Update no.788

Update from the Heartland

No.788

16.1.17 – 22.1.17

Blog version:  http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/

To all,

            The follow-up news items:

-- It was announced this week that the underwater search for the wreckage of MH370 [638, 691, 711, 716] has been officially suspended, having been unable to locate the remains.  The perpetrator of this event knew what he was doing and he has apparently succeeded.  I believe he sought to create as much uncertainty and expenditure of resources as he possibly could.  We may never know what actually happened.  The investigating agencies are likely to leave the investigation open and allow the preliminary report to stand.

-- On Tuesday, President Obama commuted the sentence of Chelsea Manning, the former Private First Class Bradley Edward Manning, then 22 years of age when he was arrested [450].  Manning was charged with espionage, tried by general court martial, and duly convicted and sentenced to 35 years in the United States Disciplinary Barracks, Fort Leavenworth, Kansas.  The President’s unilateral action, in accordance with powers granted to him by the Constitution, commuted Manning’s sentence to seven years.  She is to be released on 17.May.2017.  The President indicated she had paid her price and suffered enough.  With all due respect, Mister President, you are flat wrong!

            An interesting related footnote, Julian Paul Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks who is hole up in the Ecuadorian embassy in London to avoid extradition on charges of sexual assault in Sweden, publicly proclaimed he would submit to extradition when Manning was freed for her crimes.  We shall see if Assange is a man of his word.

            This whole kerfuffle surrounding a quarter of Democrat representatives ‘boycotting’ the inauguration was simply wrong – wrong-headed, wrong-spirited, and rather egocentric.  If they did not or could not attend, just do not go.  If they did not want to be cold, then just do not go.  To make a big public statement and spectacle that they were ‘boycotting,’ presumably because they disagreed with the president-elect is actually an insult to the American People, our form of governance, and the history of a peaceful transition of power.  I have no problem with entertainers refusing an invitation to perform, since they are only representing themselves and their art form.  A congressional representative is far more than self.  S/he represents all constituents, not just Democrat voters.  Those foolish representatives will have plenty of time to protest and resist Trump’s actions or proposed legislation.  ‘Boycotting’ the inauguration was just plain wrong.

            Representative John Robert Lewis of Georgia on NBC’s Meet the Press publicly stated, “I don't see this president-elect as a legitimate president.”  He went on to proclaim, “I think the Russians participated in helping this man get elected.  And they helped destroy the candidacy of Hillary Clinton. I don't plan to attend the inauguration. It will be the first one that I miss since I've been in the Congress. You cannot be at home with something that you feel that is wrong, is not right.”

            Comments and opinions like that are NOT helpful.  Respectfully, Representative Lewis is flat-ass WRONG!  There is NO evidence or even implications that the Russians manipulated the actual vote counts and election results.  Did the Russian meddle in our election process by creating false stories as well as stealing private information from the Democratic National Committee and releasing that information through WikiLeaks?  Yes, of that I have little doubt.  While I condemn what the Russians did, the burden for being influenced by the Russian cyber-operations against us lays solely with us – each individual citizen.  In a free society, it is incumbent on ALL of us to test the veracity of information we are presented.  If the Russians participated in our recent election, then we allowed ourselves to be seduced by their faux-news and stolen information.  Yes, John Lewis, you were wrong.  President Trump was duly and properly elected in accordance with the Constitution despite the clear preferences of the Russian leadership.  Pull up your big girl-panties and let us get on with the business of this Grand Republic.

            Well, now, that was different . . . not the usual uplifting, bright view of the future.  Instead, we were treated to a rather Orwellian, dark presentation.  Transcripts are available on-line, so I will not waste everyone’s time in analysis of his speech.  Yet, I must draw attention to several phrases and sentences that truly stunned me.  The first was his rather bleak, “. . . rusted out factories scattered like tombstones across the landscape of our nation . . . .”  Businesses have failed or ceased to remain relevant since the beginning of this Grand Republic.  Why he thinks those “tombstones” are any different from the millions of real tombstones is truly beyond my comprehension.  He went on to summarize his point, “This American carnage stops right here and stops right now.”  Carnage . . . really?  I certainly understand if you were a buggy whip maker, you might see the irrelevance of your business as carnage.  However, he is the President of the United States of America, not the foreman of a defunct buggy whip company.  Lastly (for me, not for his speech), he said, “We are assembled here today issuing a new decree to be heard in every city, in every foreign capital, and in every hall of power, from this day forward, a new vision will govern our land, from this day forward, it's going to be only America first.  America first!”  Where is that damn decoder ring we are supposed to have to interpret what The Donald really meant by his words?

            I am sorry, but . . . his words conjure up a day gone by when the term “Ugly American” was a valid observation.  [For those not familiar with the term, I urge you to read: “The Ugly American” by Eugene Burdick and William Lederer (1958).]  I have seen – as in witnessed first hand – individual examples of ugly Americans over the decades of my adult life in every country I have visited.  For my younger readers, what is an ugly American you may ask?  Well, an “Ugly American” is a derogatory term describing arrogant, boisterous, demeaning, disrespectful, ignorant, thoughtless, and egocentric American citizens mainly abroad, but also at home, as well.  Now, I ask everyone, how many of those negative attributes have been or can be ascribed to The Donald by his public conduct?  Being great is NOT being the schoolyard bully.

            Lisa Lerer of the Associated Press summed it up the best that I have seen.  “Donald Trump enters the White House on Friday just as he entered the race for president: defiant, unfiltered, unbound by tradition and utterly confident in his chosen course.”  I could deal with his defiant and unfiltered.  His unbound bothers me more than a little.  However, it is his “utterly confident” that scares the bloody hell out of me.  How could anyone be that confident in such a complicated world and troubled times?

            Now, even the Pope has weighed in.  As reported by Agence France-Presse, “Of course crises provoke fears and worries, the example of populism in the European sense of the word is Germany in 1933.  Germany . . . was looking for a leader, someone who would give her back her identity and there was a little man named Adolf Hitler who said ‘I can do it’.”  The Pope accurately noted, “Hitler did not steal power.  He was elected by his people, and then he destroyed his people.”  The Pope accurately illuminated history from 84 years ago, almost to the day.  I am not the only person seeing far too many similarities with history.  I pray history is not repeated in our times.

            If Donald Trump wants to bend over and spread ‘em for his buddy Vladimir Putin that is his choice, but that is NOT going to make America great, again.  I want to be pleasantly surprised, since I believe the Russian people want peace, tranquility and détente, just as Americans do.  In this, I want Trump to be correct, wise and effective.  Unfortunately, it is not the Russian people we have differences with, it is the Russian leadership and present government that is the problem.  They need an adversary (an enemy) to focus the Russian people into acquiescence.  Putin and his cronies favored Trump over Clinton for very real, practical reasons.  If we could ever know their actual motivation, I suspect it would be that they see his political and international naïveté as infinitely malleable in their skillful hands to gain American tacit support or at least silence to their hegemonic interests.  Again, I hope I am dreadfully wrong, but I fear I am not far off the mark.

            On Friday, after the inauguration, the Senate confirmed General James Norman Mattis, USMC (Ret.) to be Secretary of Defense [PN29; Senate: 98-1-0-1(0); 20.1.2017, 16:55].  Vice President Mike Pence administered the oath of office to Mattis as the 26^th Secretary of Defense later that day.  Congress earlier passed An Act to provide for an exception to a limitation against appointment of persons as Secretary of Defense within seven years of relief from active duty as a regular commissioned officer of the Armed Forces [PL 115-xxx; S.84; House: 268-151-1-14(1); Senate: 81-17-0-2(0); 131 Stat. xxxx; 12.1.2017] allowing the Mattis nomination to go forward to the full Senate.

            Later Friday, the Senate confirmed General John Francis Kelly, USMC (Ret.) to be Secretary of Homeland Security [PN40; Senate: 88-11-0-1(0); 20.1.2017, 17:57].  He was also sworn in later that day as 5^th Secretary of Homeland Security.  Kelly did not need a waiver for his nomination or confirmation.

            These are the first two confirmations of Trump’s cabinet nominations.

            Wednesday, a week previous, then President-elect Trump held a press conference at Trump Tower in New York City.  He was questioned about one of his multitudinous tweets earlier that morning condemning the intelligence agencies for leaking unsubstantiated claims of the Russians possessing compromising information.  Trump answered, “I think it was disgraceful — disgraceful that the intelligence agencies allowed any information that turned out to be so false and fake out. I think it’s a disgrace, and I say that — and I say that, and that’s something that Nazi Germany would have done and did do. I think it’s a disgrace that information that was false and fake and never happened got released to the public.”

            On Saturday after his inauguration, Trump went to CIA HQ Langley, Virginia, ostensibly to mend fences with the Intelligence Community, and publicly stated his political opinion, “I have a running war with the Media.  They are among the most dishonest human beings on earth.”

            This Trump-induced spate with the Press is a clear and obvious attempt at obfuscation and distraction.  Instead of talking about substantive matters, he has saturated the Press with defending itself against his attacks.  The Press has faithfully reported facts – his words spoken in public with multiple recordings.  This Trump subterfuge has gone on for 18 months of the silly season.  Now, it is clear he intends to perpetuate his deception campaign to minimize and marginalize the Press – the only institutional watchdog he has.  Further, if he cannot silence them as Hitler did with threats and assassinations, then he wants to intimidate them to such an extent they do not challenge him directly or his use of “alternative facts.”

            Once again, Trump should have studied history just a little before he made such fallacious claims.  The National Socialist thugs in Germany moved shockingly and swiftly to silence the Press as soon as the Reichstag passed by a vote of 441 to 94, and the Reichkanzler signed der Gesetz zur Behebung der Not von Volk und Reich (Law in order to remedy the misery of the people and the Empire), more widely known as der Ermächtigungsgesetz, (the Enabling Act), less than two months [23.3.1933] after the ascendancy of Hitler to the chancellorship.  In less than a year after the Enabling Act, all of the German Press were under the direct control of Reichsminister für Volksaufklärung und Propaganda Paul Joseph Goebbels (Empire Minister of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda) [rather telling title, don’t you think?].  Trump must count on and bet on the vast majority of American citizens will never knowing the history or call him out on his false statements.  Then again, perhaps he just does not care (after all, he is better than anyone living or who stood before him), and what is worse, half of the American citizens who voted him into office do not care either.  The Press is a convenient whipping boy.  So, this is how it is going to be for the next four years . . . rough ride indeed.

            No, Donald, the Press is not dishonest.  That accusation must be leveled at the person you see in the mirror every time you choose to admire your gorgeousness.

            Comments and contributions from Update no.787:

“I guess we are going to see the name Trump dominating your wise words. Little or none of it complimentary. My contacts on this side of the pond are universal in adopting the views expressed thus. We shall see, we certainly will.”

My reply:

            Trump dominating my words . . . yes, I am afraid so.  Reality is inevitable.  He is not even president, yet, and he is already doing some really bonehead things.  His narcissism, arrogance, egocentricity and paucity of any semblance of humility enable him to believe he is better than history, than the law, than treaties, than international relations . . . well, I am certain he truly believes he is better than God.  That is a very dangerous state of mind for the commander-in-chief of the most powerful military force on the planet.  Yes, we certainly shall see.

            As we’ve stated before, this is going to be a very rough ride.

 . . . Round two:

“Our morning papers all seem to be supporting your new man and the changes he intends to make. Many of us were sorry to see the objectless street rioting of those in opposition. Not the behaviour expected of a sophisticated society. Today you have the ladies on the move-that should be a little more civilised.

“Anyway it’s not our business.”

 . . . my reply to round two:

            Well, good, I’m glad the general perspective in the Motherland is positive.  Not quite the same in the colonies, but most folks are trying to see the positive, trying to give him a chance.  I found his inaugural speech to be rather dark and foreboding on several levels . . . more in this week’s Update.

            The violence and destruction is very disappointing.  From what I have seen so far, these hooligans were not anti-Trump, they were anarchists (anti-everything) looking for a convenient opportunity to riot.  That behavior in this instance is not indicative of American society.  Unfortunately, in a free society, the bad apples are allowed to become visible.

            Yes, the ladies demonstrate today; should be interesting.  I just hope the anarchists of yesterday’s obscenity do not cause similar problems today.

Comment to the Blog:

“With regard to the promised replacement for Affordable Care Act (aka Obamacare), there’s more at stake than millions of people’s health care. (I take that very seriously, especially since I could easily be one of those people.)  The lack of care could kill plenty of people before their time, and consider also the number of people employed caring for them and handling billing, customer service, and other related tasks. While a smaller number, that still runs into the millions of jobs lost. That income leaves the economy and those people compete for remaining jobs either in their fields or after some kind of (costly) retraining. That promise of replacement needs to become hard fact, a far more difficult task than attempting the repeal of a law. Fortunately for those who benefit from Obamacare, usually when one party wins control of Congress and the Presidency, they bicker among themselves for their entire term.

“With respect to the fiasco over DNC emails, I hold each party responsible for their own behaviors. The FBI Director job requires integrity. Comey released information that he knew would become public and affect the election. That’s his. The emails point to the DNC, not just the Clintons. The DNC Chairman, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, ignored her responsibilities to the party in favor of her personal connection.

“I have not yet verified a claim I saw that NPR has a separate source telling them of multiple sex tapes. I care nothing of sex scandals, but others do. Given your comparison, I would vote for Nixon over Trump without hesitation.

“I admit to missing President Obama despite reservations about some of his actual results. He is the best orator in my political lifetime. I see more personal integrity in him than in any President since Carter.

“My education emphasized hiring as the most important skill of managers. It is possible that Agent Orange knows that. On the other hand, he might be filling his Cabinet with people he believes will not invoke the Disability Clause (25^th Amendment, 4^th Clause) of the Constitution against him. His personality (or disorder) relies on bulldozing anyone who gets in his way, and it just might work. I read a book on psychopaths recently, and it discusses their uncanny ability to spot victims merely by the way the target walks. Given that Trump is not in prison or poverty by now, he may have that trait.”

My response to the Blog:

            Re: PPACA.  Good observations . . . collateral effects.  Unfortunately, most (if not all) of the people yammering to repeal PPACA do not need and thus are not affected by PPACA.  Also unfortunately, I suspect replacement is just a lot more hot air.  I doubt the congressional proponents of repeal really care what happens to those who currently benefit from PPACA.

            Re: eMail.  I was not precise.  I was referring to Hillary’s handling of highly-sensitive and classified electronic media on her private server – the subject of the FBI investigation.  The DNC eMails, which are distantly related, I refer to as the Russian affair.  I do not agree with your assessment of Comey’s actions.  Hillary’s selfish, arrogant conduct placed him in an untenable position.  Further, his letter to cognizant representatives in Congress was a private letter to properly inform them of a serious, on-going, political investigation and to give them a heads-up to the FBI’s conclusions, which he had an obligation to do.  He would have been lambasted, if he had not.  One or more of those representatives chose to publicly disclose that private letter.  Yes, the DNC bears some responsibility for not properly protecting their information, but that is quite akin to a woman being blamed for getting raped because she dressed provocatively or drank a little too much.  The Russians carried out criminal activity like a rapist; the DNC committed no crime.

            Re: sex tapes.  I have found no credible information, far short of evidence, of sex tapes . . . presumably related to Trump.  I would not be surprised that such tapes exist, given what I heard him say on that bus; further, I suspect it is more disinformation (i.e., fake news).

            Re: Nixon vs. Trump.  Oh my, now there is an alternative history “what if.”  As much damage as Nixon’s criminal conduct did, I still see Trump’s character flaws as FAR more threatening and foreboding than Nixon’s criminal conduct.  I am with you on that one.

            Trump nominating people who would not invoke the Disability Clause . . . he judged wrong with at least Mattis and Kelly.  Bulldozing his way is quite an appropriate analogy in this instance.  He has relied on intimidating anyone and everyone.  Psychopathic behavior . . . I also agree with your assessment here.  Even during the worse days of the Vietnam era, the civil rights violence, and the uncertainty of the 70’s, I never doubted the resiliency of this Grand Republic to endure.  I still espouse that belief today, however my confidence has been deeply shaken by one man . . . and I hate to give him that honorable label, given his conduct.

            “That’s just my opinion, but I could be wrong.”

            Just one related FYI: Churchill was virtually the lone voice sounding the alarm about what was happening in Germany in 1932, even before Hitler became chancellor.  He was ostracized, condemned, alienated and isolated for his audacious words, and subsequent history proved him correct . . . and everyone else wrong.  Just a thought.

 . . . Round two:

“With reference to the DNC emails, you referred to the attitude behind the incident. I referred to the content of the emails, which showed that the party's ‘leadership’ ignored their responsibilities in favor of cronyism. I'm not letting the DNC off the hook in the election of the most ‘unfavorable’ candidate on record.

“If Director Comey claims he failed to foresee the result of his letter, that is willful blindness in the correct legal sense.

“Nobody is a lone voice against Trump. He lost the popular vote, and your comparison to Hitler has been used by various sources. Should your fears materialize, it won't be for lack of warning.”

 . . . my response to round two:

            First, the DNC eMails were private communications; not public.  I dare say, none of us would appear quite so noble if our private communications were scrutinized in public.  Yes, I was not impressed by the callousness reflected in those disclosed eMails, but they were a comparative handful amongst thousands, if not tens of thousands of internal DNC communications.  I see those DNC eMails as ill-gotten gains – the product of criminal conduct.

            We do not agree on Director Comey.

            Thank you for your recognition.  I shall continue to voice my concerns, as I trust you will as well.

 . . . Round three:

“All the same, the content of those emails has been ignored by everybody except a substantial number of voters.”

 . . . my response to round three:

            I am not quite in that ‘substantial number’ group, but I am pretty close.  People say a lot of things in private . . . even to try out new or different perspectives.  Private speech is a private matter.  I am far more interested in their public conduct.  To me, those stolen, DNC eMails were akin to the Monica-Bill soirée.  I did not object to their private activities . . . well, other than the clear abuse of power implications.  It was his intentional falsehoods, obfuscation and deplorable public conduct that drew my ire and objection.

 . . . Round four:

“I share your disinterest in politicians' sexual conduct (so long as it is consensual), but my interest is in anything affecting the future of our nation. Trump's obvious deep personal issues, Comey's release of information, and the DNC's internal manipulations all affect your future and mine.”

 . . . my response to round four:

            If sexual contact is not consensual, it is criminal.  Trump’s statement on that bus was a declaration of criminal conduct.  Yet, just as he publicly pronounced that he could stand in Time Square and shoot someone (also criminal conduct) [755] and people would still vote for him, 46% of the American citizens, who chose to vote, voted for Trump, despite his obvious, demonstrable character flaws and declared criminal conduct.  To them, threatening behavior was immaterial to them; they were that desperate for change.

            The implication of your clarion caution is that all communications should be public, so we can know what they say in private settings.  I understand your sentiment, but I still go back to “ill gotten gains.”  Where is the line between public and private?  Just because an individual is a public figure does NOT give us any right to access their private communications, period, full stop.

 . . . Round five:

“Those communications became public by illicit means, true. However, their content is undisputed, and certainly that content is immoral as well. We discussed some time ago my idea that secrecy will cease to exist, whether or not that is a good thing. Here we are.”

 . . . my response to round five:

            Immoral . . . that is a pretty stiff word for the content of the DNC eMails, but that is your choice.

            Indeed, here we are.

Another contribution:

“This pisses me off.”

The article that sparked the contributor’s anger was:

“President Obama Commutes Chelsea Manning’s Sentence – Former Army intelligence analyst was serving 35 years for leaking secret government information”

by Devlin Barrett and Carol E. Lee

Wall Street Journal

Published: Updated Jan. 17, 2017; 11:14 p.m. ET

http://www.wsj.com/articles/president-obama-commutes-chelsea-mannings-sentence-1484688697?mod=djemalertNEWS

My reply:

            You are not alone there.  This was just wrong.

Postscript: I understand and appreciate President Obama’s publicly proclaimed justification for this particular commutation, but his rationalization failed to present sufficient information for me to agree with him.  National security trumps her transgender confusion.  Seven years was not enough for what she did.

            My very best wishes to all.  Take care of yourselves and each other.

Cheers,

Cap                        :-)