Despite Crazy News Cycle… We Should Remain Focused On Mueller

by with 2 Comments FeaturedPolitics

The media buzz around Meuller…

Two weeks ago as the President began to ratchet up his rhetoric against the Russia investigation, the press spent four days trying to drum up a narrative that Mueller was about to be fired, setting off a constitutional crisis. The basis was that the President was frustrated, attacking Mueller directly (which hadn’t happened before) and his past firing of Comey made it at least plausible that he might do something irrational. In supporting the narrative, CNN spent the weekend asking every GOP senator they could find whether they would support firing Mueller. As anyone could imagine, they were not supportive, and their solicited statements served to further whip up urgency that Mueller’s days were numbered. I truly don’t believe that anyone in the media thought that was really on the table; instead, a narrative to fill a slow news cycle on a Sunday.

Far more plausible is that the President ratcheted up his rhetoric because he had been promised by his lawyers the probe was going to wrap up soon. Against the President’s instincts, John Dowd had been promising him that compliance (not bravado) would carry the day. That’s not the President’s natural way, but he relented. The result was a probe that continued, and when his lawyers brought him the news that he was about to be asked to testify, he blew up at both his counsel (who he promptly dismissed), and without trust in their guidance, lashed out again in frustration. While that is petulant, childish and wholly unpresidential, that’s been no different from most of his tweets over the past year. It’s equally likely that a president who never seemed to collude with his Secretary of State, National Security Advisor, OMB chief or House and Senate leaders, also never took the time to collude with anyone on his staff talking to Russia (albeit more out of ADD than any principled stand), and is frustrated that his job is to put out a message, and yet Russia (and Stormy Daniels) have been the message over and over.

If the President didn’t understand with Comey, he understands now that the end of Mueller is the end of his administration. I can’t imagine any responsible person on either side of (or even 50 miles from) the aisle that wants any part of a president who actively colluded with an enemy nation to win his election. If that’s proven, all agree that he’s done. Further, if Mueller is fired before completing his work, the best possible outcome for the White House would be a re-start with a far more difficult prosecutor with far more reason to dig. The president firing Mueller is most likely the dream scenario for those starkly opposed to this president. Far more likely is that it drags on for another year, hangs shade over all of Washington for years to come, further pulls all of America toward the far right and far left, and we all spend the next 3 (to 7?) years reading what Jimmy Kimmel used to call “mean tweets.” These days that seemed like an antiquated characterization… These days, they’re just tweets.

Gun Control: Could It Be That Easy?

by with One Comment FeaturedPolitics

Let’s be honest, the NRA’s grip on today’s politics and the fervent insistence on unlimited gun ownership based on second amendment rights will prevent all guns from being confiscated. That said, it is possible to address gun violence, specifically in response to the exorbitant number of mass shootings our nation has had, without taking all guns from everyone (which we know wouldn’t happen anyway).

The tide seems to be turning in terms of responses and reactions to mass shootings, especially after the recent shooting carried out at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida on Valentine’s Day. This shooting is still being covered in the news over a month later, whereas previous mass shootings have disappeared from conversation in less than a week. Although nothing concrete and nationwide has been passed so far, the proposed “Federal Extreme Risk Protection Act” may be the closest to “common sense gun-control legislation” we will ever see.

The proposal would allow for those in close contact with individuals displaying concerning behavior or indicators that might suggest an impending violent outburst, to file a federal court petition, barring that individual from buying or possessing firearms. In an effort to not completely enrage second-amendment enthusiasts, individuals with a petition brought against them will have the opportunity to defend themselves and appeal the decision.

I am aware that the United States will never be one of those countries with zero guns. As much as it may reduce violent instances or be the right thing to do, it will not happen. But I do think “red flag” gun legislation is a reasonable medium that satisfies our need to do something and while continuing to allow the “responsible” gun enthusiasts to keep their arms. As much as the second amendment gives us the right, not every citizen can handle that right safely.

Progressive Woman Responds to SOTU

by with One Comment FeaturedPolitics

Last night, I went through a wide range of emotions watching the State of the Union address. I typically enjoy listening to this address, as it provides a high level report card on what the President and Congress have accomplished the previous year. I knew to expect some Republican propaganda, as all State of the Union addresses are heavily influenced by the party of the sitting President. However, something about last night was different causing the up and down of emotions I experienced.

President Trump touched on a wide variety of topics, from taxes to nuclear weapons and immigration to the opioid crisis. Unfortunately the common theme used when talking about the majority of the topics was fear. In his speech, Pres. Trump continuously pitted immigrants against Americans; environmentalists versus the coal industry; and the rich versus those who are less fortunate. Comments such as “Americans are Dreamers too;” “clean coal;” and everything he said about MS-13, though reports show White male Nationalists have killed the most Americans than any other political, ethnic or religious group in recent years, shed light on the fear he is striking in America, but packaging under the “Make America Great Again” theme.

Lastly, the showcasing of the many anomalies with all the guests in the audience he told stories about felt more like reality TV than true appreciation and/or sympathy. The Pres. and his team purposely sought out the most extreme examples and shamelessly used the grief of these families to drive his point home. Why did these families subject themselves to such a spectacle, I will probably never understand.

Conversative Vet Responds to SOTU

by with One Comment FeaturedPolitics

The nature of the state of the union speech, with its widely disseminated advance copies and formal nature, proved to be the most presidential delivery of any speech the president has given since his inauguration speech. While he seemed bored at times he did appear presidential. Still, it was a good moment for him (if only by comparison).

Nonetheless, it appeared that there were a number of cases he could have made stronger.

The power of that platform, speaking directly to the American people gave him a window to appeal for this wall – and for his amnesty plan… the great compromise that he’s proposed still needs a horse to drive through the legislature, and this was the perfect time to  demand the masses to be that horse – possibly sealing the issue and easily skirting another impending shutdown.

It was a missed opportunity that will likely gain even more attention should we be back again looking at a closed government with Schumer sitting on his hands.

His comment on Apple’s $350bn also seemed odd – while it’s a large number, it seemed to me that it was the first offer to see if the IRS of the new regime would accept that as “enough” as a strategy to onshore corporate income under the new tax reform laws. By touting it in his speech, he may have possibly intended to set the model for other US multinational companies, but he likely gave Apple an early pass before their time.

He generally made a good case for the economy, which is likely his most compelling argument and point of strength. I wonder, though, if he has the ability to stay on message and for how long.

Tonight our government felt sort of normal for the first time in a while… but I admit, I’m waiting with bated breath for the other shoe (or tweet) to drop.

Oprah is Not the Answer

by with 2 Comments FeaturedPolitics

The response to one unqualified celebrity is not another unqualified celebrity from the opposing side. Although Trump and Oprah are completely different as individuals, business people, pop-culture personalities, and potential politicians, neither are qualified to run the country. The notion that Oprah would win because she’s more widely liked, is great, I’m all for a minority as president, or a woman president, or both. But, of course Oprah is well liked, the entirety of her successful career was built on winning the hearts of middle-American housewives. Although I’m sure Oprah is well intentioned, and she probably aligns with many people’s political views, but she’s still not qualified for the intricate and critical role of President of the United States or to make her political leanings a legislative reality.

We shouldn’t be recreating a bad situation with someone who’s personality the country likes a little better. I understand that the last election was unbelievable and unprecedented. But now that there is a precedent for a celebrity president, doesn’t mean we should do it again. We’re talking about The President of the United States, a position we used to think required a competent, qualified individual with a proven track record in a relevant field. That may not be in the job requirements anymore, but look what it’s done for the country; possible nuclear war, poorly handled natural disasters, immigration and foreign affairs nightmares, and racial tensions and hate crimes at an all-time high. Oprah, as much as she is a savvy business woman, cultural icon, philanthropic juggernaut, and well-liked by almost everyone, she is not qualified to be president.

2018: Fast & Furious Politics?

by with No Comment FeaturedPolitics

Happy New Year! 2018 is here, and 2017 closes out the first year of Trump, a devastating hurricane season, more mumble rap, and of course another installment of the “Fast and Furious” franchise. Using the “Fast and Furious” franchise as a reference serves multiple purposes. Not because I’m a fan or non-fan, or because I even think the “Fast and Furious” franchise is good. It’s because it’s a good reference when comparing highly predictable actions and others that are completely unnecessary. No “Fast and Furious” movies needed to be made after the very first one back in the ancient year of 2001. Given all “Fast and Furious” movies have the same reoccurring scene with a car flying and Vin Diesel jumping out of it, and not even getting a paper cut in the process, the “Fast and Furious” movies aren’t the most surprising and cerebral movies to watch.

Now back to Happy New Year celebratory feel goods.

2018, will be much like 2017. Don’t be fooled. You just saw “Fast and Furious” 6, don’t think “Fast and Furious” 7 is going to turn into “Saving Private Ryan.” It’ll be another year of a company introducing a new phone and trying to convince us that the phone we already have is worthless, another year of a blockbuster flop and a blockbuster surprise, more mumble rap, a good sports story, a bad sports story, and then there’s Trump. Trump will have a profound effect on the political world, and I when I write world, I mean actual world affairs.

Trump’s first year largely swirled around domestic issues, he couldn’t help himself from not doing anything international. Trump in careless remarks or actions did the following: opted the United States out of the international Paris climate change treaty, one that even North Korea is on board with; during a photo opt shoved world leaders out the way to get in the front row of the picture, and engaged in a Drake/Meek Mill twitter battle with Kim Jong-Un. 2018 Twitter fingers may turn into trigger fingers (to quote Drake), and only Trump will be to blame.

Just like in the “Fast and Furious” movies Vin Diesel and company will not only save the day and get the girl, but will do it in even more of an exaggerated fashion than the previous installment, Trump’s hostile words and eventual actions towards rouge state leaders is getting worse and will continue to get worse by the Tweet.

North Korea is really a sideshow beef for Trump. His true objective is the last truly anti-American state with actual power and influence, Iran. UN Ambassador Nikki Haley and Trump in the final weeks of 2017 quietly gave the “whole world is watching” spills regarding recent protests of the government in Iran. Also, remember Trump campaigned against the Iranian nuclear agreement made under the Obama administration as being a terrible deal. Trump probably doesn’t know where Iran is on a map, but he does know that not much American business is being conducted there and that’s a problem for him. The extreme right, which Trump is clearly a part of, will lead you to believe Iran is a threat to the American way of life and the world is in danger. Akin to fear-mongering and the drumming of danger portrayed by George Bush in 2002, Iran is as much of a danger to the United States as “Fast and Furious” 7 will be nominated for the academy award picture of the year.

Iran really is an energy superpower with geographical and cultural importance that stands in the way of a complete American influenced middle east. Since 1979, and the fall the American-British propped Shah monarchy, Iran has been circled for revenge. Iran has never been surrounded geographically by American favoring states like it is now. Also, Iran had a strong relationship with Russia, one in which could easily go away with an American led and Russian backed military option against them. This is where 2018 could go from terrible Tweets and tax deals to actual boots and blood on the ground. Any unprovoked military and/or sanctions against Iran from the actual United States is completely unnecessary and can be avoided, just as I avoided “Fast and Furious” 7 for the longest until I saw it on HBO. [It was free, so don’t blame me.

Luckily, the 2018 midterm elections might stop the momentum. The Dr. Dre beats drumming for war can easily go to Great Value headphones if war hawk support for actions against Iran is defeated in November. In the meanwhile, in 2018 enjoy a terrible Super Bowl halftime performance, a viral meme, a catchy mumble rap song, and of course plans for another “Fast and Furious” movie. Things won’t change in Washington, especially with Trump in office.

[2017 In Review] Reactionary Policy Kills Dreams (DACA)

by with One Comment FeaturedPolitics

Congress, which has an approval rating less than 20%, now controls the fate of nearly 800,000 immigrants. Time is running out. Considering this White House and everything that’s going on in the world, it’s easy to forget about this critical issue. A few months ago, one of our contributors wrote a compelling piece regarding illegal immigration and why this President is wrong.

Here’s the original article…

“Just as the DEA’s (Drug Enforcement Agency) work in the “war on drugs” is primarily reactionary, meaning most of their enforcement is done to those who do business after narcotics have entered the United States, illegal immigration enforcement efforts are primarily against the illegal immigrant and not against the structures supporting their illegal immigration.”

To further to my above statement (technically a run-on sentence), drug enforcement stops roughly just 1% of the illegal drugs that enter the United States. Since 1972, the United States via local, state, and federal law enforcement has spent over a trillion dollars ensuring little Johnny doesn’t smoke weed. What do we have to show for it? We have more than 2.6 million people in prison and over half of them are there for drug related “crimes.” That’s more than any other nation, a million more than China. Yes, that China, the one with 1.2 billion people. The one where basic freedoms aren’t allowed and anything and everything will land you in prison; yet, somehow their prison population is one million less. I digress.

Back to illegal immigration.

Remember the classic Denzel Washington movie “Training Day”? It’s classic because it came out 16 years ago – newborn babies who just arrived when it hit the theaters are now driving, yikes! Anyway, there’s a scene in which Denzel is sitting in a restaurant with three judges. One of the judges tells Denzel’s character, Alonzo, about a case in which a man avoided prison because he claimed insanity. His proof was spreading peanut butter between his buttocks, and when hearing about this, Alonzo says, “Well, he earned his freedom.”

So, what does “Training Day” and the war on drugs have to do with President Trump ending DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals)? First, let me explain exactly what DACA is. DACA is an Obama-era program that shields young undocumented immigrants from deportation. The purpose of DACA is to protect eligible immigrant youth from deportation who came to the United States when they were children.

Now, let’s start comparing. First, let me use the “Training Day” reference, and quite frankly, you can find a “Training Day” comparison for anything. When Alonzo said, “he earned his freedom” in reference to getting out of jail, I compare this to children who arrived in the United States via their parents. The children at 9 obviously couldn’t tell their parents, “Naw I ain’t going,” when forced to leave their country for the United States. For that, how can one realistically penalize them? Furthermore, for those children born in the United States, there’s a thing called the Citizen Clause in the 14th Amendment, in which it states, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” Even Trump should be able to decipher that one. Constitutionally speaking and common sense wise, the children have earned their right to be United States citizens. No need to join the military, recite the pledge of allegiance backwards, or take a test in which most Americans would fail, to solidify their citizenship.

That takes care of the children, now the parents.

By definition, an illegal immigrant is a foreigner who enters the U.S. without an entry or immigrant visa, especially a person who crosses the border by avoiding inspection or who overstays the period of time allowed as a visitor, tourist, or businessperson. And though many of us as Americans like to think we’re the greatest and most happening; we do have a lot going on for sure, but people aren’t risking it all to come here to just go to Chick-fil-a or watch a ballgame. No. People come here for a very specific reason. Primarily to land work and a chance to better their current situation. It’s as simple as that. They don’t come here to rape and pillage the American landscape.

Just like the DEA’s work in the war on drugs is mostly against dealers and those involved in the drug trade within US borders, enforcement of illegal immigration is mostly against individuals and not the structure or system which enables their efforts prior to illegally entering our country. Efforts against the businesses and entities supporting the lifestyle of one who is illegal aren’t enforced with the same punishment and veracity. Meanwhile, back at your typical Trump rally, the call to round up the owner of Jed’s construction, who employs and pays illegal immigrants, isn’t as loud as it is to remove the workers he employs who made efforts to come to the United States.

In other words, just like the DEA fails to stop the drugs from entering the United States, immigration enforcement fails to truly address the support structures that keep illegal immigration alive and well.

Lastly, I’m one who supports reasonable legal immigration efforts. I understand the need to address illegal immigration; but, unlike President Trump I also understand there needs to be more serious efforts and disdain directed towards the elements behind illegal immigration and not the person simply trying to make a buck… even if it’s only to buy a chicken sandwich.

This article was originally published on 8 September 2017.

More on DACA?

Trump Ends DACA, America’s Top Universities Respond

Is Tillerson Next?

by with One Comment FeaturedGen ZPolitics

Rex might be on the way out. On October 9, 2017, we published an article detailing his troubles with the State Department. Since then, rumors of his feud with Donald Trump have continued. Our initial article below might include some of the reasons for what seems to be his inevitable departure.

[Rex Tillerson’s War Against the State Department]

Rex Tillerson has had a less-than-illustrious tenure as Secretary of State so far. Perhaps it’s because he seems to be more focused on reorganizing the department than on, you know, diplomacy. His striking lack of success has lead many to call for his resignation and for him to be called the “most ineffectual secretary of state since 1898,” by respected Foreign Policy columnist Max Boot. 

The Trump administration has made it exceedingly clear that it does not consider diplomacy a priority. According to some metrics compiled by the New York Times, under Tillerson’s leadership, the department has had its lowest profile in nearly half a century. Democracy promotion has been erased from the State Department’s mission statement and the Trump Administration has made every effort to cut key foreign aid programs. 

Part of the reason the department has been so ineffective is because the administration has failed to fill an inexcusable amount of key positions. Only one Assistant Secretary of State has been confirmed and the vast majority do not even have nominees. (Here’s a list compiled by The Washington Post of unfilled positions.) To put this in perspective the United States is currently facing a nuclear standoff in North Korea without an Undersecretary (or Assistant Secretary for that matter) for Arms control. While the federal government’s hiring freeze has been rescinded it remains in effect at the State Department. Until recently, state department officials were not allowed to serve on the National Security Council omitting an essential perspective from national security decisions. 

Tillerson’s mismanagement of the State Department has caused many senior diplomats to leave, further weakening State’s ability to conduct diplomacy. At the same time, Tillerson has suspended the prestigious fellowship programs that allow bright young minds to enter the department. Some of these fellows have their salaries paid by outside institutions, so Tillerson is essentially rejecting free labor. On top of all these other issues, there is growing evidence that the Secretary of State is on the outs with his boss. According to several sources, Donald Trump has become increasingly frustrated with Secretary Tillerson.

Just like pretty much everybody else in the government, lawmakers on Capitol Hill also seem to be fed up with the Secretary. The Senate Appropriations Committee passed a bill that completely upended the administration’s plans to make significant cuts to foreign aid and diplomacy initiatives – providing $11 billion more than requested. Not only did they allocate more funds than Tillerson wanted, they also included management amendments in the bill that severely limit the Secretary’s ability to reorganize the department. For example, the bill limits the size of the Policy Planning Staff – something that Tillerson had been expanding and that career State Department officials felt was undermining their ability to influence policy.

Now to be sure not everything Secretary Tillerson does is awful. His willingness to distance himself from Donald Trump’s remarks on Charlottesville is admirable and some of his reorganization initiatives do make a lot of sense. But the State Department still needs to serve its primary function – namely advancing US diplomatic interests – something it has not been able to do effectively under Rex Tillerson’s leadership. The decline of America’s diplomatic arm can only lead to an increased reliance on hard (military) power. A Senate report sums up this issue pretty nicely: “The lessons learned since September 11, 2001, include the reality that defense alone does not provide for American strength and resolve abroad. Battlefield technology and firepower cannot replace diplomacy and development.” 

This article was originally published on 9 October 2017.

“Sending Them Back To An Impoverished Land Is Simply Cruel!”

by with One Comment FeaturedPolitics
First Nicaragua, now Haiti…

On January 12, 2010, Haiti experienced a devastating 7.0 magnitude earthquake that ravished the island, killed more than 200,000 people, and displaced more than 1.5 million residents. Immediately following that earthquake they had a cholera outbreak that killed an additional 9,000 people, and just last year Hurricane Matthew slammed the island and damaged 80% of the homes. Considering the impact of the initial earthquake in 2010, Haitians were granted temporary status in the United States.

Their temporary protected status (TPS) was extended by John Kelly, the previous Secretary of State and current Chief of Staff. However, it was set to expire on January 22, 2018. With that being said, I think we’d be foolish to believe the extensions would continue considering Trump’s campaign stance on immigration. Also, for the past few months administration officials have been echoing his position on immigration, specifically mentioning their intent to end special programs like TPS that allow Haitians to stay and work in the United States. And not just Haitians, Nicaraguans TPS ends January 2019, and a decision for Hondurans and El Salvadorians is expected to be made soon – in all, roughly 325,000 people representing 10 countries.

On September 18, 2017, members of South Florida’s congressional delegation, both Democrats and Republicans, including Frederica Wilson and Marco Rubio, wrote a bipartisan letter to the acting Secretary of State Elaine C. Duke requesting an 18-month extension (July 2019) for the 60,000 Haitian immigrants in the United States. And last night, the officials from the Department of Homeland Security announced plans to do just that.

Their bipartisan letter stated…

“The government of Haiti has outlined plans to rebuild the country and boost economic activity, and the United States remains steadfast in assisting Haiti. In order to allow full implementation of these efforts, and given the ongoing extraordinary conditions in Haiti, we urge you to extend the TPS designation for 18 months, within all applicable rules and regulations, for Haitian nationals who are currently living in, and contributing to, our great country.” 

This letter was signed by 10 members of South Florida’s congressional delegation, from both parties. If there were no plans for an additional extension, is 18-months was considered a win? Also, do Florida Republicans like Marco Rubio deserve credit for joining their Democratic colleagues in signing this letter?

Why did they decide to write a letter? Well many Haitians here in the U.S. under TPS reside in South Florida. Many of them work in healthcare, and according to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, their immediate absence would cause a shortage in labor, which would likely have a negative impact on South Florida’s economy. 

When asked about this sudden announcement, Gary Coichy, a Haitian American and marketing professional in NYC, said…

“How quickly do we forget the catastrophic earthquake that struck Haiti in 2010. TPS has allowed these Haitians a new sense of hope, a new start. No statistical data can point to Haitians causing violence or committing any act of terrorism. This action by the U.S. Government is inhuman and illogical. There’s ways to monitor this program and ensure they go through the due process to become legal Aliens. Sending them back to an impoverished land is simply cruel!” 

Is there anything that can be done? Is this an example of Trump over-stepping with his aggressive immigration agenda, or should such policy decisions be viewed as customary and inevitable?

Regardless of how you might feel politically, it’s hard to believe that Haiti’s economy and infrastructure will be prepared to welcome and support 60,000 people in just 18 months.

The Accidental President

by with One Comment FeaturedPolitics

Six months later, amidst NFL tweets and a speech at the UN against Iran and North Korea, which sounded a bit like it was written by a speechwriter from Iran or North Korea, it still doesn’t feel quite like reality.

Even so, and although I’m not even sure it’s part of some brilliant plan anymore, there are two things that may have made this a time for a president that seems completely willing to descend into chaos: DACA and North Korea.  I understand that raises some eyebrows, but hear me out.

Despite what the President said over and over before the election on DACA, and as scary as it is to be on the train right now, I’m not certain he hasn’t done the dreamers a favor.  Press even Chuck Schumer or Dianne Feinstein to explain the legality of President Obama’s DACA program and they are hard pressed.  They know it’s not legal, and they know it’s their own Congress that’s being usurped by executive order.  They’re also extremely uncomfortable with letting the precedent of executive privilege sit with any president- but especially this one.  If these attorney generals took their case to this Supreme Court, defended by this solicitor general, DACA likely would be overturned.  Despite the rhetoric, the six-month delay to give Congress time to fix it (ie- demand they fix it) seems likely to have the votes it would need to clear, and if the President really is willing to sign it (looks very much like he is), this could be a constitutional crisis averted.  President Obama did DACA by executive order because he had to.  If Trump makes this law, it will be one point on the board for America as partial compensation for the pain of watching TV every day.

The other may be North Korea.  Now- I’m not certain that we won’t be engaged in armed conflict – possibly nuclear-armed conflict – with North Korea in the coming two years.  That said, for ten years they have been swearing that they will kill all of us in a sea of fire and building their nuclear arsenal and missile capability while president after president said “don’t do that or else…”  and they keep going, and there’s no “or else” that seems to matter.  It could well be that there was no way for this to end well for the US, that eventually this conflict was coming, and waiting for them to catch up to full nuclear capability would make it worse, not better.  If that’s true, maybe it’s prudent to end this 50-year standoff before the DPRK truly does bring a nuclear ICBM (intercontinental ballistic missile) system online.  And I’m not sure a traditional, prudent president in the mold of anyone since Eisenhower would have been willing to take the personal risk of a preemptive strike (which is likely to have horrible repercussions in the best of circumstances)- even though that same president may know it’s the most prudent course of action for the World.

I still can’t watch news live.  It hurts. But if in 2 years’ time, DACA is law and the DPRK is no longer a threat to the World, this president will have a legacy that might look better to history than it looks on Twitter.