Dear Readers,
Please forgive me for not posting yesterday. Another one of those days where I just simply couldn't squeeze my blog in with all the other tasks I had on my plate. I suspect that you understand and that somehow (although I'm not sure how), you made it through your day.
So, today is Saturday and it occurred to me that my perception of time feels odd. It just doesn't match up with reality. Two days ago, James Comey gave sworn testimony in front of the Senate Intelligence Committee. I don't know about you, but to me that event feels like it took place much longer ago than two days ago.
As I was driving to do my grocery shopping this afternoon, is when this 'time warp' hit me. I thought about it and the conclusion I came to was that the immediacy of our access to whatever happens in our world, is overwhelming. It may not be the same for Millennials, but this pace of information is what they grew up with. I, being part of the Baby Boom generation, am a product of news papers, the 6:00 pm local evening news followed at 6:30 pm by the national news. We did have two AM all news radio stations, but they didn't have the access to real time events that we have now, so the pace at which these two stations presented the news wasn't at the same speed as now. So, in juxtaposition to what I grew up with, today's pace of information plays head games with my mind. I can only speak for myself.
I'm going to slow things down a little bit and go back to Thursday. I've already had my say on James Comey's written testimony, which was made public the day before his oral, sworn testimony. I've already written about where I believe the focal point of his testimony is and where it is not. I've already reminded us of the lesson of Watergate; that the 'words' a person speaks are only part of how that person communicates. What I have not written about is my impression of James Comey as a human being.
I'll start by saying that all I know about Comey, is the public face that he presents, but it sure is a damn sight better than the public face trump presents. James Comey came across to me as a straight shooter. What I heard was a man that gave his recollection of events without making judgments. Just as Joe Friday, the detective in the 1950's detective television show Dragnet, was known for saying; "just the facts ma'am, just the facts." What I also saw was something very refreshing. This guy answered questions without defensiveness and to the best of his ability. And when he obviously perceived that questions where being asked to guide him to make a judgement or to validate a partisan point, he spoke clearly and plainly, again, with out a defensive posture. When Senator Risch of Idaho, made an obvious attempt to have Comey agree with him that trump did not attempt to obstruct justice, to stop the investigation into Michael Flynn's possible collusion with Russia, because trump used the word "hope", Comey reminded me of the lesson of the Watergate transcripts versus the actual recordings, without actually making the analogy. He simply pointed out that the word 'hope', was just that ......... a word. He did not attempt to give a lecture on the various forms of communication that also affect what is being communicated. He, with decency and a pleasant tone, answered four variations of the same question without being perturbed or trying trying to deflect.
When Mr. Comey was questioned about how and why the press learned about his memos and the content in some of them, he was honest and above board, and again with no consternation. He was clear that he had asked a friend of his to share this information with the press, in the hopes that a special prosecutor would be assigned to investigate possible obstruction of justice by trump. By the way, it is vital to understand the difference between 'leaking' and sharing. First of all Comey's memos were not classified. Only the sharing of classified documents or information is 'leaking'. Secondly, when Comey asked his friend to share this information, he was no longer a Federal employee. Therefore when you put these two facts together, Comey was well within his First Amendment rights to speak up.
James Comey, was a breath of fresh air on Thursday. I believe that the way he speaks, answers questions, behaves, carries himself, is something that Americans want to see and we appreciated it. I've said it before, Left or Right, we know Wrong. Well in this case we know Right, and Mr. Comey is the right person at a very bad time. In essence, for me at least, James Comey is a time warp, a person that conducts himself with decency. If I am to be taken back in time, this is the way that I want it it to be. Thank you Mr. Comey.
Saturday, June 10, 2017
Thursday, June 8, 2017
Complete and Total Vindication My Ass
In my best Lewis Black style............ THIS GUY'S A COMPLETE ASSHOLE!!!!!!
trump's lawyer has released a statement that, based on James Comey's prepared notes that were released yesterday by the Senate Intelligence Committee, trump "feels completely and totally vindicated." trump must pay this guy really well for this lawyer to support trump's delusions.
What is being referred to are the three entries in Comey's memos where he notes that he informed trump that d. j[ackass] was not being personally investigated.
January 6th, 2017:
"prior to the January 6 meeting, I discussed with the FBI's leadership team whether I should be prepared to assure [ ] [t]rump that we were not investigating him personally. That was true; we did not have an open counter-intelligence case on him. We agreed I should do so if circumstances warranted. During our one-on-one meeting at [t]rump Tower, based on [t]rump's reaction to the briefing and without him directly asking the question, I offered that assurance."
January 26th, 2017:
"During the dinner, [trump] returned to the salacious material I had briefed him about on January 6, and, as he had done previously, expressed his disgust for the allegations and strongly denied them. [h]e said he was considering ordering me to investigate the alleged incident to prove it didn't happen. I replied that he should give that careful thought because it might create a narrative that we were investigating him personally, which we weren't."
March 30th, 2017 phone call from trump to Director Comey:
"I explained that we had briefed the leadership of Congress on exactly which individuals we were investigating and that we had told those Congressional leaders that we were not personally investigating [t]rump. I reminded him I had previously told him that. [h]e repeatedly told me, "We need to get that fact out." (I did not tell [trump] that the FBI and the Department of Justice had been reluctant to make public statements that we did not have an open case on [t]rump for a number of reasons, most importantly because it would create a duty to correct, should that change.)"
It is important to note the following two clarifications that Comey has included in his written testimony. In his contemporaneous notes on January 6th, Comey wrote:
"I felt compelled to document my first conversation with [trump] in a memo. To ensure accuracy, I began to type it on a laptop in an FBI vehicle outside [t]rump Tower the moment I walked out of the meeting. Creating written records immediately after one-on-one conversations with [t]rump was my practice from that point forward."
And in his notes after trump called Comey on March 30th, Comey writes that "[i]mmediately after that conversation, I called Acting Deputy Attorney General Dana Boente (AG Sessions had by then recused himself on all Russia-related matters), to report the substance of the call from [trump]." I find this reference important, because Dana Boente needs to be called to testify to corroborate this point.
trump and his mouth piece along with the RNC (Republican National Committee) are attempting to pivot our attention away from the evidence that trump clearly tried to stop the investigation into Flynn's possible ties with Russia. But the following is the information that really has meaning with reference to trump keeping his job.
February 14th, 2017:
"After [trump] had spoken for a few minutes about leaks, Reince Priebus leaned in through the door by the grandfather clock and I could see a group of people waiting behind him. The President waved at him to close the door, saying he would be done shortly. The door closed.
[trump] then returned to the topic of Mike Flynn, saying, "He is a good guy and has been through a lot." [h]e repeated that Flynn hadn't done anything wrong on his calls with the Russians, but had misled the Vice President. He then said, "[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." I replied only that "he is a good guy." (In fact, I had a positive experience dealing with Mike Flynn when he was a colleague as Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency at the beginning of my term at FBI.) I did not say I would "let this go.""
Whether you call it a Jedi mind trick, magic, slight of hand, smoke and mirrors ....... they just aren't able to hide the truth. They're more obvious than the smell of dog poop after you step in it. Who gives a shit whether trump was or was not under direct investigation by the FBI or any other agency in the Intelligence Community. As soon as trump cleared that room on February 14th, and said to James Comey that he "hop[ed]" Comey would let Flynn go, that was the very moment that he became ineligible to hold the job that he currently has.
The reason I have emphasized the word "hope" is because as I was writing this post, I was watching the first hour of Comey's testimony in front of the Senate Intel Committee. I watched as Senator Risch (a Republican from Idaho) tried to make a case that trump had not attempted to obstruct justice, because he used the word "hope". This pissed me right off. Comey pointed out that trump's "word" was hope, in an obvious attempt to answer an un-asked question. There are many ways to communicate, other than words. The fact that trump isolated the conversation to just himself and Comey, speaks volumes. Who knows what trump's tone of voice was? Who knows what the expression on his face was? Who knows what his body posture was? These four aspects of communication also need to be taken into account. One of the points made during the Watergate investigation was that the words in the transcription of the tapes were not the be all and end all of what Nixon said and meant. We must not ignore that lesson.
One of the basic tenants in boy scouts is called "two deep" . An adult may never be alone with a scout one on one. There must always be at least two adults with a scout, at the minimum. I am not suggesting that Comey is a boy or that trump is an adult. I'm referencing this to point out why this rule came into being. The given reason was to protect the boys. I am not calling this into question, but I am here to tell you that there was a legal reason as well. Liability. Keeping a situation from being a he said versus he said contest. There are flaws in this Boy Scouts policy, but the basic point is to avoid this kind of legal battle. So let's just imagine that an abuser tells all of the other adults and scouts to go away and is then one on one with a scout. Maybe the adult leans in close to the boy and in a menacing, yet quiet way says to the boy, 'I hope you can see your way clear to putting your hand inside my pants'. I think you get the picture. We all understand that the adult in this scenario is clearly directing the boy to put his hands inside the adult's pants.
It is clear, that trump was directing Comey to stop the investigation into Michael Flynn. I know it, you know it, and it's hard for me to believe anything other than that the vast majority of Americans know it as well as the Senators that read and listened to Comey's words.
Let's cut the shit. trump has not been vindicated of anything. He's guilty of an attempt to obstruct justice and that is all that is necessary to be known, in order to impeach his ass and then remove that same ass from the White House.
trump's lawyer has released a statement that, based on James Comey's prepared notes that were released yesterday by the Senate Intelligence Committee, trump "feels completely and totally vindicated." trump must pay this guy really well for this lawyer to support trump's delusions.
What is being referred to are the three entries in Comey's memos where he notes that he informed trump that d. j[ackass] was not being personally investigated.
January 6th, 2017:
"prior to the January 6 meeting, I discussed with the FBI's leadership team whether I should be prepared to assure [ ] [t]rump that we were not investigating him personally. That was true; we did not have an open counter-intelligence case on him. We agreed I should do so if circumstances warranted. During our one-on-one meeting at [t]rump Tower, based on [t]rump's reaction to the briefing and without him directly asking the question, I offered that assurance."
January 26th, 2017:
"During the dinner, [trump] returned to the salacious material I had briefed him about on January 6, and, as he had done previously, expressed his disgust for the allegations and strongly denied them. [h]e said he was considering ordering me to investigate the alleged incident to prove it didn't happen. I replied that he should give that careful thought because it might create a narrative that we were investigating him personally, which we weren't."
March 30th, 2017 phone call from trump to Director Comey:
"I explained that we had briefed the leadership of Congress on exactly which individuals we were investigating and that we had told those Congressional leaders that we were not personally investigating [t]rump. I reminded him I had previously told him that. [h]e repeatedly told me, "We need to get that fact out." (I did not tell [trump] that the FBI and the Department of Justice had been reluctant to make public statements that we did not have an open case on [t]rump for a number of reasons, most importantly because it would create a duty to correct, should that change.)"
It is important to note the following two clarifications that Comey has included in his written testimony. In his contemporaneous notes on January 6th, Comey wrote:
"I felt compelled to document my first conversation with [trump] in a memo. To ensure accuracy, I began to type it on a laptop in an FBI vehicle outside [t]rump Tower the moment I walked out of the meeting. Creating written records immediately after one-on-one conversations with [t]rump was my practice from that point forward."
trump and his mouth piece along with the RNC (Republican National Committee) are attempting to pivot our attention away from the evidence that trump clearly tried to stop the investigation into Flynn's possible ties with Russia. But the following is the information that really has meaning with reference to trump keeping his job.
February 14th, 2017:
"After [trump] had spoken for a few minutes about leaks, Reince Priebus leaned in through the door by the grandfather clock and I could see a group of people waiting behind him. The President waved at him to close the door, saying he would be done shortly. The door closed.
[trump] then returned to the topic of Mike Flynn, saying, "He is a good guy and has been through a lot." [h]e repeated that Flynn hadn't done anything wrong on his calls with the Russians, but had misled the Vice President. He then said, "[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." I replied only that "he is a good guy." (In fact, I had a positive experience dealing with Mike Flynn when he was a colleague as Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency at the beginning of my term at FBI.) I did not say I would "let this go.""
Whether you call it a Jedi mind trick, magic, slight of hand, smoke and mirrors ....... they just aren't able to hide the truth. They're more obvious than the smell of dog poop after you step in it. Who gives a shit whether trump was or was not under direct investigation by the FBI or any other agency in the Intelligence Community. As soon as trump cleared that room on February 14th, and said to James Comey that he "hop[ed]" Comey would let Flynn go, that was the very moment that he became ineligible to hold the job that he currently has.
The reason I have emphasized the word "hope" is because as I was writing this post, I was watching the first hour of Comey's testimony in front of the Senate Intel Committee. I watched as Senator Risch (a Republican from Idaho) tried to make a case that trump had not attempted to obstruct justice, because he used the word "hope". This pissed me right off. Comey pointed out that trump's "word" was hope, in an obvious attempt to answer an un-asked question. There are many ways to communicate, other than words. The fact that trump isolated the conversation to just himself and Comey, speaks volumes. Who knows what trump's tone of voice was? Who knows what the expression on his face was? Who knows what his body posture was? These four aspects of communication also need to be taken into account. One of the points made during the Watergate investigation was that the words in the transcription of the tapes were not the be all and end all of what Nixon said and meant. We must not ignore that lesson.
One of the basic tenants in boy scouts is called "two deep" . An adult may never be alone with a scout one on one. There must always be at least two adults with a scout, at the minimum. I am not suggesting that Comey is a boy or that trump is an adult. I'm referencing this to point out why this rule came into being. The given reason was to protect the boys. I am not calling this into question, but I am here to tell you that there was a legal reason as well. Liability. Keeping a situation from being a he said versus he said contest. There are flaws in this Boy Scouts policy, but the basic point is to avoid this kind of legal battle. So let's just imagine that an abuser tells all of the other adults and scouts to go away and is then one on one with a scout. Maybe the adult leans in close to the boy and in a menacing, yet quiet way says to the boy, 'I hope you can see your way clear to putting your hand inside my pants'. I think you get the picture. We all understand that the adult in this scenario is clearly directing the boy to put his hands inside the adult's pants.
It is clear, that trump was directing Comey to stop the investigation into Michael Flynn. I know it, you know it, and it's hard for me to believe anything other than that the vast majority of Americans know it as well as the Senators that read and listened to Comey's words.
Let's cut the shit. trump has not been vindicated of anything. He's guilty of an attempt to obstruct justice and that is all that is necessary to be known, in order to impeach his ass and then remove that same ass from the White House.
Wednesday, June 7, 2017
Bull or Bravo
Before I start today's post, I want to introduce you to a new facet of my activism. I have started a podcast on my You Tube channel. I have titled it Off the Cuff. It is a semi-impromptu companion for this blog. I will post on Tuedays. Podcast # 1 is You Can't do That. Enjoy
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCaT5D55DKts7p4QnuDJGeSA
Now, for today's blog post.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCaT5D55DKts7p4QnuDJGeSA
Now, for today's blog post.
The noise, just two days before James Comey is set to testify in front of the Senate Intelligence Committee, is getting pretty loud. The word out on the street is that trump is planning to give a speech of some sort while Comey is testifying and that he will also be twitting live as Comey testifies
That's a lie.
Lie.
Untrue.
i'm the greatest (no ...... that was Mohammad Ali).
But then I heard the following, trump and sessions are not getting along. I started to look into it and the noise exploded right in front of my eyes. CNN, Fox News, The Wall Street Journal, ABC News, Politico; all reporting that sessions offered to resign just prior to trump's overseas foray. My question (which is unanswerable at this time) is, is this just noise designed to distract or is it true.
Here are some of the blurbs from the various news outlets:
- trump and sessions have had a "series of heated exchanges in the last several week ......a source close to [s]essions told CNN Tuesday." Then, "a senior administration official said that at one point, [s]essions expressed he would be willing to resign."
- "[s]essions recently suggested that he could resign from his post, multiple media reports said on Tuesday." When asked if trump still had confidence in sessions, puppet-spicer replied, "I have not had that discussion with him. If I haven't had a discussion with him about a subject, I tend not to speak about it."
Charles Krauthammer, who is a contributor to FOX News, said on air, “This is really bad. If you can’t absorb this one issue on which he disagrees and you have to get rid of him, no one is safe [in the White House].”
- The wall Street Journal reported that "sessions offered to resign from his post, [but] the offer wasn't a formal one"
https://www.wsj.com/articles/jeff-sessions-offered-to-resign-amid-tensions-with-donald-trump-1496801691
- According to ABC News "sources" have characterized the current relationship between trump and sessions "has become so tense that [s]essions at one point recently even suggested he could resign."
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/attorney-general-jeff-sessions-suggested-resign-amid-rising/story?id=47875090
- A person who regularly communicates with sessions told Politico that "[t]rump ultimately refused [s]essions’ offer" Politico also reports that the two Sarahs (Huckabee-Sanders of the White House and Isgur of the Justice Department) have declined to comment on this issue.
Whewwwwww!! That's a lot of noise! Now is this by design, in an effort to move attention off of the Comey testimony. I believe it is a lame possibility. I say lame, because if that is the purpose of what may be an intentional leak of mis-information, to keep attention off of the hearings on Thursday, then trumpy boy is dumber than I thought for trying to feed Americans this level of bull.
Ohhhhhhh, look how clever I am ....... this'll keep 'em from listening to that showboat Comey.
If it is true, then that's their problem, and I could care less, unless sessions goes away. Then I'll dance a jig and scream bravo.
With positive expectations, I look forward to what James Comey will have to say on Thursday. I'll be focused on his testimony like a laser beam.
With positive expectations, I look forward to what James Comey will have to say on Thursday. I'll be focused on his testimony like a laser beam.
Tuesday, June 6, 2017
Shooting One's Self in the Proverbial Foot
Much ado is being made about this coming Thursday's testimony of former FBI director James Comey before the Senate Intelligence Committee. I am not using the first three words of the above, initial, sentence to suggest that his testimony will be about nothing (a reference to the Shakespeare play Much Ado About Nothing), but I am saying that for my money, there is only one thing i am looking forward to.
Certainly, Comey has a great deal of information about Russian attempts to meddle in our elections, and this is important information. But, here's the elephant in the room; did trump ask then Director Comey to stop, back off, curtail (much too big a word for trump to use), end, close the file on, halt, you get the picture, the investigation of Michael Flynn's relationship with Russia? If trump did so then the need to go a step further in investigating trump will no longer exist. Yes, we still need to investigate if and how the Russian government interfered in our electoral process, but any investigations of trump will be in effect complete with reference to determining his continued position of lead administrator of our country.
If Comey testifies that trump, did indeed ask him to halt the aforementioned investigation, then trump has shot himself in the foot. It would not matter if trump had colluded with the Russians. It would not matter if trump has financial obligations to Russian government owned banks. It would not matter that trump has ignored the nepotism law. The question of whether trump committed treason by revealing classified information to the Russian foreign minister and ambassador becomes a moot point. The fact that trump has a lease on the Old Post Office Building in D.C., which he has made into a hotel, and is in direct conflict with the lease terms, because he has not divested himself of his business interests, no longer matters. Nothing else anyone can think of matters. Because, if trump said what has been reported, to Comey, then he is guilty of obstruction of justice. Case closed!
This will obviously be a classic case of he said versus he said. The question then becomes, who is to be believed. We can look at trump's behavior just prior to asking Comey to stop the investigation into Flynn. Why would trump clear the room, leaving only himself and Comey.
Ohhhhhhh, I made a boo boo. I should have had witnesses.
Cut me a break. This was obviously a deliberate ploy to not have witnesses, setting up a he said versus he said scenario. Oh, how clever he is.
Who had a motive for what they did on that day in February? trump had obvious motive. Even if we are to believe that his motive was to end the investigation because it was a distraction to doing our business (which is a load of horse manure), but even if we buy that load of crap, it is a motive. Did Comey have any kind of motive for going out to his car and immediately writing the memo detailing what trump had just said to him. I'm sitting here thinking, and I can't think of one, not one reason that Comey would have for writing a memo that was not true. What motive could he possibly have had. It couldn't have been in response to anticipating being fired. That happened over three months later, which in trump time is almost like three years. So based on motive, it becomes obvious who to believe.
I would also note that there is a long history of the writings of an FBI agent holding great weight in any investigation or judicial proceeding. Another reason to give more weight to what former Director Comey has to say versus what d. j[ackass] trump has to say.
Now we come to the final point in this post. If, Comey testifies that trump asked him to end the investigation of Flynn, and if he presents the memo he wrote detailing trump's 'request', and if we all agree that such behavior constitutes obstruction of justice, then, does the Republican dominated House of Representatives have the balls to impeach trump and will the Republican Majority in the Senate have the same anatomical structures to remove him from office?
At this point, it really doesn't matter, because whether they do, or do not, I believe all the way down to the marrow of my bones, that both houses of Congress will change from a Republican majority to a Democratic majority as a consequence of the 2018 mid-term election. So if the Republicans currently in both Houses of Congress do not have the nuts to do the right thing, the Democrats will do the job when they gain the majority in both Houses.
Certainly, Comey has a great deal of information about Russian attempts to meddle in our elections, and this is important information. But, here's the elephant in the room; did trump ask then Director Comey to stop, back off, curtail (much too big a word for trump to use), end, close the file on, halt, you get the picture, the investigation of Michael Flynn's relationship with Russia? If trump did so then the need to go a step further in investigating trump will no longer exist. Yes, we still need to investigate if and how the Russian government interfered in our electoral process, but any investigations of trump will be in effect complete with reference to determining his continued position of lead administrator of our country.
If Comey testifies that trump, did indeed ask him to halt the aforementioned investigation, then trump has shot himself in the foot. It would not matter if trump had colluded with the Russians. It would not matter if trump has financial obligations to Russian government owned banks. It would not matter that trump has ignored the nepotism law. The question of whether trump committed treason by revealing classified information to the Russian foreign minister and ambassador becomes a moot point. The fact that trump has a lease on the Old Post Office Building in D.C., which he has made into a hotel, and is in direct conflict with the lease terms, because he has not divested himself of his business interests, no longer matters. Nothing else anyone can think of matters. Because, if trump said what has been reported, to Comey, then he is guilty of obstruction of justice. Case closed!
This will obviously be a classic case of he said versus he said. The question then becomes, who is to be believed. We can look at trump's behavior just prior to asking Comey to stop the investigation into Flynn. Why would trump clear the room, leaving only himself and Comey.
Ohhhhhhh, I made a boo boo. I should have had witnesses.
Cut me a break. This was obviously a deliberate ploy to not have witnesses, setting up a he said versus he said scenario. Oh, how clever he is.
Who had a motive for what they did on that day in February? trump had obvious motive. Even if we are to believe that his motive was to end the investigation because it was a distraction to doing our business (which is a load of horse manure), but even if we buy that load of crap, it is a motive. Did Comey have any kind of motive for going out to his car and immediately writing the memo detailing what trump had just said to him. I'm sitting here thinking, and I can't think of one, not one reason that Comey would have for writing a memo that was not true. What motive could he possibly have had. It couldn't have been in response to anticipating being fired. That happened over three months later, which in trump time is almost like three years. So based on motive, it becomes obvious who to believe.
I would also note that there is a long history of the writings of an FBI agent holding great weight in any investigation or judicial proceeding. Another reason to give more weight to what former Director Comey has to say versus what d. j[ackass] trump has to say.
Now we come to the final point in this post. If, Comey testifies that trump asked him to end the investigation of Flynn, and if he presents the memo he wrote detailing trump's 'request', and if we all agree that such behavior constitutes obstruction of justice, then, does the Republican dominated House of Representatives have the balls to impeach trump and will the Republican Majority in the Senate have the same anatomical structures to remove him from office?
At this point, it really doesn't matter, because whether they do, or do not, I believe all the way down to the marrow of my bones, that both houses of Congress will change from a Republican majority to a Democratic majority as a consequence of the 2018 mid-term election. So if the Republicans currently in both Houses of Congress do not have the nuts to do the right thing, the Democrats will do the job when they gain the majority in both Houses.
Monday, June 5, 2017
Terrorist Attacks are Increasing (round and round......)
I do not know if my perceptions are accurate, but it seems to me that since trump started his overseas trip on May 20th that high profile terrorist attacks have increased. Maybe my perceptions are prejudiced, maybe they're correct, but a result of coincidence and not causality. I simply don't know and am willing to believe that they may or may not be correct.
In the past 14 days, there have been four very deadly and high profile terrorist actions. May 22nd, Manchester, England, 22 dead & scores more injured. May 26th, Egypt, 28 Christian pilgrims killed. May 31st, Kabul, Afghanistan, at least 90 killed and over 400 injured. June 4th, London Bridge in London, England, 7 killed and dozens injured by random stabbings and using a vehicle as a weapon. So, that's four high profile attacks in the span of 14 days.
What is the knee jerk reaction on an emotional level? .......... Kill the bastards. Well, that is just simply not going to work on many levels. How do we identify all of the terrorists in the world? If we kill known terrorists, others will become radicalized and take their place. Poverty, bigotry, exclusion, violence, the death of non-combatants, destruction of cities and dwellings, these and other actions serve to escalate the violence and terror. Stevie Wonder wrote a lyric for a song titled Pastime Paradise that noted the following as some reasons for why one group of humans is pitted against another:
Dissipation
Race relations
Consolation
Segregation
Dispensation
Isolation
Exploitation
Mutilation
Mutations
Miscreation
Confirmation, to the evils of the world
I would add deprivation, starvation, marginalization, manipulation, limitations, ostracization, filthy rich nations are more causes for wars.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again; 'you did this to me, so now I'm going to do this to you'. Round and round and round we go, and where we stop, nobody knows. We continue to lock ourselves into a perpetual cycle of violence.
Certainly we cannot sit idly by and watch atrocities. And guess what, those that we label terrorists think and feel exactly the same way. They see themselves as the good people, the injured parties, the victims. To stop this cycle of violence will take a long time. Probably on the scale of centuries and many, many generations. This is the human condition and we as humans (not we as Americans, or we as the civilized world, or we as the west, or we as the "3rd world nations"), but we as humans are going to need to make probably the largest paradigm shift in human history, in the way that we are going to live together, so we can do so peacefully on this planet.
I'm not nearly smart enough or arrogant enough to think that I know the building blocks for such a change. But, what I am convinced of is that even the rhetoric of a trump or a group that loudly speaks like trump, only serves to enrage those that the rhetoric is aimed at. Certainly the violence that is unleashed on people on each side of the divide only serves to beget the next violent act. In the martial art of Thai Chi it is taught that to meet force with force serves to continue responses of force and it follows that to back away from a violent confrontation will act to diffuse the aggression of the other party. But, again we can't sit idly by and watch the violence continue, by any party, but if we withdraw that will not mean a cessation of violence anytime soon. It's a nasty cycle we humans have trapped ourselves in.
Now, I don't think that anyone, not one person of any import will read what I'm about to write, but I'm going to write it anyway. Maybe, just maybe, we can make a start. As trite as it may sound, every journey starts with the first step. What we have now inserted ourselves into is a war in a region that has been embroiled in war for centuries. We have now found out that once your in, ya ain't gettin' out. Becoming isolated and xenophobic will not make us any safer, because everyone has to be safe before anyone will be safe. So, we start to take a defensive posture and attempt to thwart attacks with strong intelligence and at the same time start to identify people to speak with. Maybe reach out to Iran to be an intermediary, or someone in Saudi Arabia, or in Irag, or in Pakistan. Someone. Someone who can bring two people together from opposite sides of this divide, and start talking.
We need to have expectations and hope, but they need to be realistic. Like I said, this is going to take generations of humans learning that the "other" humans are ok. We need to work towards a world where everyone is taken care of. Where everyone is fed and nourished. Where everyone has shelter from the elements. Where no one group tries to exploit another group and thereby puts that "other" group at a disadvantage. I'm not saying that everyone has exactly the same amount of material goods, but that everyone has some reasonably defined standard of living. If we are able, in another century or two, to obtain this type of goal, we could be on the way to being one planet, where all humans are valued by each other and respected by one another.
In the past 14 days, there have been four very deadly and high profile terrorist actions. May 22nd, Manchester, England, 22 dead & scores more injured. May 26th, Egypt, 28 Christian pilgrims killed. May 31st, Kabul, Afghanistan, at least 90 killed and over 400 injured. June 4th, London Bridge in London, England, 7 killed and dozens injured by random stabbings and using a vehicle as a weapon. So, that's four high profile attacks in the span of 14 days.
What is the knee jerk reaction on an emotional level? .......... Kill the bastards. Well, that is just simply not going to work on many levels. How do we identify all of the terrorists in the world? If we kill known terrorists, others will become radicalized and take their place. Poverty, bigotry, exclusion, violence, the death of non-combatants, destruction of cities and dwellings, these and other actions serve to escalate the violence and terror. Stevie Wonder wrote a lyric for a song titled Pastime Paradise that noted the following as some reasons for why one group of humans is pitted against another:
Dissipation
Race relations
Consolation
Segregation
Dispensation
Isolation
Exploitation
Mutilation
Mutations
Miscreation
Confirmation, to the evils of the world
I would add deprivation, starvation, marginalization, manipulation, limitations, ostracization, filthy rich nations are more causes for wars.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again; 'you did this to me, so now I'm going to do this to you'. Round and round and round we go, and where we stop, nobody knows. We continue to lock ourselves into a perpetual cycle of violence.
Certainly we cannot sit idly by and watch atrocities. And guess what, those that we label terrorists think and feel exactly the same way. They see themselves as the good people, the injured parties, the victims. To stop this cycle of violence will take a long time. Probably on the scale of centuries and many, many generations. This is the human condition and we as humans (not we as Americans, or we as the civilized world, or we as the west, or we as the "3rd world nations"), but we as humans are going to need to make probably the largest paradigm shift in human history, in the way that we are going to live together, so we can do so peacefully on this planet.
I'm not nearly smart enough or arrogant enough to think that I know the building blocks for such a change. But, what I am convinced of is that even the rhetoric of a trump or a group that loudly speaks like trump, only serves to enrage those that the rhetoric is aimed at. Certainly the violence that is unleashed on people on each side of the divide only serves to beget the next violent act. In the martial art of Thai Chi it is taught that to meet force with force serves to continue responses of force and it follows that to back away from a violent confrontation will act to diffuse the aggression of the other party. But, again we can't sit idly by and watch the violence continue, by any party, but if we withdraw that will not mean a cessation of violence anytime soon. It's a nasty cycle we humans have trapped ourselves in.
Now, I don't think that anyone, not one person of any import will read what I'm about to write, but I'm going to write it anyway. Maybe, just maybe, we can make a start. As trite as it may sound, every journey starts with the first step. What we have now inserted ourselves into is a war in a region that has been embroiled in war for centuries. We have now found out that once your in, ya ain't gettin' out. Becoming isolated and xenophobic will not make us any safer, because everyone has to be safe before anyone will be safe. So, we start to take a defensive posture and attempt to thwart attacks with strong intelligence and at the same time start to identify people to speak with. Maybe reach out to Iran to be an intermediary, or someone in Saudi Arabia, or in Irag, or in Pakistan. Someone. Someone who can bring two people together from opposite sides of this divide, and start talking.
We need to have expectations and hope, but they need to be realistic. Like I said, this is going to take generations of humans learning that the "other" humans are ok. We need to work towards a world where everyone is taken care of. Where everyone is fed and nourished. Where everyone has shelter from the elements. Where no one group tries to exploit another group and thereby puts that "other" group at a disadvantage. I'm not saying that everyone has exactly the same amount of material goods, but that everyone has some reasonably defined standard of living. If we are able, in another century or two, to obtain this type of goal, we could be on the way to being one planet, where all humans are valued by each other and respected by one another.
Sunday, June 4, 2017
The Limits of Executive Privilege
James Comey is scheduled to give testimony to the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday, June 8th. There has been discussion about trump declaring 'executive privilege'. If he were to use this procedure, be assured that it will only be a delaying tactic.
The concept of executive privilege was first used when Nixon was in deep doo doo during the Watergate hearings. Its purpose is "to resist certain subpoenas and other interventions by the legislative and judicial branches of government to access information and personnel relating to the executive branch." With reference to accessing 'personnel', James Comey no longer works for the Federal Government. He is a private citizen. He can 'say' what ever he darn well pleases. It's called the First Amendment. With reference to information, I suspect that d. j[ackass] will claim that all memos written by Comey while he was the FBI director are property of our country and therefore fall under 'executive privilege'.
Okay, let's set up a scenario where trump claims executive privilege over these memos. This will only be a delaying tactic. "Once invoked, a presumption of privilege is established, requiring the Prosecutor to make a "sufficient showing" that the "Presidential material" is "essential to the justice of the case" (418 U.S. at 713-14). Chief Justice Warren Burger further stated that executive privilege would most effectively apply when the oversight of the executive would impair that branch's national security concerns." The Supreme Court confirmed the legitimacy of this doctrine in United States v. Nixon.
This places the revelation of these documents squarely in the hands of Special Counsel Mueller. He will obviously want these memos and will have no difficulty, what so ever, in demonstrating that these memoranda are "essential to the justice of the case" while following the path of possible obstruction of justice. Secondly, there are obviously no "national security concerns" that would be compromised by these documents being placed in the public record. The only security concerns that will be impaired are those of trump and his butt-heads. Their job security will be severely impaired.
So as you can see, if trump invokes the doctrine of executive privilege, it will only delay the inevitable. The inevitable being, the truth being revealed.
As is usual, there are varying stories coming out of the White House. The stories are inconsistent with one another, and most likely by design. Not that the various talking asses are given marching orders to put out different stories, that's just what they do, and trump set this up due to his chaotic mind and decision making processes. When he chose these people to work for him, he had no idea how they would behave as part of a cohesive team and guess what, they don't act as a cohesive team. I believe that a person associates with and hires employees that reflect that person's mindset. Thus chaos begets chaos.
puppet-spicer, on Friday, would not discount the possibility of executive privilege being used:
"Obviously, it's got to be reviewed. My understanding is the date for that hearing was just set. I haven't spoken to counsel yet. I don't know how they're going to respond."
They've been slowly allowing goebbls-conway out of her cage recently. she told ABC's Good Morning America, “We'll be watching with the rest of the world when Director Comey testifies.” To me, this implies that executive privilege will not be used. goebbels-conway also said that "[w]hen Director Comey goes to testify, I think that will be a very clarifying moment," How a group of people can be so smug and blind as to think that Comey's testimony will "clarify" anything that will be helpful to trump and the rest of these boobs, is well beyond my understanding. In reference to executive privilege she noted "the president will make that decision."
Executive privilege is a doctrine that has only had very limited success once, when used by President Obama. It did not work for Nixon and it did not work for Bill Clinton. Bring it on trumpy boy. Give us further proof of just how stupid you and those that advise you are.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/06/02/trump-use-executive-privilege-block-comey-testimony-spicer-says-white-house-hasnt-decided/102429120/
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-comey-russia-testimony-block-senate-hearing-kellyanne-conway-latest-news-a7769821.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_privilege
http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/03/opinions/trump-cant-stop-comey-testimony-pate/
The concept of executive privilege was first used when Nixon was in deep doo doo during the Watergate hearings. Its purpose is "to resist certain subpoenas and other interventions by the legislative and judicial branches of government to access information and personnel relating to the executive branch." With reference to accessing 'personnel', James Comey no longer works for the Federal Government. He is a private citizen. He can 'say' what ever he darn well pleases. It's called the First Amendment. With reference to information, I suspect that d. j[ackass] will claim that all memos written by Comey while he was the FBI director are property of our country and therefore fall under 'executive privilege'.
Okay, let's set up a scenario where trump claims executive privilege over these memos. This will only be a delaying tactic. "Once invoked, a presumption of privilege is established, requiring the Prosecutor to make a "sufficient showing" that the "Presidential material" is "essential to the justice of the case" (418 U.S. at 713-14). Chief Justice Warren Burger further stated that executive privilege would most effectively apply when the oversight of the executive would impair that branch's national security concerns." The Supreme Court confirmed the legitimacy of this doctrine in United States v. Nixon.
This places the revelation of these documents squarely in the hands of Special Counsel Mueller. He will obviously want these memos and will have no difficulty, what so ever, in demonstrating that these memoranda are "essential to the justice of the case" while following the path of possible obstruction of justice. Secondly, there are obviously no "national security concerns" that would be compromised by these documents being placed in the public record. The only security concerns that will be impaired are those of trump and his butt-heads. Their job security will be severely impaired.
So as you can see, if trump invokes the doctrine of executive privilege, it will only delay the inevitable. The inevitable being, the truth being revealed.
As is usual, there are varying stories coming out of the White House. The stories are inconsistent with one another, and most likely by design. Not that the various talking asses are given marching orders to put out different stories, that's just what they do, and trump set this up due to his chaotic mind and decision making processes. When he chose these people to work for him, he had no idea how they would behave as part of a cohesive team and guess what, they don't act as a cohesive team. I believe that a person associates with and hires employees that reflect that person's mindset. Thus chaos begets chaos.
puppet-spicer, on Friday, would not discount the possibility of executive privilege being used:
"Obviously, it's got to be reviewed. My understanding is the date for that hearing was just set. I haven't spoken to counsel yet. I don't know how they're going to respond."
They've been slowly allowing goebbls-conway out of her cage recently. she told ABC's Good Morning America, “We'll be watching with the rest of the world when Director Comey testifies.” To me, this implies that executive privilege will not be used. goebbels-conway also said that "[w]hen Director Comey goes to testify, I think that will be a very clarifying moment," How a group of people can be so smug and blind as to think that Comey's testimony will "clarify" anything that will be helpful to trump and the rest of these boobs, is well beyond my understanding. In reference to executive privilege she noted "the president will make that decision."
Executive privilege is a doctrine that has only had very limited success once, when used by President Obama. It did not work for Nixon and it did not work for Bill Clinton. Bring it on trumpy boy. Give us further proof of just how stupid you and those that advise you are.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/06/02/trump-use-executive-privilege-block-comey-testimony-spicer-says-white-house-hasnt-decided/102429120/
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-comey-russia-testimony-block-senate-hearing-kellyanne-conway-latest-news-a7769821.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_privilege
http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/03/opinions/trump-cant-stop-comey-testimony-pate/
March for Truth
This afternoon, I went to a small gathering in Pottstown, PA. It was part of the March for Truth nation wide event, June 3, 2017. Not as big as the Million Woman March. Not as big as the Earth Day March for Science. But do not be fooled, today's March for truth was every bit as important.
First, some statistics. Marches and gatherings were held in 43 of our 50 states and Washington D.C. There were marches and gatherings in 145 cities and towns. The states that were not represented were Georgia, Oklahoma, Kansas, North Dakota, New Hampshire, Wyoming and Maryland. I suspect that Maryland had no events due to the ease of access to D.C. Thousands marched across the country.
The event in Pottstown, PA where I was along with two very close friends, was a small gathering of about 200. We heard two excellent speakers. First, was CNN commentator Sally Kohn. Her list of credentials is impressive. Especially noteworthy for me is her appearance as a Ted Talk speaker and oratory skills. By way of paraphrasing, I want to share some of the points Kohn made:
- Every voice is important so bring your family and friends into the conversation. Have discussions with co-workers.
- the few hundred that we had in the relatively small city of Pottstown, were as important as the thousands in New York City; most likely more important. Ms. Kohn did not expound on this comment, but the meaning was obvious. In a small Pennsylvania manufacturing town, the fact that we showed up to be heard speaks volumes to the power and depth of dissent against trump in our country.
- Truth will come to the surface and will be known.
- We must not allow the chaos that is trump to be perceived as normal. We must point out and speak out against the madness.
Sally Kohn, thank you for your inspiring and energizing words, this afternoon.
Next up was Pennsylvania State Senator from the 17th senatorial district, Daylin Leach. Again, I was impressed by the oratory skills that he brought to his thoughts. He had been at Philadelphia's march in the morning, when it was raining and he was getting wet. He noted that he was feeling like donald trump in Russia. Lol. He also pointed out three ways in which trump is impeachable:
- The divulging of sensitive and classified information to an adversary. Espionage!
- Attempts to have former Director Comey of the FBI, stop an investigation into Flynn and connections to Russia. Obstruction of justice!
- Collusion with Russia to manipulate our election process. I've been waiting for someone to use this word and was so glad to hear a public speaker say it.....treason!
Thank you Senator Leach.
The organizers had some activities, but for me, the best was a smart phone tool named 'resistbot'. Using your text app, you can send a FAX to your representatives in The House and The Senate. The process also gives you a 'paper trail' of your FAX.
I Also want to take this opportunity to juxtapose today's nationwide march with a march at Lafayette park, across from the north face of the White House. It is a small park. I used to go there on weekends when I was very young, with my family to feed the pigeons and the squirrels, so I really do have a firm grip on the size of the park. The Fairfax County, Virginia Republican Party, hastily put together a last minute 'march' that was dubbed the "Pittsburgh Not Paris" rally. A few hundred people showed up. In contrast, there where thousands marching in D.C. for truth. The Mayor of Pittsburgh took umbrage and said that Pittsburgh will hold to the guidelines of the Paris Climate Agreement.
These events continue to re-invigorate and re-energize me. We are moving steadily towards the turning of both houses in 2018, at which time we will be impeaching d. j[ackass] trump. In the interim, the truth will become clear. I have great faith in the truth and its ability to always shine. Below are some pix from around our country, today.
Demonstrators take part in the March for Truth rally on the National Mall in Washington, D.C., June 3, 2017.
Tricia Viola posted this image to Instagram on June 3, 2017 with the caption, "The scene in NYC. #marchfortruth
Remember the "where's the beef" marketing campaign?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)