaigning. In fact, virtually ALL campaigned in total support of President Trump’s promises. And probably ALL of these 145 promised to support de-funding of Planned Parenthood, to never fund Sanctuary cities, and to pass a sensible budget that would either cut government spending or stop its growth.

So where does your district’s Congressional Representative weigh in on this vote?

Very early this morning I sent a text to my Congressman expressing my horror at what was happening: “Mike: Dan Newman here. I encourage you to vote against the Omnibus Bill. I know you are FOR the common sense process of budgeting and Leadership in the Senate is ramming this spending boondoggle down our throats. They continue to use the “shutdown” as a threat. IT MUST STOP! Please continue to demand realistic spending planning. Thanks!” (“Mike” is Mike Johnson (R-LA), a freshman Representative) His reply was, “Thanks, Dan. The omni is an OUTRAGEOUS betrayal of our people and our principles, and I am a DEFINITE NO!”

Only 89 other Republicans voted against the bill. Here’s what those 145 Republicans who voted for the bill said to American Conservatives:

“Na NaNa Boo Boo!” We fooled you. You thought we were honest, hard-working, cared for you and our Country. You believed we would vote for conservative ideals that included smaller government, protecting our borders to keep our nation safe, and stop senseless spending, like sending your tax dollars to slaughter another million or so babies at Planned Parenthood. Sanctuary Cities — who cares? We certainly don’t. You were stupid to believe we would expend any real efforts to ebb the flow of illegals into our country and cutoff sending your tax dollars to those cities that refuse to handover those criminal illegals to ICE agents. Boy, we sure got you!”


Can you tell I’m a little ticked off? Honestly, this surely is the most tragic event regarding dollars to happen in American history, IF the Senate passes this tomorrow. How ticked off am I? Before the House passed the measure I posted this in social media:

“If the Omnibus Bill passes and is signed into law, in November Democrats will regain control of the House and Senate AND the White House in 2020. It fully funds Planned Parenthood, regulates 2nd Amendment gun rights, funds Sanctuary Cities, AND no money for the border wall: all things that Congress committed in 2016 campaigns. Oh, it funds a Schumer pork project to build a tunnel between Manhattan and New Jersey INSTEAD OF THE WALL!

I should not be shocked because we know how corrupt Congress is. Personal deal making. “Why,” you ask? No one leaves Congress poor. Their pockets are filled with your hard earned money they confiscate through taxes for their gifts to special interests.

Fund Planned Parenthood? Another million babies will be sacrificed at the altar of D.C. greed.”

If President Trump who spent his entire campaign in many cases nastily lashing out against ALL of these elements in the Omnibus Bill, lashing out against the corruption in Congress that allows such things to happen, signs this bill into law — HE IS DONE!

And he should be……

“Net Neutrality”

Lots of folks are concerned about the reversal by President Trump of President Obama’s “Net Neutrality” regulation issued by the Obama Federal Communications Commission. What does “Net Neutrality” mean? What did it do? How will its reversal impact us? In audio report format below you’ll find the REAL answers to these questions so you will be able to make informed decisions. Thanks for joining in the conversation!