Tag Archives: United States

Does an Oath of Office Mean Anything?

Merriam-Webster defines it as thus:

1a

(1)
: a solemn usually formal calling upon God or a god to witness to the truth of what one says or to witness that one sincerely intends to do what one says
(2)
: a solemn attestation of the truth or inviolability of one’s words
The witness took an oath to tell the truth in court.
b
: something (such as a promise) corroborated by an oath
They were required to swear an oath of loyalty.
took the oath of office
2
: an irreverent or careless use of a sacred name
broadly : swear word
He uttered an oath and stormed away.

From Wikipedia:

In the United States, the oath of office for the President is specified in the Constitution (Article II, Section 1):
“I, (name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
The oath may be sworn or affirmed (in which case it is called an affirmation instead of oath). Although not present in the text of the Constitution, it is customary for modern presidents to say “So help me God” after the end of the oath. For officers other than the President, the expression “So help me God” is explicitly prescribed, but the Judiciary Act of 1789 also explains when it can be omitted (specifically for oaths taken by court clerks): “Which words, so help me God, shall be omitted in all cases where an affirmation is admitted instead of an oath.”
The Constitution (Article VI, clause 3) also specifies:
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.
At the start of each new U.S. Congress, in January of every odd-numbered year, newly elected or re-elected Members of Congress – the entire House of Representatives and one-third of the Senate – must recite an oath:
I, (name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. [So help me God.]

This oath is also taken by the Vice President, members of the Cabinet, federal judges and all other civil and military officers and federal employees other than the President.

Blog post by Phoenix:

It is apparent that the section of the oath that seems almost daily violated by politicians is “I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without reservation or purpose of evasion;”

The congress as a whole along with the executive branch has been knowingly presenting legislation contrary to the constitution and then relying on legal challenges to make it to supreme court for final disposition, that folks is still a violation of the oath taken no matter the lawyeristic maneuver of passing legislation as constitutional and waiting for a challenge. If these were your children you would immediately scold for exceeding limits by their hope of getting away with trouble but suffering consequences for only the most egregious just by sheer quantity, its evasive both by congress and by children, both should be accountable.

Below is the most detailed listing of codes covering the subject of congressional oath and penalties for violation,

It is apparent that the section of the oath that seems almost daily violated by politicians is “I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without reservation or purpose of evasion;”

Federal law regulating oath of office by government officials is divided into four parts along with an executive order which further defines the law for purposes of enforcement. 5 U.S.C. 3331, provides the text of the actual oath of office members of Congress are required to take before assuming office. 5 U.S.C. 3333 requires members of Congress sign an affidavit that they have taken the oath of office required by 5 U.S.C. 3331 and have not or will not violate that oath of office during their tenure of office as defined by the third part of the law, 5 U.S.C. 7311 which explicitly makes it a federal criminal offense (and a violation of oath of office) for anyone employed in the United States Government (including members of Congress) to “advocate the overthrow of our constitutional form of government”. The fourth federal law, 18 U.S.C. 1918 provides penalties for violation of oath office described in 5 U.S.C. 7311 which include: (1) removal from office and; (2) confinement or a fine.

The definition of “advocate” is further specified in Executive Order 10450 which for the purposes of enforcement supplements 5 U.S.C. 7311. One provision of Executive Order 10450 specifies it is a violation of 5 U.S.C. 7311 for any person taking the oath of office to advocate “the alteration … of the form of the government of the United States by unconstitutional means.” Our form of government is defined by the Constitution of the United States. It can only be “altered” by constitutional amendment. Thus, according to Executive Order 10450 (and therefore 5 U.S. 7311) any act taken by government officials who have taken the oath of office prescribed by 5 U.S.C. 3331which alters the form of government other by amendment, is a criminal violation of the 5 U.S.C. 7311.

Violating Oath

The subject I am bringing to the table is “why do the American people allow their representatives to break oath of office (a federal crime) and not hold them accountable?

This should be a non-partisan subject simply due to the fact this has been going on for long decades and both parties are guilty according to the law.

The scales could be tipped back somewhat if the public had awareness that the oath has teeth and voiced expectation that it be taken seriously.

I grew up on a rural farm and had an older neighbor and I had just got out of high school in the spring and turned eighteen in the late summer and come the next January, I enlisted in the military service.  The morning I was getting ready to report to boot camp Raymond came over.  I was getting ready to leave for the airport, he came up to me and stuck out his hand.  He said, “You are about to say some pretty big words soon and it will define you as a man.  Good Luck.”

At the time I was stunned, in all the years that I had known Raymond, he had patted me on the back after school football games, other sports, 4H, and at other events but he had never shook my hand till that day.  I had read the oath of service but until you are saying it and what Raymond said actually hit me like a rock.  In his eyes, I had just grown up.

Those words are what you are to live by every day during your service to your country and afterwards.  Why is it that our elected representatives fail to follow their oath of office when they require those in military and civic service to follow theirs.  We have been complacent in letting them tear us down.  We need to stand up and make them follow the same laws and Oaths we do.

High Tech Does Not Always Mean Faster and More Accurate

We all know that with new and improved stuff there are always problems even after running it through all the test you can think of, but in the Iowa Caucus just proved that the old fashion way would have been better to stay with in the end.

USA Today

“We have determined that this was due to a coding issue in the reporting system. This issue was identified and fixed,” he said in the statement. “The application’s reporting issue did not impact the ability of precinct chairs to report data accurately.”

“Because of the required paper documentation, we have been able to verify that the data recorded in the app and used to calculate State Delegate Equivalents is valid and accurate,” he said in the statement. “Precinct level results are still being reported to the IDP. While our plan is to release results as soon as possible today, our ultimate goal is to ensure that the integrity and accuracy of the process continues to be upheld.”

At about 10:30 p.m. CT, when no results had rolled in, the party issued a statement saying the party found inconsistencies in the three data sets — the first alignment, the second alignment and the overall delegate numbers — and that it would take longer than expected to report results.
– Kim Norvell, Des Moines Register

The head of the Iowa Democratic Party said the organization is manually recounting the results of the Iowa Caucuses and he expects the numbers to be released sometime Tuesday.

It’s unclear how quickly the state that kicks off the presidential nominating process will be able to reveal who won the contest.

But “the integrity of our process with the results have and always will be our top priority,” Iowa Democratic Party (IDP) Chair Troy Price told reporters at a conference call at 1 a.m. CST. “At this point, the IDP is manually verifying all precinct results. We expect to have numbers to report later today. “

Price repeated the party’s early assertion that the technical glitch with the system “is a reporting issue not a hack or an intrusion. And it’s exactly why we have a paper trail and systems in place to uphold the integrity of our process.”

“They’re validating every piece of data we have against our paper trail,” he said. “The system is taking longer than expected but it’s in place to ensure we are eventually able to report results with full confidence.”

Price said the IDP has reached out to the various campaigns and is keeping them updated.

Piyce comments followed criticism from some campaigns, notably former Vice President Joe Biden’s who called the reporting problems “acute failures.”
– Ledyard King

First, they said that there was coding errors in the new system and it was a simple fix but then they started to say that the people putting in the numbers were at fault.  Now after all that mess, to get it right and transparent they will be back to a large chalkboard with one one person reading the numbers, while one person marks the board, and ten people observing the routine.  Kind of reminds you of the “Hanging Chad” debacle.

While the Democratic candidates fumed about the delay and questionability that this new process has caused, they were each quick to proclaim themselves as “Winners” and said they were moving on to New Hampshire.  On the flip side of this, President Trump’s campaign was quick to provide the following.

The Trump campaign was quick to seize on Monday night’s delays in caucus results, calling it the “sloppiest train wreck in history.”

“Democrats are stewing in a caucus mess of their own creation with the sloppiest train wreck in history,” Trump campaign manager Brad Parscale said in an emailed statement.

He also raised concerns about “the fairness of the process” after suggesting in a tweet that the “quality control” issues Democrats cited in the delay were part of a scheme to rig the results.

– Courtney Subramaniam

So, with the official start of election season, is this what we have to look forward to the rest of the year.  No matter who wins or loses, someone will be crying in their beer.

The climate of Earth has been changing since before the beginning of time.  There are solid arguments from all sides but when one side keeps saying, “We are going to Die!” all the time it starts sounding like Chicken Little.  Truth be told it is either Greed or Politics but I think the ones standing on the soapbox are not the ones that will get rich from all their yelling and screaming.

When I first found this article, I thought that it was some new studies but when you look at the release date it was back in October 2015.  It must have not fit into either sides dogma of propaganda that we were deluged with since that time.

via NASA Study: Mass Gains of Antarctic Ice Sheet Greater than Losses | NASA

A new NASA study says that an increase in Antarctic snow accumulation that began 10,000 years ago is currently adding enough ice to the continent to outweigh the increased losses from its thinning glaciers.

The research challenges the conclusions of other studies, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) 2013 report, which says that Antarctica is overall losing land ice.

According to the new analysis of satellite data, the Antarctic ice sheet showed a net gain of 112 billion tons of ice a year from 1992 to 2001. That net gain slowed   to 82 billion tons of ice per year between 2003 and 2008.

“We’re essentially in agreement with other studies that show an increase in ice discharge in the Antarctic Peninsula and the Thwaites and Pine Island region of West Antarctica,” said Jay Zwally, a glaciologist with NASA Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, and lead author of the study, which was published on Oct. 30 in the Journal of Glaciology. “Our main disagreement is for East Antarctica and the interior of West Antarctica – there, we see an ice gain that exceeds the losses in the other areas.”  Zwally added that his team “measured small height changes over large areas, as well as the large changes observed over smaller areas.”

There is much we do not understand about our planet or the environmental system we call Mother Nature.  To bad we no longer have an educational system that trains us how to look for an answer but requires us to know, verbatim, every answer on the test.  We need to see, read. and understand what is going on around us, not what some talking head is telling us.

via LA Times Admits Trump Right About What’s Causing California’s Massive Wildfires

by Tim Pearce

Adopting more active forest management policies such as increased thinning of trees and conducting controlled burns will help mitigate damage from future wildfires, The Las Angeles Times editorial board writes.

Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke began advocating similar policy prescriptions earlier in the year after President Donald Trump blamed California’s “bad environmental laws” for creating a wildfire-prone environment.

California forests have grown dryer and less healthy from overcrowded trees, infestations of bark beetles and the effects of climate change, the Las Angeles Times writes. California’s restrictions on active forest management have contributed to the poor and worsening conditions of the forests, allowing them to grow uninhibited while suppressing fires that would normally naturally control the forests’ growth.

“Fire is not necessarily bad for forests. California used to burn with regularity, and low-intensity fires are vital in some ecosystems to clear excess brush and small trees from the landscape,” the editorial board writes. “But there’s been a change in fire behavior over the last century, as the state and federal government began dousing the blazes. Decades of fire suppression have allowed forests to grow dense with trees.”

“Combined with drought, insect infestations and the stress of a warming climate, those management practices have led to more intense and destructive fires that are more dangerous to people living near the forests and more damaging to air quality,” the op-ed continues.

California’s environmental laws entered the national spotlight in early August when Trump blamed them for the severity of the wildfires that were ravaging the state.

Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke was soon at the front of the administration’s push for California to begin adopting more active land management policies. Zinke traveled to California to see the damage from the fires and meet with local officials and firefighters Aug. 13.

Zinke ramped up calls for greater forest thinning while also dismissing the idea that climate change is playing a significant factor in the wildfires’ intensity.

“I’ve heard the climate change argument back and forth,” Zinke told Sacramento-based KCRA. “This has nothing to do with climate change. This has to do with active forest management.”

California Gov. Jerry Brown partnered with state lawmakers to introduce changes to the state’s policies. The bill would grant $1 billion toward forest thinning and ease regulations on cutting trees on private property, according to the Las Angeles Times.

Kind of reminds me of something I hear many many years ago.

Setting: Courtroom with the Forest Service Manager (FSM) on the stand.

Lawyer: “Sir you are in charge of all the national forests in the United States. Correct?”

FSM:  “Yes Sir.”

Lawyer: “For purpose of demonstration, we will equate one wooden matchstick for one million trees.  Please hold out your hands, as he placed a couple of boxes of match sticks in the FSM’s hands.  This should equal the amount of trees that were around when you department was formed.  Now, over the years, your department has sold off lumber rights to harvest for private and public industry.”  The Lawyer takes a few off the FSM’s hands.  “With a few outcries of deforestation, your department gets an expert guidebook to run your forests.”  The Lawyer adds a few matchsticks back. “Now with trees doing what trees do in the forest and new science backing your guidebooks,” adding a few more matchsticks to the pile, “Your department was slowly breaking even keeping the forests healthy and productive, correct?”

FSM: “Yes.”

Lawyer: “Now we have the interference from people running around with unproven scientific facts and Lumber companies and corporations trying to tell you how to do your job, making your department spend all your allocated money in the court system which is not allowing you to do your job to keep the forests healthy and productive.”  All this time the Lawyer has been adding to the pile in the FSM’s hand.

FSM: Looking down at his hands and seeing that he is holding about four boxes of match sticks in his hands. “That’s about right.”

Lawyer: “Now to be fair, I am going to remove the percentage that you were allowed to sell off.”  He reached up and removed one matchstick from the FSM’s hands and holds it up for the court to see.  Turns to the FSM and looks him in the eye, “What do you think Mother Nature’s solution to your problem would be?” 

The Forest Service Manager’s eyes got very big as he saw the Lawyer’s thumbnail scratch the head of the lone matchstick in his hand.

I believe in conservation but to go too far left or right really upsets the balance.  Mother Nature has been doing this for millions of years and we can see what she has done with mistakes over that time period.  The bigest problem we have today is too many theorys that are broadcasted by the media, our leaders and schools and not enough facts.

Climate change in nature is an ongoing thing.  If humans are speeding it up or slowing it down is the question we need to answer.  I turn on the news and someone is spouting something about it but it is all theory with little or no facts behind it.  They trot out some unknown science person that says in the last twenty, thirty, or fifty years there has been this amount of change  but when asked, they have no clue what climate did in a certain area one hundred, one thousand, one million, or one trillion years ago.

The Truth of it is, that while it is sad for the lives lost and the damage done to the forests, we need to return to the middle of the road to continue to survive.

Chess or Checkers?

For years the political establishment was like playing the game of chess and they were quite good at it.  They had the money from the Political Action Committees, Wall Street, and the propaganda mill donated by the Media.  Their electorate was contained and bowed to their will at call.  Their strategies were really good and for every move, there was a counter move.  The Elite could skirt the Rules at any time or completely disregard the Laws at will.  The laws that they generated was never top of the line, they wanted an out at every corner.  If you are elected to Congress, you are on the fast track to be part of the rich and powerful elite.

When it came time for re-election, you could almost have a free pass in the primary but if someone came out of left field to challenge your position, you would have a laugh.  For an outsider or a complete unknown to step into the ring, the odds were stacked against him or her.  It is amazing how easy it is to speak up and toss your hat into the political ring but once you are there you have to get the backing from some money source and galvanise the electorate.  The Founders of our country wanted the elected leaders to be people who did well enough in their occupation or companies to want to set it aside for a term and step up help run a country, then return to their life knowing that they helped the country with their service.  But over time, the only ones being elected where people who knew how to gather money and prestige without actually doing nothing or being at the top of their profession.

Now, along comes a person that is a successful business person which helped him accrue some great wealth and after looking around, throws his hat into the ring.  This person is not some nobody.  The people have heard about him.  He is out-spoken.  He doesn’t fall into the category of  the established political realm or a Media darling.  He speaks to the common people like he is at a family dinner table and what he says hits home.  He does not use the Media to filter his message, he speaks over them.  He is playing checkers with the common folks.

The political elite on both sides have been playing their game for ages and now this person has come along and worse than the running of the bulls, he is upsetting their apple cart.  He forces everyone to follow the laws of the land that the elite have spent little time reading over before passing.  He finds the loopholes that will make them scream.  They have had years and many options to fix these laws and didn’t.

Now you look at all the campaign promises that was made, you will find that he has bucked the establishment at ever turn.  He is following the laws enacted by the establishment and the previous administrations.  He has asked and at times, demanded that both parties involved, step up and fix the problems that they both have made.  They both have denied him.  When will they see the error of their ways?  Both sides of the Establishment think that their spines have been reinforced with iron, that it is their way of doing things, and they can outlast him.  They do not think that the laws that they made need to be changed.  They wrote them to keep the money pouring into their pockets.  They wrote them to keep their supporters in the electorate  docile and wanting the free things that others have worked for.

The common electorate on both the republican and democratic sides, as well as all the other fringe parties are starting to sit up and take notice.  Those that vote really do have the right and duty to take the blinders off.  The electorate does have the ability to soften iron or break it.  They may not leave the center base of their parties but in the General Election, a person does not have to vote the party line.  Hopefully they will vote for real leaders, not like the scum that conned their way to leadership.

 

Illegal Immigrants Left For Dead By Smugglers

In this day and age of the media and the far left telling of all of the so-called atrocities that are happening by our government and the men and women that work there on behalf of the United States people on the southern border.  We never hear of how these people are actually better after medical care and being given food and water.  We are not hearing about corrupt leaders of the countries that these people are coming from.  We are not hearing about the heroes in these countries that are trying to stand up to the corrupt leaders of these countries.  The Media is not giving them a voice.  If they did, more world-wide political pressure could be gained for change.

The United States has in the past stepped in and helped make these changes and was held up as a standard for the rights and welfare of all.  This was done openly and covertly at times.  Due to the changes of politics and Media in our own country it is frowned upon today.  Because of the actions of the past, good and bad, to many in the region the United States is still a beacon for Freedom and Justice but we are  not allowed to do it today.  Rather than the US helping those citizens in these corrupt countries change for the better, the citizens of those coutries seeing no hope or assistance for change are trying to leave there, for here.

They are leaving any way they can.  They are paying for safe passage for their lives.  They may be abused, sold into slavery, sexually assaulted, or one maybe two may be killed so that  the rest of the group may continue.  These smugglers already have their money so they have no problem letting them die rather than them being caught.  In the US, they may get jail time but in other places they may get summary executed and a trial, if any, after words.  So they will leave these people to die in the desert which brings us to the excerpt below.  Even though our media portrays the Border Patrol in such poor light they are sometimes the angel of mercy for those that left seeking a dream only to left to die.

via Border Patrol Rescues 57 Illegal Immigrants Left For Dead By Smugglers | The Daily Caller

Border Patrol rescued a group of 57 Central American migrants abandoned by cartel smugglers in Arizona Friday.

The group of migrant men, women and children — including one underage pregnant girl and 36 minors — were left for dead in 108-degree heat and had to be rescued by the Tucson Sector Border Patrol, according to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

Among the 36 minors who were as young as one year old, 17 were unaccompanied by an adult. The stranded illegal immigrants came from El Salvador, Nicaragua, Honduras and Guatemala, according to U.S. Customs and Border Patrol.

Several of the migrants were given fluids to treat dehydration, and the pregnant female was given intravenous fluids by Border Patrol EMT’s and transported to a hospital for further treatment. The rest of the group was transported to Ajo station for processing.

“Regardless of the unscrupulous and ill regard for human life attitude by smugglers, Border Patrol Agents work tirelessly to ensure not only the safety and security of our nation but also the safety of those who they come in contact with,” Customs and Border Patrol said in a statement on their website.

Of this group, the 17 unaccompanied minor will probably end up with social services until their families can be located then the immigration courts will take over and the rest may be deported because they did not cross the border at a port of entry.

The Media and the political establishment keep saying that we are a nation of laws but we keep seeing that many are exempt from following or suffering the consequences of these laws.  That is like saying that if I come to your home and the front door and the back door is locked but the side window is open it is illegal for me to enter and make myself at home.  But if I do this, the Media and the Left say it ok for me to stay and make a life with you with no repercussions.

What a state we live in.

via Supreme Court Makes Landmark Decision Regarding Ohio Voter Fraud

In a ruling that could have implications for the November midterm elections, the Supreme Court ruled Monday that Ohio’s method for removing names from its list of registered voters does not violate federal law.

The court ruled 5-4 in favor of Ohio, with the five conservative judges supporting the state and the four liberal judges voting against it.

Eligible Ohio voters who have not cast a vote in more than two years receive a notice from the state. If that person fails to respond to the notice and doesn’t vote over the next four years, they are dropped from the registration list.

All states have methods for removing names from voter registration lists which usually involve people who have moved out of a given precinct or who have died. Voter inactivity is not usually a reason in and of itself.

The biggest folly I have seen about any election is when a town or city with a known population votes and when the votes are counted, they add up to more than the known population.  The dead should not vote and the media has convenience non-citizens to vote more and more.  Not to mention, the illegal voting more than once using someone elses name.

As a voter, you go to the polls on election day and do your civic duty and vote.  The next step is that the box of ballots go usually to the county/parish clerks office and everything gets counted up.  The number of voters that checked in at the polling place against the number of actual votes.  Now throw in the early voting and absentee ballots with their ballots and names already checked off and send all the numbers up to the next level, the county/parish board of commissioners, supervisors, directors, ect.  If the number of names and the number of ballots don’t match then a re-survey of the names begin.  After the county level is done and approved it will go to the State level to be reviewed.  Then on to the Federal level for Federal elections.

Now that is a lot of names to check through and the media makes you think it all happens in a twenty-four news cycle.  Depending on the type and kind of election it can actually take up to a week to three months to find out the real results of an election.

Maybe next week they will look into having a valid picture ID to check in to vote.

In the below joint statement, two of the worlds leaders have a face to face discussion and set up an outline to further talks and future it may hold.

via Joint Statement of President Donald J. Trump of the United States of America and Chairman Kim Jong Un of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea at the Singapore Summit

President Donald J. Trump of the United States of America and Chairman Kim Jong Un of the State Affairs Commission of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) held a first, historic summit in Singapore on June 12, 2018.

President Trump and Chairman Kim Jong Un conducted a comprehensive, in-depth, and sincere exchange of opinions on the issues related to the establishment of new U.S.–DPRK relations and the building of a lasting and robust peace regime on the Korean Peninsula.  President Trump committed to provide security guarantees to the DPRK, and Chairman Kim Jong Un reaffirmed his firm and unwavering commitment to complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.

Convinced that the establishment of new U.S.–DPRK relations will contribute to the peace and prosperity of the Korean Peninsula and of the world, and recognizing that mutual confidence building can promote the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, President Trump and Chairman Kim Jong Un state the following:

  1. The United States and the DPRK commit to establish new U.S.–DPRK relations in accordance with the desire of the peoples of the two countries for peace and prosperity.

  2. The United States and the DPRK will join their efforts to build a lasting and stable peace regime on the Korean Peninsula.

  3. Reaffirming the April 27, 2018 Panmunjom Declaration, the DPRK commits to work toward complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.

  4. The United States and the DPRK commit to recovering POW/MIA remains, including the immediate repatriation of those already identified.

Having acknowledged that the U.S.–DPRK summit—the first in history—was an epochal event of great significance in overcoming decades of tensions and hostilities between the two countries and for the opening up of a new future, President Trump and Chairman Kim Jong Un commit to implement the stipulations in this joint statement fully and expeditiously.  The United States and the DPRK commit to hold follow-on negotiations, led by the U.S. Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, and a relevant high-level DPRK official, at the earliest possible date, to implement the outcomes of the U.S.–DPRK summit.

President Donald J. Trump of the United States of America and Chairman Kim Jong Un of the State Affairs Commission of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea have committed to cooperate for the development of new U.S.–DPRK relations and for the promotion of peace, prosperity, and security of the Korean Peninsula and of the world.

DONALD J. TRUMP
President of the United States of America

KIM JONG UN
Chairman of the State Affairs Commission of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea

June 12, 2018
Sentosa Island
Singapore

 

The Media stuttered because they were not the conveyor of news between two world leaders.  The propaganda machine tried to speculate, discuss, and outright fabricate many scenarios.  But all failed because the leaders in question made a private deal to get together and for the first time in many years and just talk.

Many things may come out of this.  Some good and some bad.  That is to be expected.  After seventy (70) years of conflict and bashing propaganda that set the region on edge, this is a good start.

There have been many attempts in the past by many US leaders, Presidential, Congressional, and other individuals, but all in all, they were worried about their political future rather than actually finding a peaceful solution.  There will be the naysayers and their puppet media outlets but if a good solution is presented to the American people and they feel it is in their best interest, the American people will force their congressional elected leaders to approve it or get replaced.  For if the diplomatic process ever fails and sometimes it does.  The final option doesn’t allow for safe spaces.

Secrets in Washington?

via Alleged Leaker Engaged in ‘Betrayal’ of Public Trust, Prosecutor Says

The indictment of a top Senate staffer in a leak investigation touched off more concerns about politicized leaking of what is supposed to be secret government information.

A federal grand jury in Washington indicted James A. Wolfe, 58, the director of security for the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, for lying to FBI investigators in the course of a leak investigation.

Wolfe’s job was safeguarding all classified information in the possession of the committee, according to the Justice Department.

“These leaks shouldn’t be happening. This was not a case of a whistleblower, but an actual violation of security protocol,” said Sidney Powell, a former federal prosecutor who was the chief of the appellate divisions in the Western District of Texas and Northern District of Texas. “This is a government employee entrusted with national security secrets and [he] apparently had no hesitation about leaking them and then lying about it.”

Why is it so hard to find people who can do their job in protecting the national security of the United States?  I am sure that it is happening at all government agencies but more so on the Legislative side of the Government.  Many of those that are elected and their staff cannot pass the screening requirements for a security rating.  We hold our breath everyday that they at least do not slip up and speak to the wrong person about something they haven’t a clue what it is about.  This is not just about national security but also other classified stuff that may be part of a larger criminal investigation that if leaked, will nullify the ability of the judicial system to correctly decide the guilt or innocence of the person in question.

There are probably reporters in Washington that have a better chance of getting a security clearance than our elected officials and their staff.  Why do I say this?  If our elected officials and staff are always spouting off in public, whispering over lunch, or at the bar. You know there is a set of ears that either belong to a reporter or one of their unknown sources nearby and the public will never hear about it.

All In Or Nothing

via Democrats Anger Bernie Sanders Supporters with Rule Change for Presidential Candidates

Supporters of Sen. Bernie Sanders bristled Friday at a new rule being proposed by the Democratic National Committee that would require Democrat presidential candidates to identify as a Democrat.

The move came during a meeting of the DNC’s Rules and Bylaws Committee, which was meeting over the weekend in Providence, Rhode Island, Politico reported.

New of the proposed rule was tweeted by DNC member Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers. Weingarten said Democrats “changed the rules to ensure to run for President as a Democrat you need to be A Democrat.”

“At the time a presidential candidate announces their candidacy publicly, they must publicly affirm that they are a Democrat,” the rule said, according to Yahoo News. “Each candidate pursuing the Democratic nomination shall affirm, in writing, to the National Chairperson of the Democratic National Committee that they: A. are a member of the Democratic Party; B. will accept the Democratic nomination; and C. will run and serve as a member of the Democratic Party.”

Sorry Bernie, you want to be an Independent but run as a Democrat.  That is not going to fly anymore.  Looks like some of the big money party members wasn’t to happy with what you tried to pull the last primary season.  I know from what the media portrayed, they really did not know what your platform was and how it fit their agenda.  So, you took the spotlight away from their chosen one.  You were trying to dig into the big money pockets and that limited them when it came time to help the party candidate.  So if you want to try again to become the Democratic nomination the next time around you have to join them whole hog.

Or.

Are they scared that some sleeper Republican or other party will run?  Win the Primary, use their money in the general election and once sworn in, change party allegiance?  That would be somewhat funny.

Are they adding all this fine print to give them a way to get their money back?  Would this be so Mr. Sanders doesn’t buy that fourth or fifth beach house?

I could speculate but I will leave that to the Media.  It is hard to find a story with one confirmed fact now days.  It will fun to watch this play out.