Tag Archives: Clinton

Shame of choice?

I have been around for some time. In this time I have always accepted the choices I have made, and for the most, I have had one regret, that was around 2001, it was a choice and I accept responsibility for the choice I mader, I might not be happy about it, but that is life. In that frame of mind I am or the most a Republican, I believe in Republican standards, yet until January 2019 I had never expected to be ashamed of that. The entire Huawei situation and as the Guardian reported 6 hours ago, ‘US blocks vote on UN’s bid for global ceasefire over reference to WHO’, the idea that the Trump administration opposes mention of the WHO must be one of the most fucked up situations that ANY commander in chief of the US in the history of that nation has set up. The stage is even more diluted when we see “Donald Trump has blamed the WHO for the pandemic, claiming (without any supporting evidence) that it withheld information in the early days of the outbreak.” In all honesty, from that pointof view, when people are THAT stupid, I will had all my IP to Huawei (hoping that they will pay me) there is no chance that there can be any hope for the US in a stage where Trump is president. The man gives rise to chimps being more intelligent than people. To give further notice, I grew up seeing and accepting that Russia was the great evil in the 70’s and 80’s, I was in the mistaken understanding that the US was the bastion of actual freedom, how wrong can a man be?

When the elections were held, it was my opinion that Clinton was the wrong choice, her bungling of the entire Benghazi situation, in light of all the spin and misdirection was reason enough. If she could not get that right, seeing her in charge of the US was in my personal view a massive mistake. I had no idea that the baboon chosen would be even worse.

And the American people are about to find out why. The economic disaster that the US now faces is estimated to outdo the Depression that preceded WW2. 

In all this, I expect that Google, Apple, IBM and Microsoft will see a massive brain drain towards Europe and Asia. I personally expected my IP to be valued no less than $2 billion, yet I personally do not see the stage where the US will honour anything, as such and to protect my IP (which is based on new 5G principles) I have no option but to offer it to Huawei and hope for the best. Even if I end up with nothing, I will set in motion gears (already done) that will push it all to the public domain. Even as that leaves me with nothing, it will be evidence that I was right all along, which will boost my ego and place me on the high moral ground, merely for the view it gives me, above the presenters, the bullet point people and the proclaimers towards their own bonus, their own needs, not the corporate needs. 

I always saw myself as a Republican because personal freedom is where it is at, not the constrictive laws that binds all together behind a fence of rules, less laws and more freedom, yet that freedom comes with personal responsibility, I never doubted or opposed that. I wonder how people will react when the works of Stephen Moore, the one economist that supports the Republican plan reacts when the flaws get out into the open and he is asked critical questions. What do you do when people set the election of a president above the value of human lives? The quote “If we don’t get the economy reopened, we go into november with a severe depression, then you’re looking probably at President Joe Biden”, yet the stage of how many will die as a feigned economy will reopen, one that has an additional $3,000,000,000,000 debt. Bloomberg did not go deeper into that part, yet the question is out there “Why was this not investigated?” Lets not forget that this is the same Moore who set the 2012 taxcut exploding the budget without producing an economic boom (source: NY Times), so where is the evidence this time and in support of that, what are the speculated death numbers? We know that the, so-called expected 1.8% mortality rate that President Trump stated months ago was a joke and he made the claim in a time when it was already well over twice as large. That beside the point of a lacking “intellectual gravitas” as some stated. The NY Times article is still an important read. He makes statements on pandemic culling that sets the stage that precautions like New York are not needed in Lincoln, Des Moines or Boise. That is as I see it the first flaw. If the US had shut its borders a lot sooner, there might have been a small gesture of hope, but that was not done. The interview gives off the noise of ‘lets not set all urban areas the same’ yet the flu will get to any stage where people are together, that is the premise and I am not a health expert either. We see at present that 1/3rd of all infected in the world are in the US. Almost one in three of all global deaths are in the US as well. Those are directly seen numbers and there is every indication that a lot of the numbers of those passing away of the Coronavirus are not showing up, so the numbers might be higher. It amounts to the entire population of Lakewood City California. Not really an urban place is it, but that is the size of the issue and I expect that the station of care includes Lakewood City, not excluding it. 

Numbers are easy to misdirect, lives less so. I understand (not completely agreeing) with Stephen Moore, yet opening as soon as possible will set a much larger stage as the US enters Christmas, and the outgoing president should consider the legacy he is about to leave the US, the outbreak might not be his fault, but the consequences of his actions are and as such I am horrified that they were made by a Republican. 

Even my own reaction, the fact that my chances are much better turning to the Chinese than the Americans is still a debate my two guardian angels are having on my shoulders (the good one on the right shoulder the other one on the left. It is leaving me rather unhappy. It is like listening to the book of Good Omens on a daily basis, unnerving to say the least.

Yet I also accept that there is a larger group of people that sets the accusation that the WHO cannot handle the pandemic. Yet it is also a stage where the US and UK largely disregarded the warnings, I saw the pandemic coming close to two weeks before the media accepted it, even as the the dictionary version of pandemic was surpassed days before I stated it, the media did not follow and questioned this part for the longest time, yet we are not looking at that, are we?

There is a much larger stage that the media is ignoring, but we let that slip, the entire issue is now on the US blocking a UN vote as it indirectly makes mention of the WHO, I wonder if the elected US official is 5 years old (a speculative assumption on my side). There are larger fish to fry, but at present we need to be asking more and more questions of the Republican political base and most media outlets are not doing that and we need to see and wonder why that is. As I see it, there is within me, a much larger fight going on. I feel ashamed for being a Republican, I wonder if I have been wrong on that choice for a much longer time, and it worries me.

It is an internal fight I never had before and that too worries me. 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics, Science

In this peachy White House

There have been a lot of issues going on lately when we get to the American El Jefe. There is a larger issue and there is consideration whether the larger issue exists for real. When it comes to the 45th President of the United States, the looneys and the conspiracy theorists are having a field day, this President has been the acceleration of looney tunes and goofy vision holders. He has been able to give rise to more conspiracies than the previous ten together. So there is what happens, what belongs to the ‘other’ classes of rumours. We now get ‘Michael Cohen recorded Trump discussing payment to Playboy model – report‘ (at https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jul/20/michael-cohen-trump-tapes-recording-playboy-model-karen-mcdougal-latest), so there is that adding fuel to the fire. By the way, have you seen Karen McDougal? I know that it is shallow to judge by looks, but if I got the attention of a woman THAT good looking, I would not be hiding it. OK, I get it, the man is married! Yet as we get another escalation that is taking the focus off the economy, there is now a serious setting where we need to look at the impeachment process (because of the shouting). It is not a new process, it was initially suggested by Benjamin Franklin in 1787; he thought it was a better solution then assassinating the ruler, which I disagree with, because I did not master 10 versions of Assassins Creed, just to get some idiot impeached. I was actually looking forward testing my skills against the US Secret Service, LOL!

The impeachment process plays is done in Congress and requires critical votes from both the House of Representatives as well as the Senate. So the House of represents the conviction and the Senate does the execution. This is not a simple setting. The House Judiciary Committee decides whether there is a case for impeachment or not. If they go for the Yay! Setting it will be up to the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee to propose a resolution calling for the Judiciary Committee to begin the formal inquiry towards impeachment. At this point we see the Judiciary Committee getting the resolution composed of one or more “Articles of Impeachment” to the full House stating that impeachment is warranted and why or that impeachment is not called for. So far there has not been a successful impeachment (Nixon resigned and Clinton got acquitted. Let’s get it out in the open that if President Trump gets to walk the path of former President Clinton, at least it was whilst he got allegedly caught with a woman (roughly) 2587% better looking than White House intern Monica Lewinsky ever did.

What gives?

Well the sweet part of all this is Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution says, “The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanours.

So now we get the list.

Bribery anyone? Well unless Karen McDougal was offered Hawaii for the optional alleged invasive action of penetration, there might not be a case, in addition to that, she is not a government official and there has never been any mention of a presidential vote being swayed by any of her deeds of desire.

Now we get to the part that is a bit of an issue. You see High crimes and misdemeanours seem to be intentionally ambiguous to cover a lot more than initially intended. The Constitutional rights foundation (at http://www.crf-usa.org/impeachment/high-crimes-and-misdemeanors.html) gives us:

At the Constitutional Convention in 1787, the framers wanted to create a stronger central government than what existed under the Articles of Confederation. Adopted following the American Revolution, the Articles of Confederation provided for a loose organization of the states. The framers wanted a stronger federal government, but not one too strong. To achieve the right balance, the framers divided the powers of the new government into three branches—the executive, legislative, and judicial. This is known as the separation of powers. They also gave each branch ways to check the power of the other branches. For example, although Congress (the legislative branch) makes laws, the president (the executive) can veto proposed laws. This complex system is known as checks and balances“.

So now we have a setting that covers allegations of misconduct peculiar to elected officials. This gives us: perjury of oath (Clinton), abuse of authority (Nixon), bribery, intimidation (Nixon), misuse of assets (Clinton and Trump, although the penis is personal property and is disregarded from being accused of misuse in this particular setting), failure to supervise, dereliction of duty, unbecoming conduct (Nixon, Clinton and Trump several Times), and refusal to obey a lawful order. There is another setting which we got in 1970 under Representative Gerald Ford. It was “Representative Gerald R. Ford defined impeachable offenses as “whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at a given moment in history.”
Which opens the trough in a few ways, because in modern settings (when married) you are supposed to lie about having an affair, making it no longer an alleged crime, in addition, a Gentlemen is not supposed to tell on what he shoves where, which puts both Clinton and Trump in the Green. And let’s be honest, in public opinion, would you really want to be the one having to admit looking at other women when you are married to a woman looking like Melania Trump? And in finality, when it comes to ‘conduct unbecoming’, the media has been soiling their own meadows for the longest of times whilst acting unbecoming, shielding big corporations in regards to activities as they were advertisers and stake holders, so there!

So we think we have the foundation of an impeachment, the question becomes will the US government push ahead on this? If it is to the 1970 setting of getting this past the House of Representatives that has 240 republicans, good luck to that setting. I think that we can throw out any chance of getting traction here; any impeachment is dead in the waters. The issue is that this might become a tactic next year in light of the 2020 presidential elections. Yet it only holds any serious grounds if the Democratic Party has anyone to offer as a serious contender. It does not as far as I can tell. You see, they have two serious players (for now), Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders. Joe Biden cannot get the numbers, nowhere near what is needed, which gives us Bernie Sanders. He might be ready to get that distance, but the setting needs to become the conversion of all the independent votes to go towards the Democratic Party. A lot of them remain independent for a reason and that is the loss for Bernie Sanders. The conversion path is not there and is unlikely to get there, giving the Republicans a large advantage, so any impeachment needs to die in the House of Representatives and it likely will. So as Fox News is all about ‘Trump impeachment push emerges as next Dem litmus test‘, I can tell you now that this is not going to happen, if it cannot be opposed in the house for starting, it will most definitely end up getting killed there.

As we see Fox giving us: “CIA Director John Brennan all but endorsed impeachment when he tweeted that “Donald Trump’s press conference performance in Helsinki rises to & exceeds the threshold of ‘high crimes & misdemeanors'” and was “nothing short of treasonous.”“, the non-republican Americans get all emotional, yet the setting is that John Brennan does not see it going anywhere, and he did not endorse impeachment as it would never happen. That is the clarity of the matter. Over half a dozen video’s and news bytes, all about impeachment, yet the cold sighting of the rules of impeachment were all ignored by the news readers, all hoping for dozens of cycles on what gets Americans emotional, whilst the clinical side show us that this for now is not going to happen, if it would proceed, it would never make it through and that indicated that any impeachment action is about turning heads and taking attention away from matters that actually require attention.

The one act I moved away from is Treason. Treason is a dangerous setting, especially in this day and age. If we go back to the 1970 setting discussed earlier, we see acts of treason from Edward Snowden and Bradley Edward Manning. They got out, acquitted and given a ‘hero’ welcome, yet they fit the traitor bill, although in the case of Manning, it is likely to fall over on the indictment when discussing gender. I can already see the headlines: ‘Falling over technicality, Male, Nay Female overthrows conviction’, this is not some anti-LGBT rant. I think (s)he choose the exit strategy that no other person would have chosen. Julian Assange did not make the Traitor cut as he was not an American, in addition, he has given materials and as s publicist he might have acted wrongly. It was his mistake to make and that does not qualify for treason.

Especially in light of Snowden, the traitor issue becomes a much harder setting. I have written many articles in the past on Snowden and I stand by them, I believe that this matter is far from over. This is an entirely different setting, but it requires reflection for the mere reason that any consideration of President Trump being considered, and convicted a traitor whilst Snowden got acquitted should be regarded as a first marker that the insane are truly ruling America, but that is merely my personal view on the matter.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media, Politics