MinBane

I write what I like.

Archive for the tag “Morning Joe”

White House Chief of Staff Memo from John Kelly to McGahn, Hagin, Sessions, Coats and Wray – “Re: Improvements to the Clearance Process” (16.02.2018)

Advertisements

Opinion: US Code might allow the White House to Appoint Trump Family Members, but it’s doesn’t make it less questionable!

3 U.S. Code § 105 – Assistance and services for the President: (e) Assistance and services authorized pursuant to this section to the President are authorized to be provided to the spouse of the President in connection with assistance provided by such spouse to the President in the discharge of the President’s duties and responsibilities. If the President does not have a spouse, such assistance and services may be provided for such purposes to a member of the President’s family whom the President designates” (Cornell Law School).

I don’t know about you, but it’s just one of these days, where you see entitlement in the New York Gang or the Trump Administration. This was made and prepared for the President Donald J. Trump, as he was swearing-in and starting his term. Because the Office of Government Ethics (OGE), who is in-charge of checking and making the sure the personnel and staff is following the codes and procedures for their roles in government. Seriously, the OGE Lawyer worked the laws in his favor, even when I struggle to see it. My first question after reading the US Code 105 Title 5(d), did the President loose his wife? Therefore, because of his tragic loss, he needed counsel from son-in-law Jared Kushner and oldest daughter Ivanka Trump inside the White House. How can you spell the code wrong, “If the President does not have a spouse”. True she was in New York the first months of the Presidency. Still, she was still his spouse, meaning that “he had”. But before I rant, take a look into key parts of the reasoning for the appointments of his family inside the White House!


Section 3110 of title 5, also known as the anti-nepotism statute, states that “[a] public official may not appoint, employ, promote, advance, or advocate for appointment, employment, promotion, or advancement, in or to a civilian position in the agency in which he is serving or over which he exercises jurisdiction or control any individual who is a relative of the public official.” 5 U.S.C. § 3110(b). The statute expressly identifies the President as one of the “public official[s]” subject to the prohibition, and a son-in-law is a covered “relative.” Id. § 3110(a)(2), (a)(3). Moreover, under Article II of the Constitution, the President exercises “jurisdiction or control” over the White House Office as well as over the rest of the Executive Branch. See Myers v. United States, 272 U.S. 52, 163–64 (1926); Inspector General Legislation, 1 Op. O.L.C. 16, 17 (1977). Less certain is whether the White House Office is an “agency”—a term that section 3110 defines to include an “Executive agency,” thereby calling up the definition of “Executive agency” generally applicable to title 5, see 5 U.S.C. § 3110(a)(1)(A); id. § 105. But whether or not the White House Office meets this definition (a subject to which we will return in Part II, infra), we believe that the President’s special hiring authority in 3 U.S.C. § 105(a) permits him to make appointments to the White House Office that the anti-nepotism statute might otherwise forbid” (Koffsky, P:2, 2017).

A President wanting a relative’s advice on governmental matters therefore has a choice: to seek that advice on an unofficial, ad hoc basis without conferring the status and imposing the responsibilities that accompany formal White House positions; or to appoint his relative to the White House under title 3 and subject him to substantial restrictions against conflicts of interest. Cf. AAPS, 997 F.2d at 911 n.10 (declining, after holding that the First Lady qualifies as a “full-time officer or employee” of the government under FACA, to decide her status under the conflict of interest statutes). In choosing his personal staff, the President enjoys an unusual degree of freedom, which Congress found suitable to the demands of his office. Any appointment to that staff, however, carries with it a set of legal restrictions, by which Congress has regulated and fenced in the conduct of federal officials” (Koffsky, P: 16-17, 2017).

I will not jumping jacks around this OGE Lawyer Koffsky, but office that is run by the President is an Executive Office, that issues Executive Orders and Executive Memorandums. That if followed by current law and within provisions within the state because legal and acts that all citizens has to follow. To subject the White House into a sublime role of the state is demeaning, even if he needs support of the branches of government like the Courts and Congress. But that doesn’t make the White House into a playhouse for playboy bunnies, its the place where executive orders and legal minds meet to determine the future of the Republic. It’s insulting that Koffsky is belittling the office and the White House, so it fits legally President role and his ability to appoint family members.

Yes, the President is allowed to seek advice and that ad-hock with family members. That is without doubt, but that is different ones in while speak with an uncle in Louisiana before making a decision that matters for both United States and the World itself. There is problematic to hire family into the White House, as their supposed restrictions and the boundaries of their roles. Since the family bond will not be cut, but be ever present in the decision making.

That Jared Kushner is a Public Official is clear with his title and responsibilities, as a Senior Advisor to the President, who is working on American Innovation, Peace in the Middle East and combating the Opioid crisis in the United States. Ivanka Trump is by title the Assistance to the President. Both of them has had a public role and been acting as Public Officials. They have been there, traveling with the President and even taking his place when he was tired or wanted to relax. Like Ivanka Trump did during the G-20 in July 2017, when the not-elected family member took the seat G20 Leaders Table. So her assistance goes further than ordinary public officials. Since, this sort of role would usually end on Secretary of State and the Vice-President. However, it isn’t the case in the matter of Trump Family.

Enforcement. While the statutory language bars the appointment of relatives as well as the acceptance of such appointments, enforcement of the prohibition may be limited. The remedy expressly provided for violating this prohibition states that the appointed individual “is not entitled to pay, and money may not be paid from the Treasury as pay” for that person. The statute itself does not require nor does it provide expressly for removal of the individual from the federal civilian position. As noted above, the provision was directed at stopping the practice of placing relatives on the government payroll, and thus the law assures that a relative so appointed may not be paid from federal funds for any such service. The statute likewise does not provide a penalty for the public official who appointed the individual. However, it may be noted that for some rank-and-file positions, not of a confidential or policy making nature, the appointment of a relative may involve a “prohibited personnel practice” by the appointing official” (CRS Report & Analysis, 2016).

Here is another one giving leeway for the possible hiring of Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump, that is if they are in their roles unpaid and with ranks. Even, that is an issue with the role of the Senior Advisor Kushner and all his positions, even the clearances he needs to be able to fulfill his duty at the White House. Ivanka has also been part of the close-knitted leadership of his fathers. She been part of meetings and such. So both of them has been have been close to confidential material most likely, as they work so close with their relative, the President.

Just like covered in People Magazine in January 2017: “Though Kushner’s appointment does not require Senate confirmation, it is a controversial one: Anti-nepotism laws forbid the hiring of relatives to Cabinet positions, but are less clear on whether they can be appointed to White House staff roles. In American history, anti-nepotism laws are actually a relatively recent development: They were put into place in 1967 by then-President Lyndon B. Johnson not long after one of his predecessor’s appointments raised eyebrows” (Pearl, 2017).

So even if the law and the Anti-nepotism law are put in place to accept family members in White House roles. Still, the nepotism is in full affect. There is no half-step on that. The United States should have a hard time accepting the appointment of Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump as Senior Advisor and Assistant to the President. All of this has entitled them and given them a special role in the Executive Office of the United States. What is clear by the U.S. Code 105, title 5(d) and will always stand out for the provision in the code that said this: “If the President does not have a spouse, such assistance and services may be provided for such purposes to a member of the President’s family whom the President designates”.

The President has a spouse, his third wife, Melanie, therefore he doe not need such assistance and services. Instead, they are using the titles in the anti-nepotism statutes, they can most likely not be as valuable as these words. However, Koffsky wrote this: “or to appoint his relative to the White House under title 3 and subject him to substantial restrictions against conflicts of interest”. These words are saying that its set substantial restrictions to the office, even as the President has let them be a vital part of his term, Kushner is nearly saving half of America and the Middle-East. Ivanka is publicly part abroad and in Washington. It’s not like they are restricted in that manner, but creating conflicts of interests. That should worry anyone caring about the honest of the public office.

Therefore it was striking what Jason Chafetz said in January 2017: “According to Josh Chafetz, a professor at Cornell Law School and an expert in constitutional law and legislative procedure, the White House is not regulated in the same way as other administrative agencies. “The bigger issue for the administration is not so much about the technical bounds of these nepotism laws, but it just looks bad,” Chafetz said. “I don’t think there’s anything legal that can be done in terms of the appointment. It just looks like there’s a pattern of cronyism that has emerged, especially in conjunction with the cabinet appointments.” (Delkic & Mallin, 2017).

It’s enough. Peace.

Reference:

Koffsky, Daniel L. – ‘Application of the Anti-Nepotism Statute to a Presidential Appointment in the White House Office’ (20.01.2017)

Cornell Law School – ‘U.S. Code › Title 3 › Chapter 2 › § 105’ link: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/3/105

CRS Report & Analysis – ‘The Federal Anti-Nepotism Statute: Limits on Appointing, Hiring, and Promoting Relatives’ (12.01.2016) link: https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/nepotism.pdf

Delkic, Melina & Mallin, Alex – ‘Nepotism Laws Don’t Apply to Jared Kushner Appointment, DOJ Says’ (21.01.2017) link: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/nepotism-laws-apply-jared-kushner-appointment-doj/story?id=44951811

Pearl, Diana – ‘Donald Trump’s Son-in-Law Has Hillary Clinton to Thank for Skirting JFK-Inspired Nepotism Rules’ (11.01.2017) link: http://people.com/politics/jared-kushner-nepotism-laws-donald-trump/

Statement by U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven T. Mnuchin on Charlottesville and Yale Classmate’s inquiries (19.08.2017)

A ACLU Paper of October 1934: Teaches us how to address Nazis today!

It is hard to believe, but it is true that, President Donald J. Trump, who says there are good people and great people within groups of White Supremacists, White Nationalists and Nazis; because of this are obviously racist. There are only fools, that can deny that now. Those who do is apologists for the President and his fellow complicit aides. This could be said for a number of reasons, also because of the people around him, and not denouncing fellow leadership of organizations who spread hatred in the United States.

President Trump has clearly supported the ‘Unite the Right’ rally in Charlottesville and the way it has been done with violence. Clearly, shows the problems of the alt-right and the neo-Nazis. Still, the ACLU of old, are still with their wisdom showing how a just and free society should make sure their transgressions and their hatred get perceived in society. The ACLU in the 1934 shows their paper on free speech for Nazis are still relevant today. It shouldn’t be, but clearly it is. Because the ideals of the ACLU are noble and shows the openness, to a society where ideas get spread and get to streets. Still, there should be allowed to address the differences without breaching the laws and statutes of the law. If so, then the Nazis should serve for their crime, as all of the ones who breaks the law.

The ideal of ACLU of 1934, the argument and the approach are one of the best I have read, even if it is in defense of despicable, this was done before the holocaust and all the hatred of the Nazis was known. Before, they could do so, when they took to power in Germany and started their dictatorship that led to the second World War. Still, with the knowledge of the results of all the hatred and disgusting ideals and ideology, the ACLU shows with their paper, an understanding we should follow in this day. Not because the streets, the airways, the TV-Channels or any other platform should have Nazis and their teachings on their, but if should mock it or fact-check their ignorance. Than it needs to be in the open and not make it underground to grow into an unknown force, that can come with militias and destroy the freedom of speech.

This is what the ACLU of 1934 believed and we should be like that today. Just take a look!

To whose who advocate suppressing propaganda they hate, we ask – where do you draw the line? They can answer only the terms of revolutionists – at our political enemies. But experience shows that “political enemies” is a broad term, and has covered the breaking up even of working class meetings by rival work class organizations. It illustrates the danger, and the impractically of making any distinctions in defending rights sought by all” (…) “To those who urge suppression of meetings that may incite riot or violence, the complete answer is that nobody can tell in advance what meetings may do so. Where there is reasonable ground for apprehension, the police can ordinarily prevent disorder” (…) “To whose who would suppress meetings where race or religious hatred is likely to be stirred up, the answer is simple – that there is no general agreement on what constitutes race or religious prejudice. Once the bars are so let down, the fields is open for all-comers to charge such prejudice against any propagandists – Communists, Socialists, atheists, – even against Jews attacking the Nazis. On that ground the Union has opposed the anti-Nazi bills introduced in the New York and New Jersey legislature punishing propaganda which “stirs up race or religious hatred” or “domestic strife”. No laws can be written to outlaw Nazi propaganda without striking at freedom of speech in general” (…) “Further, we point out the inevitable effect of making martyrs by persecution. Persecute the Nazis, drive them underground, imitate their methods in Germany – and attract to them hundreds of sympathizers with the persecuted who would otherwise be indifferent. The best way to combat their propaganda is in the open where it can be fought by counter-propaganda, protest demonstrations, picketing, – and all the devices of attack which do not involve denying the rights to meet and speak” (…) “If and when Nazi meetings results in breaches of the peace, their organizers can be prosecuted under the criminal law. If their speakers libel individuals by reason of race and religion, recourse to the criminal libel statutes is open as a remedy. Short of that, and of overt acts of interference with others’ rights their freedom to carry on their agitation should be unrestricted” (ACLU, 1934).

It is proof that the knowledge and the arguments of old can be useful today as it was yesterday. The people, the organizations and their ideals might be the same, the problem might be a resurrected one. But the Nazis should be allowed to speak and have their meetings, as long as they are not breaching the law and the statutes. If they do, then they should be prosecuted!

The ACLU of 1934, have understood certain aspects of life and also the martyrdom of the political enemies and revolutionaries might give soil for further extremes. Also, give the platform and the leadership of these organization more power. Therefore, to silence them totally and ban them, does not make them go away, but make them underground.

This paper shows the importance of free speech, but also the grandeur of fighting the Nazis within just acts, to counter their propaganda and their ideology. That we should do, undress the hatred and white supremacy, which should be buried. Since the Nazi ideology shouldn’t be needed to be in our time, as it wasn’t needed even in the 1930s when the ALCU wrote this paper. Still, we should counter it and show the misgivings and the worthlessness of the Nazism, instead of banning it. The bans of their acts will only enforce it more.

It doesn’t help that President Trump defended the Charlottesville ‘Unite the Right’ rally and their violence. While attacking the counter-demonstrators. Also, neglecting the fear and the violence created by the right-extremists. That is why peaceful marches, the peaceful demonstrations and addressing the lacking clues of justification for their ideology and their belief is needed. Instead, of making them a fringe organizations, who can suddenly pop-up like wild-flowers. Therefore, the need to address them at public courts are more important than ever. To not give them a free-pass, but for their disgrace, their misunderstood arrogance of race and for their devilish ideology, who are to take total control and to terminate others. That cannot be shadow and put in the dark, the violence and viciousness of the Nazis, cannot be silenced and their will of doing evil. Should be known!

To say anything else is ignorant, they should not become martyrs, but make fooled and mocked. They should understand, that they are not all-powerful, but people we can bring down from the pedestal and put in the trash-bind of history. Peace.

Reference:

American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) – ‘Shall we defend free speech for Nazis in America’ (October 1934

Reps. Nadler, Watson Coleman, and Jayapal Announce Censure Resolution Against President Trump for Blaming “Both Sides” for Violence in Charlottesville, VA and Excusing Behavior of ‘Unite the Right’ Participants (18.08.2017)

After more CEO’s resigning from the Manufacturing Council, Trump now disbands the Council as a result!

After hree more CEO’s resigned from the American Manufacturing Council or the Trump Administration Manufacturing Council who was assembled in January 2017. Since the Charlottesville alt-right rallies and defense of it, there has been dozens of CEO’s resigning. Today there was two more, one was Denise Morrison of Campbell Soups, Jeff Immelt of General Electric and Inge Thulin of 3M. Therefore, the resistance and pressure has succeeded.

Yesterday Donald Trump wrote: “For every CEO that drops out of the Manufacturing Council, I have many to take their place. Grandstanders should not have gone on. JOBS!” (Trump, 15.08.2017). Did he yesterday think he could easily replace 9 CEO’s who resigned within 48 hours yesterday. Also, the earlier resignation of Elon Musk of Tesla. So now there are even two more on the Council resigning themselves from it. As a reaction to the President’s Defense of White Nationalists, White Supremacy and the Alt-Right in Charlottesville. Even when his statements yesterday wasn’t true and has been debunked by witnesses in Charlottesville, as the clergy on CNN has proven.

So today, the almighty fixer and guy with fantastic deal-making skills had to do this: “Rather than putting pressure on the businesspeople of the Manufacturing Council & Strategy & Policy Forum, I am ending both. Thank you all!” (Trump, 16.08.2017). Just like so many of his businesses, they got discontinued. The Resistance and other activists with promises of boycott and calling out the corporations their values and moral judgment for participating and complicit supporting Trump. They don’t have too, as the CEO’s who has left are making sure their missions are gone.

Clearly, the President must have gotten a whiff of the pressure put on the CEO’s and their businesses, as the people are telling they would boycott and stop buying their products if they stay on the course and take part of the advisory councils of the President. So, this Trump initiatives has now been suspended and enacted to end because of public will and pressure. This is beautiful and proves the power of Social Media and campaigning.

The Manufacturing Council and their CEO’s could not be changed or get new appointments, since Trump couldn’t stomach or have the will to force his own agenda on the businesses. It was a nice propaganda machine, but now it couldn’t carry its own. The Council has lost value and therefore abandoned by him.

People are really reacting to his openness to supporting the “Alt-Right”, the White Nationalist, White Supremacists and the Neo-Nazi’s who was illegally beating and causing harm in Charlottesville. Therefore, the CEO’s couldn’t stand the pressure and be affiliated with the President. Now he has lost his leverage with these businessmen. Therefore, has to find other avenues to prove his listening skills with the business-community. Since they cannot handle is open trust into racists groups and their vile act of violence. The public are outrage and displeased with their leader, who are blaming anyone else and making up his alternative-reality, his alt-reality. Peace.

Opinion: Trump is a racist, who now blatantly supported the “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville!

I have said it before and say it again. President Donald J. Trump is a racist; the deniers have to dig themselves a deep hole, because the Press Conference yesterday proves it. Even if the “Unite the Right” had permit, the walking of Neo-Nazis and White Supremacist shouldn’t have this sort of defense. It doesn’t belong to this world and the American experience, but apparently it do, since the President slogan is even from Nazi supporters in the mid-1920s and 1930s, the America First Movement. So his doubling down and his blatant disregard and alternative-reality. Alt-Reality I will call it, since there is not Alt-Left, there is a Alt-Right, because the Neo-Nazis, White Supremacist and the KKK are all on that basket. All of them are happy for the rise of power to Trump. Who clearly do what he can to have their support.

Just take some of the quotes from his Press Conference yesterday!

“Q: Senator McCain defined them as the same group.

Trump: What about the alt left that came charging at, as you say, at the alt right? Do they have any assemblage of guilt? What about the fact that they came charging with clubs in their hands swinging clubs? Do they have any problem? I think they do. That was a horrible, horrible day. Wait a minute. I’m not finished. I’m not finished, fake news. That was a horrible day. I will fell tell you something. I watched that very closely, much more closely than you people watched it. You had a group on one side that was bad. You had a group on the other side that was also very violent. Nobody wants to say that. I’ll say it right now. You had a group on the other side that came charging in without a permit and they were very, very violent.

Q: Do you think what you call the alt left is the same as neo-Nazis?

Trump: All of those people — i’ve condemned neo-Nazis. I’ve condemned many different groups. Not all of those people were neo-Nazis, believe me. Not all of those people were white supremacists by any stretch. Those people were also there because they wanted to protest the taking down of a statue, Robert E. Lee.

You take a look at some of the groups and you see and you would know it if you were honest reporters, which in many cases, you are not. Many of those people were there to protest the taking down of the statue of Robert E. Lee. This week, it is Robert E. Lee and this week, Stonewall Jackson. Is it George Washington next? You have to ask yourself, where does it stop? You take a look. The night before. They were there to protest the taking down of the statue of Robert E. Lee” (Nelson & Swanson, 2017).

This sort of insane defense of the White Supremacist and Neo-Nazis that is hard to believe a sitting President in 2017 would do, but he does. He talks about the permits to walk and such, but the Alt-Right groups where violent from the get-go, a reason why the Police Officers was following the parade, while not going into the battles between the right-wing conspirators and the reactionary protest movement. He quickly blames them, and trying to save the face of fascist groups, who was violent themselves. It is insane and weird, but proves the open racist the President himself is. Trump is defending them better than the Daily Stormer and the Breitbart. Bot which is special!

“Q: You said there was hatred and violence on both sides?

Trump: I think there is blame on both sides. You look at both sides. I think there is blame object both on both sides. I have no doubt about it. You don’t have doubt about it either. If you reported it accurately, you would say that the neo-Nazis started this thing. They showed up in Charlottesville. Excuse me. They didn’t put themselves down as neo-Nazis. You had some very bad people in that group. You also had some very fine people on both sides. You had people in that group — excuse me, excuse me. I saw the same pictures as you did. You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down, of to them, a very, very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name.

George Washington was a slave owner. Was George Washington a slave owner? So will George Washington now lose his status? Are we going to take down — excuse me. Are we going to take down statues to George Washington? How about Thomas Jefferson? What do you think of Thomas Jefferson? You like him. Good. Are we going to take down his statue. He was a major slave owner. Are we going to take down his statue? It is fine. You are changing history and culture.

You had people and i’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists. They should be condemned totally. You had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists. The press has treated them absolutely unfairly. Now, in the other group also, you had some fine people but you also had troublemakers and you see them come with the black outfits and with the helmets and with the baseball bats. You had a lot of bad people in the other group too.

Q: You were saying the press has treated white nationalists unfairly?

Trump: No, no. There were people in that rally. I looked the night before. If you look, there were people protesting very quietly the taking down taking down the statue of Robert E. Lee. I am sure there were some bad ones.

The following day, it looked like they had some rough, bad people, neo-Nazis, white nationalists, whatever you want to call them. You had a lot of people in that group that were there to innocently protest and very legally protest. I don’t know if you know, they had a permit. The other group didn’t have a permit.

So I only tell you this. There are two sides to a story. I thought what took place was horrible moment for our country, a horrible moment. But there are two sides to the country” (Nelson & Swanson).

So it is weird that the President would say that Neo-Nazis and White Nationalist were treated unfairly, when their were permitted to rally, even it spread fear amongst people in the town and in Virginia in general. They were right to fear it, since the violence sparked with the demonstration started. That he is even defending the statue and the name, shows his bias, instead of understand the concern of the Confederate War General name over a park and as a statue. It is as if the President is a Confederate from the New York, which is ironic.

The others reacted to the fear and wasn’t violent. Not as the ones killing and hurting opposing groups. It is weird that President Trump defends them and this way. Blue Virginia wrote this on the 4th August 2017:

Once again Charlottesville is the focus of national attention as an “alt-right” rally is scheduled for Aug. 12, bringing hate and fear to an otherwise peaceful community. And once again people of faith are ready to rise up to meet this challenge with prayer, presence and, yes, even love. Charlottesville survived a July protest by the Klan without serious incident, but city officials appear concerned that the coming “Unite the Right” rally could be bigger and more dangerous. Led by white supremacist Richard Spencer and local activist Jason Kessler, thousands of people could attend. The rally’s stated purpose is to protest the removal of the city’s Robert E. Lee statue from the park, recently renamed Emancipation Park. City officials have been attempting to convince Kessler to relocate his rally. Kessler has responded by hiring the Warlords motorcycle gang as his “security.”” (Blue Virginia, 04.08.2017)

Clearly, the Virginians was not seeing this demonstration for the Lee Statue as a noble thing or something worthwhile, as Spencer and Kessler are even hiring Motorcycle gangs to defend them. It is like they were prepared for violence, as the local organizers had gotten security for the “alt-right” demonstrators. It is strange, that these are defended and said is fine. Since, the can carry and ride around spring fear in the Charlottesville, but the reactionary are the violent one. That is in the mind in the alternative universe of President Trump.

I am not shocked, Trump, has been and are a racists, I said it like forever, but this just settle the argument once and for all. That the doubles down on the “many sides” and saying there is many fine people amongst the White Nationalists, White Supremacists and Neo-Nazis. This is sickening. Peace.

Reference:

Nelson, Libby & Swanson, Kelly – ‘Full transcript: Donald Trump’s press conference defending the Charlottesville rally’ (15.08.2017) link: https://www.vox.com/2017/8/15/16154028/trump-press-conference-transcript-charlottesville

The CEOs should step-down from the Manufacturing Council: As result of the President non-bashing of “Unite the Right” terror in Charlottesville

Not long after getting into office, President Donald J. Trump appointed and created his own American Manufacturing Council or the Manufacturing Council at the White House, it was appointed on the 26th January 2017. After the weekend of the soft-spoken words against the Neo-Nazi’s, White-Supremacy and the rest of the Alt-Right extremists that was collectively created havoc in Charlottesville. The supporters against boycott and asking them to step down, is for the simple reason: that if they are part of the Council, than they are complicit and also neglecting their roles are people who has power.

The CEOs who has stepped down from the Council is now, Mark Fields from Ford Motor, Ken Frazier of Merck & Co, Klaus Kleinfeld of Aronic, Brian Krzanich of Inter Corporation, Marie Lenghi of U.S. Steel, Thea Lee of AFL-CIO, Scott Paul of Alliance for Manufacturing, and Kevin Plank of Under Amor. Also, because of the Presidents stance on Climate Change, the CEO of Tesla Elon Musk, stepped down from the Council. Therefore, within 48 hours 8 CEO’s have stepped down and in total 9.

Because on the 12th August as the “Unite the Right” who was saying they could finally walk-free and be open about their racism. Clearly, even former KKK big-man David Duke said there was there, because the victory of Trump. On the Daily Stormer, the Alt-Right and White Supremacist Daily Paper online, they even was proud of the statement and not answering journalists for his response to the media on the matter. He was correctly addressed for his misgivings as claiming it was on “all sides”.

Therefore, his answer to the people resigning is this: “For every CEO that drops out of the Manufacturing Council, I have many to take their place. Grandstanders should not have gone on. JOBS!” (Trump, 15.08.2017). Clearly, if people are still in the council, they should resign in compassion and care against the Alt-Right in the White House, the White Supremacy and the racism that is visible from the Executive. He doesn’t care, he could bash the CEOs before there had gone down to dawn, but needed 48 hours before he could address, who and what on a teleprompter to the American people.

The American people deserves a person who includes and appreciate all walks of live, not only the ones of his own. Seemingly, he bashes anyone who isn’t like him and making it hard to emigrate to the United States. This is because his appointed Attorney General Jeff Sessions works hard to make policies and regulations to fit the paradigm of Trump. That advisor Stephan Bannon, Gorka and Stephen Miller all Alt-Right craziness, compared with the ones who has been fired. Are clearly, showing the traits of this government and why the ones in the rally at Charlottesville. Feel they have a government fitting them.

Therefore, when this known, together with the slurs against Mexians, LGBT and all sort of others than White. Than you know the true compassion of Trump. The CEOs of the United States Companies who are there will support and be culpable people compromised by Trump. That is why the President even says there are always someone to take their place. They can easily be changed and get new puppets to the show. That is what the President says.

Therefore, the ones who are in the Council, know that you are used by the President, as useful props in his game. I got General Electric, Campbell Soups, Locheed Martin, Johnson /& Johnson, Dell Technologies, Timken Company, Caterpillar, Boeing, 3M and Newell Brands on my board. The others didn’t add anything to create jobs anyway. Soon he will get FoxxCon to join, since they soon has business in Wisconsin and Chinese doesn’t care about internal political squabble elsewhere, it is just business.

The ones who will take a step against the racists uprising, the ignorant President who couldn’t condemn it, but when did, it was soft and not really counting. It was like a forced farce of teleprompter eye-hurting, dwell-dodging baffoon trying to sound smart. When he really didn’t believe the words he did, since he is initially on their side. Everyone else, are just cleaning up his mess, because if he has an issue, he sparks fury on Twitter against you and calls you out. That he didn’t with the violence of Charlottesville. That is because he agrees and are one of them.

This is now proven, by the President. It isn’t beyond any doubt. The CEOs who are still part of the Manufacturing Council has a decision, will they be complicit or will they defend sound values? Will they be silent enforces of the ideals of the President. This will counter the ideals of open society and inclusive society that are open to anyone not on race, religion or gender. These are now on stand-by as their inclusive workforce and others can be in question as they can be appointed and on a board. Where they are connected to a leadership that fits “America First”.

President Trump has run an “America First” program, this was first coined this way, as been quoted from the Heritage Foundation: “Like any mass political movement, America First was an amalgamation of groups and fellow travelers who sometimes shared little more in common than an opposition to America’s entry into the war. The ranks of the antiwar movement included pacifists and communists (at least until Germany attacked the Soviet Union in 1941), wild-haired liberals, straight-laced conservatives and everything in between. The antiwar movement was far from homogenous. For instance, in January 1941 Lindbergh issued a press statement distancing himself from the No Foreign Wars Committee headed by the journalist Verne Marshall and pro-Nazi businessman William Rhodes Davis. Lindbergh had helped the group get started, but then cut ties over Marshall’s volatile leadership and vitriolic attacks, including swipes at Lindbergh and other leaders in the America First Committee” (James Jay Carafano, Ph.D. – ‘The Truth About the America First Movement’, 11.07.2016, link: http://www.heritage.org/defense/commentary/the-truth-about-the-america-first-movement).

Also in the Washington Post on the 20th January 2017 wrote this: “During the early 1930s, as the Nazis consolidated control over Germany, the U.S. media baron William Randolph Hearst began touting the slogan “America First” against President Franklin Roosevelt, whom he saw as dangerously likely to “allow the international bankers and the other big influences that have gambled with your prosperity to gamble with your politics.” Hearst regarded Roosevelt’s New Deal as “un-American to the core” and “more communistic than the communists” — unlike Nazism, which he believed had won a great victory for “liberty-loving people” everywhere in defeating Communism” (Eric Rauchway – ‘ President Trump’s ‘America First’ slogan was popularized by Nazi sympathizers’, 20-01.2017, Link: https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2017/01/20/president-trumps-america-first-slogan-was-popularized-by-nazi-sympathizers/?utm_term=.81f399389af0 ).

So it is not strange Nazi’s, Racists and White Supremacists likes and supports Donald Trump, he uses their lingo and proudly spends time spreading their message to the whole world. It is like his mantra, using their slogans and their messages. Therefore, if the CEO will stand behind it, a man who has never denounced David Duke or had to be forced condemning domestic-terrorism through White Supremacy. There, are not a better time to step down than now.

Or will you be remembered in time for your complicit acts of silence walking together with the disrespect of people in the United States? Peace.

Republican’s loved the filibuster as minority, but as Majority in the Senate: they killed it!

In Federalist Papers No. 22, Alexander Hamilton seemed to anticipate the modern day Republican party, writing of the concept of a supermajority, “(I)ts real operation is to embarrass the administration, to destroy the energy of government and to substitute the pleasure, caprice or artifices of an insignificant, turbulent or corrupt junta, to the regular deliberations and decisions of a respectable majority.” (Jones, 2009).

As of today we know that Mitch McConnell and other Republicans do not value their own internal laws for bi-partisanship, neither the value of a silent minority when creating laws. That can be said in the days after the Senate used the ‘Nuclear Option’ to circumvent and have a second vote to secure the newly made nominee for the Supreme Court Judge Neil Gorsuch appointed by them. Even as the Democrats had earlier filibuster move and blocked the appointment. Just as the Republican Party did for a year, when the then elected President Barrack Obama, nominated Merrick Garland for the same slot in the Supreme Court.

This here is pivotal to the ideas of the Senate, as the Republicans clearly now proves that the laws are only mattering when they are in opposition, because when they get in power they will use it to silent the opposition. The reality is that the Democratic Party, is losing more ground quicker than they could anticipate. The Senate are now filled with corporate stooges who could not care about the laws and the true conservative measures, as the filibuster might have stopped processes, but has been there as a safeguard against regulations who might hurt the Republic. That is something the Republicans should care about, but apparently they are hooked on power.

The filibuster, long seen by its proponents as a necessary check on power and by its critics as a frustrating waste of time, has been around since the mid-19th century. A filibuster simply allows the minority political party to choose to endlessly debate a bill, stalling — and sometimes preventing — an actual vote. The word comes from the Dutch term vrijbuiter (pirate), in addition to the Spanish word filibustero (freebooting). The origins of filibuster use trace back to ancient Rome, and the practice has been common in several other countries including England and Australia. In the U.S., the tactic became known as a label for a Senator who held his colleagues hostage by overtalking legislation” (…) “The first filibuster in U.S. Senate history began on March 5, 1841, over the issue of the firing of Senate printers, and lasted six days. Ever since, politicians have loved filibusters or hated them — depending which side of the fight they were on. Proponents argue the filibuster protects the right to free speech and prevents the Senate majority from steamrolling the minority, thus ensuring that critical legislation gets a sufficient airing before being pushed through. Others contend the practice has gotten out of hand, leaving bills gridlocked in an oft-feuding Senate and stalling important votes for purely partisan gain. Peter Fenn, GOP consultant and former Senate aide, called filibusters the “tyranny of the minority.” (Oloffson, 2009).

The reality of what they have done is that after the first vote on the 4th April voted a majority Republicans to hold an Executive Session to consider Gorsuch as Supreme Court Judge. Than the Senate tried to fill in a clout on the 6th April 2017, but that got rejected by the minority after the filibuster rule. Therefore, Majority leader McConnell came with the good idea of using the Reed Rule and overrule the Filibuster through reconsidering the motion and change the rules on how many that needs to vote “yay” to win legislation victory in the senate. So late after a long debate on the 6th April, the Senate got the amount of votes to get the “On the Cloture Motion” that gave way for the majority in the Senate. So with the new rules, yesterday with 54 Yay over 45 Nay, the victory of the Republicans and the Trump nominee for the Court.

GovTrack explains it perfectly: “A vote on cloture is a vote to limit further debate and move to an up-or-down vote, in other words to prevent a filibuster. With only 55 votes in favor, 5 short of the 60 required, the Democrats blocked cloture so that they could filibuster the nomination. Following this vote, in Senate vote #109, the rule for cloture on Supreme Court nominations was changed to a simple majority. In Senate vote #110, the cloture vote was retaken under the new rules and with 55 votes again, 4 more than was needed on the second attempt, cloture was approved and further debate was limited. Gorsuch was confirmed in the final vote the following day” (GovTrack, 2017).

So with this change, the Majority knows totally control the Senate as the Filibuster is now gone away. It is ironic that the Republicans voting for this week, has as a minority proclaimed their love for the filibuster rule and it value in the Senate. So when themselves needs to circumvent it, it was easy to vote and change so their man could have a slot in the court. But they could use the same rule to stop laws and nominations from Obama.

A few recent times the Republican’s have filibuster themselves:

In 2013: “Ted Cruz called in the doctor to knock down ObamaCare — Dr. Seuss, that is.
The Republican senator from Texas recited Seuss’ “Green Eggs and Ham” during a wide-ranging, 21- hour quasi-filibuster to blast the health-care law(Miller, 2013).

In 2012: “Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev) wants to change the filibuster rule in the Senate because Republicans have been abusing it. He pointed out in Politico this September, “Since Democrats took control of the Senate in 2006, Republicans have mounted 380 filibusters. This far exceeds anything we’ve seen before in the Senate. By comparison, in Lyndon B. Johnson’s six years as Senate majority leader, he faced just one filibuster.” (…) “But Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell claims that the 60 supermajority vote rule is ordinary procedure. McConnell huffed at Reid’s filibuster reform, “What these Democrats have in mind is a fundamental change to the way the Senate operates.” (Jones, 2012).

In 2010: “Senate Republicans proved their fortitude today when they voted to filibuster the Zadroga bill, the measure to provide health insurance to 9/11 workers. The measure failed by a vote of 57-42. Under the leadership of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, Senate Republicans vowed to filibuster any legislation introduced in the Senate until a settlement is reached on the Bush tax cuts and federal funding” (Clabough, 2010).

So there is a precedence and a history of Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to use the filibuster on his own grounds and stop the Democratic Party from getting through legislation, as much as 380 times at least since 2006 alone. So it is not like the Republican Party doesn’t know how obstructive they have been in opposition. Nevertheless, when they got in power they used the tools possible to not respect the way the Democratic Majority Leader Reid did, but instead overrule the filibuster to get in the Trump nominee. The Nobel men of the Republican party who, has said they care about the sacred laws of the Senate, we’re lying all these years. Since the minute they get into power and get majority inside the Senate, they use the clouts and the roads not used. To make sure their will get passed. No bi-partisanship, but instead close the gate and says “our will rule them all”.

The Republican Party and their Senate leader will surely be remembered for their ill-will and take control of the Senate, rewrite the rules for their donors and their corporate partners, instead of serving the public will. The Republican Party and their leader can be remembered for not caring that they we’re ones using a 200 year old rule for their benefit, but when they entered the gates as majority. They couldn’t care less. Peace.

Reference:

Clabough, Raven – ‘Republican Filibuster Blocks 9/11 Bill’ (09.12.2010) link: https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/3577-republican-filibuster-blocks-9-11-bill

Miller, S.A. – ‘Cruz reads ‘Green Eggs and Ham’ in marathon filibuster’ (23.09.2013) link: http://nypost.com/2013/09/25/cruz-vows-to-speak-till-he-cant-against-obamacare/

Jones, Sarah – ‘Since Democrats took control of the Senate in 2006, Republicans Have Mounted 380 Filibusters’ (09.12.2009) link: http://www.politicususa.com/2012/12/09/block-blame-successful-republican-filibuster-strategy.html

GovTrack – ‘Motion to Invoke Cloture on the Nomination of Neil M. Gorsuch, of Colorado, to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States: Neil M. Gorsuch, of Colorado, to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States’ (06.04.2017) link: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2017/s105?utm_campaign=govtrack_feed&utm_source=govtrack/feed&utm_medium=rss

Oloffson, Kristi – ‘A BRIEF HISTORY OF Filibusters’ (02.11.2009) link: http://content.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1933802,00.html

Judge Garland’s ghost will now follow the vacant Supreme Court seat!

I said I would take this process seriously — and I did. I chose a serious man and an exemplary judge, Merrick Garland. Over my seven years as President, in all my conversations with senators from both parties in which I asked their views on qualified Supreme Court nominees — this includes the previous two seats that I had to fill — the one name that has come up repeatedly, from Republicans and Democrats alike, is Merrick Garland” (…) “Now, I recognize that we have entered the political season — or perhaps, these days it never ends — a political season that is even noisier and more volatile than usual. I know that Republicans will point to Democrats who’ve made it hard for Republican Presidents to get their nominees confirmed. And they’re not wrong about that. There’s been politics involved in nominations in the past. Although it should be pointed out that, in each of those instances, Democrats ultimately confirmed a nominee put forward by a Republican President” – Barrack Obama (16.03.2016 – White House – Rose Garden – from the Obama Archives).

I hate to say it, it doesn’t matter how the creature and individual judge Neil Gorsuch, the nominated person to fill the empty seat in the Supreme Court of the United States. Why I don’t care? It is because of the process he has been entangled into, that has been created by the Republican Party taking away the Executive right for former President Barrack Obama. So, there is certainly no will to give that the new President Donald Trump, as he is just a new politician and President Obama was in his second term as the Executive. There haven’t even gone a 100 days of his presidency, it should take more time, as it soon is election and primary season for the Senate election in 2018. That is if I stand by the same rules the Republicans used against Obama, to not nominate and hired someone to the last remaining seat in the Supreme Court.

I don’t care if is Neil Gorsuch is a mix of Mother Theresa, Pope Francis and Baby Jesus. He can be the best American since John Wayne, he can be mix Sylvester Stallone and Wesley Snipes, still not be the man for the Supreme Court seat. To me he is just the trick of the Republican party, to thief away a spot from the Democratic Party elected President. Therefore, I see nothing else than a theft.

The Republicans like Lindsay Graham, the Senator of South Carolina can talk the game he wants about the judge and his profound knowledge of judgment. Still, Sen. Graham doesn’t consider the constitutional rights of Obama, as he neglect the preposterous attempts of filibustering and stopping the sessions at play for months, to give way to Trump so he could nominate someone. The Republicans are hereby saying they are entitled to elected who they please, but other parties has to beg to do so. The Republic can only have Presidents who has the love of the Republican party, if not they are not constitutional. That is the state that Sen. Graham profess to.

Mitch McConnell, Senator of Kentucky and the Majority Leader of the Senate, has said that he does not accept that the Democratic Party representatives to Block Gorsuch, but my initial problem with that sort of statement from a Majority leader is that he blocked Garland all through the 2016 year and until President Trump got into office. Not like he didn’t use all sorts of tricks and pushed the buttons to stop the process of getting an Obama nominated fellow inside the Supreme Court. That is because Obama was not righteous enough, but the pussy-grabbing, shallow-snake-oil-salesman and the fake University owner Trump has the legal mind to pick someone. McConnell himself by October 2016, than suspending the nomination of Garland, said it was a lame-duck, that was only 7 months after vacancy was open.

The seat of the Supreme Court in the total months that Barrack Obama was president was about 12, that is a year, that is one fourth of his last term. That means that the Republican Senators and Representatives suspended and postponed the vacancy through major parts of his presidency. So that they could claim the seat as the Election was on horizon. Because they feared a liberal or a progressive candidate filling Judge Scalia’s place. It is clear this is ignorance and disregard of the ones electing President Obama, that they could not spare him his duty as the Executive or understand his judgment for the picking of Garland.

So if Speaker Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell feels they are disrespected and feels that the Democratic representatives isn’t working within the perimeter of the Constitution and the rights of the Republican President Trump. If they conduct such behavior and claims that the Democratic Party is dissolving the Supreme court vacancy. Than, they are hypocrites.

As Paul Ryan himself stated on the 16th March 2016:

This has never been about who the nominee is. It is about a basic principle. Under our Constitution, the president has every right to make this nomination, and the Senate has every right not to confirm a nominee. I fully support Leader McConnell and Chairman Grassley’s decision not to move forward with the confirmation process. We should let the American people decide the direction of the court.” (Paul Ryan, 16.03.2016).

Therefore, if the Republicans can suspend hearings and voting for Garland, why cannot Democrats do it now? The Tea Party representatives and Freedom Caucus representatives have had no issues with stifling the process of Capitol Hill. So if the resistance and the Democrats decides to stop Gorsuch nomination, that would be filibustering and stopping Trumps will. If they would accept it, is it like Republicans only have rights to nominate and the only ones who knows how to pick people for important positions?

Since President Trump has already hired his son-in-law Jared Kushner and daughter Ivanka Trump, so it not like we can question his own methods of picking Gorsuch. The Education Minister Betty De Vos family has been a big donor to the Republican Party and also Trump Campaign. So it not like the donations from big spenders change the ethical perspective of appointments under the Trump Era. It isn’t all white-supremacist and right-wing representatives, more on the financial backdrop and who’s favor Trump has gotten or hoping to get.

Than, with this in mind, what sort of favors has Gorsuch promised to do for Trump? Let’s be clear I don’t care if he is the softest most gentle judge ever existing, if he is the Marvin Gaye of judges. Still, he is the man stealing the possible seat of Garland. Ghost of Merrick will always follow Neil. No matter what happens, the one taking the seat now in the Supreme Court will always have the illegitimate picked person working in the most important legal job of the republic. That shows how low the legal system and the elected representatives of the United States has sunk down too.

President Obama wasn’t given the right to appoint because of people like Senator McConnell and Representative Ryan are the leadership that put forward reasoning for stopping the nominations. So now that they have Republican President and he has made a nomination, which happens to be Gorsuch.

We could talk fair and justice, but this is a sinister political ploy from the Republican party and using the laws to cherry-pick the ones supporting their will. The reality of it all is that the Obama administration was weaken by the control of the senate and the representatives house. The chambers did what they could to silence and stop his policies. Instead of building by bi-partisan ways. Now the Republican party want that from the Democratic Party and their members in the chambers. That train has left the station and hasn’t a plan to return.

The Ghost of Garland, even as he never entered the Supreme Court as an official judge or gotten the seat. Still, the will of President Obama and the denial of process of the appointment has proven that the Congress, the house or the senate didn’t want to fill the seat. The reality cannot be swayed away from this and the current state of affairs. That Trump should fill this seat is justified, as much as he can have ability to fill more if their time on earth stops. That is the rules. So Trump can fill even more in his time. They would have been correct! The appointment of possibly Gorsuch isn’t, and the Republican Party senators and representatives knows this perfectly well. All of them and most of them know they we’re part of the theft.

The grand theft and the perfect crime was orchestrated all through an election year, though all sorts of display and disregard of the President Obama and the Constitution, that they are supposed to keep in high regard. Instead they are propping up all tools and spin-control to let the Democrats leave it alone. That they did not to lose face during the Presidential Election, but here we are and we should know that the ghost of Garland will now overshadow the Supreme Court. Peace.

Post Navigation

%d bloggers like this: