Update no.1252

 Update from the Heartland

No.1252

5.1.26 – 11.1.26

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

 

To all,

 

Days after [the person who shall no longer be named], who has been pretending to be president, executed a raid to capture President Nicolas Maduro of Venezuela [1251], a journalist asked the pretender if there were limits to his power?  [No name] answered:

“Yeah, there is one thing.

My own morality.

My own mind.

It’s the only thing that can stop me.”

There is one major problem with his answer. He has no discernible morality, which in turn, means he has no boundaries, no limits, no constraints. The man went on to declare, "I don't need international law. I'm not looking to hurt people." I wonder what happened to the 80 plus people in those boats he blew up in the Caribbean Sea without due process of law? The last time I checked, smuggling was not a death sentence. Without due process of law, killing is murder, which is punishable. If that is not bad enough, he continues to rattle the saber at Denmark, a NATO ally, and Greenland, stating, “We’ll take it one way or another.” Then, the MAGA sycophants and ihr Anführer started spewing misinformation that Denmark has approached Russia and China about buying Greenland. The orange one sacrificed his credibility and integrity many years ago with his grotesque penchant for making false statements on a myriad of topics. We cannot believe any of them—not a single one of them, from top to bottom.

The decent, moral, experienced president would have answered: ‘Yes, the Constitution, established law, precedence, and common sense.’ Unfortunately, the orange one does not recognize, nor does he demonstrate any of those constraints. The Founders and Framers of the Constitution recognized they needed a strong but not autonomous president. They made a critical assumption that the electoral process would eliminate those candidates with less than acceptable moral values. Unfortunately, with all the collective wisdom of the Framers, no one ever considered an immoral person would make it through even the first few steps of the electoral process. Even worse, the Framers would have said the checks and balances in the tripartite governmental structure would stop any aberrant conduct. In our contemporary instance, the last and final check on any rogue president has been removed—impeachment, conviction, and permanent banishment. I know and acknowledge that there are good, moral, responsible Republican members of the House and the Senate. Regrettably, the MAGAts have figured out how to cower even good people into compliance. The consequence is, there are no checks & balances to stop this particular rogue president. Our system of governance has failed!

If anyone is looking for an epitaph on the tombstone of the orange one, it is his words noted above. He has declared himself dictator . . . and perhaps even dictator for life.

Lastly, I am compelled to reiterate that the current version of the United States of America is NOT and NEVER WILL BE what the principles that founded the Republic intended. Whether this Republic can survive and recover from the damage [no name] and his MAGAt supporters have done is yet to be seen. This is not the United States I defended, and I know and love. This is an ugly aberration. To quote very famous words, “Forgive them, Lord! They know not what they do.”

 

Comments and contributions from Update no.1251:

Comment to the Blog:

“Cadet Bone Spurs cares nothing about any law. It’s utterly ridiculous to charge a foreign official with a U.S. crime over unrelated foreign internal policy. Nationalizing Venezuela’s oil reserves is Venezuela’s option. (Drugs aren’t a real part of this.) The problem is that Bone Spurs occupies the White House for now and only knows aggression as a strategy.

“Why aren’t we listening to Epstein’s many survivors? What about the millions losing health insurance?”

My response to the Blog:

I agree for the most part. I can find very little to debate. He has consistently and persistently demonstrated his paucity of any respect for the law. If both chambers of Congress change hands, his tune might change.

Good Q. I suppose the answer is, people do not want to listen, so the Press does not report. I have noted that every time we hear from the victims, we do not hear names. I would encourage the survivors to tell us what they experienced and especially by whom. We are not there yet.

 . . . with a follow-up comment:

“Were I an Epstein victim, I'd hide my identity. People have already died. I'm not sure who the people are who don't want to listen. We've had plenty of discussion of the Epstein ‘files;’ why not witnesses?”

 . . . my follow-up response:

The perpetrators are the ones who do not want to listen. They are rich, influential friends of Jeffrey Epstein. They do not fear prosecution, but they do fear the public humiliation that would surely come with disclosure.

Witnesses are going to be few and far between. At that kind of gathering, there were victims and perpetrators, very few witnesses.

What I want to see is the list of perpetrators (with or without the victim’s identity. I imagine part of the allure Epstein used was the identity of his customers.

 

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

Cheers,

Cap                  :-)