Update no.841

Update from the Sunland

No.841

5.2.18 – 11.2.18

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

            To all,

            The follow-up news items:

-- After the fellow in the Oval Office decided to declassify the Republican HPSCI memorandum without redaction against the objections of the Democrat HPSCI members, the FBI and the Department of Justice [839/40], the HPSCI voted unanimously (both parties, all members) to release the companion Opposition memorandum.  Given the unwarranted and unjustified unilateral declaration (by Tweet) of total vindication by the fellow in the Oval Office based on the Republican HPSCI memorandum alone, I think it was inevitable that he would reject declassification and block release of the “rest of the story,” citing “significant national security concerns.”

            The objections to the Republican memorandum were based on errors by omission, i.e., the selected facts painted an inaccurate picture of the episode.  As noted in my first read through [840], I saw nothing that deserved classification at any level in the Republican memorandum.  What I did object to was the one-sided disclosure of the Republican memorandum in the face of stern public objections from a wide variety of sources.  At the very least, the two memoranda should have been released as a companion set.  Nonetheless, the fellow in the Oval Office could not care less for fairness, balance, objectivity or respect for the Opposition or the process of governance.  The only thing he reliably and consistently cares for is his perceived image of himself . . . thus, this decision to release the Republican memorandum by itself.

            As a side note, I really think I should open a new section for the Update—Continuing Efforts to Appear So Bloody Guilty.  He keeps giving us a steady stream of material.

-- Once again, the federal government technically shutdown at 00:01 [R] EST, Friday, 9.February.2018, and Congress worked through the night, with the Senate voting at 01:31 [R] EST, 9.2.18, and the House voting at 05:32 [R] EST, 9.2.18, to pass the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 [PL 115-123; HR 1892; House: 240-186-0-5(4): Senate: 71-28-0-1(0); 131 Stat. xxxx].  Of course, the fellow in the Oval Office is too important to be bothered by urgent legislation; he had to get his beauty sleep and have breakfast before tending to business.  He signed the bill along with a companion bill— Continuing Appropriations Amendments Act, 2018 [PL 115-124; HR 1301; Senate: unanimous consent; House: 371-48-0-10(6): 131 Stat. xxxx], providing appropriations for the remainder of the fiscal year [839].

            On Monday, the Supreme Court denied an appeal by Pennsylvania state legislators (a Republican majority) to reinstate their grotesquely gerrymandered House district map.  Associate Justice Alito issued the simple denial without comment.  Although the Court has not definitively decided the issue of political partisan gerrymandering, the body of accumulating evidence suggests the Court is headed toward that decision—none too soon from my perspective.  The minority in terms of registered voters is resorting to every means available to retrain control.  They will not succeed.

            One of many benefits or advantages of being retired from the work-a-day life came on Tuesday as I watched live the SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket launch from Florida's Kennedy Space Center.  One word . . . AWESOME! (emphasis mine)  Space Exploration Technologies successfully launched the Falcon Heavy rocket on its initial test flight, marking another engineering coup for founder Elon Musk.  In a somewhat whimsical modification of the inaugural test flight, Musk sent his Tesla roadster with a “Starman” mannequin securely fastened in the driver’s seat as the payload of the mission.  The launch was impressive, but what struck me the most graphically was the simultaneous return and successful landing of both external boosters.  The computational energy, the physics, the engineering of that achievement is difficult to articulate properly.  The core first stage booster apparently ran out of fuel before it could land on a barge at sea down range.  If that is the only reason, the solution is easily achieved.  So, ‘Starman’ in his roadster is headed into a heliocentric, elliptical orbit with aphelion beyond the orbit of Mars.  The Falcon Heavy system is required to support a Moon or Mars manned mission.  Well done, SpaceX!

            This is not an epiphany or revelation, just an incidental observation.  I laugh—not in humor but in pain—when Republicans refer to themselves as fiscal conservatives.  They are not!  They have made the term an oxymoron.  Both of the largest parties simply and obsessively spend the treasury without regard to revenue.  They are only separated by what they choose to spend the treasury on.  Neither party has demonstrated even a modicum of responsibility for balancing the books like all the rest of us must do, despite the established law they created, passed and enacted.  Republicans start publicly fretting over the deficit spending after they have over-spent the treasury on their pet projects. (emphasis mine)  I ping the Republicans simply because of the hypocrisy.  Here, I find myself quoting Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky:

"When the Democrats are in power, Republicans appear to be the conservative party.  But when Republicans are in power, it seems there is no conservative party.  The hypocrisy hangs in the air and chokes anyone with a sense of decency or intellectual honesty." (8.2.2018)

Spot on, Rand!  The Democrats make no claim of fiscal conservatism and responsibility, so at least they are not hypocritical.  Every time a Republican claims fiscal conservatism, we all should laugh loudly like the speaker gave us a big joke expertly delivered.  Back in the days of Senator Barry Goldwater of Arizona, I thought of my political leanings and affinity to be Republican.  My disillusionment and alienation from that notional thought has been complete and absolute for several decades now.  I’m just sayin’.

            First and foremost, I have in the past and I continue to this day in my absolute condemnation of Donald J. Trump’s misogyny and despicable conduct relative to women.  In his case, I believe most, if not all, of the accusations are true, just as I did with Bill Clinton’s reprehensible conduct toward women.  Further, I hold considerable empathy toward victims of domestic abuse—physical, mental and/or emotional.  The inequality of such events is wrong in every manner I can imagine.  However, I find myself agreeing with one of his recent tweets after yet another West Wing staffer resigned under allegations of domestic abuse.  At 07:33 [R] EST - 10 Feb 2018, the fellow in the Oval Office tweeted:

“Peoples lives are being shattered and destroyed by a mere allegation. Some are true and some are false. Some are old and some are new. There is no recovery for someone falsely accused - life and career are gone. Is there no such thing any longer as Due Process?”

He is spot-on correct.  In contrast, the MeToo movement sprang from years and decades of abuse at the hands of husbands, fathers, employers, boyfriends and other assorted men.  Many women reported their abuse to law enforcement or comparable authorities without apparent or appropriate redress; they were denied due process of the law.  In such circumstances, injustice and especially protracted injustice are understandable motives for revenge and retribution—vigilante justice, if you will.  Due process is our method of sorting out real, bona fide claims from false accusations leveled out of vengeance or some other personal motive.  What of these claims are such false accusations?  Is it really worth crucifying innocent men to feed our desire to rectify mountains of past injustice?  In so many of these sexual misconduct, sexual and domestic abuse cases, the alleged events are well beyond the statute of limitations, thus the legal remedy has been de facto eliminated.  Engineers have a relevant saying: “One data point does not define a curve, and two data points do not define a family of curves.”  We must return to due process of law rather than revenge by public opinion.  Hopefully, some day soon, we shall realize the real benefit of the MeToo movement . . . inspiring and convincing female victims of abuse to seek legal remedy immediately after incidents and allow justice to be served.  Lastly, changing the statute of limitations is not an appropriate response.

            Comments and contributions from Update no.840:

Comment to the Blog:

“We agree on the formerly secret memo, its Democratic answer, and the implications of events around them.

“Having become averse to staged media events, I didn't watch the State of the Union speech, the Democratic response, or the Super Bowl.  I will note that Joseph Kennedy III has taken over $50,000 from the pharmaceutical industry, which rules out any support from me.  What was the objectionable venue for his speech?

“‘Clean coal’ is a marketing term for coal pollution mitigation.  Due to that ‘clean coal’ term, I imagine many Americans, including the Trump family, have an image of chunk coal on a conveyor belt being sprayed with some chemical to ‘clean’ it, or of a different kind of coal being mined.  Those pictures do not approach reality, but marketers of coal would like you to have them.  The best actual information I found in a casual search is the Wikipedia article linked here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_pollution_mitigation.

“The Russia investigation continues. Harold Watson ‘Trey’ Gowdy III (that is, Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-SC), best known for his dogged and fruitless pursuit of evidence against Hillary Clinton in the Benghazi mess, had an important role in drafting the Republican memo currently in question.  He stated on Face the Nation this week that the memo has nothing to do with the meeting in focus at the Trump Tower and nothing to do with obstruction of justice.  Trey Gowdy is a lawyer as well as a Tea Party member and is deeply involved in the investigation.  No source could be stronger than that.

“Nothing to date has vindicated Trump.  The odds against that grow ever longer.”

My response to the Blog:

            Re: SOTU.  It may seem so; however, it is a constitutionally mandated event . . . although not required to be verbally delivered, presidents have addressed a joint session of Congress since President Wilson (1913).  For that reason alone, I believe listening (or reading) the president’s report is like our obligation to vote.  But hey, that’s just me.

            Thank you for the explanation.  I know what the term refers to technically.  However, it was the context and usage by the fellow in the Oval Office that has continued to be an irritant to me.

            Quite so!  ‘Trey’ Gowdy is reported to be the only Republican to actually read the submitted FISC requests for surveillance of Carter Page.  I have no reason to doubt Gowdy’s representation in direct contrast to the yammerings of the fellow in the Oval Office.  Since last week’s Update [840], the HPSCI reportedly voted unanimously to release the Opposition companion memorandum.  What remains disturbing is why the Republicans refused to do so originally.  I look forward to reading the Opposition’s perspective.  Now, we wait to see what the fellow in the Oval Office will do with the HPSCI request.

            Again, quite so!  Nothing has been publicly presented to date, to vindicate the fellow in the Oval Office.  In fact, as I stated, with each attempt at self-proclamation, he appears guiltier.  Given his penchant as a snake-oil salesman, perhaps that appearance is by design and intention . . . although I am reticent to give him that credit.  We shall see.

 . . . a follow-up comment:

“I will note that I expected you to know more about ‘clean coal’ than the Orange Menace or the bulk of Americans.  I included the comment and link for the benefit of other readers.  The facts of ‘clean coal’ are not widely known.”

Another contribution:

“Deaf, dumb and blind liberals .... sorry Cap you are one of them. ... but you are good at writing words ....you have all the MSNBC and CNN talking points of the day .. surprised you didn't use the words nothing burger... listen to WMAL and you'll have a totally different take .. Rush is on at 10:07 this morning http://www.wmal.com.  I double dare you ...”

My reply:

            What is the child’s phrase . . . “sticks and stones . . .”  I know how Rush sees such things.  I do not need a refresher.  What I do want is your opinion.  So, rather than resorting to ill-informed name-calling, use your words to give me your arguments, your opinions, your perspective on contemporary topics, or any topic you may wish to choose.

A different contribution:

“The Brexit argument goes on in never ending conflicting detail with the pro and anti-Brexit continuing  their remorseless arguments. Today we are hearing how badly our trade with the world will suffer by as much as 15% while others express totally divergent views. What are we the public supposed to believe?

“Our health service has had a bad winter with sick people waiting many hours to be seen in hospitals some even dying before treatment. And yet I could ring our village doctor tomorrow and be quite certain of an appointment that day or at the worst the next day. Your President using our rather ‘sick’ but wonderful Health Service as an example of how your Democrat’s health plan would fail did nothing to strengthen the strong bind that will continue to grasp our two nations together. He was rightly ‘ex-communicated’ and roasted by the popular and non-popular press.”

My response:

            It seems we all have these struggles with conflicting opinions in the political arena.  Since the campaign before the Brexit vote [758], I have suspected too many voters did not take the Brexit vote seriously or did not understand the consequences of their votes.  Remorse for the 2016 vote seems to be at play as well.  “What are we the public supposed to believe?”  My only suggestion: read and listen to all sides as best you can, and make your judgments regarding reliability and accuracy of your news sources.  Trust your sixth sense.  A classic information management technique when someone does not have a strong argument is to create and maintain an atmosphere of confusion, which inherently fosters doubt.  The Russians are masters of confusion.  Beyond the reality, I suspect some folks are seeking a de facto re-vote.  Good luck as you and your countrymen walk through the minefield.

            There are many, many reasons (too many to possibly recount) to be critical of the current occupant of the Oval Office.  During my family’s two-year stint in the United Kingdom, we had cause to interact with the National Health Service, and we have nothing but praise for the performance and service of the NHS.  He is wrong about his criticism of NHS, as he is wrong about so many topics.  I have direct NHS experience (very limited compared to you, but experience nonetheless); I seriously doubt he has any similar experience and is relying upon calcified political dogma he feels he must spew without conscience.

 . . . follow-up comment:

“And today we have high ranking political ‘aristocrats’ very strongly suggesting another national vote on the Brexit subject.  Our Prime Minister Mrs. May is quite determined to continue on a course to leave the EU as it is, or was, the nation’s wish in the referendum.

“She is having tough time of it but is showing ‘Thatcher’ fortitude.  I believe she will stick to the plan whatever it may bring.

“This brings me to another subject Cap.  We in the U/K are celebrating 100 years since women received the right to vote.  Not all women mind only those over a certain age run a business and own property.  I know nothing about your female voting rights but here even 100 years later we still do not have equal pay for both sexes in the same type of employment. Uncertain of the exact date Cap but parliament passed an act over 30 years ago which has been widely ignored.  I expect you have some comments?”

 . . . my follow-up response:

            I meant to add in my previous reply that the Prime Minister has respected the will of the people by their vote two years ago, even though I imagine she feels personally, as her predecessor did, that Brexit was wrong from the get-go.  I wish her well and trust she will stick to the plan the people set in motion two years ago.  Godspeed and following winds.

            One of my hot button issues is equality for all, full stop!  I have been a feminist since the late 60’s.  The social factors may affect an individual’s personal choice of association, friendship and such.  The social factors have no place in the public domain, i.e., employment, the law, and such.  Unequal pay based on gender is wrong in every possible way.  We have had such laws as well, but enforcement is not easy.  The 19th Amendment to our Constitution was ratified and certified in 1920, guaranteeing the right of women to vote.  However, the Doctrine of Coverture (articulated by Blackstone in 1765 and established English common law for centuries) was not declared unconstitutional in the United States until 1981 (Louisiana).  The struggle for equal rights continues to this very day for women, for citizens with dark skin pigmentation, for non-heterosexual citizens . . . well, actually, for everyone who is not or could not pass for a respectable, heterosexual, Caucasian male.  I could go on, but I fear I have already over-done my comment.

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

Cheers,

Cap                        :-)