Impeachment? A Lot of Questions and Very Few Answers

by with No Comment FeaturedGlobalPolitics

They say that timing is everything and you should not rush into anything that could have a lasting impact. Well on Monday, after much consulting with colleagues and other invested parties, Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi decided to call the question of impeachment for President Donald J. Trump. Some question her timing, did she wait too long? What was she waiting on in the first place? Why now and what is the game plan moving forward?

If you go back in time to when he was elected in 2016, there were already hints that he had worked with the Russians through family ties and others to get information on his opponent, Senator Hilary Clinton, that would help him become what we know now as our 45th President. After the Mueller investigation concluded with such lackluster results, the world still wanted to know how is this guy still in office. It was not until an insider with knowledge of Trump’s phone call with the President of Ukraine tipped off authorities did members of the Democratic Party get the smoking gun they needed to enact and solidify Trump’s fate to be impeached. A phone call where Trump tried to strong-arm information on one of his political rivals, former Vice President of the United States, Joe Biden’s son Hunter Biden and him doing business in Ukraine. Trump’s response was that of a person who felt he did nothing wrong. “Yes, I did talk to the President of Ukraine. It was a perfect call,” said Trump on his talk with the Ukrainian President.

Trump admitting to talking to the President of Ukraine and asking him to investigate Hunter Biden’s business dealings to use that against Vice President Joe Biden is a violation of his duties as the President of the United States of America, no matter how you slice it. Trump used his office for political gain just like the former Governor from Illinois, Rob Blagojevich did in 2009, when he tried to sell the vacated Senate seat of President Barack Obama when he was elected to the office. Blagojevich has served 7 years of his 14-year sentence.

So now what?

Well, members of the majority controlled Democratic House have to vote unanimously to impeach him and then the process begins. Looking at how many people have come out in support of impeachment from Congress, Democrats like Al Green of Texas, John Lewis of Maryland and freshman Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, you would think they are ready to take the vote and move it on to the Senate, which is controlled by the Republican Party… the same Republican Party whose majority leader is Mitch McConnell and who some have called a puppet of Donald Trump.

One can only wonder how long this is going to take? Will it impact the election season which is already underway? Will the base that Trump has handled so well continue to support him, or will they slowly drift away? What about Vice President Joe Biden? Will he take a stand for Hunter who was wrongly singled out by Trump… who, of course, is looking for one of his usual distractions from a number of recent bad dealings, such as tariffs, guns and mass shootings, his alienation of all of our allies and lastly, his friend and supporter Putin from Russia.

Looks like we’ll have to wait and see.

Similar Read: Important Takeaways From the Mueller Testimony 

GHWB

George HW Bush and the American Dream

by with No Comment FeaturedPolitics

“The ‘American Dream’ means giving it your all, trying your hardest, accomplishing something. And then I’d add to that, giving something back. No definition of a successful life can do anything but include serving others.”

That quote from George HW Bush struck me even as a kid as my concept of a model life, and his life truly was an ultimate example of a life well lived.

There was no shortage of privilege – but also no sign of resting on his family laurels. The son of a wealthy bank executive turned Senator, he was shot down in the Pacific at 19 years old – only returning to Yale to begin school after the war.

George HW Bush could’ve live a charmed life any way he wished, and chose to live a charmed life in service to his country. As an ambassador to China and the UN, as head of the CIA, he proved to be one of the most successful commanders in chief in American history – evident at the time for his management of the surprisingly successful first war in Iraq, and his wisdom in bringing it to a quick end once the initial objectives had been achieved.

He would also be one of the most exemplary ex-presidents of modern history. As press scrutiny laid bare the foibles of the 20th century’s presidents, his example of personal character as a husband and father seems matched only by President Obama’s.

He lived his life to the fullest for 94 years, and left the world as he lived – selflessly, but on his own terms. Among family and friends.

God bless, Sir… heaven surely awaits.

The Pepsi Challenge (Political Opinions & Social Progress)

by with No Comment Diversity & InclusionSocial Issues

Opinions should be innocuous and a matter of preference, and that has not been the case with political opinions. They’ve become so polarizing, that they’ve halted the political progression of this nation. Something no opinion should do. 

Have you ever been to a restaurant and the waiter asks for your drink order and you say, “I’ll just have a Coke?” The waiter sometimes responds, “I’m sorry, we only have Pepsi products.” With the exception of very rare sticklers to Coke products, almost everyone will simply order a Pepsi without giving it much thought.  Why? Because while most people prefer either Coke or Pepsi, it doesn’t prohibit them from enjoying a nice cold fizzy drink if their favorite isn’t available. No one is going to leave a restaurant for the protest of Coke products when the restaurant only has Pepsi products. You like Coke over Pepsi or Pepsi over Coke, yet your opinion on the soda is inconsequential and you have no problem drinking the similar alternative.

The current US political climate has allowed people to have political stances, stances that are quite damaging under the guise of “opinions.” 

Even more dangerous, opinions have superseded actual facts.

From the revisionist historical narrative that the American Civil War was fought over “states rights” and not slavery to holding dear to the belief President Obama was a Muslim (as if that would have been a bad thing anyway), their opinions have become shields for bigotry, thus the extreme polarization of issues. 

Related: Diplomacy and War: Know the Difference

Recent news has been filled with such opinions of Black Lives Matter vs all lives matter… maintaining confederate statues vs removing confederate statues… and the latest debate… how do people feel about Colin Kaepernick and the NFL player protests. “Opinions” on these issues mentioned above, specifically from those who identify as Conservative/Trump base, unequivocally go against a cause or people that have been wronged. 

“That’s just my opinion” simply isn’t valid for wanting to uphold honoring public places for a treasonous faction like the Confederate States of America. That “opinion” fuels the opposition and it’s a shield for an appreciation of the Confederacy, which you know… attacked the United States to uphold slavery. 

Yes, it seems as if this article is a dig at Conservatives/Trump base. For starters, you catch on quick; and second, yes, you are correct. Conservatives have become entrenched on opinions that side with the wrongdoing of marginalized people. Liberal or Conservative extremism is bad; however, Conservative extremism seems to be furthering the political divide in this nation for their relentless defense of bigotry and being anti-social progress. 

I want to do my part with those burning their Nikes… worried about Hillary Clinton emails… and seeing the need to honor Generals of a nation that went to war with their countrymen and attempted to secede from the United States. I offer you all a Coke and a smile… and if you don’t yell, “It’s disrespectful to the flag,” I’ll even see if I can get you a Pepsi. 

Was Michelle Obama Wrong?

by with 6 Comments CultureFeatured

In 2016, Michelle Obama left attendees at the Democratic National Convention in awe after finishing her speech in support of Hillary Clinton’s bid for President. A speech that will surely be remembered for decades was highlighted by her now famous moto that has probably been echoed and repeated more than a billion times since…

“When they go low, we go high!” 

In reference to not stooping to the level of a figurative bully, how could anyone regardless of their socioeconomic background or political beliefs disagree? It’s a perfect example to set for our children and followers alike. It’s also a courageous and impressive thing to say regarding an opposition who has taken shots at the legitimacy of your husband’s citizenship and faith, who’s been accused of sexual misconduct by numerous women, and who’s incited violence at his protests… to say the least. I don’t think anyone on the left would’ve faulted Michelle for stooping low. But she didn’t, she stayed high just as she informed and directed millions of people do to that evening in Philadelphia, PA.

Except, there’s one problem.

In reference to the 2016 election, she was wrong… dead wrong. Candidate and soon to be President Donald Trump went low, extremely low… and won. Hillary and Democrats tried to go high, much higher than Trump and his surrogates, and they lost. How did this happen?

Did Hillary run a bad campaign? Maybe

Did FBI Director Comey’s announcement about her emails hurt her campaign? Maybe

We could go on and on about who and what potentially impacted the election. But in the game of politics, can Democrats continue to go high when their opposition is willing to do whatever it takes to win?

Regarding our moral compass, the ramifications of going high have and will continue to cost Dems and their constituents a lot. Countless criminal justice reforms have been rolled back, LGBT protections have been reversed, environmental regulations have been cut, we’ve imposed tariffs on our allies, the Courts upheld his travel ban which could last for decades, he’ll get to nominate another Supreme Court Justice (Kennedy’s resigned – 6/27/18), and Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 ruling which legalized abortion, will likely be on the table in the near future. It hasn’t even been 2 years, and that’s just a few of the going high costs that will hurt Dems for years to come.

So looking back, and looking forward, was going high worth it… when going so low paid off?

Subscribe for free to receive similar content. 

Normalizing Hate?

by with 2 Comments News

Roseanne Barr was called to the carpet this week, after tweeting some incredibly incendiary racist comments. ABC canceled “Roseanne” the newly-rebooted sitcom she starred in. She shocked and horrified many, and has been publicly derided for her openly hostile tweets about Valerie Jarrett, a senior advisor to Barack Obama during his tenure in the White House.

First off, this is no surprise if you’ve been within earshot of Roseanne’s mouth, or in this case, tweets. She has a rich and storied history of spouting off hateful rhetoric and conspiracy theories. But her latest circus act is perfectly acceptable – and even endorsed – by the POTUS. 

Related: Trump Is Not a Racist… He’s Worse 

Barr’s off-the-wall behavior is a mere symptom of our current social crisis, and throws it in sharp relief:

White supremacist rallies, and Trump’s refusal to condemn them. Muslim bans. Calling Haiti and African nations “shithole” countries. “Pocahontas.” “Grab ‘em by the pussy!” The “Wall.” Removing protections for LGBTQ people, people of color and low-income families. Removing environmental protections. Vilifying the Free Press. Undermining the very fabric of our system of laws by spouting unsupported claims that the FBI is the problem – not him or Russia. Eroding hard-fought protections and rights of anyone who is not white, male and rich. Actually, of anyone who isn’t Donald Trump.

Trump is the Great Pretender. He is pretending to care about our country, national security, and economy; yet, he is alienating other nations, ignoring the potential consequences of his posturing, and ripping our country apart. He feeds the small-minded the scraps of his “heroism,” while he works to undo the social progress of the last 60 years. Spinning like a hurricane, he destroys nearly everything in his path. 

A true leader works to support and protect the country and its citizens. Not just some of its citizens, or those who excuse the leader’s behavior because they get more money that way.

Can’t anyone see that the Emperor has no clothes? We can no longer think of these outrages as one-offs. This is a methodical and systematic unraveling of what this country stands for: life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

This is NOT normal, is it? 

Subscribe for free for similar content. 

[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

The Life And Times of Bowe Bergdahl

by with One Comment FeaturedGlobal

Bergdahl is going home. Getting to that answer has taken the Army more than three years – after the Obama administration traded him for five of the worst terrorists in Guantanamo. There’s a lot to unpack in this.

Working backward:

Bowe Bergdahl was a dumb kid who did dumb kid things. While that’s true, sometimes dumb kid things get you killed or land you in prison in awful places of the world – just ask Otto Warmbier who went to North Korea against all advice, was imprisoned for stealing a poster from his hotel hallway and was released by the DPRK after 17 months in his final days after what seems to have been massive brain damage from torture. Neither Bergdahl nor Warmbier deserved such consequences, but that’s beside the point – sometimes the costs of bad decisions are too much to bear. I don’t fault the military judge who decided five years in the awful place Bergdahl was locked away was enough. That military judge was making a decision based on facts and circumstances and American justice. I probably would have given prison time, but that isn’t the painful issue to me. The painful issue is that we traded to get Bergdahl back at all.

The decision to trade him back fits with President Obama’s core beliefs. They are beliefs I don’t demonize, but in this application, I deeply disagree. President Obama pardoned or commuted huge numbers of people whom he believed were US citizens who were in jail beyond the bounds of justice. This fits solidly with that tenet of justice he holds dear. It’s a good concept, and while I may not have made those commutations, the decision to do so is not outrageous and is consistent with much of his world view. The decision also fits with President Obama’s longstanding view that Guantanamo should be closed. Releasing five of the worst inmates in the entire place certainly seems to reduce the level of need on many of the other members. Again – his concept of American justice is not invalid, but in practice these people were there because short of murdering them, there seemed no other way to remove them from a world of free people those individuals were determined to kill and maim. They were not in prison to serve time, but to keep them away from those they would harm. In one stroke, the president moved closer to both of those objectives which were noble in concept, consistent with good values and extremely dangerous to the long term safety of Americans and the West.

Most of those prisoners in Guantanamo were captured at great risk to American lives. By all rights, they should have died on the battlefield in Afghanistan rather than being captured. That we went to such pains to take them alive was due to an over-arching need for information about the attacks they had just unleashed on the US and a sense of fear that they had more already in planning. In trying to learn what we could from them, we did a number of things America says it doesn’t believe in – including torture and indefinite extra-judicial detention. That was misguided and horribly unfortunate, but we are at much greater risk for their release.

Also at issue is the precedent we set by trading so many high profile people for such a marginalized soldier – captured by his own criminal act of desertion for reasons that still seem either frivolous or simply disingenuous. Such actions show that the way for terrorists to engineer further releases is through further capture of American citizens. In the coming years we will likely re-learn what the hostage negotiators of the 60s and 70s learned about negotiating with terrorists: it breeds more negotiation with more terrorists.

Bowe Bergdahl didn’t deserve another term in a US prison, but he did deserve to spend whatever time was due with the Taliban until a US force could find him and mount a real rescue operation that kept those evil men we had separated from society in a place where they could do no more harm. It wasn’t the prison Bergdahl deserved, but it was the right and rational consequence of his circumstances. The “Taliban Five” are already largely back plotting death and destruction to the West – and they are among the few free, living people alive who remain from the pre-9/11 days who are really, really good and experienced at doing just that.

Additionally, we’ve set the precedent that any American traveling abroad is a living, breathing ticket to release the worst terrorists ever to speak the words “Death to America.” President Obama did truly act in a manner that’s consistent with most of what we value as Americans in making what I’m sure was a hard choice. Unfortunately for us, I fear no good deed will go unpunished.

Elizabeth Warren Agrees, DNC Cheated Bernie

by with One Comment Media
In an interview Thursday [11/2/17], CNN’s Jake Tapper asked Elizabeth Warren, “Very quickly Senator, do you agree with the notion that it was rigged?” Without hesitation, Warren answered “Yes.”
The DNC has nobody to blame but themselves seems to be the sentiment many picked up in the Politico article that highlighted excerpts from Donna Brazil’s new book set to be released November 7th. Nearly a year after Hillary Clinton’s shocking loss to Donald Trump, Donna Brazile, the former interim chair of the Democratic National Committee, is making strong claims against the DNC and others.
What are the claims? President Obama left the DNC in significant debt ($24 million in debt to be exact), and Debbie Wasserman Schultz was not a good leader and a terrible fundraiser are among them. The biggest claim; however, states that Hillary rigged the DNC and Bernie never had a fair chance to win the nomination.

“If the fight had been fair, one campaign would not have control of the party before the voters had decided which one they wanted to lead. This was not a criminal act, but as I saw it, it compromised the party’s integrity. I had to keep my promise to Bernie. I was in agony as I dialed him. Keeping this secret was against everything that I stood for, all that I valued as a woman and as a public servant. “Hello, senator. I’ve completed my review of the DNC and I did find the cancer,” I said. “But I will not kill the patient.” I told Bernie I had found Hillary’s Joint Fundraising Agreement. I explained that the cancer was that she had exerted this control of the party long before she became its nominee. Had I known this, I never would have accepted the interim chair position…” – Donna Brazile

She regretfully called Bernie to discuss the findings of her investigation. Despite basically telling Bernie he had been cheated, she quickly went on say that his support was needed to secure Hillary’s victory.

“but here we were with only weeks before the election… I had to be frank with him. I urged Bernie to work as hard as he could to bring his supporters into the fold with Hillary, and to campaign with all the heart and hope he could muster. He might find some of her positions too centrist, and her coziness with the financial elites distasteful, but he knew and I knew that the alternative was a person who would put the very future of the country in peril. I knew he heard me. I knew he agreed with me, but I never in my life had felt so tiny and powerless as I did making that call. When I hung up the call to Bernie, I started to cry, not out of guilt, but out of anger. We would go forward. We had to.” – Donna Brazile

This is a stunning revelation – maybe great leadership in her ability to focus on the big picture and try to get Bernie and his supporters on board? Or maybe not, considering CNN fired her for apparently sharing debate questions with Hillary prior to one of the presidential debates.
I’m sure people from Hillary’s camp and others at the DNC will respond to this article and Donna’s book that comes out in a few weeks. Whether some of her claims or all of them are true, its appears that our political system is broken at best and corrupt at worse.
If Donna’s claims regarding Hilary and the DNC are true, where does this leave the party?
How will this hurt their voting base and ability to attract millennials and/or working class voters who decided to vote for Trump in 2016?
Want to read similar content from the Left, Center, Right? SUBSCRIBE for only $2/month.

Independent Responds to Conservative… Transgenger Ban Revisited

by with No Comment Uncategorized

On August 29, 2017, LCR Contributor Right Army Veteran published an article about Trump’s decision to ban transgender service members. He suggested that both administrations (Obama and Trump) dropped the ball regarding the policy implementation and ban. He also mentioned costs as a driving factor for the ban.

“Military service members retire after 20 years and then collect benefits for a lifetime. That’s an expensive investment- especially if 2 years may make them non-deployable for surgery at a minimum, and for years after they continue with guaranteed medical needs and lifetime complications (and sanitary requirements) that may be difficult to ensure in the filthy, harsh business of war in dark places.”– Right Army Veteran

His full article can be viewed here: Transgender in the Military – A Case in Political Hijackings by Democrats and Republicans

I disagree…

This is a farce of epic proportions. Using medical costs as a reason to exclude a person from serving in the military is a coverup for bigotry and hate against a group of people too many are unwilling to fully understand. The medical costs excuse is a smokescreen. If the military really wanted to curb or prevent medical costs they wouldn’t allow our presidents to get us involved in unjust wars. Iraq and Afghanistan are already costing us $1 trillion, that’s with a T, in medical costs. And most veterans from those two wars aren’t even 40 years old yet. If it’s really about costs, then why not completely cut medical benefits after retirement? Find me a profession in the private sector in which merely retiring at any level provides healthcare benefits for you, your spouse, and family, until death. So let’s be honest, it’s probably not about the costs. Becuase if it was then the military wouldn’t spend $41.6 million annually on Viagra alone, which according to the Military Times analysis that figure is five times the estimated spend on transgender transition-related care.

 I could accept a policy of not covering active service members who wanted to have the elective surgery; however, this ban is a universal ban – no matter what, if you identify as transgender you’re not eligible for military service.

 If this ban stays in place, the irony would be noteworthy… We’d be the world’s freest nation, yet not everyone would be free to serve and defend it.

Want to read similar content from the Left, Center, Right? SUBSCRIBE for only $2/month.

Trump Ends DACA, America’s Top Universities Respond

by with One Comment FeaturedPolitics

On Tuesday, September 5th, President Trump ordered the end of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, which protects some 800,000 undocumented young people who were brought to the US illegally. New applications will not be processed and Congress now has 6 months to write a law and “resolve the fate of the Dreamers.”

Trump recently tweeted:

Is this about policy? Or is this just another step to undo Obama’s work and Make America Great Again?

Speaking of Obama, he called the move by Trump “cruel” and “self-defeating.” Several top universities, most notably Columbia University and the University of Pennsylvania, immediately denounced Trump’s decision to end DACA.

“Columbia unequivocally opposes the ending of DACA and is working with others in higher education to urge Congress and federal officials to reinstate DACA’s protections and protect the rights of those with DACA status during and after the “wind-down” process that has been announced.” – Professor Suzanne Goldberg, Executive Vice President for University Life, Herbert and Doris Wechsler Clinical Professor of Law, Columbia Law School …Columbia University full statement

“We know the Dreamers to be gifted and successful students who have grown up in our communities, attended our schools, and who are poised to make vital contributions to our nation’s economic strength, creativity, and global competitiveness. The repeal of DACA will mean the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs in the United States and hundreds of billions of dollars in economic growth over the next decade.” – University of Pennsylvania full statement

Check The LCR in the coming days for following articles about DACA.