Outrage

Soon after placing yesterday's post, I noted that a large amount of outrage had been registered from all segments of our society and that Kathy Griffin had apologized for "going too far".  So I go back to Judeo-Christianity ........ two wrongs don't make a right.  This is, of course, true.  Look at the middle east.  6,000 years of:

- you did this to me, so I'm going to do this to you;
- oh but you did it first, so now I'm going to do it back to you again
- now I'm doing it to you again, slap back no tag backs

And on and on.  The story is as old as humanity.  In our country, the Hatfields and the McCoys.  I don't know about other cultures, but I suspect they have the same story.

I am not suggesting that Kathy Griffin's photo, that was released yesterday, is not a disturbing image; it is.  It fits into the human condition of responding to egregious behavior with similar behavior.  In this case, it is no more harmful than other behaviors I will list below.  In fact, some of what I will refer to will be more disturbing, and yet the level of outrage from some segments of our society will be almost non-existent when compared to what I have seen  in relation to Griffin's photo.   So, here we go.

“You could see there was blood coming out of her eyes. Blood coming out of her wherever,”

We all recognize this comment and we all know who made it. And yet this person has not experienced a reaction that ruined his career.  All Kathy Griffin did was give us a visual representation of part of what trump said.

Tuesday, August 9, 2016:

"Hillary wants to abolish, essentially abolish the Second Amendment.   By the way, and if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks.  Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don't know."

Again, we all know who said this.  This is no less disturbing to me than the image that Kathy Griffin posted.  In fact, to me it was more disturbing.  To me it was a direct incitement to shoot someone.  The fact that it was Hillary Clinton does not make the comment any more or less disturbing.  I don't  know, maybe trump was doing a 'stand up routine'.  Maybe he's a comedian.  And yet ........ there was not enough outrage to prevent him from becoming the head admin of our country.  If my memory serves me well, there was backlash regarding this comment, but I don't remember a lot and I seem to recall that some segments of our society didn't seem have an issue with this comment.

October 8, 2016, one month prior to the election, again,  this "locker room talk" needs no introduction:

"I'm automatically attracted to beautiful [women]—I just start kissing them. It's like a magnet. Just kiss. I don't even wait. And when you're a star they let you do it. You can do anything ... Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything."

I don't see this as any less egregious than Kathy's photo.  It's easy enough to build the image in your mind of trump walking up to a woman and grabbing her pussy (and I don't mean her cat, I mean the same part of a woman's body that he did). 

May 26, 2017, I don't hear any large amount of outrage here.  Jeremy Joseph Christian did not allegedly stab three men, killing two, he just plain old did it.  You can throw the word 'allegedly right out the window.  Don't tell me you can't judge a book by its cover, see the photo of Christian below.  The men that were killed, spoke up to Christian on a train while he verbally abused two teenage girls who were Muslim, one wearing a head scarf.  I'm not hearing nearly the amount of outrage about this.  I hope no one is going to tell me that what Kathy Griffin did as a comedian warrants more outrage than this.

This morning eighty people were killed and over 300 injured in Kabul, Afghanistan.  I have not taken a read on world response yet, but I'm willing to bet that many of those that found Griffin's photo offensive will have nothing to say about this attack.  By the way, I am in no way saying that the lives of the victims in Manchester or Kabul are more or less valued than the other city's lost lives.  And because I see all lives as valuable as any life, then why will I not see the same level of outrage regarding a much larger bombing in Kabul than in Manchester.  You know, I hope I'm wrong, but I don't expect to be.

So .......... I will not be recanting my support for the photo Griffin posted.  I think it's funny.  As I explained yesterday, I have been bullied way too many times in my life to have anyone dictate to me what I find funny, just as i will not dictate to anyone what they find not funny.  

I will say a few things in closing.  He who is without sin, cast the first stone.  And like so many of those that are outraged by Griffin's behavior, but show no outrage regarding any of the incidents mentioned above like to say, 'get over yourselves and move on'!

Bully for Dark Humor

I ......... am a proponent of dark humor.  I am a purveyor of dark humor.  I have made jokes about death for most of my life.  Jokes about the death of my family members and jokes about my eventual death.   So, it should come as no surprise that I find the photo shoot that was released today by the comedian, Kathy Griffin funny.  I can see how most will find the photo over the top, but I have no issues with it.  And I am clear about my reasons.

When I was young, I was bullied for many years and by many people.  I have the pictures to prove it.  I carry them with me every day.  Some days I view the pictures with more clarity than others, but they're always there, right there in my mind's eye.  I'm willing to bet that most people who were bullied can say the same thing.  I also know how a felt after each incident.  I was filled with fear, shame, anger at the perpetrator, anger at myself for not being tough enough, anger for those that watched passively or cheered the bully on.  The overriding feeling I had though, was that what I wanted more than anything else at that moment was ............ you guessed it, revenge.  I could visualize what I wanted to do to this person who bullied me and it wasn't pretty.

I felt all of these  feelings, because I'm human and like it or not these are all human feelings.  Judeo-Christian ethics preach peace, and I certainly agree with that philosophy and have said so in my writings.  Another course that Judea-Christianity would have us, we humans, walk, is to not have violent, gruesome thoughts.  This I do not agree with.  The reason is simply as humans, we do have these type of thoughts.  There just isn't any way around it.  That is part of what being human is.  I do not believe in acting on violent or vengeful thoughts.  In fact, I believe that suppressing those types of thoughts increases the possibility of a person acting on them.  In order to act and respond in a responsible way, we need to be aware. conscious of the feelings driving our actions.  To suppress is to keep feelings in the realm of the sub-conscious, where we can act on them and not even know we are doing so.

Bill .......... what the hell are you rambling on about?  Just this.  I suspect that many comedians were targets of, victims of bullies when they were young.  I believe that many comedians have and as part of their profession use dark humor as a way to work through these deep wounds that may have been placed in the child of their being and need expression as adults when bullies are encountered.  I don not know if this is true, but I'm willing to bet it is, and I am not a betting man.

With this in mind, I speculate that Kathy Griffin may have run into a bully or two in her lifetime.  They may have been males who harassed her as trump proposed he had carte blanche to do to any woman.  Maybe I'm wrong, but again, I bet not.  And therefore I present the following and say 'bully for you Kathy'.








http://www.tmz.com/2017/05/30/kathy-griffin-beheads-donald-trump-photo-tyler-shields/

Free Speech

As I was driving to work this morning, I heard an interview on NPR about free speech on college and university campuses.  I do not feel the need to go into a lot of detail about the article, suffice it to say that many higher education institutions have 'speech codes'.  Of course, as is my usual operating procedure, I looked up the phrase 'speech code' and found the following:


A speech code is any rule or regulation that limits, restricts, or bans speech beyond the strict legal limitations upon freedom of speech or press found in the legal definitions of harassment, slander, libel, and fighting words. Such codes are common in the workplace, in universities,^[1] and in private organizations. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speech_code 


I believe that all persons have the right to speak within these parameters.  I am aware of instances where speakers have been invited to university campuses, by on campus groups, and have been shouted down or had a campus experience violence with the intent of having the person to not be heard.

In February, when the wounds of trump's inauguration were still raw, there were violent protests at Berkeley and NYU due to speakers that were set to speak on these campuses.   I saw an article from the Boston Globe about violence at Middlebury College in Vermont.  Middlebury has always been a small peaceful school nestled in the mountains of Vermont.  This March a social scientist, Charles Murray, who had been invited to speak to the campus by students and the President of the school ( who did not support Murray's philosophies), was physically attacked along with one of the school's professors who was with Murray.  This is not ok on a lot of levels.  Neither is any type of violence as a form of protest.  The photo below is shows Murray speaking at Middlebury and the students turning their backs on him.  To me this is a much more effective protest and at the same time does not impinge on his freedom to speak out  about how he sees the world.  I assume he was not attempting to incite violence, like trump did in Kentucky and other venues during his campaign prior to the election.  Middle bury junior, Sabina Hague pointed out that since trump's election she sees people on campus digging in with their ideological heels.






Other notable instances of speech being curtailed were at DePaul University where two conservative speakers Milo Yiannopoulos and Ben Shapiro were banned from campus, at the Unversity of California, Irvine campus, A pro-palestinian grop used violence to attempt to stop an event sponsored by students supporting Israel. Three students were arrested at Kellogg Community College for handing out pocket Constitutions in a public space on campus.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2017/03/04/middlebury/hAfpA1Hquh7DIS1doiKbhJ/story.html

We are familiar with the approximately one hundred students that walked out on their commencement at Notre Dame when pence started to speak.  This and the turning of backs on a speaker are legitimate forms of free speech in response to speakers that we do not agree with.  It is important, though, for all people, around the world to be able to speak their minds without violent reactions.  It is especially important that all voices be heard on college and university campuses where discourse and debate have always occurred and must continue to occur for human knowledge and ethics to continue to evolve.  The truth, both morally and scientifically are strong enough to stand up to ideologues who are what I would label as misguided.

In our country, the kkk and the american nazi party have as much right to assemble and speak (as long as they are not inciting  violence) as a Congressperson or a Senator.  The ACLU has fought for the first amendment liberties that are an integral part of the fabric of our country.  Extreme right wing groups are not the only ones capable of violence and attempts to shut down free speech.  We are all humans and therefore all have the same emotions eating away at us, no matter what political views we hold.  It is incumbent on all of us to rise above this type of behavior even though we now find our country embroiled in a decisive battle of cultures and ideologies.  For those of us who are resisting trump and those that he represents, I still endorse what Michelle Obama famously said, "when they go low, we go high".  We all need to remember this and we all need to stay on the high road.  We are that good.

Introspection

Yesterday afternoon, I sat down in the living room and struck up a conversation about jared kushner and other things trump with my son.  He is very bright and as most 20 year olds assertive about his thoughts.  I respect what he says to me because I know he has a level head (for the most part, I mean, after all, he is just a few weeks shy of 20, c'mon now).  I was speaking from my gut, not from a reasoned place.  Each time I opened my mouth I was sounding very childish and my son pointed this out to me.  And what he told me cut me deeply.  He said I was being an extremist.

At first, I pushed back.  I mean, who wants to be called an extremist?  Who wants to think of themselves as an extremist?  He asked me if I thought that suicide bombers think of themselves as extremists.  I answered 'probably not'.  Truth be told, as I am writing, right now, I really do not know the answer to that question, but at the moment, I was willing to follow my son's lead.

It also came out in the conversation that I call my representatives frequently.  He pointed out that when the time was right and the issue at hand warranted it, that would be a good time to call, but calling frequently only showed me as an ass to the people who answer the phone  and that the representative I'm calling never knows about my call.

Of course these insights from my son  hurt my feelings, but I want to look at the points he made and give them real consideration.  First though, I must note that I was immediately proud that an ideal I taught him since he was nine or ten has taken hold; extremism in any form is dangerous.  He's got it.

So ........ am I an extremist?  Well the issue that I need to tackle first is what is extremism and what defines an extremist.  It seems to me that the concept of extremism is highly subjective and depends on the perspective of the person using the label.

I found some definitions for extremism which both referred me back to the word extreme

Definition of extremism

1: the quality or state of being extreme
2: advocacy of extreme measures or views : radicalism

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/extremism

ex·trem·ism
ikˈstrēˌmizəm/
noun

the holding of extreme political or religious views; fanaticism.
"the dangers of religious extremism"

https://www.google.com/search?q=defione+extremism&oq=defione+extremism&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l5.5007j0j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

So, I looked up 'extreme'

Definition of extreme

1a : existing in a very high degree extreme poverty

 b : going to great or exaggerated lengths : radical went on an extreme diet

 c : exceeding the ordinary, usual, or expected extreme weather conditions
3 : situated at the farthest possible point from a center

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/extreme

So I lookked up 'radical'

Definition of radical

3 a : very different from the usual or traditional : extreme 
   b : favoring extreme changes in existing views, habits, conditions, or institutions 
   c : associated with political views, practices, and policies of extreme change 
   d : advocating extreme measures to retain or restore a political state of affairs

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/radical

Okay, now I've got a basis to work from.  Am I going to 'great or exaggerated lengths'?  With this as the test, I'm willing to say yes.  Am I 'exceeding the ordinary, usual or expected'?  Again, I'll say yes.  Am I 'situated at the farthest point from the center'?  To this, I say no.  Am I 'very different from the usual'?  To this i say no, considering what has become usual in order to protest and remove trump.  Am I 'very different from the traditional'?  Yes and no.  It is certainly not the traditional if we are talking about normal involvement in relation to our county's direction, but I believe it is traditional at those times, in our country, when it is in peril.

Now we come to the last three definitions for radical  The word radical seems to be interchangeable with the concept of extreme.  It is not me that is 'favoring extreme changes in existing views, habits, conditions or institutions'.  My political views are not 'associated with political views, practices and policies of extreme change'.  Given the fact that trump and bannon are proponents of these two definitions of radical, I can see that I am 'advocating [ ] measures to retain or restore a political state of affairs'  However, I am not able to label those measures as 'extreme' and from my perspective my advocacy is directed at the well being of our country, not at the body politic.

So.......am I an extremist.  In total, I have to say no.  What I am is a citizen who is concerned and actively resisting the radical extremism that we have been presented with in the forms of trump, bannon and sessions.

Do I have the ability to be childish?  Yes.  And I'm clear about that.  Sometimes i have to let my inner child have his say.  But, something else that my son pointed out to me was that not everyone who has taken on a job in the trump administration should be painted with the same brush that I use on trump.  Some of these men and women do want to work for what they believe is the betterment of our country and to that end I am willing to pay those individuals the respect that they are due.  There are those, though, that in my opinion are not due my respect, and i will always make it clear who those individuals are.  Whether it is using lower case lettering for their names or assigning them nick names that i deem appropriate, it will be clear.  If I disagree with someone's philosophy, I will still give them the respect that they are due, but I will express my opinion regarding their philosophy and how my views differ.

All's Quiet

Here I am, we are, on this pleasant Memorial Day weekend Saturday, and all is quiet.  For me, the quiet is unsettling.  In four months and seven days we have been exposed to so much chaos and turmoil that this quiet day seems abnormal, disquieting if you will.  There is a take away to this though.  It all reminds me of a similar dynamic on a smaller scale.

My experience tells me that when a child is raised in a dysfunctional home; a home with alcoholism, or drug addiction, or a gambling addiction, or any kind of addiction, or even no addiction, but where there is mental or emotional illness, the child experiences chaos.  The child grows to be an adult and in one way or another recreates chaos in her or his life because it is what they know.  It is what they are comfortable with.  It is the way that they have experienced the world and have a core unconscious belief that chaos is how the world should be.  When that person's world becomes free of chaos, they feel uncomfortable, anxious, on edge, hypervigilant.  They would rather not feel these emotions.  These emotions were the warning signals that something bad was going to happen, but they didn't know when.

Now let's take this picture and expand it a couple of different ways.  These first four months of trump being the administrator of our country have been, from my perspective, extremely chaotic.  I have become "comfortable" with the chaos.  On a day like today, I do feel anxious.  I know more chaos is coming, but I don't know when.  America is my home and there is a great deal of dysfunction in our family.

The next way that I see what is happening in our country has to do with speculation regarding trump's home life in his family of origin.  I believe, I obviously do not know, that trump was raised in a dysfunctional home.  I believe trump became used to chaos and that chaos is an integral part of how he conducts all aspects of his life.  I believe that his chaotic lifestyle was reinforced by money.  Money is obviously a reinforcing agent for trump.  I believe that he has seized on and exploited the dysfunction of our American family because it is familiar to him and he is comfortable with it.  I believe that he has exposed us as a dysfunctional family and keeps us embroiled in chaos because that is how he is most comfortable.  This is pure conjecture and I will most likely never determine if it is true, but it all fits for me.

As I was thinking this through and writing about it, my son asked me if I had heard the latest report from The Washington Post, that jared kushner proposed back channel communications to the Russians in December of 2016.  Reports are that this back channel suggestion was not acted on by either party.  Thank God.  some more chaos

Focus in the Wrong Place

The goal ...... remove trump from office.

The reason ....... because he consistently breaks laws.

How ......... by focusing on the laws that he has already, obviously broken.

This morning, I was reading the news, when I came across an article from the Chicago Tribune.  It was discussing the alleged focus of investigators on jared kushner.  I don't need to review this, but for the purpose of this post I will.  kushner is the husband of ivanka trump, making him the son-in-law of d. j[ackass] trump.

The article points out various ways that kushner met or may have met with Russian officials and bankers in 2016 during the campaign and after the election, but prior to inauguration day.  The article also makes note of the many initiatives that kushner is currently heading up for this administration.  The deal here is, we do not need kushner to be investigated to determine illegal activity by trump or by kushner.  The fact that kushner has the position that he does, in this administration, is a crime.  I don't mean 'waaaa, waaaaa, waaaaa that's a crime'.  I mean trump has appointed kushner to the position that kushner holds, in direct conflict with the nepotism law.

5 U.S. Code § 3110 - Employment of relatives; restriction
(a)For the purpose of this section—

(1)“agency” means—

   (A)an Executive agency;
   (B)an office, agency, or other establishment in the legislative branch;
   (C)an office, agency, or other establishment in the judicial branch; and
   (D)the government of the District of Columbia;

2)“public official” means an officer (including the President and a Member of Congress)

(3)“relative” means, with respect to a public official, an individual who is related to the public official as father, mother, son, daughter, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, first cousin, nephew, niece, husband, wife, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, stepfather, stepmother, stepson, stepdaughter, stepbrother, stepsister, half brother, or half sister.

      (b)A public official may not appoint, employ, promote, advance, or advocate for appointment, employment, promotion, or advancement, in or to a civilian position in the agency in which he is serving or over which he exercises jurisdiction or control any individual who is a relative of the public official. An individual may not be appointed, employed, promoted, or advanced in or to a civilian position in an agency if such appointment, employment, promotion, or advancement has been advocated by a public official, serving in or exercising jurisdiction or control over the agency, who is a relative of the individual.
I have written on this subject, before, but not since kushner took on this official position, representing us, forming policy for us and negotiating with other countries on our behalf, illegally.

We do not need to go a step further.  We do not need to prove obstruction of justice with relation to trump asking James Comey to stop investigations into Flynn's ties with Russia.  We don't need to prove running afoul of The Constitution's emolument clause, due to possible financial ties to Russia which would be illegal because he has not divested himself from all of his businesses.  We do not need to prove treason, due to the possibility of "giving aide and comfort" to Russia, when giving two Russian officials classified information.  We don't need to do anything else, besides impeach him and remove him from office due to disregarding 5 U.S. Code § 3110.

Enough said!



http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-jared-kushner-russia-investigation-20170525-story.html

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/5/3110

Pursuing PEACE?

Donald J. Trump ✔@realDonaldTrump

Honor of a lifetime to meet His Holiness Pope Francis. I leave the Vatican more determined than ever to pursue PEACE in our world.
8:20 AM - 24 May 2017 · Italy
This is a rare occasion, where I will use his given name and his surname, but they still will both be spelled in lower case.  I will only do him this courtesy once.  donald trump has a great deal to learn about "PEACE" and how to "pursue" it.  Ya see, I have a tendency to read between the lines.

'Hi.  my name is d. j[ackass] trump and i'm going to try to convince you that i have been completely changed by my visit with the Pope.  What i'm really going to do is threaten and bomb the shit out of people until they give up (i don't know words like acquiesce).' 

In Matthew 5:39, Jesus said "But I am saying to you, you shall not rise up against an evil person, but whoever strikes you on your right cheek, turn to him also the other".  Ya know, he didn't say this because he liked being hit. He understood that when met with violence, returning that violence in kind, only serves to continue the cycle of violence at best and most likely would lead to an escalation in the magnitude of violent behavior.  I am not a Christian, I am not a theologian, I am not a religious person.  What Jesus said, has nothing to do with any of these labels.  Jesus was addressing basic human nature and a way to stop the cycle of violence.  You don't need to be a genius to figure this out or understand it.  trump is far from a genius

In modern times we have the gift of being able to record wise thoughts uttered by wise people in a more effective way than 2,000 years ago.  Mahatma Gandhi had much to say about violence and peace.  Upon reading through many of his quotes, I happened on one that made more sense than I know what to do with.  "An eye for an eye only ends up making the whole world blind."  Again, wisdom that is so simple an idiot can understand it.  I do not believe that trump can.

Martin Luther King Junior:

"But it is not enough for me to stand before you tonight and condemn riots. It would be morally irresponsible for me to do that without, at the same time, condemning the contingent, intolerable conditions that exist in our society. These conditions are the things that cause individuals to feel that they have no other alternative than to engage in violent rebellions to get attention. And I must say tonight that a riot is the language of the unheard. And what is it America has failed to hear?...It has failed to hear that the promises of freedom and justice have not been met. And it has failed to hear that large segments of white society are more concerned about tranquility and the status quo than about justice and humanity."
Reverend King understood that when a people and when individuals have voices that are not heard, they turn up the volume, so to speak.  It may be a conscious effort to be heard, but more often than not, it is simply an expression of deep frustration over the clear injustice that they are experiencing.

trump and those of the mind set that violence will stop violence simply don't get it.  As long as the world remains an unjust place, there will be individuals, at the very least, that will express their frustration with violence.  Kill one and another will crop up soon enough.  We have a violent world simply because humans are violent.  The only possible way to develop a peaceful planet is by being at peace within ourselves and with each other.  I strongly doubt that trump has a clue, even though the Pope gave him one.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/23/politics/pope-trump-tweets/

http://biblehub.com/matthew/5-39.htm

http://members.tripod.com/lutheran_peace/gandhi-peace-quotes.html

http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/riot-language-unheard-9-mlk-quotes-mainstream-media-wont-cite

13.5 %

Last week, I discussed just what's about to happen, just this kind of crap.  trump has presented his budget proposal for 2018.  There are many flaws in it, many cuts, in order to fund his massive requested funding increase for military spending.

Today, as part of the budget hearings being held by the House Appropriations Committee, Betsy DeVos will attempt to testify.  I say attempt, because we all remember her bumbling answers at her confirmation hearings.  I just can't wait to hear the comedy that comes out of her mouth when she tries to defend a 13.5% proposed cut in education spending.  That 13.5% translates into $9.2 billion.  The proposed cut would be from K through 12 and extend into higher education.  Smart (pun intended)!  By the way.......I keep saying proposed' because this is not going to happen.  This is just so much smoke.  Congress will not agree to this and as I pointed out yesterday, Ryan is already pushing back on trump's budget.

One of the largest cuts will be $2.3 billion for a teacher training and class size reduction program.  Also a $1.2 billion cut for an after school program which serves almost two million children, many of them who are poor.  And of course a program that neither trump nor DeVos understand, they would cut a literacy program with $190 million of funding.

It is also noteworthy that trump's proposed cuts to medicaid will effect schools and students to the tune of $4 billion in reimbursements per year.  These reimbursements will effect both special-needs students and poor students in public schools for services ranging from vision screening to speech therapy.

Why would they do this.  DeVoss would have us believe that school choice is the issue.  I think that's a load of shit.  I do not believe that the federal government will be enabling school choice by taking this money, from these programs. off the table.  I think that trump found a real dumb one in deVos to cover his desire to take money from domestic programs to pay for a military build up.

My son is currently a student at The George Washington University, in Washington, D.C. only four blocks from the White House.  The first half of his K through 12 education was home schooling.  My wife laid down a strong foundation for his continued education in public schools starting in seventh grade and graduating from our local high school.  At no time, did we think, believe or feel that our money was being mis-spent or wasted  in the arena of public education.  By example, by the way we conducted ourselves, we are living (albeit anecdotal) proof that citizens can support public education while choosing an alternate path.  To make the deep cuts that d. j[ackass] and his stooge DeVos are proposing would be setting up millions of children for failure, not success.  And by extension, they would be setting up our country for failure, not success.

As I have done before, i am providing links that list contact information for members of the House and the Senate.  Please find your representatives and call them.  Let them know that these callus a literally careless cuts can not occur and that if they do, they will be placing yet another nail in their own political coffins.


https://www.senate.gov/senators/contact/

http://www.house.gov/representatives/

http://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2017/05/22/529534031/president-trumps-budget-proposal-calls-for-deep-cuts-to-education

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/devos-to-testify-on-trumps-budget-her-first-time-before-congress-since-rocky-confirmation-hearing/2017/05/23/db2934e8-3fe2-11e7-adba-394ee67a7582_story.html?utm_term=.b406b3c8608f

The World Moves On

In spite of, despite, to spite d. j[ackass] trump, the world is moving on.

An example of 'to spite' is the suicide bomber last night in Manchester England.  Anyone on this planet who thinks that this bombing is not a direct response to trump's current overseas trip which started in Saudi Arabia, moved on to Israel and now is focused on talks with Mahmoud Abbas, has their head firmly implanted ........well you can finish this sentence.  I know the difference between contiguity (two unrelated events close together in time and space) and cause and effect, but come on.

trump, with the childish rhetoric that he uses, has immediately labeled the suicide bomber and terrorists in general as "losers".  d. j[ackass] went on to say that:

"I won’t call them monsters because they would like that term. They would think that’s a great name. I will call them from now on losers, because that’s what they are. They’re losers. And we’ll have more of them. But they’re losers. Just remember that."

So, what's wrong with that Bill? Well, from my way of thinking, claiming that a group of people are "losers" means that there are winners. Dividing the world into winners and losers sets up an antagonistic world. "Losers" are people who are suffering, or are watching people they care about suffer, or are part of a group or groups that have been suffering over the course of generations. "Losers" can be people who have a keen sense of justice and see injustice taking place when the world is divided into "winners" and "losers". These same people can become so sympathetic to the people that they view as being treated unjustly, that they strongly identify with them. They can experience so much hopelessness and despair that they are driven to commit acts of violence. I'm not saying that this is ok, but I am saying that it is understandable, on some level. 

Taking away the concept of winners and losers could go a long way to reducing all of this, but changing this dynamic will take generations. Many generations. Between the generation that I was born into and the current Millenial generation, I do see an easing of this mentality, but the human race has a long way to go. So, where does this leave us. It leaves us in the position where terror attacks will continue to occur. Using the kind of rhetoric that trump uses only serves to ramp up the upset & increase the odds of more terror attacks around the world.

In spite of trump, despite trump, the grind to learn about his possible improprieties and illegal actions continues. Resistance to trump continues.  The usual disagreements between the administration and Congress continue.   Being out of the country may give trump the illusion that his world has all of the sudden become a wonderful, rosy place. If so, that's his fantasy, let him have it. 

Flynn was subpoenaed by the Senate Intelligence committee to turn over "documents related to the committee's investigation of possible collusion between the [t]rump campaign and the Russian government's efforts to sway the 2016 election." Flynn invoked the 5th amendment, which protects an individual from possibly incriminating themselves. 'Pleading the fifth' is applicable to documents.

This leaves the ball in the Senate's court. There are a few different paths that the Senate can take to force Flynn to produce the documents. One method will be to hold Flynn in contempt, which the whole Senate will have to vote on in order for the contempt charge to move forward into the court system. This will bring its own set of difficulties which will make the process protracted and messy. Suffice it to say that the longer Flynn's refusal to provide documents drags on, the longer it will remain a thorn in the side of both the administration and the Republican dominated Senate.

On Sunday, approximately 100 students walked out of their graduation ceremony at Nore Dame in South Bend Indiana because of the Commencement speaker, Mike Pence.

Today, the former CIA Director under President Obama, John Brennan, testified in front of a House panel that he was aware of evidence indicating contact between [t]rump's campaign and Russians, but that he didn't have enough information to determine if they colluded.

There are reports that Paul Ryan and the White House are not seeing eye to eye on tax reform.

Reports have surfaced that the director of national intelligence, Daniel Coats and the director of the national security agency, Admiral Michael Rogers were both asked by trump, directly, to "deny the existence of any evidence of collusion during the 2016 election." The Washington Post interviewed two current and former officials, independently of one another and both insisted on anonymity because the were discussing private communications with trump. The sources both reported that Coats and Rogers saw this as an inappropriate request.

See what I mean.......the world moves on.




https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/may/23/donald-trump-evil-losers-manchester-attack


https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2017/05/22/what-taking-fifth-amendment-means/102023990/


https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/21/us/mike-pence-notre-dame-commencement-address.html




http://www.npr.org/2017/05/23/529730674/former-cia-director-says-he-had-concerns-about-russia-ties-to-trump-campaign


http://www.politico.com/story/2017/05/22/paul-ryan-trump-tax-battle-238692


https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-asked-intelligence-chiefs-to-push-back-against-fbi-collusion-probe-after-comey-revealed-its-existence/2017/05/22/394933bc-3f10-11e7-9869-bac8b446820a_story.html?utm_term=.7baa81eb3be3

Comic Relief

****** Dear readers, had this ready to go yesterday afternoon, but forgot to proof read and post.  Sorry.




About a week ago, my mind was wandering and the thought popped up in my head that trump needs a vacation (and as I'm writing this I'm recognizing that I need a vacation from trump).  And what came to mind was that he should take a hunting vacation down in Texas for quail with Dick Cheney.  Okay, enough said.  Then the funny thing was, I watched Louis Black's show that he shot (no pun intended) at The Warner Theater in D.C. in 2006, titled Red, White and Screwed.  He launches into a bit by saying 'so, Dick Cheyney'.  The audience cracks up (and so do I) and he responds 'I don't need to say another thing, we understand each other'.

It was hilarious how a show that was obviously dated to the G.W. Bush administration was now relevant eleven years later.  Black pointed out how hard it was to keep up with events at that point in time and of course demonstrated his frustration that every time he worked through three issues that ten new ones popped up.  Well...........how do you think he feels now.

Then I thought, 'oh shit, if I post this about trump going hunting with Cheyney, I'll get a knock on my door'.

Knock knock knock (as opposed to knock knock) ............. William Sherman?
Yes?
Cone with us please sir.  You're under arrest for threatening the life of the president.
We don't have a president.  Don't be silly.
You wrote that trump should go hunting with Dick Cheyney in a blog?
Yes.
That is a threat, sir.  Dick Cheyney is a known dangerous weapon.  Come with us sir.

Another thing that Black addressed in his routine, that was no longer dated just to the Bush years was the idea of a boarder wall.  'Hell, they can't even build a levee in New Orleans, how in the hell are they going to build a wall 700 miles long?'  'And then it will take Congress five years to decide what color to paint it.'

I've been keeping up with the idiot while he's over seas.  he was played as a fool in Saudi Arabia, as far as I'm concerned.  They fed his ego, as though he was the big white buana come to save them.  And you could see it on his face, he sucked it right up, like a good milk shake through the straw.  Next he goes to Israel and makes the huuuuuuuge claim that he's going to make the "ultimate deal" and bring peace between the Palestinians and Israel.  What frikin' planet is d[is] j[ackass] living on?

I'm probably pre-mature with this post, because i won't squeeze in the hilarity he will cause when visiting with the Pope.  I'll report on it after it happens.  I can't wait.  I'm sure that whatever the calamity will be, the Pope will handle it like the gentleman that he is.

One more therapeutic exercise I do for myself, every night is to watch Steven Colbert.  Somehow, I suspect that most of you keep up with Steven also.  He has helped me keep my wits about me, by turning angry energy into laughter.  Thank you Mr. Colbert.

The deal is, humor is where you find it.  It certainly helps that we now have a special counsel investigating trump and that trump is out of the country, but even through the trials and upset of the past four months I have worked to take care of myself and see humor in d' j[ackass].  Maybe for the purpose of this post, I'll label him d. j[ester].

The Importance of Being Resistant

I am glad that Rod Rosenstein has stepped up and appointed Robert Mueller to investigate all things trump (as they relate to our country).  I could care less about all other things trump, those are his problems.  Rosenstein was sorely used by trump, but I believe that in appointing  this special counsel, he will be seen by historians in the future as one of those people that JFK wrote about in Profiles in Courage.

We, the American people may very well be written about as having displayed great courage during this period in our country's history also. along with legitimate news media outlets.  But, and this is an important 'but', we have an obligation to ourselves and to each other to remain vigilant.

The pressure that we have brought to bear is the reason we have come to this place where we have an excellent person heading up an independent investigation.  Mueller will do his job, there is no doubt.  He will not be speaking to the press.  He will go about his business in a deliberate fashion and the truth will be found out, whatever it is, so the pressure we need to continue with does not apply to removing trump from office (for right now).  That will come to pass in due course.  The reason we need to remain vigilant is because trump and his idiots will now take this as a signal that they can act with impunity on the legislative front and with unilateral executive actions.

trump, sessions, goebbels-bannon, jivanka, mumbles mcconnell, ryan et.al  will take this opportunity to ram through a whole mess of legislation that will set our country back.  When I say 'mess of', the key work in that phrase is 'mess'.  When i say 'set our country back', I mean as far back as the 1950s.  Ah, the good ole days.  Where men were men and women where safely relegated to the home.  Where Jim Crow laws ruled the south.  Where the concept of air and water pollution were not even part of the American psyche or lexicon.  When rarely was heard a discouraging word and Muslims were not on the scene,  horay.  You get the picture.

The past is the past, the present is the present and the future needs to be the future, not the past.  We need to ensure our continued efforts to make our world a better place for all that live on it (well except for viruses and harmful bacteria, although to be truthful, they have a very important place in the eco system as well).

Bill, what in hell are you getting at?  It's this simple.  d.j[ackass] is still a danger to us all.  We must shift our focus from getting rid of him to stopping him while he is still in office.  We need to keep our energy level on loud.  We need to keep up the momentum we have built to turn both houses of Congress over to Democratic party control.  I am not saying that the Dems are perfect.  I am not saying they are the panacea.  I am saying they will not cause nearly the damage that the current batch of republicans will.

The same way that we have affected the proper method of investigation of trump is exactly the same way we will be able to limit the damage that trump and the Republican Congress will do to us.  And, I might add, it really does work from the bottom up.  I truly believe that those in the legitimate news media want the same things that we do, have the same concerns that we have.  But, make no mistake, news is a business.  The ultimate goal of any business is to make money.  If we keep the volume turned up, the legitimate media will respond by reporting on the issues we identify.  They naturally investigate and publish news that brings them large audiences and therefore money.

We are doing great.  I feel like I'm living through the late 60s again, but with a much better understanding of our Constitution, the law and the power that we as a collective people have.  Writing this gives me a swell of pride in being an American.  We are not being led by the nose. We have led our government and we need to continue leading those that we have elected.  Let's not be self congratulatory yet, lest we let down our guard and thereby hurt ourselves.  Continue to resist!

Drip, Drip, Drip

On May 10th, the day after trump fired James Comey as the Director of the FBI, trump met with the Russian Foreign Minister and the Russian Ambassador to our country, in the Oval office of the White House. All of you already know this, I'm sure. I'm also confident that you know that there were no American journalists in the room and that there was a photographer from the official news agency of Russia, Tass. Given this information, how did the New York Times become privy to trump's alleged comment to the Russians in that meeting?

“I just fired the head of the F.B.I. He was crazy, a real nut job. I faced great pressure because of Russia. That’s taken off. I’m not under investigation.”
The article noted that the comments were "based on notes taken from inside the Oval Office and has been circulated as the official account of the meeting." The document was read to The New York Times by "an American official" and independent of the first reading of those notes "a second official confirmed ..... the discussion." per the article.

My question is simple and I believe obvious. Who was in that room taking these notes that have been "circulated as the official account of the meeting"? Also, and more simply, who was in that room?  Whoever was in that room during this meeting, needs to be interviewed as part of Mueller's investigation, and I feel confident they will be.

Today, CNN reported that Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov has denied discussing Comey's firing in that meeting. There are some questions here. Does Lavrov understand English? If not, then can I assume there was an interpreter in the room? If there was an interpreter in the room, did this person pass on the information? Why would notes that are reportedly the official White House account, not be true, if Lavrov is being truthful? Somebody is lying here. Lavrov's statement was reported in an interview that he had today, with the state-run Tass news agency.

It has become obvious that there are at least two people in the White House, and maybe more, that are valuable faucets of information. We are now beyond the dripping stage. There have been repeated reports of discord in the White House. People in the White House either see that what is going on is plain wrong, or they're singing to save their own butts.

As the investigation by Robert Mueller kicks off after he gets his office staffed, White House staff will begin to incur legal fees that will become significant as they are questioned, as they surely will be. An unpaid campaign worker has reached out, hoping that trump will set up a fund to assist former campaign staff with legal fees . It only makes sense that some of these folks will start to sing.

But,, I want to be fair, and publish puppet-spicer's take on this:

“By grandstanding and politicizing the investigation into Russia’s actions, James Comey created unnecessary pressure on our ability to engage and negotiate with Russia. The investigation would have always continued, and obviously, the termination of Comey would not have ended it. Once again, the real story is that our national security has been undermined by the leaking of private and highly classified conversations.”

Ya know, I've thought for a couple of weeks now that one of the leakers is spicey boy himself. It certainly appears that he is not in a secure or stable position with d. j[ackass]. No matter who the leaker is or who they are, in fact maybe because of them,  the truth will out.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/19/us/politics/trump-russia-comey.html

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/20/politics/russian-foreign-minister-denies-talking-comey/

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/20/politics/trump-aide-legal-funds/

If he Smells Like a Witch ...........

........ and he walks like a witch, and he talks like a witch, then ......... you guessed it, he's a witch.

Now let's be clear, there are no laws that make being a witch illegal.  But ....... if the witch has broken laws, then we need to hunt for the witch and prosecute his ass.  As I start to think about witches, I make note in my mind that witches are usually pretty clever, what with their spells and all.  So as witches go, he is not the brightest penny in the stack.  Yes, some of his spells and incantations worked on some people, but those spells are wearing off, and only the most susceptible seem to still remain under his control.  The latest Gallop poll has him with a 38% approval rating.  The spell that he cast on election day in 2016 showed that he had 46.1% of voters drinking his kool-aid.  He's loosing his grip.

trump has screwed himself. No one has screwed him. trump has begged to be hunted, if we want to call it that. When someone commits a crime and then eludes the grasp of the law, we call that a man-hunt, and so this is what we have, in essence. 

The phrase "witch hunt" is very charged in our country for obvious reasons. We go back to the shameful Salem witch trials in the late 1600's in Salem Massachusetts. From February 1692 and May 1693, the trials resulted in twenty executions, fourteen of them women. Five others (including two infant children) died in prison.  The estimated population of Salem and the surrounding countryside was approximately 2,000 with an estimated 500 to 600 in the village.  Twenty five deaths out of 2,000 is a lot.  In fact, if I can make a joke in bad taste, it is huuuuuuuuge.

And then there were the McCarthy Senate hearings between April 1954 and June 1954.  Again, many people paid very serious consequences, although thankfully none were put to death.

Both of these "witch hunts" were the result of irrational fear.  Both had multiple casualties.  trump is a single person and must have an ego even larger than I thought to equate himself with being the same as large groups of people who suffered terribly.  

We do not have irrational fear here.  What we do have here are well documented reasons to investigate whether d. j[ackass] has broken the law.  If trump has broken any laws, then he will bear no greater punishment then, removal from office.  Compared to what the consequences a commoner would receive, he will get off, basically, scott free. Obstruction of justice?  usually jail time.  Treason?  Well these days, a citizen would probably not hang, but certainly would receive jail time. All trump will get is his name sullied in the history books.  And, he is the person who will have sullied it, nobody else.

To paraphrase trumpy boy, I too, am looking forward to the conclusion of this ugly period in our country's history.  But, I do not want it to be speedy.  I want it done well with no stone left un-turned.  I want the "facts" to speak for themselves.  If he has committed a crime, then he needs to swing (non-violently).

http://www.gallup.com/interactives/185273/presidential-job-approval-center.aspx?g_source=POLITICS&g_medium=topic&g_campaign=tiles

 http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/hillary-clinton-officially-wins-popular-vote-29-million/story?id=44354341

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salem_witch_trials

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Army%E2%80%93McCarthy_hearings

http://www.tulane.edu/~salem/Salem%20and%20Village.html

Special Counsel Robert Mueller

I was very pleased to learn, last night, that Rod Rosenstein has done the right thing. He has created an independent position with the title Special Counsel. The position is being filled by Robert Mueller (pronounced Muller). Although all the reports I heard about Mueller were glowing, I have the need to learn about him further. Below is what I have found.

Mr. Mueller was born in 1944 and is currently 72 years old. Politically, he is registered as a Republican. He has earned the following degrees from the following schools:

Princeton University - BA
New York University - MA
University of Virginia - JD

Mueller served as an officer in the marine Corps and commanded a rifle platoon of the 3rd Marine Division in Vietnam. While in Vietnam, he earned the Purple Heart, the Bronze Star and the Galantry Cross.

In 1986, Mueller was appointed by President Ronald Reagan as the U.S. Attorney for the District of Massachusetts. and served in that position into 1987.

In 1989, he served in the U.S. Department of Justice (D.O.J.) as an assistant to Attorney general Richard (Dick) Thornburgh. The next year, in 1990, President George H.W. Bush appointed Mueller as the Assistant Attorney general in charge of the Criminal Division. he served in this position into the administration of President Bill Clinton, until 1993. While in charge of the Criminal Division he prosecuted such notable cases as Panamanian leader Manuel Noriega, the Pan Am Flight 103 (Lockerbie bombing) case, and the Gambino crime family boss John Gotti.

After a respite from public service, he was tapped again by President Clinton for the position of U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of California. He served in this position from 1998 until 2001. On January 20 of 2001 President George W. Bush appointed Mueller the acting Deputy Attorney General. He served in this position until May 10, 2001.

His break from public service didn't last long. President Bush appointed him as the Director of the FBI on September 4, 2001.  He served under President Bush and then under President Obama until September 4, 2013, twelve years to the day. It is note worthy that the usual term for the Director of the FBI is ten years.

As you can see, this guy has, if I dare say it, unimpeachable credentials. There is no one who can be critical of Mueller's ability to conduct an independent, thorough and unbiased investigation, no matter where the trail of evidence leads. Up here in Pennsylvania I heard the collective sigh of relief coming from Washington D.C. last night.

I do want to make something immediately clear though, lest we let our guard down. We have come to this point, in large part due to public dissent and the great work of our legitimate news media. We can not and must not let the pressure flag. When we see immoral and illegal behavior come out of trump and the White House, we must and the press must continue to scream loudly in recognition of it. I believe that Bob Mueller is immune from being prejudiced by his surroundings, but he lives in our world and will certainly take note of possible illegal behavior if we are loud in pointing it out.

Of course there is one person who is not happy about this and is already trying to guide the investigation and discredit it. Last night, trump tried to guide it when he put out a statement that included he is "look[ing] forward to this matter concluding quickly." This, of course, is code for he expects the investigation to be done with quickly or he'll be pissed off. Well trumpy boy, you can look forward to a quick conclusion to this investigation all you want, but be prepared to be pissed off.

Investigations by independent counsels have historically take years. Furthermore, Mueller is known for conducting thorough investigations, following all leads and performing his work, strictly by the book. Former chief of staff and senior counsel to Mueller, John Carlin, has noted that Mr. Mueller will run "a buttoned-down, by-the-book operation"

The attempts at discrediting Mueller's office and task started this morning when the twit twitted:

Donald J. Trump
✔@realDonaldTrump

This is the single greatest witch hunt of a politician in American history!
7:52 AM - 18 May 2017

And at a news anchors luncheon today, d. j[ackass] said, "I believe it hurts our country terribly, because it shows we're a divided, mixed-up, not-unified country."

My sister in-law told me, soon after trump was elected, that D.C. was going to chew this asshole up and spit him out. Well ........ let the chewing begin!


http://www.wikiwand.com/en/Robert_Mueller

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Mueller

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/18/politics/donald-trump-robert-mueller-appointment/

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-says-fbi-russia-investigation-will-confirm-what-we-already-know/

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/05/18/robert-mueller-fbi-director-trump-investigation-238537

The Story of Hanzel Comey

As I remember it from childhood, the story of Hanzel and Gretyl goes something like this:

They were taking a hike through the forest.  They left a trail of crumbs along the way.  They came upon a house that was made out of cookies; were hungry and started to eat the house.  A witch came out of the house and tried to bake them in the oven.  They escaped and followed there trail of crumbs to get out of the forest.

Well boys and girls, we seem to have a modern day Hanzel in the person of former Director of the FBI, James Comey.  Yesterday, The New York Times published an article about a paper trail created by Comey.   According to the two people that the Times interviewed for their article, and are close to Comey, he "was uncomfortable at times with his relationship with Mr. Trump."  The two sources reported that it was Comey's practice to document conversations that he believed would later be called into question.  The sources reported that "Mr. Comey created similar memos — including some that are classified — about every phone call and meeting he had with  [trump]. It is unclear whether Mr. Comey told the Justice Department about the conversation or his memos."

The memo that is currently of much interest is one detailing a meeting between Mr. Comey and d.j[ackass] trump one day after Mike Flynn "resigned", was 'fired" ..... you choose.  Comey had been in the Oval Office that day with other senior national security officials for a terrorism threat briefing. When the meeting ended, trump told all those present, including pence and jeff sessions, to leave the room except for Mr. Comey.  Comey wrote a detailed memo regarding the conversation as soon as he could, after the meeting.  One of Mr. Comey’s associates read parts of it to a Times reporter.  “I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go,.  He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go.” To which Comey's only reply was “I agree he is a good guy.”

Of course we all know what this means.  Attempted obstruction of justice.  Oooooooops!!

So......trump's press office throws a statement out there, which reads:

“While [trump]has repeatedly expressed his view that General Flynn is a decent man who served and protected our country, [he] has never asked Mr. Comey or anyone else to end any investigation, including any investigation involving General Flynn.  [trump] has the utmost respect for our law enforcement agencies, and all investigations. This is not a truthful or accurate portrayal of the conversation between [trump] and Mr. Comey.”

Ya know.......when a crime is committed, one of the things investigators look for is motive.  Does James (Hantzel) Comey have a motive for lying, for saying that trump asked him to stop investigating Flynn?  I can't see any reason, unless he just maybe dislikes, even hates trump.  He's conspiring against trump.  It's a conspiracy.  Everybody's against trump ....... it's a huuuuuuuge conspiracy, the biggest ever!  Aw, c'mon.

Does d. j[ackass] trump have a motive for lying?  You bettcha.  He knows he attempted to obstruct justice and now he's trying to use the power of his office to call Comey the liar.

And if it comes down to a he said versus he said battle, it is worth noting that (as the Times reported) "[a]n F.B.I. agent’s contemporaneous notes are widely held up in court as credible evidence of conversations."

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/16/us/politics/james-comey-trump-flynn-russia-investigation.html


Interestingly, the crumbs that Hanzel has left are flowing right into Congress and surprisingly into Jason Chaffetz's field of vision. You remember Chaffetz, the toad that ran to trump when he was fed a load of crap about some of trump's associates being wire tapped by president Obama. Well it turns out that Chaffetz has decided to not run for re-election in 2018, and so is starting to grow a pair. See the letter, below, to now acting director of the FBI, Andrew McCabe:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4513260/Chaffetz-requests-paper-trail-Comey-kept-Trump.html

According to this letter, May 25th should be a whole lotta fun.

 As for possible recordings made in the oval office a source close to Comey has told CNN that "If there is a tape, there's nothing he is worried about,"  which was corroborated by Ken Dilanian of NBC.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4500926/Comey-WELCOME-published-tapes-Trump-talks.html

trump is Making America Less Secure

This is a very simple concept that even people who are not bright can grasp.  When an intelligence agency from another country provides our country with information, it is still owned by that country. Established protocol has always been that, information can only be shared if the owner of the information gives its permission to do so for each instance of sharing.  If that information is shared without the permission of the country that owns it, then we run the risk that that county's intelligence agency will stop sharing information with us.  This, of course, makes us less secure.  The less information we have, the less secure we are.  Simple!

With the above in mind, let's determine if we are more secure today, less secure or have no change. Yesterday the Washington Post reported that trump revealed intelligence to the Russian Foreign Minister and Ambassador during their meeting at the White House last week.  The intelligence trump shared was gathered by another nation.  We, the U.S. have an intelligence-sharing arrangement with that other nation that includes the proviso that information given by one nation (the owner of the information) to the other will not be shared with a third country without the owner's permission.  The Post reported that "[t]he partner had not given the United States permission to share the material with Russia".  

By the way, I should note that the information that the Post gathered was from un-named current and former U.S. officials. It is also interesting to note that if the Post or any other news outlet divulged sources that gave information, with the understanding that they would remain anonymous, then broke that agreement, that source of information would obviously dry up.  Same concept with trump and the Russians.

With reference to the legality of trump's alleged behavior, trump has the authority to declassify information and therefore many would say he did not break any laws.  Firstly that is not the issue. The issue is that trump has jeopardized our security by not respecting the country that provided us with information.  But ......... if you want to talk about legality, he did break one law, as far as I can see.  He provided a long standing enemy of our country with "aide and comfort".  Oh, excuse me, what did you say Bill?  You heard me "aide and comfort", and we all know what that defines ....... treason!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-revealed-highly-classified-information-to-russian-foreign-minister-and-ambassador/2017/05/15/530c172a-3960-11e7-9e48-c4f199710b69_story.html?utm_term=.5ecc0ebfd4a5

So, to continue with this sordid episode, trump trotted National Security Advisor McMaster out in front of the microphones.  McMaster claimed in no uncertain terms that the story in the Post "as reported, is false".  McMaster went on to say:

"At no time — at no time — were intelligence sources or methods discussed. And the [trump] did not disclose any military operations that were not already publicly known. Two other senior officials who were present, including the secretary of state, remember it being the same way and have said so. Their on-the-record accounts should outweigh those of anonymous sources. And I was in the room. It didn’t happen."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/05/15/the-white-house-isnt-denying-that-trump-gave-russia-classified-information-not-really/?utm_term=.e8c64d554ae9

Let's get this crap straight!  The Post did not indicate in any way, in any way, that trump disclosed "intelligence sources", that trump disclosed "methods", that trump disclosed "military operations that were not already publicly known".  What the trump administration is attempting to do is make true statements and hope that the public will blindly believe that what those statements address is a rebutal to the Post's article.  

And then today, while I was working on this post to the blog, I learned that trump twitted and admitted that he shared the information and that he had the authority to do it.  Again ....... nobody is disputing that a person holding the position that trump holds, has the authority to behave as he did.  But I wll make my thoughts on this as clear as distilled water.  Just because he has the authority doesn't make his behavior any less stupid or treasonous and certainly makes our country less secure.

Donald J. Trump
✔@realDonaldTrump

As President I wanted to share with Russia (at an openly scheduled W.H. meeting) which I have the absolute right to do, facts pertaining....
7:03 AM - 16 May 2017

Donald J. Trump
✔@realDonaldTrump

...to terrorism and airline flight safety. Humanitarian reasons, plus I want Russia to greatly step up their fight against ISIS & terrorism.
7:13 AM - 16 May 2017

Well mr. trump (note that this is one of the rare instatnces that I refer to d.j[ackass] as mister), you keep thinking and behaving the way that you have in the past week.  You are disgracing our country, making it less secure and have secured your position in history as the worst holder of the office that you currently occupy.

Where do We Go From Here?

The drum beat is getting louder and is not abating.  trump is behaving as though he can not only wait out the storm, but can stir the pot without incurring any consequences that he does not want.  I must admit, I have sometimes thought that trump wants to be impeached.  That he doesn't want the job he currently has.  It is certainly a conclusion that can be reached when adding up all of his behavior.

Over the coming days and weeks, I will be monitoring the escalating collective voice calling for an independent  investigation of trump, which is the only way that will be trusted by all Americans.  The calls for an independent committee, counsel, investigator, prosecutor, what ever you may want to call it, are being lodged from all quarters.

At a meeting of Democratic state Attorneys General in Oregon last week, the group authored, signed and sent a letter to Rod Rosenstein calling for the immediate appointment of an independent special counsel to investigate Russian interference in the U.S. presidential election. The letter notes that “As prosecutors committed to the rule of law, we urge you to consider the damage to our democratic system of any attempts by the administration to derail and delegitimize the investigation.”   The letter calls Director Comey's firing by trump during his ongoing investigation “a violation of the public trust.”  The states represented by the signatures on the letter are Massachusetts, California, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Iowa, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Virginia, Vermont and Washington.  

http://www.theskanner.com/news/usa/25401-ag-rosenblum-calls-for-independent-prosecutor-to-investigate-russian-interference

John McCain is on record as saying he is “disappointed in [trump's] decision”.   He also noted that trump's behavior has  bolstered the case “for a special congressional committee to investigate Russia’s interference in the 2016 election.”

Richard  Burr a Republican from North Carolina and chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee reported that “[he is] troubled by the timing and reasoning of Jim Comey’s termination”. Mr. Burr said in a statement, "[It] further confuses an already difficult investigation by our committee,”  and added that Mr. Comey had been “more forthcoming with
information” than any of his predecessors.

The Democratic vice chairman of the Senate intell panel, Mark Warner of Virginia, said in a brief interview that Mr. Comey’s firing “means the Senate Intelligence investigation has to redouble its efforts, has to speed up its timeline, because we’ve got real questions about the rule of law.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/09/us/politics/trump-comey-fbi-senators.html

California Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein renewed her call for the appointment of a special prosecutor and said trump's startling decision to fire Comey now is “beyond surprising.”

http://www.latimes.com/politics/washington/la-na-essential-washington-updates-calls-get-louder-for-an-independent-1494432019-htmlstory.html

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer told reporters, last Tuesday, "I have said from the get-go that I think a special prosecutor is the way to go, but now with what's happened it is the only way to go." 

Another report I read quoted Senator McCain from a statement he released saying "I have long called for a special congressional committee to investigate Russia's interference in the 2016 election  [trump's] decision to remove the FBI Director only confirms the need and the urgency of such a committee."

Again, from a CNBC online posting, Senator Burr, is reported as saying in his statement that he considered the fired FBI director "to be a public servant of the highest order.  Director Comey has been more forthcoming with information than any FBI Director I can recall in my tenure on the congressional intelligence committees. His dismissal, I believe, is a loss for the Bureau and the nation." 

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/09/senate-democratic-leader-schumer-calls-for-special-prosecutor-in-trump-russia-probe.html

Republican Representative Justin Amash, from Michigan, serves on the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.   Representative Amash is a member of the very conservative Freedom Caucus.  In a tweet (which as I have said is a poor method of legitimate communication, but it's what I've got) said:

Justin Amash
✔@justinamash

My staff and I are reviewing legislation to establish an independent commission on Russia. The second paragraph of [trump's] letter [firing Comey] is bizarre. https://twitter.com/cnn/status/862082478839914497 …
7:37 PM - 9 May 2017

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/332659-gop-lawmaker-calls-for-independent-commission-on-russia-after-comeys

Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, from South Carolina, while on NBC's Meet the Press this past Sunday gave some advice to d. j[ackass]; “[he] advise[d] the president not to tweet about the investigation going forward.”   He continued on this subject when he pointed out that “if there are tapes of [Comey’s conversations with Trump]", especially related to the Russia investigation, “they need to be turned over. You can’t be cute about tapes. He needs to back off here.”

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/you-cant-be-cute-about-tapes-lindsey-graham-tells-trump-to-back-off-on-tweeting/

Even Breitbart is jumping on the band wagon.  I found the following headline:
Lindsey Graham: Trump Needs to ‘Back Off’ Russian Investigation, Stop Tweeting

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/05/14/lindsey-graham-trump-needs-back-off-russian-investigation-stop-tweeting/

And the final drum beat for today, a reprint of a portion of an open letter from the editorial staff of the New York Times to Assistant Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.  Proceeding this excerpt, the Times had nothing but praise for Rosenstein and grieved his manipulation by trump:

You have one choice: Appoint a special counsel who is independent of both the department and the White House. No one else would have the standing to assure the public it is getting the truth. While a handful of Republican senators and representatives expressed concern at Mr. Comey’s firing, there is as yet no sign that the congressional investigations into Russian interference will be properly staffed or competently run. And Americans can have little faith that the Justice Department, or an F.B.I. run by [m]r. [t]rump’s handpicked replacement, will get to the bottom of whether and how Russia helped steal the presidency for [m]r. [t]rump.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/11/opinion/deputy-attorney-general-open-letter.html