Thursday, July 26, 2018

Republican Moves to Silence Muller

Image result for Republicans Move to impeach Rosenstein

Trump threatens to revoke Obama era security clearances, this is a brazen attempt to silence criticism and prevent   testimony for Muller's investigation of Russian collusion.."The main thing these former Obama administration officials have in common is a desire to tell the truth. What does Trump not want us to know about?"[1] these Include: "former CIA Director John Brennan, an NBC News contributor; former FBI Director James B. Comey; former CIA Director Michael V. Hayden; former National Security Adviser Susan E. Rice; former Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr.; and former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe."[2] No illegality or misconduct has been alleged.

And although some conservatives, including Sen. Rand Paul, claim these public servants are somehow “monetizing” their clearances, there is no evidence to suggest that any of them are hawking classified data in return for cash payments. In fact, if the president had any reason to suspect that these outspoken critics were disclosing national secrets, he would likely have them in handcuffs before their next television appearance.[3]
Frank Figliuzzi was assistant director of  FBI counter intelligence . He explains why they extend security clearances beyond the administration of one's time in office:
When I retired from that position, I maintained my clearance for a year. This wasn’t because I enjoyed filling out thick, mind-numbing documents that ask for the Vehicle Identification Numbers on my cars, the addresses of temporary, corporate apartments I lived in seven years ago, or because I relished the prospect of being hooked up to a polygraph machine and asked if I socialized with foreign intelligence officers (yes, many allied officers). The FBI asked me to do this for the sake of continuity, transition and maintenance of institutional knowledge. I agreed.This is just common sense. If the FBI or other intelligence agency had a question about some investigative decision, strategy discussion, or policy issue, they wanted the ability to reach out, brief me on the issue and seamlessly move forward in securing our nation from threats. When that transition period ended, the FBI allowed my clearance to lapse. For someone who was the director of an agency, the period can last much longer. If my clearances were still in place today, perhaps I too would be subject to Trump’s call to revoke clearances of people who he doesn’t like.[4]
It is not a threat to current security that they do this. Paul's criticism, is ignorant as is Trump's. The idea that they make  money off of the clearances is wrong.

Those kinds of security clearances are not particularly lucrative for people who have had the top jobs. That is not why they maintain them, but Trump probably has no idea that that is the case. Rather, he apparently thinks that he can punish his enemies by going after their wallets, not realizing that Michael Hayden’s speaking fees and book advances will go up if the White House manages to pull his code-word tickets. He does not understand the value assigned by the insiders to their predecessors’ experience or the mentality of people who want to continue to serve their country even in semiretirement. Quiet patriotism—as opposed to the flag-waving, wall-building, ally-bashing, threat-tweeting brand of nationalism that Trump has ridden to the presidency—is beyond him.[5]
The reason they want to pull security clearances from these people is because they acknowledged that Russia conducted cyber attacks upon the U.S. electoral process and they have been critical of Trump's refusal to defend American  security agaisnt Putin.

On another front Republican desperation can be seen in a new attempt at shutting down the the Muller probe. Eleven house republicans have put up articles of impeachment against Rod Rosestein who is Muller's boss in DOJ. With Rosenstein out a Trump-biased new boss would pt more pressure on Muller or even shut his investigation down directly, [6]

The five articles charge Rosenstein of "high crimes and misdemeanors" for failing to produce information to the committees, even though the department has already provided lawmakers with more than 800,000 documents, and of signing off on what some Republicans say was improper surveillance of a Trump adviser.The resolution also goes directly after Rosenstein for his role in the ongoing Mueller investigation, criticizing him for refusing to produce a memo that outlines the scope of that investigation and questioning whether the investigation was started on legitimate grounds. Mueller is investigating Russian interference in the 2016 election and whether Trump's campaign was in any way involved.[7]
The move is not backed by all republicans, it is not clear that it has the votes to succeed, Speaker Ryan is said to be Against  the move. [8] The problem is, aside from the fact that it could succeed, is the fact that  a faction loyal to the alleged President Russian intervention investigated. That is pretty serious, If this as 9/11 what would be the reaction at Republican congressmen saying this is a witch hunt we should not investigate this attack on the world trade center? What if Obama was saying we don't need to investigate attacks by Russia upon our elections especially because they benefited me and got me elected? We the Republicans would never let Obama get away with that. This transcends politics we can't afford to allow the Republicans to  silence Muller.

Call Your congressman: 202-224-3121

Demand that Muller be allowed to conduct his investigation and that Rosenstein not be impeached,


[1]Frank Figliuzzi , "Trump's treat To Revoke Obama Era Security Clearances Is a Brazen Attempt to Silence Critics..."  Think , published by NBC News (
(accessed 7/26/18)

[2] Ibid

[3] Ibid

[4] Ibid

[5] , "Pulling Security Clearances Is Just the Start, The Atlantic (JUL 25, 2018) (accessed 7/26/18)

[6] Mary Clare Jalonick, "GOP Leaders Move to Impeach Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein," Chicago Tribune, associated press, (July 26,2018)
(accessed 7/26/18)

[7] Ibid


Sunday, July 22, 2018

Majority Disprove of Trump but not as much as they should

The Post-ABC poll conducted Wednesday through Friday finds that overall, 33 percent of Americans approve of Trump's handling of his meeting with Putin while 50 percent disapprove. A sizable 18 percent say they have no opinion. A slightly larger 56 percent disapprove of Trump expressing doubts about U.S. intelligence agencies' conclusion that Russia tried to influence the outcome of the 2016 election. On both questions, those who say they "strongly disapprove" of Trump's performance outnumber those who say they "strongly approve" by better than 2 to 1.

Tuesday, July 17, 2018

Is Trump Right To sit with Putin?

Image result for Trump

I am listening to Rand Paul, good little Trump attack dog, defending his master by saying even Reagan did not confront Gorbachev with the evils of the USSR when they met with him. True but he also did not throw his intelligence agents under the bus and say:I have no reason to doubt Putin," My Trumpie friend says "he did not say that" yes he did, That is what his words meant, He did not use those very words but hes aid it, He did say:I have no reason not to accept Putin's word, but what about the fact that Putin is a dictator? A murderer,a liar? are those not reasons? What about the fact that all our security people agree that Russia did work to destabilize us in the election? The reason he gives for trusting Putin? "He denied it in such a strong and powerful,way!" He voice so caressing those words as he spoke. So it is as though strong and powerful = right. I say Rand, old man,I would buy your argument iff we had a messenger I could trust. If Our guy talking to Putin was trustworthy I would say yes sit down with him and talk amiably about our aims and theirs. But we don;t have anyone like that.. We have a liar who clearly puts Putin;s interest above our own

Sunday, July 15, 2018

Thursday, July 12, 2018

Make America Hate Again: The Trump Effect (Part 1 of 2)

"A former reserve sheriff’s deputy is facing hate crime charges after telling Louisiana authorities that he plowed his pickup truck into a convenience store because he thought its Sikh owners were Muslim."*This is by no means an isolated indecent as both major hate group watchers (FBI and Southern Poverty law Center) say hate is rising again, 

"Trump Hate Map" America's Voice

New rising climate of hate
There were more than 6,100 reported incidents of hate crimes in 2016, up from more than 5,800 the year before, the FBI said in a report based on data submitted by law enforcement agencies across the country. The number of hate crimes increased for a second consecutive year, and as was the case in 2015, the largest share of victims last year — nearly 6 in 10 — were targeted because of bias against the victim’s race or ethnicity...Studies have shown increasing discrimination against Muslims in the United States. Jewish schools and institutions have been repeatedly shuttered by threats. Cities have struggled with how to handle white-supremacist groups seeking to hold rallies, and gay rights activists have decried what they describe as the Trump administration’s “all out assault on LGBTQ people, women, and other minority communities.” The number of American hate groups also has increased, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center.[2]
While the Southern Poverty Law Center "has documented 954 hate groups"  it correlates the spike with Trump's Tweets.[3]

The question is can these crimes be laid at Trump's door? It's not that cut and dried. There is a clear correlation, Incidents have been growing steadily for the last four years since Trump announced his campaign, In 2015 and 16, "There were more than 6,100 reported incidents of hate crimes in 2016, up from more than 5,800 the year before, the FBI said in a report based on data submitted by law enforcement agencies across the country. The number of hate crimes increased for a second consecutive year, and as was the case in 2015"[4]  These are mainly crimes against  religion and ethnicity, they mark the years since Trump's famous anti immigrant announcement speech that kicked off his campaign."Hate crimes reported to police in America’s ten largest cities rose 12.5 percent in 2017. The increase was the fourth consecutive annual rise in a row and the highest total in over a decade according to an analysis by the Center for the Study of Hate & Extremism at California State University, San Bernardino."[5]

"The Trump effect." This is the phrase used by the Southern Poverty Law Center to describe the up turn in racist behavior. The center reports that not only have attacks on people for race and religion doubled anti-Muslims organizations have tripled."Our report found tat the campaign is producing a high degree of fear and anxiety among children of color and flimflamming racial and Ethnic tensions in the classroom."[6] The Center clearly lays it at Trump's door. Now they are careful to make the caveat that the information is anecdotal and  not a scientific study. Nevertheless the center is a highly respected source and they have testimony from thousands of people. Ten thousand  teachers, counselors, and and administrators of schools responded to their 2016 survey. The SPLC concluded that the election had a profoundly negative effect, 90% of the sample reporting that school climate has been negativity effected.Students of color suffering great anxiety,students targeting each other based upon which candidate was supported,and four of 10 report derogatory language used agaisnt Muslims and people of color.[7]

Mr. Trump’s comment to lawmakers that the United States should accept more immigrants from places like Norway instead of from Haiti or “shithole countries” in Africa did not sound consistent with the notion that all people are equal no matter the place of their birth or the color of their skin.,...If it were a one-time comment, an inadvertent insensitivity, it would still have stirred a firestorm. But Mr. Trump has said so many things on so many occasions that have rubbed the raw edges of race in America that they have raised the larger issue. A country tainted at its founding by slavery and struggling with that legacy ever since is now led by a chief executive who, intentionally or not, has fanned, rather than doused, the fires that divide white, black and brown.[8]

PBS published a list of Trump racial record and there are several positive things Trump has done that remove the stigma of racist. Such as opening various clubs to black membership, his daughter married a Jew and so on.[9] But it is a mixed record and it shows a history of insensitivity,[10]

Of course there is no way to actually prove that. All we have to go on is the correlation but it's a pretty strong correlation. It's clear that Trump did not cause the new racism because it was there and we can see it brewing in the Obama era as a reaction to having a black President, yet  it is clear Trump was a very important trigger, giving supposed  "legitimacy" at the crucial juncture. We can't blame Obama for being black while President nor refuse to vote for the best candidate on the off chance that he night trigger racism. The candidates who plays on sympathy with a base that include the racists is not be trusted. The one who finds that there are lovely people among the racists is playing that game. Still it is not the racism of the man Trump that is at issue but the "Trump effect."

White supremacists agreed. Richard Spencer, the white nationalist leader, said on Friday that conservatives defending Mr. Trump on Fox News should stop saying it was about economics and legal systems, rather than race. “It’s obviously all about race, and to their credit, liberals point out the obvious,” he said.The Daily Stormer, a neo-Nazi website, likewise welcomed Mr. Trump’s comments. “This is encouraging and refreshing, as it indicates Trump is more or less on the same page as us with regards to race and immigration,” the site said.[11]
The Trump effect, his luke warm mealy mouthed half acceptneceof white suremicists has emboldoned those rank regardlessof his intensionor hispersona feeling The Daily Stormer agaim

The Daily Stormer, a neo-Nazi publication, expressed delight: “Trump comments were good. He didn’t attack us. He just said the nation should come together. Nothing specific against us. He said that we need to study why people are so angry, and implied that there was hate … on both sides! So he implied the antifa [anti-fascists] are haters. There was virtually no counter-signaling of us at all.”[12]



[1]Joseph Barracto "92 Year Old Mexican Man Beaten With Brick..." NY Daily News (July 9,2018)
(accessed on July 12,2018)

[2] Mark Berman "Hate Crimes in The US increased last year FBI Says." The Washington Post   (Niv.13,2017)
(accessed on July 12,2018)

[3] Felicia Persaud,  "Blame rising anti-immigrant environment in the US on the hater-in-chief." NY Amsterdam News (5/24/2018,)
(accessed on July 12,2018)

[4] Mark Berman, op cit.

[5] Center for the Study of Hate an Extremism.
(accessed on July 12,2018)

Data compiled for 38 jurisdictions.
Brian Levin (Author) "is a professor of criminal justice at California State University, San Bernardino, where he is the director of the Center for the Study of Hate & Extremism...He received his JD from Stanford Law School where he was awarded the Block Civil Liberties Award and his BA summa cum laude from the University of Pennsylvania with multiple honors in American History."
John David Reitzel (Author/Analytic Charting) "is an assistant professor of criminal justice at California State University, San Bernardino. He has a PhD in Criminology from the University of Florida and specializes in race, crime, and policing research."

NBC Reporting on this research

[6] Mark Potock,"Campaign Language of the man Who Would Become President" Southern Poverty Law Center, official site (Feb 15, 2017)
(accessed on July 12,2018)

[7] Southern Poverty Law Center"The Trump Effect The Impact of The 2016 Presidential Election on Our Nations Schools." (Nov 28,2016)
(accessed on July 12,2018)

[8] Peter Baker, "A President Who Fans, Rather than Douses, the Nation's Racial Fores." NY Times (Jan 12,2018)
(accessed on July 12,2018)

[9] PBS News Hour, "Every Moment in Trump's Charged Relationship With Race" (Aug 22,2017)
(accessed on July 12,2018)

[10] Ibid

[11] Baker, op cit
(accessed on July 12,2018)

[12] Donald Smith "Trump's Failure to Condemn Virginia Neo Nazis is Schockimg But Not Surprizig," The Guardian, (Aug 14, 2017
(accessed on July 12,2018)

Sunday, July 1, 2018

Trump ends Clean air

Image result for air pollution

"Trump Administration ends clear air policy Opposed by fossil fuel companies," CBS News
(Jan, 26, 2018)

The Trump administration announced Thursday it is doing away with a decades-old air emissions policy opposed by fossil fuel companies, a move that environmental groups say will result in more pollution. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) said it was withdrawing the "once-in always-in" policy under the Clean Air Act, which dictated how major sources of hazardous air pollutants are regulated. [more, see link above]

Brad Plumer,"Kennedy Retirement could clear path for Trump's environmental Roll  backs."New York Times (June 28,2018)

In his 30 years on the court, Justice Kennedy was frequently a crucial swing vote on major environmental questions. While he tended to be skeptical of expansive federal regulations that intruded on private property rights, he was also willing to break with the court’s conservative wing in favor of more aggressive government action to limit air and water pollution. [see more here]

More NYT stories on Trump and Enironment

Monday, June 11, 2018

Image result for end of net Neutrality

CBS this morning, this morning, Trump's FCC guy defending the end of net neutrality. Every answer he gave assumed the rues are in place, the rules that were just eliminated.
The reporters said ATT and others were limiting competitors sights before the regulations.The The Trump FCC Rep says we don't see that kind of behavior today. That;s because you've had the rules. the reporters pointed this out he actually said the rules forbid it,!Hey, you just eliminated the rules!
Trump;s dream world thinking is really catching, They must really assume consumers are total idiots,

Internet Jonik