Curses, Foiled Again...

This is the text of a proposed amendment to the United
States Constitution that was approved by both Houses
of Congress:

    Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied
    or abridged by the United States or any State on
    account of sex...the Congress shall have the power
    to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions
    of this Article.

If you think you have heard about this amendment before,
you are right, it was first introduced in October of, ready
for this, 1921.  That's right folks, that's how long it has
been kicking around.  It was proposed after the 19th
amendment was ratified, that amendment gave women the
right to vote.  However, after giving women the vote, I guess
Congress didn't want them to get a swelled head.

It took fifty years, but on October 12, 1971 the Equal Rights
Amendment passed the U.S. House of Representatives and
on March 3, 1972, it passed the U.S. Senate and went to the
states for ratification.  It had one caveat, in the preamble to
the bill was the wording that the bill must be ratified by 38
of the states before March 22, 1979.  By 1977, the bill was
ratified by 35 states, the first of these was Hawaii, followed
by 34 other states, and that is where it encountered a problem.

The problem was named, Phyllis Schlafly.  In 1972, Ms. Schlafly
founded an organization called Stop ERA.  Her objections were
that the ERA would be bad for 'housewives' read 'stay-at-home'
moms, and women might be open to the selective service, and
it would threaten maternal custody of the children in the case of
a divorce.  Due to those, and other erroneous objections, five
states; Idaho, Kentucky, Tennessee, and South Dakota revoked
their ratification prior to 1979.  Ms. Schlafly was out in front in
her objections, but she wasn't alone.  Behind her were:
      * The National Council of Catholic Women
      * The AFL-CIO
      * Religious conservatives concerned with abortion and gay
         marriage
      * Southern Whites
      * Mormons
      * Orthodox Jews
      *Roman Catholics

In 1978, Congress voted for, and President Jimmy Carter signed a
bill extending the ratification deadline to June 30, 1982.  Since then
there have been numerous attempts to extend or remove the dead-
line to no avail.

Equal rights for women was a plank in the Republican party platform
from 1940 until 1980.  The Democratic party, because of pressures
from the unions, didn't include equal rights for women in their party
platform until 1972 when Congress passed the ERA amendment.  In
1980 at the Republican party convention, the party platform was amended
to end support for the ERA.  This resulted in women's dissatisfaction
with the GOP and there was a movement to the Democrats that helped
elect Bill Clinton.    

A new movement to pass the ERA began again in the 1960's as a result
of Betty Friedan's book The Feminine Mystique.  And it was driven by
problems with women's social and economic status and the lack of
government enforcement of the equal pay act.  In June of 1966, Ms.
Friedan and several female activist groups formed the National
Organization for Women, NOW, and begun demanding full equality.
The term 'feminist' took on a pejorative connotation, and despite being
introduced in Congress every year, the ERA failed to gain momentum.

In 2010, the Me-Too movement once again garnered interest in reviving
the ERA, and on March 8, 2011, the 100th anniversary of International
Women's Day, Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D. Wisc), introduced legislation
to remove the deadline for ratification of the ERA.  It had 56 co-sponsors.
The resolution was referred to the Subcommittee of the Constitution in the
Justice Department.  The subcommittee failed to vote on it and it died in
committee when the Congressional session ended for the year.  In 2012
Sen. Benjamin Cardin (D, Maryland), introduced a similar bill in the
Senate, it died in committee also.

In 2017 Nevada, despite the sunset clause in the Equal Rights bill, ratified
the amendment.  And in 2018 the Illinois state congress did the same.  At
this point, there are now 37 of the 38 states needed to make the Equal Rights
Amendment an article of the Constitution.  And on November 5, 2019, the
state of Virginia turned blue, with a majority of the congress and the governor
belonging to the Democratic Party.  For the first time in over 400 years, there
is a woman who is the Speaker of the House, and she is ready to preside over
the vote to ratify the ERA.

Last week, the third week in November 2019, the House Judiciary Committee
voted 21 to 11 in favor of a resolution eliminating the deadline for ratification
of the ERA.  This paves the way for Virginia to be the 38th state to ratify the
ERA - a full 96 years after it was first proposed.  Once there are 38 states who
ratified the amendment, the ratification is sent to the National Archives and
Records Administration where an archivist will certify that the amendment is
valid and has become part of the Constitution.

However Rep. Mike Johnson (R Iowa), has said he feels the proceedings are
invalid and the entire process must be restarted.  It is anticipated that the matter
will involve the Supreme Court and when that happens, both side have lawyers
waiting to file amicus briefs as soon as Virginia acts.  And if that does happen,
legal scholars say there is no reasonable chance that the ERA would be held to
have been validly adopted, since it expired 35 years ago.

Ratification of the Equal Rights  Amendment would have disastrous consequences
for the pro-life cause. It might invalidate the state laws which have placed onerous
obstacles in the way of women seeking a legal abortion.  Conservatives feel this is
why the Democrats are pushing ahead with ratification before Roe v Wade can be
re-adjudicated before the Supreme Court.

Let me say something to all the Republicans who feel they are saving me from the
disastrous consequences of the ERA; do not bother, I don't need you to tell me I am
your equal, in fact I already know I am your superior.

I'm just sayin'.      

When the Cat's Away...

While most of the world and some people in the United
States, are engrossed in the impeachment hearings, the
administration of Donald J. Trump has been busy slipping
a few things by, hoping no one will notice.

Number one is Trump's demand for a five-fold increase
in South Korea's payments for the U. S.  military presence
in their country, along with the rumor that Trump is
considering withdrawing thousands of troops from South
Korea.  This is causing turmoil between South Korea and
Japan and their intelligence sharing pact, which is due to
expire at the beginning of next year.  And that is drawing
North Korea and China closer together.

And number two is Secretary Mike Pompeo's announcement
that the United States will no longer consider the Israeli
settlements in occupied territories as being illegal.  That has
been the policy of the United States for years and was
reaffirmed by President Reagan.

The United Nations Security Council has decried the Trump
administration for the move, and has said it's position on
settlements is unchanged, they are a violation of international
law.  It has called the settlement activity "a flagrant violation
under international law, and it will undermine the prospect
of establishing a Palestinian state".

The British ambassador to the U. N. declared that Britain's
position remains unchanged, she said the Trump administration's
move "presents an obstacle to peace in the region and threatens
the two-state solution". Even Russia has called on Israel to end
settlement activity stating "the new United States position will
exasperate the already tense situation".  And the European
Union has also called on Israel to end all settlement activity.

So what has made the Trump administration such an outlier
in the rest of the world?  What has caused the Trump
administration to move the United States embassy from
Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, a move that now has the embassy
under high alert and it is issuing advisories to U.S. citizens
in or traveling to Jerusalem or the West Bank or Gaza to
be vigilant and to increase security awareness?  Let me
speculate, Donald Trump will do anything to secure his
reelection in 2020.

Trump's greatest voting block is the Protestant Fundamentalist
Movement, and they have had a Pro-Israeli American policy
since 1948.  Their influence is apparent in Trump's choice of
judicial nominees, his attempts to eviscerate the ACA, which
they feel is the devil's work, his attempted banning of Muslims,
and his building the Mexican wall, but the greatest of these is
his undying support of Israel.  Why is it so important to these
fundamentalists?  For that we have to look at their belief in
the literal translation of the bible.

The fundamentalists believe Jesus will come back after the
Great Tribulation, when the true believers will rise up from
the dead and, with the righteous on earth, will be lifted into
heaven, in other words, those who are believers when this
occurs will never die.  This know as the Rapture.  But prior
to that will be the Great Tribulation when there will be great
suffering and death.  The fundamentalists also believe the
bible when it says that Jesus will return when 2/3 of the Jews
in Israel will be dead and 84 months have passed.  Thus, Jesus
will transfer the Great Tribulation onto the Jews instead of
the Christians.  So America must support Israel until after the
Rapture, so the Great Tribulation will transfer to the Jews.

The unofficial doctrine says, Kings X warns against evangelism
of Israel so god may preserve them for the sake of the destruction
of modern Israel in the Great Tribulation.  Thus, ensuring that
Christians alone will get out of this life alive.  Though no
evangelical leader will state this as truth, it is widely believed.

Support of Israel is dependent on these four things:
     *  Israel must be defended at all costs by America
     *  If Israel is militarily removed from history prior to
         the Rapture, then Christian's imminent escape from
         death would have to be abandoned
     *  That would cause the Rapture to be indefinitely
         delayed
     *  Fundamentalists believe in the doctrine of an
         imminent Rapture

Trump's support of Israel is proof that the Rapture is coming
in this lifetime.  God is working through Donald Trump, and
even though he is flawed, they believe he is the one who will
precipitate the 'second coming'.  So they will support him
without question as their pastors have dictated from the pulpit.

This kind of belief is hard to dislodge, as it defies reason, but
then most articles of faith do.  So what is the answer?  Those
of us of another persuasion must work to counter their votes
with votes of our own.  There is a good possibility that Trump
will be impeached and just as good a possibility that the
Senate will not convict him.  When this happens, it will be
further proof to the fundamentalists that he is god's chosen
one.  As dangerous as this is to our country, it will be
disastrous to the countries in the Middle East.  The riots
in Lebanon and Iran have already destabilized the area,
and Trump's interference will only make matters worse.

I'm just sayin'.

Let's Begin at the Beginning...

The much anticipated open testimony of the impeachment
inquiry of Donald Trump has begun.  Those of us who have
nothing better to do, have been glued to the TV or radio, I
myself prefer NPR radio as I like my news without added
opinion.  Also it leaves me free to do other things while I'm
listening, like folding laundry.

The opening statement of Rep. Adam Schiff was compelling.
He laid out the case which the previous closed-door hearings
had uncovered.  If the Democrats can prove their case, it will
be a damning indictment of the President.  It was a step-by-
step accounting of an orchestrated plot to obtain information,
rightly so or not, that Hunter Biden and his father, Joe Biden,
then the vice-president, were complicit in a cover-up of illegal
activities involving Hunter Biden and a Ukrainian gas company
called Burista.  That alone, would not be such a problem, but the
president was also asking for proof of Ukrainian involvement
in the 2016 election on behalf of Hillary Clinton.  And he wanted
the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelensky, to make an
announcement, in public, of his government's investigation of
both of these allegations.

To secure the cooperation of Zelensky, President Trump was
withholding funds that had been allocated by Congress for the
defense of the Ukraine against Russian aggression.  President
Trump was also holding back an official visit to the White
House for Zelensky, such a visit would impart greater stature
for Zelensky and the new Ukrainian government.  Both of these
would be confirmed , if and when, Zelensky would make the public
announcement.  Prior to the phone call from President Trump to
President Zelensky, the two conditions were laid out by a series
of back-door visits from President Trump's private attorney, Rudy
Giuliani, and several other emissaries.  But, before that could
occur the administration had to get rid of the U.S. ambassador
to the Ukraine, who would probably object vociferously to such goings
 on.  These same back-door emissaries began a smear campaign
 against an outstanding career diplomat, Marie Yovanovich.

All of this appears to be for the benefit of Donald Trump's re-
election campaign.  And all of this
 could be construed as to be
asking a foreign country for help in interfering in an election,
as was done in the 2016 election by the Russian government.
That interference was well documented in the Mueller Report
which was released on March 22, 2019.  As a result of that report
thirteen Russian operatives were indicted for election tampering,
they will never be brought to justice as they have fled the country
and Russia has no plans to extradite them.  Despite the evidence
by both the FBI and the Mueller Report, of Russian involvement,
Trump still believes that it was Ukraine who was involved in the
election tampering.

But interference of this sort was not the first time nor was it
the last time that the Russians mounted a full-scale assault on
a democratic election.  The New York Times reported that
Russian political operatives openly interfered in the general
election of the island country of Madagascar in November
2018.  Why, you would ask, would Russia be interested in a
tiny African country.  It appears that Madagascar has a very
valuable chromium mine, and the major stake holder (70%)
of the mine is an ally of Vladimir Putin.  The election would
have returned the mine control back to Madagascar if the
right man was elected.  As many as 30 Russians, working
openly, paid bribes, spread misinformation, and ran spoiler
candidates to secure a win the election.  And win they did!

These Russian operatives are a part of Putin's private army,
the Wagner Group, which has been working in Africa for a
number of years.  The Wagner Group, headed by another
Putin ally, Yevgeny Prigozhin, the successor of the KGB,
may be uniformed, but have no insignia identifying them.
They went into Syria to retake the oil fields, they disarmed
the Ukrainian resistance, and are involved with Assad's elite
forces in Syria.  They are also moving into the Central African
Republic, Libya, and Burundi.

But Russia is not alone in interfering in democratically elected
governments.  The first and the biggest was the CIA operation
to overthrow the elected Prime Minister of Iran in 1953.  The
CIA worked to supplant the Prime Minister to strengthen the
rule of the Shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, all to stop the
Iranian oil from being nationalized.  During the unrest 200-
300 people were killed.  That led to the Iran Revolution of
1978-1979 and the October 1979 seizing of our embassy
which was captured and held for 444 days.

The United States is notorious for interfering in foreign
governments when we fell they are not in our interests.
Here is but a brief synopsis:

         1954 - Guatemala, a covert CIA operation to depose
                 the democratically elected President Jacob Arbenz.

         1956-1957 - Syria, the CIA backed forces in an attempt
                to overthrow the government in both 1956 and 1957,
                both attempts failed and the CIA was expelled from
                the country.

         1957-1958 - Indonesia, the CIA attempted to blackmail
                President Sukarno to lessen the communist party
                influence in the elections.

         1959 - Cuba, where there were five attempts by the CIA
                to assassinate Fidel Castro during the years 1959-1963.
                all the attempts failed.
         
          1961- Cuba, the now famous botched Bay of Pigs invasion
                 by the CIA.

          1964 - Brazil, the CIA supported the overthrow of the
                 democratically elected President Joao Goulart.

          1965-1973 - Viet Nam, 1.4 million Vietnamese civilians
                 were killed or wounded and over 47,000 American
                 military killed, before the war ended March 29, 1973

All of these were either sanctioned by the Congress or the president
with the approval of the Congress, which does not excuse them, but
makes them legal in terms of approved covert or overt actions.  None
were done for the expressed benefit of the President personally.  This
is why we must take up these investigations, so whether it is the CIA,
the Russians, or the President himself, we Americans must say that
election manipulation will be exposed and stopped, no matter where
it occurs or who benefits from it.

                                                         I'm just sayin'.
         

Who is Minding the Store?

After the major tax cut of 2017 that favored mainly huge
corporations and a few of the very wealthy, and which
has depleted the US treasury, Trump is talking about another
tax cut before the election of 2020.  We have already racked
up a trillion-dollar annual deficit, now The Donald wants to
go for broke.
Yes, we have had a trillion-dollar deficit before, back in
2009 a mere ten years ago in fact.  But that occurred as a
result of the 'great recession' when ours, and the entire
world's economies, were in the tank. Thanks to Obama's
stimulus package the economy began mounting a come-
back.  The economy that Trump inherited was strong
and getting stronger.  That is what is so troubling about
todays huge deficit and national debt,because the economy
is humming along with close to full employment
maximizing tax revenues.  Most economist say the idea
of another tax cut is insane.  There has never been, in
our history, such a deficit while the economy is booming.

In 2007, the ration of debt-to-GDP was 62%, today the ratio
is 106%.  After pressure from the president, and because of
talk of a slowdown, the Federal Reserve cut interest rates again.
So what will happen when the inevitable downturn occurs, and
tax revenues shrink; the low interest rates will begin to rise and
our debt payments will be a further drag on the economy.

As grim as the outlook is, it is amazing that no one seems to
care.  Certainly not the White House, or the Congress.  In
2011, during the Obama administration, the Republican
Senate was so overwrought with the national debt and deficit
levels they wanted to pass an amendment to the Constitution
calling for a balanced budget.  That appears to be dying a slow
death these days. One of the signature promises Trump made
during his campaign, was his vow to eliminate the national debt
in eight years.  There's a laugh!

So what happened to all the deficit hawks?  With the impeachment
proceeding sucking all the oxygen out of the room, it seems
no one is watching the checkbook.

While Trump is pushing to reduce our forces in the middle-east,
and our military presence every where else in the world, which
should significantly reduce our spending on defense, he is on the
other hand increasing military spending.

The Republicans have always maintained that tax cuts lead to
economic growth and that growth translates to more tax
revenue which pays for the tax cuts.  Get it?  This voodoo
economics has never worked in the past, but despite those facts
the Republicans still hold to it.

So where are the Democrats?  They have closed their eyes to
the whole budget controversy. Those candidates running in
the presidential primary have been promising the moon, with
exorbitant plans such as; Medicare for all, free child care,
free college tuition, forgiving student loans, and the green
new deal.  All well and good, but should any of these
candidates actually defeat Trump, they will find the Federal
Piggy Bank empty, except for a few billion in IOUs.  So to
fulfill those promises it will mean a massive tax increase, and
not just on the wealthy.

We have been lucky so far, the huge deficits have not brought
on higher inflation rates, and Government borrowing has not
slowed consumer borrowing, though businesses have cut back,
due more to the uncertainty of the tariffs.  The good news from
the Stock Market and the unemployment figures have given
Trump impetus to continue his ruinous economic policies of
more spending, more tax cuts and bigger deficits.  My God,
who is minding the store?

I'm just askin'.

Welcome to the 21st Century

The Wisconsin State Assembly passed a measure recently, with
bi-partisan support 82-13, that would allow pharmacists to
prescribe hormonal birth control to women over the age of 18,
both in pill and patch form.  The Bill still has to go to the Senate
for approval and then on to the Governor for his signature.  It
is being opposed by right-to-life activist who say it will lead
to an increase in extra-marital sexual activity and an increase
in unwanted pregnancies and more abortions.  DUH! I may be
dense, but how will using effective birth control lead to
unwanted pregnancy and more abortions?  We will leave that
objection for the time being.

If the birth control bill passes, and becomes law, Wisconsin will
join ten other states and the District of Columbia that have
already enacted similar legislation.

Five years ago, the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology
issued a policy statement saying it is time to make hormonal oral
birth control an over the counter drug.  The American Association
of Family Physicians support the measure also, saying it would
greatly reduce unintended pregnancies.  However, only the FDA
can change the status of a drug from prescription to over the
counter, and as of yet no manufacturer has petitioned the FDA
to do that.  Even if a manufacturer did request a change in status,
it would be years before the FDA could conclude the testing
required to move hormonal contraceptives from prescription to
over the counter status.

One other concern is selling the pill to persons under the age of
18.  Right now the pill may be prescribed to those under 18 but
no states allow for purchase of the pill without a doctor's orders.
Researchers say there is no evidence that teens are at risk from
using the pill, in fact the reverse is true, teens do not have the
increased risk of blood clots that some adults do.  And studies
have shown there is no increase in sexual activity, in fact, teen
pregnancy rates are down in the United States by 36% from
2007-2013, and the abortion rate has fallen also.

The hormonal birth control method has been around for nearly
sixty years, it was first approved for use in June of 1960, but
didn't begin to be used as a contraceptive until July of 1961.
At that time, it could only be prescribed to married women for
birth control, and it was not until 1972 that doctors were allowed
to prescribe it to unmarried women for use as a contraceptive.
Though many doctors were prescribing it off label use for acne
and to regulate a woman's cycle.

The pill was the first form of birth control that did not interfere
with the spontaneity and sensation of sexual intercourse. It
allowed women to take control of when and how many children
she wished to have.  It was a key player in expanding women's
economic role.  After the pill was introduced, there was a sharp
rise in college attendance and graduation rates for women.  There
was no longer the fear of unplanned pregnancy interrupting a
woman's life, and employers were more inclined to invest in a
woman's future in their corporate structures.

Today the pill is used by 100 million women world-wide and
12 million women in the United States, and if used correctly,
it is 0.3% effective in preventing pregnancy.  For most of the
world, the pill does not require a doctor's prescription, and in
many countries it is free or at very low cost.  The biggest obstacle
in the United States is the cost.  Since the Affordable Care Act,
insurance companies must cover the cost of birth control pills,
and Medicaid also covers their cost.  But, and this is a big but,
insurance and Medicaid will not cover over the cost of the pill
if it were over the counter.

It is unclear whether that means the pill has to be prescribed by a
physician or if insurance will still pay for the pill if you can get it
through the pharmacy.  Regardless, those states that have opted to
by-pass the doctors prescription for a pharmacist direct filling of
the script, have not seen a big increase in pharmacy participation.
The service is not mandatory in most states and in California
only 11%  of retail pharmacies are offering the service.  The
requirements for such a service vary from state to state, but all
states require some training of the pharmacist, forms to be filled
out and filed and blood pressure must be monitored.  The initial
consultation cost may vary also, but range from $25-$50 and it
is not covered by insurance, however Oregon is the only state that
requires Medicaid to pay for the consultation.

So as usual it is the ones who need the help the most who will be
priced out of receiving it.  A family with more children than they
can afford, is priced out of the one thing that could help them
prevent another pregnancy.  Fifty dollars would go a long way
to feed the brood around the table.  We know that the hormonal
birth control method is safe and effective, now we must make
it affordable and easy to access for all women.

I'm just sayin'.
control

Get it Done, Get it Over, and Move On

And so it begins, I was eagerly tuned to the radio last Thursday,
(Halloween, of all days) but I fear I was in the minority, even
amongst my fiends.  They are getting tired of me and my obsession
with all things Trump.  They have moved on with their lives.  In
the beginning they were as appalled as I at Trump's unpresidential
behavior, his speeches elicited laughter, his demeanor resulted in
head shaking disbelief.  There were jokes about his limited
vocabulary and his penchant for lying in the face of overwhelming
evidence to the contrary.  But the jokes have wore thin and the daily
onslaught is wearyingly banal.

If these women, strident female libbers that they are, can ignore the
ever-worsening news from the White House and not be incensed,
ignore the increasing aberrant antics of a man who seems to be losing
his grip on reality, if they can say they just don't care anymore, what
chance is there for the rest of us?  The general consensus seems to be
nothing will ever change, it's all a tempest in a teapot, all done for show.
Both side prancing and preening for their constituents and nothing more.

But there is something more, and everyday more and more of it is revealed,
and with each new testimony something new is discovered.  It is becoming
harder and harder to deny the evidence.  So, what do the Republicans do,
they attack the proceedings.  They say the hearings are done in secret, and
they are not allowed in, both of which are blatantly false, they stormed
the hearing room at the behest of the President, and when the pizza ran out
they quietly went home like sheep being herded out of the pasture, and
like sheep they may be headed to the abattoir.  

The Republicans protested the closed-door hearings and when the House
announced that the hearings will be opened to all, including TV, they protested
that also.  They don't like the rules, though they are the same rules that they
established for the Clinton impeachment.  They want to see the transcripts
from the closed-door hearing, and when Rep. Adam Schiff said the
transcripts will be available in the coming week, the Republicans said,
not soon enough.  There seems to be a pattern emerging here.

Trump had said that the call to Zelenskiy, the Ukrainian president-elect, was
beautiful and his denial of wrongdoing just doesn't hold water anymore.
What now? Trump and the Republicans say that, OK the President did
ask Zelenskiy to look into Hunter Biden, but that there was nothing wrong
with that.  Holding back money and presidential influence is done all the
time.  It is at the discretion of the President.  So, the defense changed; Trump
did it but it wasn't wrong, except his own intelligence people saw it differently.
The testimony of Lt. Col. Vindman, a decorated war hero, who was listening
in on the call, said he found it 'troubling'.  The President was asking a foreign
government to investigate a potential political rival in exchange for money
and a visit to the White House.  And his testimony was just one of several others.
In addition to asking about the Bidens, Trump also asked about the computer
server that was used to hack into the DNC data base in 2016.  It appears
that Trump just cannot get over the vote count in 2016.

So let us reiterate, first Trump didn't do it, then he did do it but it wasn't wrong,
and finally it was wrong, but it doesn't rise to the level of high crimes and
misdemeanors necessary for impeachment.  Ah, but obstruction of Congress
does, and the more the administration stymies the investigation the closer
it get gets to obstruction.  The cover-up is what brought down the Nixon
presidency.

Today, November 3, 2019, is exactly one year to the date of the 2020
presidential election, and only three months to the Iowa Caucasus, and
what is going on in Washington hasn't even rippled the waters, but it
should.  A president who believes what he is does is justifiable because he
is the president is dangerous.  If Donald Trump is allowed to walk away from
this, he will be emboldened to try something else.  After all it was just one
day after the Mueller Report announced no collusion with Russia during the
2016 election, that Trump tried to coerce the Ukraine government to
interfere in the 2020 election.  it is frightening to think of what he would attempt
after being found not guilty in the Senate trial.  And if the Senate thinks they
could contain him in 2020 they are bigger fools than I believe them to be.  It is
time for the Congress to stand up and take back the powers they have been
ceding to this president.   Or...There may be another way out; censure!

Censure by the entire Congress, the House and Senate with a super majority vote.
Andrew Jackson was censured by the Senate, and John Tyler was censured by the
House, both were strictly political actions.  I firmly believe there are enough
Republicans who think that Donald Trump is unfit for the presidency, and they
would be judged harshly by history if they acquitted him, but they are afraid to
come forward.  The Democrats know if they proceed with the impeachment,
they will lose.  They will lose the trial and the House and the White House in
2020 and who knows how far beyond.  That is a big price to pay.

But Trump cannot get away with his distain of the Constitution, he must be
brought to heel.  A record of censure by the entire Congress would be something
Trump has never had to deal with, being told he is wrong, by his peers.  And
there is always the threat of prosecution once he has left office.

Time is running out and to quote the bard: "If it were done when 'tis done, then
'twere well it were done quickly... That but this blow, might be the be-all and
end-all here".

I'm just sayin'.

 

Where in the World is Billy Barr?

It appears the United States Attorney General is MIA. He
was last seen hiding out in Rome espousing President Trump's
handling of the Ukrainian congratulatory phone call to Ukraine's
president-elect. A phone call, Trump said was "beautiful".  He is
also gathering information from countries he feels have the
inside dope on Hunter Biden's activities while he was on the
board of the Ukraine natural gas producing company, Burisma.
And while he is at it there, he is looking at whether the Ukraine
was also involved with the server that processed Hillary Clinton's
missing emails.  Both of the these incidents have been debunked
by the United States intelligence agencies.  The Democrats have
accused Barr of using the Justice Department as Trump's personal
law firm.  This would not be the first time Barr would have
interfered on behalf of a president.

Billy Barr is a lifelong proponent of the 'unitary executive theory'
that allows for unfettered presidential authority.  Much of Barr's
thinking has been influenced by his strong religious convictions,
he is a staunch Roman Catholic.  He believes that Roe v Wade
was incorrectly decided, and in 1992 he wrote a report in
favor of increased incarceration.  However, upon independent
examination, the data Barr used to support his conclusions
did not corroborate his theory that mass incarceration reduced
the crime rate anywhere.

In 1990, Barr was appointed Deputy Attorney General by then
president George H. W. Bush.  Bush was so impressed with Barr's
work that he nominated him to be his Attorney General in 1991.
Barr's squeaky-clean record allowed Barr to be confirmed by the
Senate in two days.

In 1992, an Independent counsel was formed to investigate the
Iran-Contra Affair, it was headed by Lawrence Walsh.  Walsh had
found documents from Casper Weinberger's office of evidence of
a conspiracy among the highest officials in the
Reagan administration, to lie to both Congress and the American
people.  The cover-up was the sale of arms to Iran for their help in
freeing the hostages taken by Hezbollah and being held in Lebanon.
Weinberger was to stand trial and contradict President Bush's
assertion that he had no knowledge of the exchange of arms for
hostages.  It was apparent that Bush would be called to testify in
the court case also.  Billy Barr went into action, He convinced
Bush to pardon Weinberger and five others from the Reagan
administration who were already found guilty, only day before the
end of Bush's term of office.  Thus saving the reputation of the Bush
presidency.  Lawrence Walsh complained, insinuating that Bush and
Barr had covered-up the Iran-Contra Affair.

That wasn't the end, Barr also refused to appoint another Independent
Counsel to investigate 'Iraq-gate'.  Iraq-gate is not as well-known as the
Iran-Contra Affair but it was much more insidious.  For those not as
familiar with what went on, I will try to give you a thumbnail sketch.

During the Reagan/Bush administrations, and while Bill Clinton was
governor of Arkansas, in a small town in Arkansas called Mena, there
was an operation that was working out of the Mena airport that involved
drugs, guns, and billions of dollars under the radar, but with the knowledge
and consent of the CIA.  Drugs were smuggled into the United States,
weapons were smuggled out, and money was laundered thru the banks
in Mena and Atlanta Georgia.

The money and drugs went to support Saddam Hussain in Iraq, yup, that
Saddam Hussain.  Money from the United States, supposedly for agricultural
support, went instead to buy weapons back from the United States.  It
was estimated that more than $5 billion in aid and also weaponry, and
military intelligence, and special ops went to support Hussain's war
against Iran, which by now was in control of the Ayatollah.  All of
which was against the will of the Congress.  The money came from
the drug operation in Mena.  All in all, over a thousand kilos of heroin
was smuggled into our country and over $5 billion of money was laundered
prior to being sent to Iraq.  Everyone involved with the operation in Mena
is now dead, in fact, more than 26 deaths were attributed to it, some under
suspicious circumstances, some were outright hits.  All covered-up by one
Billy Barr, in defense of presidents Reagan and Bush.  His argument;
'a president has complete authority to start or stop a law enforcement
proceeding'.

So why is Billy Barr hiding out in Rome?  Has he finally found a president
he cannot support?  Or is it that this president has implicated him in his
tawdry business dealings?  Squeaky-clean Billy may have finally got
his hands so dirty even he cannot live with himself?

I'm just sayin'.