Nixon complained incessantly to his staff about the leaks coming out of his administration. In the week following the arrest of his Watergate burglary gang on June 17, 1972, an agitated Nixon, was also deep into strategizing against McGovern (whom he anticipated was his strongest opposition to re-election). So, on June 21, Nixon laid down general instructions that every time they had a leak in their organization, they should claim that they are being bugged--even if they had to plant and discover the bug themselves.
Compare this president's strategy with Trump's March 4th, 2017, (red-herring) tweet that his predecessor "wiretapped" Trump Tower.
That tweet has spawned a lawsuit demanding records that prove or disprove the statement.
Note that the DNC, within a week of the Watergate arrests, filed suit against Nixon's Committee for Re-election, filing on behalf of all Democrats.
Monday, May 29, 2017
Sunday, May 28, 2017
The President and Criminal Prosecution @ 5 2017
Federal Election Laws, Espionage, Sabotage, Sedition, Conspiracy, and Treason: The Trump-tanic @2017
AND
Perjury, Computer Hacking, and Solicitation: the Trump-tanic @ 7 2017
So there is a lot of discussion now about impeachment, removal, and/or criminal prosecution of a wayward U.S. President. So far I haven't heard of a sitting U.S. President being prosecuted criminally for espionage, sabotage, and/or treason, but I think we may be close to witnessing a quite novel and historic event where this may be the most appropriate process.
The day that the president-elect visited Obama, Trump's physical demeanor and scared expression almost made me feel for the man. The persons that I immediately did feel concern for were his adult children, as my prediction then was that his conflicts immunity (notwithstanding the Emoluments Clause issues) was no protection to his children and so they were likely to end up in jail. albeit for bribery, corruption, etc..
In the days after his inauguration, it became clear that he would in fact put his family into play, so to speak. Starting in February, I started thinking that our "cultural" discussion of criminal prosecution of Trump (and certain of his family members) may be too limited and may need to consider the federal crimes of espionage, treason, and sabotage. Now, with the recent release of information that Kushner, Trump's son-in-law, sought during the transition to establish a communication back channel directly with the Kremlin, this thought becomes even more interesting, if morbidly so, because, well, its my layman's understanding that a civilian attempting to skirt U.S. surveillance to communicate directly with the Kremlin is usually called a "spy" .
Now I acknowledge that Presidents pretty routinely establish back-channels and send their officials to attempt whatever policy progress that they conclude would be good for the country and good for their legacy. Nixon sent Kissinger into secret meetings with the Soviets and we ended up with the Strategic Arms Limitations Treaty (SALT). But Kushner's actions are completely different:
- He wasn't a public official--and even if he was we have a "One President" policy in this country;
- He didn't have a security clearance;
- He didn't have/express a policy motive;
- He (and Trump) did/do have a sizable personal financial motive. Kissinger and his President-father-in-law didn't have any massive personal financial interests/wealth associated with important Russians/Russian banks;
- Kissinger didn't ask to have secret communications directly with the Kremlin solely on Russian soil and solely using Russian equipment and protocols; and most important of all right now,
- The Soviet's hadn't just interfered with Presidential election and hacked the DNC, actions which both party's members have characterized as an act of war, as an attack.
And, as you already know if you read my previous posts, I predict that VP Pence is too tainted to avoid going down with the Trump-tanic. In the "high crimes" thought, we have to remember that Pence lead Trump's transition team and so was in charge of background screenings for clearances, among other things. Pence knew or had a duty to know a lot of important things that were going on from November 9th to January 20th.
Let's start with:
VIOLATION OF FEDERAL ELECTION LAW
TREASON
The law: U.S. Constitution
Article 3 Section 3
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
Reader be aware that treason has distinct importance as a crime for which one can be prosecuted and convicted and a distinct importance as a cultural legal and political concept. This point is important because there may be treasonous acts which demand prosecution but which occurred not during a time of war, which is a requirement for the criminal prosecution of treason. Also, it may be interesting to remember that states have their own version (criminal versions) of "treason".
So, as history shows, when War has not been declared, the "perpetraitor" is subject to prosecution and conviction for violation of any of a myriad of other "black letter" crimes.
The U.S. Constitution, at Article III, section 3, defines "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort." It then speaks to the crime of treason and what is required for the criminal conviction.
First, let's highlight that Trump's/Trump's team's actions very likely meet the understanding of "Treason" as we know it culturally in that they have betrayed their country by attempting to overthrow a government to which they owe allegiance. They colluded amongst themselves and with a foreign government to subvert election laws and to subvert U.S. citizens' right to participate in the election of their president, with the goal of assuming control of the executive branch of the U.S. government, and in exchange for depleting the authority and power of the U.S. within the Western world and as against Russia's position in that system.
Because several important public officials - elected and appointed (Congressional and Intelligence Community) have characterized Russia's 2016 interference with our electoral process as an "act of war", conviction for treason may not be the long shot that I originally thought. So this is an important characterization when it comes to exploring whether Trump, member(s) of his campaign or transition team, or his staff/family can be charged with committing treason. Further, convictions have been obtained using only circumstantial evidence, and against a father harboring his spy son.
SABOTAGE
The law:
U.S. Code › Title 18 › Part I › Chapter 105
18 U.S. Code § 2153 - Destruction of war material, war premises, or war utilities
(a) Whoever, when the United States is at war, or in times of national emergency as declared by the President or by the Congress, with intent to injure, interfere with, or obstruct the United States or any associate nation in preparing for or carrying on the war or defense activities, or, with reason to believe that his act may injure, interfere with, or obstruct the United States or any associate nation in preparing for or carrying on the war or defense activities, willfully injures, destroys, contaminates or infects, or attempts to so injure, destroy, contaminate or infect any war material, war premises, or war utilities, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than thirty years, or both.
(b)If two or more persons conspire to violate this section, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each of the parties to such conspiracy shall be punished as provided in subsection (a) of this section.
This may be a non-starter due to the apparent requirement of a state or war or a declared national emergency. Nonetheless, it is a very interesting prosecution to consider, since the violation is an act that sabotages the ability of the government to prepare for or participate in war or national defense. Operating a "fake media" system that usurps the government's ability to inform its citizenry about important security matters may fall into this category.
ESPIONAGE
The law: U.S. Code › Title 18 › Part I › Chapter 37
18 U.S. Code § 794 - Gathering or delivering defense information to aid foreign government
(a)Whoever, with intent or reason to believe that it is to be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of a foreign nation, communicates, delivers, or transmits, or attempts to communicate, deliver, or transmit, to any foreign government, or to any faction or party or military or naval force within a foreign country, whether recognized or unrecognized by the United States, or to any representative, officer, agent, employee, subject, or citizen thereof, either directly or indirectly, any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, note, instrument, appliance, or information relating to the national defense, shall be punished by death or by imprisonment for any term of years or for life, except that the sentence of death shall not be imposed unless the jury or, if there is no jury, the court, further finds that the offense resulted in the identification by a foreign power (as defined in section 101(a) of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978) of an individual acting as an agent of the United States and consequently in the death of that individual, or directly concerned nuclear weaponry, military spacecraft or satellites, early warning systems, or other means of defense or retaliation against large-scale attack; war plans; communications intelligence or cryptographic information; or any other major weapons system or major element of defense strategy.
Prosecution and conviction is possible during peace time-- no formal declaration of war is necessary. Violation occurs when, for example, a person gathers and transmits defense information knowing it will be used to damage the United States or assist foreign nation(s).
Also see this other section:
18 U.S. Code § 798 - Disclosure of classified information
(a)Whoever knowingly and willfully communicates, furnishes, transmits, or otherwise makes available to an unauthorized person, or publishes, or uses in any manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States or for the benefit of any foreign government to the detriment of the United States any classified information—
(1) concerning the nature, preparation, or use of any code, cipher, or cryptographic system of the United States or any foreign government; or
(2) concerning the design, construction, use, maintenance, or repair of any device, apparatus, or appliance used or prepared or planned for use by the United States or any foreign government for cryptographic or communication intelligence purposes; or
(3) concerning the communication intelligence activities of the United States or any foreign government; or
(4) obtained by the processes of communication intelligence from the communications of any foreign government, knowing the same to have been obtained by such processes—
SEDITION AND CONSPIRACY
There are federal and state version of sedition laws, so this opens up a whole new set of questions. But, basically, sedition laws make criminal the act of advocating/aiding overthrow of the government.
Coordination v. Collusion
Coordination is an election law term: plan with another to interfere unlawfully with campaign
AND
Perjury, Computer Hacking, and Solicitation: the Trump-tanic @ 7 2017
So there is a lot of discussion now about impeachment, removal, and/or criminal prosecution of a wayward U.S. President. So far I haven't heard of a sitting U.S. President being prosecuted criminally for espionage, sabotage, and/or treason, but I think we may be close to witnessing a quite novel and historic event where this may be the most appropriate process.
The day that the president-elect visited Obama, Trump's physical demeanor and scared expression almost made me feel for the man. The persons that I immediately did feel concern for were his adult children, as my prediction then was that his conflicts immunity (notwithstanding the Emoluments Clause issues) was no protection to his children and so they were likely to end up in jail. albeit for bribery, corruption, etc..
In the days after his inauguration, it became clear that he would in fact put his family into play, so to speak. Starting in February, I started thinking that our "cultural" discussion of criminal prosecution of Trump (and certain of his family members) may be too limited and may need to consider the federal crimes of espionage, treason, and sabotage. Now, with the recent release of information that Kushner, Trump's son-in-law, sought during the transition to establish a communication back channel directly with the Kremlin, this thought becomes even more interesting, if morbidly so, because, well, its my layman's understanding that a civilian attempting to skirt U.S. surveillance to communicate directly with the Kremlin is usually called a "spy" .
Now I acknowledge that Presidents pretty routinely establish back-channels and send their officials to attempt whatever policy progress that they conclude would be good for the country and good for their legacy. Nixon sent Kissinger into secret meetings with the Soviets and we ended up with the Strategic Arms Limitations Treaty (SALT). But Kushner's actions are completely different:
- He wasn't a public official--and even if he was we have a "One President" policy in this country;
- He didn't have a security clearance;
- He didn't have/express a policy motive;
- He (and Trump) did/do have a sizable personal financial motive. Kissinger and his President-father-in-law didn't have any massive personal financial interests/wealth associated with important Russians/Russian banks;
- Kissinger didn't ask to have secret communications directly with the Kremlin solely on Russian soil and solely using Russian equipment and protocols; and most important of all right now,
- The Soviet's hadn't just interfered with Presidential election and hacked the DNC, actions which both party's members have characterized as an act of war, as an attack.
And, as you already know if you read my previous posts, I predict that VP Pence is too tainted to avoid going down with the Trump-tanic. In the "high crimes" thought, we have to remember that Pence lead Trump's transition team and so was in charge of background screenings for clearances, among other things. Pence knew or had a duty to know a lot of important things that were going on from November 9th to January 20th.
Let's start with:
VIOLATION OF FEDERAL ELECTION LAW
The law: 11 CFR 110.20 - Prohibition on contributions, donations, expenditures, independent expenditures, and disbursements by foreign nationals (52 U.S.C. 30121, 36 U.S.C. 510).
(a) Definitions
Title 11, Chap. I, Subchapter C, Part 300, Section 300.2, Definitions
(a)Definitions. For purposes of this section, the following definitions apply:
(1)Disbursement has the same meaning as in 11 CFR 300.2(d).
(2)Donation has the same meaning as in 11 CFR 300.2(e). [Which says:
"(e)Donation. For purposes of part 300, donation means a payment, gift, subscription, loan, advance, deposit, or anything of value given to a person, but does not include contributions."]
(4)Knowingly means that a person must:
(i) Have actual knowledge that the source of the funds solicited, accepted or received is a foreign national;
(ii) Be aware of facts that would lead a reasonable person to conclude that there is a substantial probability that the source of the funds solicited, accepted or received is a foreign national; or
(iii) Be aware of facts that would lead a reasonable person to inquire whether the source of the funds solicited, accepted or received is a foreign national, but the person failed to conduct a reasonable inquiry.
(g)Solicitation, acceptance, or receipt of contributions and donations from foreign nationals. No person shall knowingly solicit, accept, or receive from a foreign national any contribution or donation prohibited by paragraphs (b) through (d) of this section.
(h)Providing substantial assistance.
(1) No person shall knowingly provide substantial assistance in the solicitation, making, acceptance, or receipt of a contribution or donation prohibited by paragraphs (b) through (d), and (g) of this section.
(2) No person shall knowingly provide substantial assistance in the making of an expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement prohibited by paragraphs (e) and (f) of this section.
(i)Participation by foreign nationals in decisions involving election-related activities. A foreign national shall not direct, dictate, control, or directly or indirectly participate in the decision-making process of any person, such as a corporation, labor organization, political committee, or political organization with regard to such person's Federal or non-Federal election-related activities, such as decisions concerning the making of contributions, donations, expenditures, or disbursements in connection with elections for any Federal, State, or local office or decisions concerning the administration of a political committee.
CASE LAW:
Bluman v. Federal Election Commission, 2012 : A lawful resident alien has no First Amendment right to contribute to American candidates and political committees, and that foreign national political intervention implicated a principle "fundamental to the definition of our national political community," "which is that "foreign citizens do not have a constitutional right to participate in, and thus may be excluded from, activities of democratic self-government." It is the sovereign's obligation to preserve the basic conception of a political community.
CASE LAW:
Bluman v. Federal Election Commission, 2012 : A lawful resident alien has no First Amendment right to contribute to American candidates and political committees, and that foreign national political intervention implicated a principle "fundamental to the definition of our national political community," "which is that "foreign citizens do not have a constitutional right to participate in, and thus may be excluded from, activities of democratic self-government." It is the sovereign's obligation to preserve the basic conception of a political community.
TREASON
The law: U.S. Constitution
Article 3 Section 3
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
Reader be aware that treason has distinct importance as a crime for which one can be prosecuted and convicted and a distinct importance as a cultural legal and political concept. This point is important because there may be treasonous acts which demand prosecution but which occurred not during a time of war, which is a requirement for the criminal prosecution of treason. Also, it may be interesting to remember that states have their own version (criminal versions) of "treason".
So, as history shows, when War has not been declared, the "perpetraitor" is subject to prosecution and conviction for violation of any of a myriad of other "black letter" crimes.
The U.S. Constitution, at Article III, section 3, defines "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort." It then speaks to the crime of treason and what is required for the criminal conviction.
First, let's highlight that Trump's/Trump's team's actions very likely meet the understanding of "Treason" as we know it culturally in that they have betrayed their country by attempting to overthrow a government to which they owe allegiance. They colluded amongst themselves and with a foreign government to subvert election laws and to subvert U.S. citizens' right to participate in the election of their president, with the goal of assuming control of the executive branch of the U.S. government, and in exchange for depleting the authority and power of the U.S. within the Western world and as against Russia's position in that system.
Because several important public officials - elected and appointed (Congressional and Intelligence Community) have characterized Russia's 2016 interference with our electoral process as an "act of war", conviction for treason may not be the long shot that I originally thought. So this is an important characterization when it comes to exploring whether Trump, member(s) of his campaign or transition team, or his staff/family can be charged with committing treason. Further, convictions have been obtained using only circumstantial evidence, and against a father harboring his spy son.
SABOTAGE
The law:
U.S. Code › Title 18 › Part I › Chapter 105
18 U.S. Code § 2153 - Destruction of war material, war premises, or war utilities
(a) Whoever, when the United States is at war, or in times of national emergency as declared by the President or by the Congress, with intent to injure, interfere with, or obstruct the United States or any associate nation in preparing for or carrying on the war or defense activities, or, with reason to believe that his act may injure, interfere with, or obstruct the United States or any associate nation in preparing for or carrying on the war or defense activities, willfully injures, destroys, contaminates or infects, or attempts to so injure, destroy, contaminate or infect any war material, war premises, or war utilities, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than thirty years, or both.
(b)If two or more persons conspire to violate this section, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each of the parties to such conspiracy shall be punished as provided in subsection (a) of this section.
This may be a non-starter due to the apparent requirement of a state or war or a declared national emergency. Nonetheless, it is a very interesting prosecution to consider, since the violation is an act that sabotages the ability of the government to prepare for or participate in war or national defense. Operating a "fake media" system that usurps the government's ability to inform its citizenry about important security matters may fall into this category.
ESPIONAGE
The law: U.S. Code › Title 18 › Part I › Chapter 37
18 U.S. Code § 794 - Gathering or delivering defense information to aid foreign government
(a)Whoever, with intent or reason to believe that it is to be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of a foreign nation, communicates, delivers, or transmits, or attempts to communicate, deliver, or transmit, to any foreign government, or to any faction or party or military or naval force within a foreign country, whether recognized or unrecognized by the United States, or to any representative, officer, agent, employee, subject, or citizen thereof, either directly or indirectly, any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, note, instrument, appliance, or information relating to the national defense, shall be punished by death or by imprisonment for any term of years or for life, except that the sentence of death shall not be imposed unless the jury or, if there is no jury, the court, further finds that the offense resulted in the identification by a foreign power (as defined in section 101(a) of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978) of an individual acting as an agent of the United States and consequently in the death of that individual, or directly concerned nuclear weaponry, military spacecraft or satellites, early warning systems, or other means of defense or retaliation against large-scale attack; war plans; communications intelligence or cryptographic information; or any other major weapons system or major element of defense strategy.
Prosecution and conviction is possible during peace time-- no formal declaration of war is necessary. Violation occurs when, for example, a person gathers and transmits defense information knowing it will be used to damage the United States or assist foreign nation(s).
Also see this other section:
18 U.S. Code § 798 - Disclosure of classified information
(a)Whoever knowingly and willfully communicates, furnishes, transmits, or otherwise makes available to an unauthorized person, or publishes, or uses in any manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States or for the benefit of any foreign government to the detriment of the United States any classified information—
(1) concerning the nature, preparation, or use of any code, cipher, or cryptographic system of the United States or any foreign government; or
(2) concerning the design, construction, use, maintenance, or repair of any device, apparatus, or appliance used or prepared or planned for use by the United States or any foreign government for cryptographic or communication intelligence purposes; or
(3) concerning the communication intelligence activities of the United States or any foreign government; or
(4) obtained by the processes of communication intelligence from the communications of any foreign government, knowing the same to have been obtained by such processes—
SEDITION AND CONSPIRACY
There are federal and state version of sedition laws, so this opens up a whole new set of questions. But, basically, sedition laws make criminal the act of advocating/aiding overthrow of the government.
Coordination v. Collusion
Coordination is an election law term: plan with another to interfere unlawfully with campaign
Wednesday, May 10, 2017
The Nixon-Trump Parallel @ 2017
The Great Parallel @ 2017
Let's Start with a summary:
This Parallel, that I first noticed while reading the Haldeman Diaries earlier this year (2017) and first wrote about this March, is disturbingly informative of the existence not of some coincidental basket of personality traits and political antics but of the existence of a diagnosable personality disorder--a psychopathology, with similar outcomes when occurring in a similar situational context and access to social or cultural power.
Diagnosable narcissist
Governing style: pure partisanship consistently at the expense of the U.S. citizenry
Obsessed with his own media image
Targeted the media and labelled as "enemy"
Morbidly obsessed with revenge: Nixon's target was Ted Kennedy, developing a crystallizing and seething anger when JFK bested him in the 1960 presidential election. Trump's target is Hillary Clinton, having developed a crystallizing and seething anger at Obama having embarrassed him at the White House Correspondents Dinner. For both men, their targets represented the embodiment of--and access to, the person who actually triggered their revenge. Couching his actions as attacking an opposing candidate in the next presidential election, Nixon actually arranged to have Ted Kennedy "set up" and demanded that CIA give him the Lodge files/CIA files re: the death of Diem and the Bay of Pigs events, intending to use the classified info to publically tarnish JFK's legacy (and further taint Ted K.). Since assuming the job as president on Jan. 20, Trump has repeatedly blamed numerous gaffs and failures on Obama, regardless of the truth of the matter, and further stating the he inherited a mess from Obama and remaining entrenched, in his public speeches in his campaign rhetoric.
Criminality: Nixon fired persons (IRS) resisting his commands to commit criminal or unethical acts for "the party". Trump fired persons resisting his commands to commit or criminal or dishonest acts supporting his false accusations and pursuing the Russia investigation(s).
Publically excoriates "leaks" yet harbored demand for media to comply with his use of leaks.
Hypocritical position on transparency and openness: Both refused to release tax returns, publically challenging opponents to be open and transparent. Nixon stated that opponents don't release tax returns because they are hiding bad conduct. Trump tells citizenry the White House is the people's house while prohibiting media attendance and disclosure of WH visitor's log to the public.
Pathologically obsessed with infiltrating opponent candidate's/party's "offices". Nixon's Plumbers/Watergate 5. Trump's Hackers.
TIP: Nixon's vanity led him to record the very conversations that exposed his criminality. Given the significant parallels in the Trump and Nixon personalities, there is reason to conclude that Trump is also somehow memorializing his "negotiating excellence".
Let's Start with a summary:
This Parallel, that I first noticed while reading the Haldeman Diaries earlier this year (2017) and first wrote about this March, is disturbingly informative of the existence not of some coincidental basket of personality traits and political antics but of the existence of a diagnosable personality disorder--a psychopathology, with similar outcomes when occurring in a similar situational context and access to social or cultural power.
Diagnosable narcissist
Governing style: pure partisanship consistently at the expense of the U.S. citizenry
Obsessed with his own media image
Targeted the media and labelled as "enemy"
Morbidly obsessed with revenge: Nixon's target was Ted Kennedy, developing a crystallizing and seething anger when JFK bested him in the 1960 presidential election. Trump's target is Hillary Clinton, having developed a crystallizing and seething anger at Obama having embarrassed him at the White House Correspondents Dinner. For both men, their targets represented the embodiment of--and access to, the person who actually triggered their revenge. Couching his actions as attacking an opposing candidate in the next presidential election, Nixon actually arranged to have Ted Kennedy "set up" and demanded that CIA give him the Lodge files/CIA files re: the death of Diem and the Bay of Pigs events, intending to use the classified info to publically tarnish JFK's legacy (and further taint Ted K.). Since assuming the job as president on Jan. 20, Trump has repeatedly blamed numerous gaffs and failures on Obama, regardless of the truth of the matter, and further stating the he inherited a mess from Obama and remaining entrenched, in his public speeches in his campaign rhetoric.
Criminality: Nixon fired persons (IRS) resisting his commands to commit criminal or unethical acts for "the party". Trump fired persons resisting his commands to commit or criminal or dishonest acts supporting his false accusations and pursuing the Russia investigation(s).
Publically excoriates "leaks" yet harbored demand for media to comply with his use of leaks.
Hypocritical position on transparency and openness: Both refused to release tax returns, publically challenging opponents to be open and transparent. Nixon stated that opponents don't release tax returns because they are hiding bad conduct. Trump tells citizenry the White House is the people's house while prohibiting media attendance and disclosure of WH visitor's log to the public.
Pathologically obsessed with infiltrating opponent candidate's/party's "offices". Nixon's Plumbers/Watergate 5. Trump's Hackers.
TIP: Nixon's vanity led him to record the very conversations that exposed his criminality. Given the significant parallels in the Trump and Nixon personalities, there is reason to conclude that Trump is also somehow memorializing his "negotiating excellence".
Beyond the talking points @2017
* I hope that I can continue "Beyond the Talking Points" as a frequent themed-post looking beyond the media's analysis and politicians' spin of important cultural issues. These posts won't be fashioned as pre-cursors to white papers or the like, but as succinct thought-provokers.
1. RECENT WHITE HOUSE AND GOP CITATIONS OF SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCED ILLEGAL BORDER CROSSING MAKES FOR $20b BORDER WALL IRRESPONSIBLE
Trump White House administration and loyal GOP'ers have recently published statements that "illegal border crossings" are down well over 60% since January 20th (the day that Trump took office). They present this statistic in support of Trump's promise to build a $20B+ "border wall", when it is more likely to present the strongest argument against it: $20Billion now seems like a fiscally irresponsible policy to achieve the remaining goals intended by the border wall, and perhaps is even just a "gratuitous" real estate deal by a bloviating real estate mogul.
2. GOP LEADERS FACILITATED COMEY FIRING TO DELAY CURRENT WHITE HOUSE ADMINSTRATION COLLAPSE
Trump's firing of FBI director Comey may have caught the DNC, media, and public (and Comey) by surprise, but was more likely planned with the assistance of certain GOP leadership. This act will, in fact, delay the ongoing investigation into Russian meddling in the U.S. 2016 elections and the investigation into Trump campaign's ties to Russian intermediaries. And, where either investigation is likely to have progressed to critical knowledge/acquisition of evidence points, a party in control of Washington D.C. is likely to strategize delays to the implosion that are long enough to allow them to achieve some partisan advantage. The GOP certainly has a reputation for this kind of selfish myopic strategizing, and would certainly desire to at least like to retain a majority through the next election cycle.
3. WHEN TRUMP SAYS THE WHITE HOUSE IS THE PEOPLE'S HOUSE, HE DOESN'T MEAN THE PEOPLE WHO VOTED FOR HIM.
He means the people who paid for him.
4 MEDIA, PUNDITS, AND POLITICIANS HAVE ALL FORGOTTEN THAT REPUBLICANS FUNDAMENTAL POSITION IS AGAINST ANY TYPE OF HEALTH CARE PROGRAM, MAKING ANY GOP "REPLACE" EFFORTS A COMPLETE-YET UNSPOKEN, FLIP FLOP
Remember when Obama and the Dems were trying to get the ACA passed? Remember those Republicans that argued to vote "no" because there really won't be an opportunity to make changes once the American public gets used to having the ACA in the version that was passed? Remember that the GOP, rather than crossing the aisle and telling the American people that it, too, wanted all citizens to have access to affordable health care, adopted a partisan divisive demonizing approach in order to ensure the loyalty of its conservative voters? What the media and pundits are not analyzing is that the current efforts by the GOP and WH to repeal and replace the ACA requires a fundamental policy position that is the exact the same position for which the GOP demonized the Dems and the Obama WH when the latter struggled to pass the ACA. Why aren't the Dems harping on that, especially to leverage that criticism into bi-partisan-ism on the issue of access to health care FOR ALL.
On that last note, I want to point out again, as I did during the ACA fight, that the real issue is that the ACA is an insurance bill. Its not a health care bill. In that fact, there was/is no reason to think that any bill that is really an insurance bill will ever be sufficient or successful as a health care bill.
@ 2017
1. RECENT WHITE HOUSE AND GOP CITATIONS OF SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCED ILLEGAL BORDER CROSSING MAKES FOR $20b BORDER WALL IRRESPONSIBLE
Trump White House administration and loyal GOP'ers have recently published statements that "illegal border crossings" are down well over 60% since January 20th (the day that Trump took office). They present this statistic in support of Trump's promise to build a $20B+ "border wall", when it is more likely to present the strongest argument against it: $20Billion now seems like a fiscally irresponsible policy to achieve the remaining goals intended by the border wall, and perhaps is even just a "gratuitous" real estate deal by a bloviating real estate mogul.
2. GOP LEADERS FACILITATED COMEY FIRING TO DELAY CURRENT WHITE HOUSE ADMINSTRATION COLLAPSE
Trump's firing of FBI director Comey may have caught the DNC, media, and public (and Comey) by surprise, but was more likely planned with the assistance of certain GOP leadership. This act will, in fact, delay the ongoing investigation into Russian meddling in the U.S. 2016 elections and the investigation into Trump campaign's ties to Russian intermediaries. And, where either investigation is likely to have progressed to critical knowledge/acquisition of evidence points, a party in control of Washington D.C. is likely to strategize delays to the implosion that are long enough to allow them to achieve some partisan advantage. The GOP certainly has a reputation for this kind of selfish myopic strategizing, and would certainly desire to at least like to retain a majority through the next election cycle.
3. WHEN TRUMP SAYS THE WHITE HOUSE IS THE PEOPLE'S HOUSE, HE DOESN'T MEAN THE PEOPLE WHO VOTED FOR HIM.
He means the people who paid for him.
4 MEDIA, PUNDITS, AND POLITICIANS HAVE ALL FORGOTTEN THAT REPUBLICANS FUNDAMENTAL POSITION IS AGAINST ANY TYPE OF HEALTH CARE PROGRAM, MAKING ANY GOP "REPLACE" EFFORTS A COMPLETE-YET UNSPOKEN, FLIP FLOP
Remember when Obama and the Dems were trying to get the ACA passed? Remember those Republicans that argued to vote "no" because there really won't be an opportunity to make changes once the American public gets used to having the ACA in the version that was passed? Remember that the GOP, rather than crossing the aisle and telling the American people that it, too, wanted all citizens to have access to affordable health care, adopted a partisan divisive demonizing approach in order to ensure the loyalty of its conservative voters? What the media and pundits are not analyzing is that the current efforts by the GOP and WH to repeal and replace the ACA requires a fundamental policy position that is the exact the same position for which the GOP demonized the Dems and the Obama WH when the latter struggled to pass the ACA. Why aren't the Dems harping on that, especially to leverage that criticism into bi-partisan-ism on the issue of access to health care FOR ALL.
On that last note, I want to point out again, as I did during the ACA fight, that the real issue is that the ACA is an insurance bill. Its not a health care bill. In that fact, there was/is no reason to think that any bill that is really an insurance bill will ever be sufficient or successful as a health care bill.
@ 2017
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)