Wednesday, January 30, 2019

SILENT COUP - THE IMPEACHMENT OF DONALD TRUMP


  Most people do not understand the term impeachment. At least that has been my experience over the years. I learned what the term impeachment meant when I had civics in junior high school, along with the fact that our Federal government had three branches of government. Beyond that I didn't learn much. The rest of my education about government was attained at Middle Tennessee State University when I minored in political science and all the reading I have done over the years. Merriam - Webster dictionary defines the word impeach like this. To charge with a crime or misdemeanor specifically : to charge (a public official) before a competent tribunal with misconduct in office. The following is what the Constitution says about impeachment.

The Constitution, Article II, Section 4:

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.


The Constitution, Article I, Section 3:

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

Judgment in Cases of Impeachments shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust, or Profit under the United States, but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment, and Punishmnet, according to Law.

A president or judge can only be impeached in the House of Representatives with a simple majority of votes. The House can be likened to a grand jury that hears the evidence and decides whether or not to indict or charge a person of a crime. The Senate is likened to a jury trial. The judge is the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and the jury is the full Senate. The Senate can only remove a president or judge from office after a vote of two thirds of its members. This only involves removal from office. They cannot fine, place on probation, or sentence a president or judge to prison. For example if a president or judge was guilty of violating established law they could be indicted by the district in which the crime or crimes were committed. After indictment the president would be tried in court and if found guilty could be fined or sent to prison. They have to be removed from office first, however.


THE IMPEACHMENT OF ANDREW JOHNSON:

  If I asked a member of my generation, the Baby Boomers, what they knew about Andrew Johnson the answer would likely to be that he was the only president in American history to be impeached. Beyond that most of them would probably not know much. If I asked a millennial what they knew about Andrew Johnson they would probably respond "Who is Andrew Johnson"? In my view Johnson was one of our worst presidents in American history. I hate to say this about a fellow Tennessean but truth is truth. Even if Johnson was a more capable leader in the mode of a Washington, Theodore Roosevelt, or Reagan he would have inherited office under some of the most challenging circumstances in history. First of all he was having to fill the shoes of Abraham Lincoln who had been assassinated and is considered by many historians to be our greatest president. Secondly he was a Southern War Democrat. Although he had remained steadfastly loyal to the Union his loyalty continued to be questioned because of his Southern roots. Third, he believed in states rights and he wanted the South to return to autonomous government as soon as possible. This had also been Lincoln's wish. Lincoln had devised the 10% plan which only required 10% of the voters, who had been on the voter rolls in 1860, to swear allegiance to the Union. Once this was accomplished the former Confederate states could be readmitted to the Union. This plan was unpopular with the Radical Republicans in congress who wanted a harsher reconstruction of the South. When the former Confederates took control of the Southern state governments they began to enact Black codes that in essence was an attempt to re-enslave Blacks. Eventually the Republican Congress would have to step in and pass the Reconstruction Act of 1867 which was designed to protect the civil rights of the Freedman and set conditions for the former Confederate states to be re-admitted to the Union. The actions of the South prompted the Republican congress to eventually draft the 14th Amendment guaranteeing the Freedman their civil rights and the 15th Amendment guaranteeing their right to vote. The death of Lincoln had been a huge setback to reuniting the country. Lincoln was a brilliant politician and was the only leader capable of pulling off a smoother reunification of the country. Johnson on the other hand did not possess Lincoln's political skills and was a poor successor to him. Congress passed a law over Johnson's veto in March 1867 called the Tenure of Office Act. In my view this law was unconstitutional because it made it impossible for Johnson to fire his cabinet members once they had been approved by the Senate. This law basically set Johnson up for impeachment because it was a law that any president was bound to defy because of it's illegality. Secretary of War Edwin Stanton had been Lincoln's Secretary of War but he did not like Johnson. He was a Radical Republican and Congress was using him to spy on Johnson. Johnson tried to remove Stanton by replacing him with Ulysses S. Grant. Grant stepped down and Johnson picked Lorenzo Thomas as his successor. In the meantime Stanton refused to give up his cabinet position and barricaded himself in his office. On February 24, 1868 Congress impeached Johnson and his trial began in the Senate on March 13th and ended in late May. The attempt to remove Johnson failed by one vote. That vote against impeachment was cast by a radical Republican named Edmond G. Ross of Kansas. John Kennedy included Ross in his book Profiles In Courage as a man bravely voting against removal of Johnson because he realized that the Tenure of Office Act was unconstitutional. Other historians argue that Ross voted against removal because he would have been the beneficiary of a 150,000 dollar slush fund set up by Johnson supporters. Either way I believe that the Tenure of Office Act was unconstitutional and if Johnson was removed it would have upset the balance of power between the legislative and executive branches of government. Thereby weakening our republican form of democratic government. The impeachment process was used to remove a president for political rather than legal reasons and I am glad that it failed.



Edmond G. Ross 

THE RESIGNATION OF RICHARD NIXON :

  Richard Nixon was the first president that I ever saw in person. He was, however; Vice President at the time campaigning against John Kennedy in 1960. Nixon was also the first president that I ever voted for in 1972. I identified as a Democrat then but like most American's I felt that George McGovern was just too far left of center to vote for him in 1972. Nixon won the fourth largest landslide in American history that year. He won 520 electoral votes while McGovern only won 17 from Massachusetts and the District of Columbia. McGovern even lost his home state of South Dakota. Nixon beat McGovern by 17,838,725 popular votes. Unknown to most people a break-in had occurred at the Watergate office building in Washington DC on June 17, 1972 just a few months before Nixon's whopping landslide re-election. The media for once actually did some good investigative reporting and uncovered the fact that the break-in, which targeted the Democrat National Committee headquarters in the Watergate office complex, could actually be connected to the Nixon administration. Because of this reporting by the Washington Post and the New York Times the scandal began to heat up. The Senate began the Watergate hearings in early 1973 that were broadcast live to the American people. This was at a time when there were only three major networks, ABC, CBS and NBC. Instead of soap operas housewives and shift workers were forced to watch the soap opera called Watergate instead. Without going into a long detailed blow by blow account of the scandal the senate hearings revealed the existence of a White House taping system. The independent counsel Archibald Cox subpoenaed the tapes. Nixon refused citing executive privilege and ordered his attorney general Elliot Richardson to fire Cox but he resigned in protest. The deputy attorney general also resigned. Solicitor General Robert Bork finally agreed to fire Cox. This came to be known as the "Saturday Night Massacre". Eventually the issue of the tapes went before the Supreme Court and they ruled 8 to 0 that Nixon could not claim executive privilege. He was forced to release edited transcripts. These transcripts revealed the dark side of Nixon and his staff. On the tapes it appeared that Nixon was agreeing to hush money payments to buy the silence of Watergate burglars.. Eventually the Watergate burglars, and many Nixon aides, were sentenced to prison. On August 5, 1974 a tape was released that revealed what came to be known as the "Smoking Gun". Nixon could be heard ordering the CIA to obstruct the F.B.I.'s investigation of the Watergate burglary as early as June 1972, which meant that Nixon was aware of the break-in from almost the very beginning. Nixon's poll numbers plummeted by the summer of 1974. The House Judiciary committee would pass three articles of impeachment. The three articles were for obstruction of justice, abuse of power, and contempt of congress. A committee of Republican Congressmen led by Senator Barry Goldwater visited Nixon in the oval office and they advised him that he had lost the support of most Republican Congressmen and they would vote for impeachment and removal. Nixon decided to resign on August 8, 1974. Although I voted for Nixon in 1972 he also lost my support. There was no doubt in my mind that Nixon was guilty of a cover-up and needed to be impeached. Since that time, however; I have come to believe that Nixon did not know about the Watergate break-in. He was so fearful and paranoid, however; about political embarrassment, that he was willing to break the law in order to avoid it. A book named Silent Coup makes a strong case that John Dean ordered the break-in without Nixon's knowledge in order to destroy evidence that would have been embarrassing to his then girlfriend who later became his wife. Nixon was paranoid of the Kennedy's ever since he had been narrowly defeated by John Kennedy in the 1960 election. This paranoia led Nixon to surround himself with sycophants willing to do his bidding. In my view, for once the mainstream media did their job and uncovered a real scandal worthy of being uncovered. It was not a witch hunt like the present Russia investigation targeting Trump. The years since the Watergate scandal have taught me that if you have an R in front of your name you are treated much differently than those who have a D in front of their name. Richard Nixon was hated by the press, the media, Hollywood and Academia. He made the mistake of giving his enemies a real reason to get rid of him. Since Nixon the media has treated all Republican presidents with contempt. The hate that Trump is experiencing right now is unprecedented and he is catching it from both sides of the aisle. The real scandals and criminality of the Clinton's and the Obama administration, that were equal to or surpassed the crimes of Nixon, are virtually ignored by the left. If the Clinton's and Obama had endured the public scrutiny by the media that Nixon endured they would have not only been removed from office they would have gone to prison. Nixon might have gone to prison if he hadn't been pardoned by Gerald Ford. In my view this was the biggest reason Ford lost the 1976 race against Jimmy Carter and the fact that the American people wanted a change from the corruption of the Nixon administration. We went from bad to worse, however; because although I voted for Carter he turned out to be one of the worst presidents in American history.


THE IMPEACHMENT OF BILL CLINTON

In my view the Clinton's are the most corrupt couple in American history. They are the Bonnie & Clyde of politics but I would like to apologize to Bonnie & Clyde for comparing them to the Clinton's, however. The Clinton's made their debut on the national scene during the presidential campaign of of 1992. I say the Clinton's because Bill and Hillary blatantly informed the American people that if they elected Bill they were also electing Hillary as president. No president in American history had as sordid of a past as Bill Clinton before becoming president. He avoided the draft several times during the Vietnam war violating law in the process. While working toward a Rhodes scholarship in England, which he never acquired, Bill toured Europe and Communist bloc nations. To this day no one knows the purpose of this trip and how it was financed. Since as far as I know he never had a job to that point and did not come from wealth. He came from a lower middle class environment, much like my own, but he always seemed to have money to get by on. His mentor was the segregationist Arkansas senator William Fulbright who helped him get his shot at the Rhodes scholarship. Bill and Hillary met at Yale and they were both involved in the leadership of the anti-war movement. Only God and the Clinton's really know whether their relationship was a love based relationship in the beginning or a business partnership. Personally I think that they both realized, early on, that as far as their political aspirations went they made a great team. The evidence is based on the fact that after Hillary was fired from the Watergate investigation for lying she left Washington for Arkansas in order to begin her life with Bill. Clinton was running for Congress in 1974 and Hillary's father and brother were working for the Clinton campaign.They warned Hillary that Bill was bedding down every girl he came in contact with but she came to Arkansas anyway armed with that knowledge. They were married in 1975 and Bill was elected as Attorney General in 1976. It was during his stint as the Attorney General, and while campaigning for governor in 1978, that he violently raped Juanita Broadrick. At a campaign function weeks later Hillary approached Broadrick in a not so subtle fashion, trying to intimidate her into silence about the rape. Clinton was elected governor in 1978 but was defeated in 1980 because he came across as too radical for the typical conservative Arkansas voter. Bill wore his hair long as well as others on his staff. Hillary refused to take his name in marriage. She was addressed by her maiden name of Hillary Rodham. Hillary had the look of a radical feminist, wearing headbands, no make-up, and thick glasses. Taking Saul Alinsky's advice after his gubernatorial defeat the Clinton's changed their image. From 1980 until 1982 Bill cut his hair, began attending a large Baptist church, whose services were televised each week. He took up a position in the choir where he could easily be seen by the television audience and was frequently seen carrying a Bible. Hillary began putting on make-up, taking on a more feminine look in her dress and took her husbands last name. I recently listened to an interview by Dolly Kyle, a longtime girlfriend of Bill Clinton. Kyle said that when Hillary first came to Arkansas she stunk so bad that Kyle was reluctant to let her ride in her new car. She said that even after she changed her image Hillary still had a foul odor about her. In 1982 the Clinton's were able to fool enough voters to win back the office of governor and they would not relinquish it until they ran for president in 1992. By the time they ran for president there was a long resume of scandals. A common pattern became obvious. They would break the law and cover it up by lying. Whitewater was a shady land deal scheme started in 1978 which also involved James & Susan McDougal. The Madison Guaranty Savings & Loan that was managed by the McDougal's became the Clinton's personal piggy bank. Clinton's misuse of funds would contribute to the Saving's & Loan crisis of the late 1980's and early 1990's. Bill was an alleged cocaine user and drug trafficker laundering drug money. He was friends with the known cocaine traffickers Dan Lasater and Don Tyson. In a drug bust Bill Clinton's brother Roger could be heard on a surveillance tape saying that Bill had a nose like a vacuum cleaner. Of course there was the cattle futures scheme where Hillary turned a one thousand dollar investment into an unprecedented one hundred thousand dollar profit. People were mysteriously dying around the Clinton's or being beat up or injured. Bill was using the Arkansas Highway patrol as his personal dating service. Officers approached hundreds of women arranging sexual liaisons with these women and the governor. Many ended up with state jobs as a reward. Bill wanted to run for president in 1988 but Hillary and her aide Betsy Wright talked him out of it. Gary Hart was caught red handed cheating on his wife, which ended his presidential aspirations. Hillary and Wright did not want Bill to suffer the same fate. So they spent the next four years compiling a list of women that he had slept with so they could defend his political career if and when he was attacked. Wright was in charge of handling the so-called "Bimbo Eruption's". Most women would compile a list like that in order to make a case for divorce. Not Hillary. She was out to save her man's political butt and by extension her own. When the Jennifer Flowers story was broken by a grocery store tabloid and had been ignored by the mainstream media Bill Clinton was campaigning for president in New Hampshire in 1992. Just before the Super Bowl that year in an interview by 60 Minutes, Hillary saved Bill Clinton's political butt by standing by her man. In the interview she offended Tammy Wynette by claiming that she was not Tammy Wynette, standing by her man. That was exactly what she was doing. The producer of 60 Minutes, Don Hewitt, could be seen in a later interview bragging that his editing saved Bill Clinton's campaign. This is the same Don Hewitt that directed the camera crews to do close-up shots of a pale, sweating, and fidgety Richard Nixon while doing complementary shots of John Kennedy in the famous Kennedy - Nixon debates of 1960. Viewers of the debates on TV chose Kennedy as the winner. For those who listened on radio they chose Nixon as the winner. Recently I watched an ABC special about the Clinton and Lewinsky affair. It was very informative but I came away with the feeling that the report doubled down on the mainstream media verdict of the time.That yes Clinton did some inappropriate things with Monica Lewinsky. In their view his affair was beneath the dignity of the office of the presidency but it was just about sex and did not rise to the level of impeachment or being removed from office. They also painted Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr as an overzealous prudish man who overreached his authority. This was the same attitude that drove me to distraction by the media at the time of the scandal. Bill Clinton and his wife, with the exception of Obama, are the most corrupt politicians in my lifetime and possibly in American history. For the sake of time I will not list them all. The evidence of their corruption is available and I will leave it up to the reader to do their own research. In regard to the impeachment of Bill Clinton it was a clear case of obstruction of justice. He was no less guilty than Richard Nixon and should have been removed from office. On May 8, 1991 while Clinton was still governor of Arkansas state trooper Danny Ferguson told a female state employee named Paula Jones that the governor would like to see her in his hotel suite. For years Clinton had been using certain Arkansas state troopers to find sexual partners for him on a regular basis. The naive Jones, not realizing why the governor wanted to see her, agreed to the meeting. Almost from the moment she arrived Clinton began to make advances toward her. He dropped his pants and asked her to kiss his penis. She replied that she wasn't that king of girl and left the room. Clinton cautioned her to keep quite about what happened as she was leaving. Paula did mention what happened to trusted coworkers but beyond that she had no intention of going public. David Brock, a writer for the conservative magazine the American Spectator broke the scandal. It came to be known as Troopergate in the January 1994 issue. The article was about how Bill Clinton was regularly using state troopers to solicit women for sex. In the article trooper Ferguson was quoted as overhearing Paula say that she wouldn't mind being Clinton's mistress. When Paula heard about this comment she felt that she had to come forward publicly in order to save her reputation. She filed a sexual harassment suit against Clinton in Federal court. Clinton was president in 1994 and former Clinton law student turned judge Susan Webber Wright ruled that Jones couldn't sue a sitting president. Wright did, however; rule that the pre-trial discovery phase could proceed so that her case could go forward as soon as Clinton left office. Both Clinton and Jones appealed to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals which found in favor of Jones. The ruling read that the president could be sued in the same manner as any other citizen. Clinton appealed this decision to the Supreme Court which ruled unanimously to uphold the Eighth Court of Appeals decision. I want you to think about this for a moment. For years the court has been divided pretty much down the middle with liberal vs. conservative judges. One or two of these judges acting as a swing vote such as was the case with justice Anthony Kennedy for so many years. This court voted UNANIMOUSLY in favor of Paula Jones. It would later be discovered by the independent counsel that Bill Clinton lied under oath three times regarding Paula Jones. Jones lawyers found out through Linda Tripp's testimony to the independent counsel of the existence of Monica Lewinsky. The Jones lawyers were trying to strengthen her case for sexual harassment by compiling a list of all the women Clinton had been with. More evidence of media bias is that the mainstream media knew about Lewinsky but sat on the story. It was the Drudge Report that made Monica Lewinsky a household name. Clinton lied under oath about Lewinsky and was only forced to tell the truth about the affair because of his semen stains on the infamous blue dress. The obstruction of justice and abuse of power charges against Clinton were very valid. Yes sex was the vehicle that led to these charges but by lying Clinton tried to obstruct a private citizen from having her day in court. Nixon used the CIA to obstruct a criminal investigation. Although one was criminal and the other civil both were impeachable offenses in my view. A valid reason to remove a president from office. Especially in light of the criminal cloud that always seemed to hover over the Clinton's. As a result of his crimes Clinton was suspended from practicing law in Arkansas for five years and fined 25,000 dollars. He was fined 90,000 dollars by the Federal court for violating it's orders. Clinton agreed to pay Paula Jones a settlement of 850,000 dollars. In my view Clinton was ultimately saved from being removed from office because of a roaring economy during the 1990's and he did not receive the press scrutiny that Nixon received during Watergate. The mainstream media protected Bill Clinton as they usually protect other Democrats. They spun the impeachment charges to sound as if it was a partisan attack to bring down a popular president over a sex scandal. Details on the rape of Juanita Broaddrick came out during the impeachment and were suppressed by the mainstream media. I am a firm believer that when Americans are armed with knowledge they will always do the right thing. In my view the primary role of the media is to provide the truth to the American people. When the media is nothing but an extension of a political party, in this case the Democrat Party, the truth is much harder to come by. Unfortunately far too many of us are too lazy to seek out the truth.






DONALD TRUMP

  Andrew Johnson was not one of my favorite historical characters. In my view he was a terrible president. Johnson was a flawed person holding a different world view from the Republicans. A difference of opinion is no justification for impeachment. The Republicans set Johnson up for failure in order to impeach him. By passing the Tenure of Office Act they knew that Johnson was bound to violate the law. Additionally this law was unconstitutional because it violated the separation of powers principle set forth in the Constitution between the Legislative and Executive branches of government. Johnson could fire anyone he wanted to that worked for the Executive branch of government and Congress should not have been able to do anything about it. I revisit the impeachment of Johnson here to illustrate the fact that some of the same factors are at play with Donald Trump. There are vast differences, however. In my view Donald Trump has some mighty big flaws but so far he has been a great and very effective president in the short time he has been in office. Trump was not my first choice but so far he has greatly exceeded my expectations. He is doing what I elected him to do by cutting taxes, untying the hands of business by removing Obama era regulations, fighting Obamacare, reestablishing an effective foreign policy, building up our military, and slowing down illegal immigration. Building a wall or barrier is a big part of that. It is too simplistic to say that hatred of Donald Trump is the sole reason that the Democrats want to impeach him. Hatred is a huge part of the problem but it much more complex than that. Additionally there is massive corruption on the part of the Democrats, massive egos and massive ideological differences. It is not my intention to bore you with the specific details, dates and events that have occurred since Donald Trump announced that he was running for president. Hopefully I can capture the essence of what has happened in simple fashion. Barack Hussein Obama is without a doubt the most left wing president to ever inhabit the oval office. While growing the power and expense of government at an enormous rate on a domestic level he managed to decrease the footprint of America worldwide. At the end of eight years in office we were less respected and less feared by the world. He turned his back on our traditional friends like Israel and appeased our enemies like Iran. Although Obama is a Marxist first and foremost you could easily believe that he is Muslim because he was so eager to avoid the least slight to Islam. He was chummy with the radicals and less so with the moderate Muslims. Some of the worst things that Obama did while in office was weaponizing the F.B.I. the NSA, the CIA, the IRS and other Federal agencies in order to hurt his political enemies. By doing this he has done great damage to this country. He has also set race relations back fifty years.


  Donald Trump was not supposed to be elected president in 2016. Very few people saw it coming. I predicted that Trump could be elected president because of the chaos in the street and the average American's hatred of Obama's policies throughout his term. Many American's could be charged with being schizophrenic. They liked Obama on a personal level but hated his policies. This kind of thinking makes no sense to me because I despised the sight of him and his policies. To hear Hillary tell it she was defeated because of all the deplorable straight, misogynist, racist, White males who voted for Trump and their weak minded women who they compelled to vote against her. Oh yes and we can't forget those pesky Russians that Trump colluded with. No Hillary you lost the election because you are Hillary first and foremost. You are not your husband and most sane people cannot stand looking at you or listening to you. You are the political equivalent of listening to someone scratching their nails across a chalkboard. You represented a continuation of Obama's policies and the American people weren't having it. Donald Trump was a new kind of Republican. Coarse, vulgar, a businessman and not a RINO, or Republican In Name Only. In the face of left wing dirty tricks and verbal assaults he does not curl up in the fetal position and take it. He strikes back and we love him for it. When Trump first threw his hat in the ring the mainstream media unwittingly provided Trump with free air time which propelled him into the lead as far as Republican candidates were concerned. They covered his early speeches and rallies in the hope that Trump would be chosen as the Republican nominee. In their elite arrogance they totally underestimated Trump and the impact he was having on the voter. By the time they realized their mistake the Trump snowball was gathering size and momentum. Then they embarked on a full frontal hate filled attack that has lasted until this day. This episode proves what I have been saying about the mainstream media all along. Fox News reaches more people than any other single mainstream news network but collectively the mainstream media reaches far more people and has more power to be a kingmaker than Fox News. Or to influence public opinion than Fox News and conservative talk radio combined. The Democrats and their media lackeys have tried to pick our candidates for us over the years and have met with some success. They do it like this. Months before the nominating process begins in the Republican Party the media will pick who they think will be the easiest to be defeated by a Democrat. You will hear positive things about this person all the way through primaries until they are safely nominated. Then the media tears into them. They did this with boring Bob Dole, John McCain, and Mitt Romney. Any conservative candidate that is gathering momentum during the primaries and appears to be a solid challenger to the media's Republican pick they will dig up any dirt they can find. Real or fake on them. Herman Kane was a fine example of this. In 2012 Kane was gathering momentum against the mainstream medias pick, Mitt Romney. The media, just like in the Trump campaign, the Kavanaugh judicial appointment,and the Roy Moore senate campaign in Alabama, brought out of the woodwork all of the women allegedly sexually harrassed by these men going all the way back to kindergarten. Once a political campaign is over with all of these women seem to magically disappear. In Kane's case there was no way that Obama could allow a Black man to run against him in 2012, thereby splitting the Black vote. Although Reagan was hated I have never seen the amount of hatred leveled at a president in my lifetime as I have seen leveled at Donald Trump and anyone associated with him. Yet this man might be the most successful and effective president I have ever seen. Reagan was the greatest president of my lifetime and in some areas Trump has surpassed him. He has been successful in spite of the hatred toward him which is absolutely amazing. There is no telling what he could do with a little help from his own Party and from across the aisle. He is hated by the Democrats and the elites in the Republican Party. Academia, Hollywood, the mass media and everyone else hate him with the exception of the mainstream American's that voted for him.

  There are basically three phases to what the Democrats have done to Donald Trump in the last two years. In my view Trump is not guilty of collusion with the Russians or any other crime associated with the presidency and history will vindicate him. As I understand it collusion is only a crime in the business world. It is not a crime in the political world. Three things are at play here. Obama did things like using the IRS to harass conservative groups such as the Tea Party in his presidential race of 2012. The Tea Party was largely responsible for helping Republicans win back the House of Representatives in 2010. Obama used the IRS to neuter the Tea Party and render them ineffective in 2012 against him. In 2016 he used our intelligence agencies to illegally spy on the Trump campaign. Trump was tipped off by an intelligence agent with a conscience and once Trump made it public the Obama administration tried the legal route by obtaining a FISA warrant. Authorizing surveillance of the Trump campaign. A phony dossier accusing Trump of inappropriate activity was used to obtain this warrant and it was granted by the court. All of this was designed to hamper the Trump campaign. Obama, Hillary and the powers that be never saw a Trump victory coming, however. Once he won everyone was scrambling to cover up the real felonies and paper trail of the Obama administration along with the crimes of Hillary Clinton. The Mueller investigation is a clean up operation to hide evidence. Even Mueller has committed crimes that have to be covered up. His investigation has the added benefit of tying up the Trump administration. Politically this places Trump in an impossible position. If he fires Mueller and ends the probe he appears guilty of obstruction of justice even though he has every legal right in the constitution to do it. Even if Trump was guilty of collusion, which he is not, it would be the moral equivalent of a man going to prison for ripping the label off of a mattress while murderers and rapists go free. The crimes of Obama, Hillary, and all the other players comprises a political scandal the likes of which make Watergate look like a jaywalking violation.


Saturday, January 26, 2019

BOYS SHOULD BE BOYS


  There is a PSA on television which shows well known actors repeating the line " Boys will be boys" over and over until at the end of the commercial it reads in big letters "ENOUGH". It is obvious what the commercial is referring to. That bad behavior from men has has been ignored or trivialized by a male patriarchal society for years. I have seen this boys will be boys attitude firsthand. I didn't like it when I was young and I don't like it now. For example, in my youth it was expected by many people, including many females, that a boy was expected to cheat on his girlfriend, or wife, because boys will be boys. If women cheated, however; they were considered to be a slut and a whore. This is why John Kennedy got a pass from the media and most political figures of his day because of this boys will be boys attitude. Today, only Democrats and leftists get away with this behavior. The modern feminist movement has a much more sinister motive than just trying to end bad behavior in men. Their goal is to emasculate men in much the same way that the Democrat slave owners tried to emasculate male Blacks during slavery. The male, because of testosterone posed the greatest threat to the slave system and males are the greatest threat to stopping cultural Marxism in America today."Toxic masculinity" is the new war cry of the left. As if there is no such thing as toxic femininity. By their very nature radical feminists are toxic. Their message is about male hatred. This past Monday we just celebrated the birth of Martin Luther King. This was a man who said "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character".The left, by engaging in identity politics, has perverted Kings dream in America today. It is no longer segregation by race but by gender, and what gender you choose to sleep with. Being a woman, being Black, Asian, White, Hispanic, American Indian, and homosexual doesn't matter to them. You must be the right kind of woman, Black person, White Person, Hispanic person, American Indian, or homosexual to matter. God help you if you are a virulent White Christian male who identifies as a Conservative or a Republican. If you are a Republican or Conservative regardless of how you identify the content of your character means nothing to them. It is all about ideology and has nothing to do with character. Yet the left continues to claim King as one of their heroes as well as John Kennedy. The ideas of both men are anathema to the modern left of today. King leaned toward socialism, and was a whoremonger in his personal life but he at least espoused the tenets of Christianity. King was a disciple of non-violence and did not care what ideology you identified with as as long as you believed in the concept that all men were created equal. John Kennedy was also a whoremonger but he was a war hero, an American patriot, a fiscal conservative, believing in a strong national defense and was a huge supporter of the space program. As a Catholic he had experienced anti-catholic bias and was also a believer in the equality of all.

The men in my life, as well as the women,  taught me the values of a real man. That hard work  was a virtue and that a man's primary focus was to support his family. They taught me to pass these values on to my children and grandchildren. Women were worthy of respect and all people were worthy of respect regardless of their station in life. This is why I can treat the person that cleans the toilets with the same respect as those who manage the corporations.They taught me that a real man doesn't physically or verbally assault a woman or take advantage of anyone regardless of what they identify as. Do we really want effeminate emasculated men dominating the America of the future or the men that protect and support their families, fight our wars, arrest our criminals, and fight our fires? Men who are able to teach their children and grandchildren what it means to be a man like my father and grandfather before me. In addition the men who ended slavery, segregation, and helped give women the right to vote. These are the kind of boys and men that we should raise. There is no such thing as toxic masculinity or toxic femininity. There is only character and a lack of character. The Ten Commandments and Christs admonition that we should love God with our heart mind and soul and love our neighbor as ourselves. The law of God applies to all mankind. There are bad people and good people. It is no more complicated than that. So how about it? Let's let boys be boys.
My family
The alternative




Saturday, January 19, 2019

APPLES & ORANGES


  Recently I was watching a Youtube historian comparing Lincoln and Obama to illustrate the point that the South felt that their right to own slaves was threatened by Lincoln in much the same way as gun owners felt threatened by Obama. In other words that the slave owners had no valid reason to fear Lincoln and the gun owners had no valid reason to fear Obama. To me this argument is comparing apples to oranges. Like many historians he was guilty of using Lincoln's famous quote in August of 1862 to prove his argument. Lincoln stated: "If I could save the union without freeing any slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that." The historian is right in his point that Lincoln was no threat to slavery when he was elected president in 1860. Lincoln was a political genius but he was also a great pragmatist and a great lawyer. He knew that he had no constitutional right to end slavery where it already existed. If the Civil War had not occurred he would have more than likely finished out his term with the institution of slavery intact. Like most Republicans, however; he viewed slavery as a moral evil and he was against the expansion of slavery into the new western territories acquired by the treaty ending the War with Mexico. There were firm constitutional arguments supporting Lincoln's position on this. Lincoln was also a man that was not afraid to seize on an opportunity when it presented itself. The Civil War afforded that opportunity. By August of 1862, when Lincoln made his aforementioned quote, he had already decided to make a dent in slavery by issuing the Emancipation Proclamation. He took Secretary of State Seward's advice not to issue it until the North had won a victory so it would not appear to be an act of desperation. Lincoln announced the proclamation after the Union victory at Antietam. The proclamation was an executive order and war measure designed to rob the South of it's labor force in time of war. This act had broad implications and greatly affected the outcome of the war. The proclamation drove the final nail in the coffin of any hope the South had for an alliance with Britain or France. It provided the North with Black recruits at a crucial time when White enlistments were falling off due to attrition. Desertion was becoming a problem in the Southern army due to soldiers going back home to work farms abandoned by slaves. Lincoln knew that the proclamation was a temporary fix and like any executive order it could be overturned by a successor once the emergency had passed. He knew that the slaves that had been freed could be returned to slavery. Knowing that the South was on the verge of collapse Lincoln saw his opportunity in 1865 to end slavery once and for all by pushing through the 13th Amendment. There is no doubt that Lincoln had been an abolitionist at heart all along. One of the reasons that Lincoln's father left Kentucky for Indiana was because Kentucky was a slave state and he hated slavery. Lincoln and his father were not close but the one thing he took from his him was a hatred of slavery. Lincoln was smart enough to understand his limitations. He was much too complicated of a man to use a quote to place him a convenient box to bolster a particular argument. The greatness of Lincoln was his ability to adapt to changing situations. There is a scene in the movie Lincoln by Stephen Spielberg that nails the essence of Lincoln. He and Thaddeus Stephens are having a private conversation in the White House cellar about the proposed 13th Amendment. Lincoln is trying to secure stephens support. Stephens was a unapologetic abolitionist who had been one of Lincoln's severest critics over the years. He was opposed to gradualism in freeing the slaves.. Stephens was in a longtime romantic common law relationship with his Black housekeeper. In the scene Lincoln is asking Stephens not to scare the conservative Republicans with his radical approach to ending slavery. Their vote is needed to pass the 13th Amendment. Stephens was pushing for confiscating all property and wealth from Southern slave owners who supported the Southern war effort and giving it to the Freedman. He also wanted a harsh reconstruction policy that would severely punish the South and it's leaders. This was very radical for that time and even most Northerners were not in favor of this kind of policy. Stephens mentions using a moral compass and Lincoln takes this opportunity to destroy Stephen's argument. Lincoln said that as a surveyor in his youth he used a compass. The compass can point north but what good is it to know true north if you do not take into account the swamps, deserts, and chasms in between that you will have to cross?  In summation, if the war had never happened it is correct to say that lincoln was no threat to the institution of slavery. As Grant once said the South insured the abolition of slavery by firing on fort Sumter which makes them the greatest abolitionists of all. The civil War was an actual crisis that Lincoln had to deal with. Obama on the other hand used tragic situations to call for gun control. Compared to the mass killings of Blacks at the hands of other Blacks in our large cities on a continual basis these were isolated events. Does anyone believe for a moment that Obama and the Democrats would not confiscate our guns if the opportunity presented itself?  It is not about curbing violence but about power. If we own guns they do not have total power over us.The Democrats ultimate goal is to confiscate all guns and their comments prove it. In this past congressional election some Democrats ran on abolishing the 2nd Amendment. Prior to Lincoln's election he never once stated that his real intent was to abolish slavery. Although slavery was a right protected by the constitution it was not an inalienable right. Man does not have a God given right to own another man as property. Nor do they have the right to confiscate the fruits of their labor. Man does, however; have a God given right to own property. He also has a God given right to defend himself and abolish a tyrannical government if the need arises. This is the basis of the 2nd Amendment, the 1st Amendment and every Amendment in the Bill of Rights. Comparing Lincoln to Obama has no basis in fact.