Tuesday, November 27, 2018

Using a Trumpian Tactic

Remember this tweet?




There was no evidence.  No proof.  This is a typical Trump tactic, making an accusation without evidence of any kind.  In the wake of what happened at the San Ysidro border crossing between the U.S. and Mexico, it seems reasonable to use Trump's tactic in advancing a theory of mine.

Who benefited from the charge toward the border this weekend?  The people who wound up being tear gassed did not benefit from their futile attempt to enter the U.S. illegally.  The women and children who were gassed were victims, not beneficiaries of the "charge."  But the anti-immigrant messaging of Donald Trump benefited.

I don't believe that Mr. Trump personally arranged/paid for those who led the charge toward the wall to do so, but it is easy to believe that Trump supporters made contact with members of the caravan and paid them to charge the wall.

The very rude tough guys who charged the border crossing are paid professionals only looking to make the anti-immigrant campaign look good.  Don't fall for it!

* * *

Speaking of Trump and tactics, there was this pair of tweets yesterday:




CNN's viewership is down year over year in the most recent quarter, but that doesn't mean they are "failing" as Trump likes to say about the New York Times.  As for honest reporting and factual accuracy, the #LiarInChief has no business questioning the veracity of anyone else.

We already have the Voice of America, which is not subject to the whims of whoever happens to occupy the Oval Office at any given moment.  The U.S. government has no business trying to compete in the arena of cable news.  Then there is the fact that state-run television networks look a little like this:


(Leon Askin in Airplane 2, he is best known for his role as "General Burkhalter" in Hogan's Heroes)

I believe that Trump's sounding off on this and other things at this moment in time is designed to deflect attention from what's going on in Mississippi on Tuesday, November 27th.  There is a special election taking place today.  It is a run-off for the U.S. Senate seat currently held by Cindy Hyde-Smith and Mike Espy  Ms Hyde-Smith was appointed to the seat that was vacated when Thad Cochran resigned.  She is a Republican.  He is a Democrat.

Mississippi is a very "red" state.  It has been almost three full decades since a Democrat held one of the state's two U.S. Senate seats.  Trump carried the state in 2017 by a margin of nearly 18 percentage points.  Three of the state's four seats in the U.S. House of Representatives are held by Republicans and it has been that way since 2012.

This video has been a problem for Ms Hyde-Smith:


Then there's her comment about encouraging voter suppression:




Trump will look very bad if Hyde-Smith loses this election.  That's why he wants everyone talking about anything but what's going on in Mississippi.

Sunday, November 25, 2018

Fighting non-traditional with non-traditional

One of the most consistent comments about the Trump administration is that it doesn't adhere to the traditions established in the 229 years since George Washington was our nation's first president.  In January, the Democrats take control of the House of Representatives and will elect a new Speaker of the House.

Tradition is, when the Democratic party retakes control of the House, the member who was the Minority Leader prior to the election becomes Speaker.  That would be Nancy Pelosi, who deserves the bulk of the credit for the "blue wave" that lead to this change in power in the House.

There is opposition to electing her back to the post she held from 2007 to 2011 as the first female Speaker of the House in U.S. History.  Some say that the fact that she is getting support from Donald Trump is one good reason to not put her back in the post.

Let's table whether or not Nancy Pelosi is the best qualified member of the incoming Congress to represent the interests of the Democratic party, for a moment.  Let's look at a nontraditional approach. First step is to examine the U.S. Constitution's requirements for someone to become Speaker of the House:

The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.”

That's it.  There is no requirement that the Speaker be an elected member of the House.  In an era where tradition has been thrown out of the window (name one previous president who had no experience in elected office and/or no military service or service in a President's cabinet), perhaps it is time to make a nontraditional choice to lead the House.

Barrack Obama is not eligible to be President again, but that would not prevent him from becoming Speaker of the House.  In point of fact, Hillary Clinton could be Speaker of the House.

I am not opposed to or supportive of Nancy Pelosi being chosen to again be Speaker.  The resistance to her reelection to the post is troublesome.  She more than anyone else, save the Idiot-in-Chief, is responsible for Democrats taking back control of the House.  It is worth noting that the fact that the aforementioned Orange Miscreant is supporting Ms Pelosi's bid for that position is in and of itself a fact against her having the job.  If he wants her, he has a reason.

I doubt anyone but Ms Pelosi will be selected as Speaker.  But, imagine what it would do to Donald Trump if he had to deal with Speaker Clinton.

Saturday, November 24, 2018

A Wedding Cancelation

The following was sent via mass email to the invitees to a once-in-a-lifetime, destination wedding.

Dear Former Friends,

This is to let you know that the wedding that was to be held on Saturday, June 31st of 2019 has been irrevocably canceled.  You may still want to avail yourself of the plane tickets/hotel reservations, especially if you purchased the less-expensive, non-refundable options.  I will not be there on Hayman Island, near the Great Barrier Reef.  I do not know, nor do I care where my former fiancé will be.

The plans for the best wedding ever have been canceled, thanks to the unwillingness of the majority of you to contribute to my wedding.  I carefully selected only those individuals who I felt truly connected to, to invite to our wedding.  I spent weeks personally doing the beautiful calligraphy on the personalized invitation you received.  I spent months planning this event.  All I asked was that you contribute the small sum of $25,000 plus your personal travel expense to share a weekend of true joy with me.  And none of you were willing to give, even when I reduced the amount requested to only $10,000.

My maid of honor, my life-long best friend had the nerve to come to my home uninvited to throw the invitation in my face and tell me she never wanted to speak to me again.  I will happily make her desire come true.  I have blocked her on all social media and will be seeking a restraining order to keep her at least 100 yard away from me in perpetuity.

Were my desires so unreasonable?  I asked only that all of the women attending the wedding, save the bridesmaids and my mother, refrain from wearing makeup of any kind.  That they all wear their hair in low ponytails, refrain from wearing any color approaching white, wear only long pants rather than dresses or skirts, and not speak to me or my future husband until we were departing from the reception.  Was it too much to ask that you not bring your phones to the ceremony and reception and rely on the highly skilled photographers and videographers we were going to use to record the event?  Those of you who said you wanted to be able to record your own presence at MY wedding via selfie are clearly too entitled to be friends of mine.

* * *

Maybe it's a fake.  Maybe not.  But it is sad and funny all at once.

Friday, November 23, 2018

What I saw on Black Friday, 2018

The 405 freeway north so empty I could drive the speed limit.

Spaces near the front of the West LA VA Medical Center parking lot.

An almost empty waiting room in the Primary Care Clinic.

Being seen by a physician after waiting less than 30 minutes as a walk-in patient.

A nurse and a doctor hugging after having a verbal battle over the signature on a consent form.

Waiting less than ten minutes to get a prescription from the VA Pharmacy.

A whole lot of pus coming out of this badly infected thumb after an orthopedic surgeon cut into it.


No line in the drive-thru at Chick-Fil-A on a day they were open.

A blonde driving a convertible who bore a strong resemblance to this woman back when she appeared in this car in a movie.





Thursday, November 22, 2018

Thanksgiving - 2018

I do my best to be thankful every day.  A brush with death (details here) tends to make one thankful for every single day thereafter.  There are things I am particularly thankful for on this day.  For my family.  For my friends.  For a vocation that allows me to help others.  

I saw a tweet today that contained an excerpt from the remarks that John F. Kennedy was going to deliver 55 years ago today.  They aren't exactly typical Thanksgiving talk; but given the state of affairs in our nation's capital, they are worth repeating today.

"I am honored to have this invitation to address the annual meeting of the Dallas Citizens Council, joined by the members of the Dallas Assembly — and pleased to have this opportunity to salute the Graduate Research Center of the Southwest. It is fitting that these two symbols of Dallas progress are united in the sponsorship of this meeting. For they represent the best qualities, I am told, of leadership and learning in this city — and leadership and learning are indispensable to each other. The advancement of learning depends on community leadership for financial political support, and the products of that learning, in turn, are essential to the leadership’s hopes for continued progress and prosperity. It is not a coincidence that those communities possessing the best in research and graduate facilities — from MIT to Cal Tech — tend to attract new and growing industries. I congratulate those of you here in Dallas who have recognized these basic facts through the creation of the unique and forward-looking Graduate Research Center.
"This Nation’s strength and security are not easily or cheaply obtained, nor are they quickly and simply explained. There are many kinds of strength and no one kind will suffice."
This link between leadership and learning is not only essential at the community level. It is even more indispensable in world affairs. Ignorance and misinformation can handicap the progress of a city or a company, but they can, if allowed to prevail in foreign policy, handicap this country’s security. In a world of complex and continuing problems, in a world full of frustrations and irritations, America’s leadership must be guided by the lights of learning and reason — or else those who confuse rhetoric with reality and the plausible with the possible will gain the popular ascendancy with their seemingly swift and simple solutions to every world problem.
There will always be dissident voices heard in the land, expressing opposition without alternative, finding fault but never favor, perceiving gloom on every side and seeking influence without responsibility. Those voices are inevitable.
But today other voices are heard in the land — voices preaching doctrines wholly unrelated to reality, wholly unsuited to the sixties, doctrines which apparently assume that words will suffice without weapons, that vituperation is as good as victory and that peace is a sign of weakness. At a time when the national debt is steadily being reduced in terms of its burden on our economy, they [view] that debt as the single greatest threat to our security. At a time when we are steadily reducing the number of Federal employees serving every thousand citizens, they fear those supposed hordes of civil servants far more than the actual hordes of opposing armies.
We cannot expect that everyone, to use the phrase of a decade ago, will “talk sense to the American people.” But we can hope that fewer people will listen to nonsense. And the notion that this Nation is headed for defeat through deficit, or that strength is but a matter of slogans, is nothing but just plain nonsense.
I want to discuss with you today the status of our security because this question clearly calls for the most responsible qualities of leadership and the most enlightened products of scholarship. For this Nation’s strength and security are not easily or cheaply obtained, nor are they quickly and simply explained. There are many kinds of strength and no one kind will suffice. Overwhelming nuclear strength cannot stop a guerrilla war. Formal pacts of alliance cannot stop internal subversion. Displays of material wealth cannot stop the disillusionment of diplomats subjected to discrimination.
Above all, words alone are not enough. The United States is a peaceful nation. And where our strength and determination are clear, our words need merely to convey conviction, not belligerence. If we are strong, our strength will speak for itself. If we are weak, words will be of no help.
I realize that this Nation often tends to identify turning-points in world affairs with the major addresses which preceded them. But it was not the Monroe Doctrine that kept all Europe away from this hemisphere — it was the strength of the British fleet and the width of the Atlantic Ocean. It was not General Marshall’s speech at Harvard which kept communism out of Western Europe — it was the strength and stability made possible by our military and economic assistance.
In this administration also it has been necessary at times to issue specific warnings — warnings that we could not stand by and watch the Communists conquer Laos by force, or intervene in the Congo, or swallow West Berlin, or maintain offensive missiles on Cuba. But while our goals were at least temporarily obtained in these and other instances, our successful defense of freedom was not due to the words we used, but to the strength we stood ready to use on behalf of the principles we stand ready to defend.
This strength is composed of many different elements, ranging from the most massive deterrents to the most subtle influences. And all types of strength are needed — no one kind could do the job alone. Let us take a moment, therefore, to review this Nation’s progress in each major area of strength.
First, as Secretary McNamara made clear in his address last Monday, the strategic nuclear power of the United States has been so greatly modernized and expanded in the last 1,000 days, by the rapid production and deployment of the most modern missile systems, that any and all potential aggressors are clearly confronted now with the impossibility of strategic victory — and the certainty of total destruction — if by reckless attack they should ever force upon us the necessity of a strategic reply.
In less than 3 years, we have increased by 50 percent the number of Polaris submarines scheduled to be in force by the next fiscal year, increased by more than 70 percent our total Polaris purchase program, increased by more than 75 percent our Minutemen purchase program, increased by 50 percent the portion of our strategic bombers on 15-minute alert forces. Our security is further enhanced by the steps we have taken regarding these weapons to improve the speed and certainty of their response, their readiness at all times to respond, their ability to survive an attack, and their ability to be carefully controlled and directed through secure command operations.
But the lessons of the last decade have taught us that freedom cannot be defended by strategic nuclear power alone. We have, therefore, in the last three years accelerated the development and deployment of tactical nuclear weapons, and increased by 60 percent the tactical nuclear forces deployed in Western Europe.
Nor can Europe or any other continent rely on nuclear forces alone, whether they are strategic or tactical. We have radically improved the readiness of our conventional forces — increased by 45 percent of the number of combat ready Army divisions, increased by 100 percent the procurement of modern Army weapons and equipment, increased by 100 percent our procurement of our ship construction, conversion, and modernization program, increased by 100 percent our procurement of tactical aircraft, increased by 30 percent the number of tactical air squadrons, and increased the strength of the Marines. As last month’s “Operation Big Lift” — which originated here in Texas — showed so clearly, this Nation is prepared as never before to move substantial numbers of men in surprisingly little time to advanced positions anywhere in the world. We have increased by 175 percent the procurement of airlift aircraft, and we have already achieved a 75 percent increase in our existing strategic airlift capability. Finally, moving beyond the traditional roles of our military forces, we have achieved an increase of nearly 600 percent in our special forces — those forces that are prepared to work with our allies and friends against the guerrillas, saboteurs, insurgents and assassins who threaten freedom in a less direct but equally dangerous manner.
But American military might should not and need not stand alone against the ambitions of international communism. Our security and strength, in the last analysis, directly depend on the security and strength of others, and that is why our military and economic assistance plays such a key role in enabling those who live on the periphery of the Communist world to maintain their independence of choice. Our assistance to these nations can be painful, risky, and costly, as is true in Southeast Asia today. But we dare not weary of the task. For our assistance makes possible the stationing of 3.5 million allied troops along the Communist frontier at one-tenth the cost of maintaining a comparable number of American soldiers. A successful Communist breakthrough in these area, necessitating direct United States intervention, would cost us several times as much as our entire foreign aid program, and might cost us heavily in American lives as well.
About 70 percent of our military assistance goes to nine key countries located on or near the borders of the Communist-bloc — nine countries confronted directly or indirectly with the threat of Communistic aggression — Vietnam, Free China, Korea, India, Pakistan, Thailand, Greece, Turkey, and Iran. No one of these countries possesses on its own the resources to maintain the forces which our own Chiefs of Staff think needed in the common interest. Reducing our efforts to train, equip, and assist their armies can only encourage Communist penetration and require in time the increased overseas deployment of American combat forces. And reducing the economic help needed to bolster these nations that undertake to help defend freedom can have the same disastrous result. In short, the $50 billion we spend each year on our own defense could well be ineffective without the $4 billion required for military and economic assistance.
Our foreign aid program is not growing in size, it is, on the contrary, smaller now than in previous years. It has had its weaknesses, but we have undertaken to correct them. And the proper way of treating weaknesses is to replace them with strength, not to increase those weaknesses by emasculating essential programs. Dollar for dollar, in or out of government, there is no better form of investment in our national security than our much-abused foreign aid program. We cannot afford to lose it. We can afford to maintain it. We can surely afford, for example, to do as much for our 19 needy neighbors of Latin America as the Communist bloc is sending to the island of Cuba alone.
I have spoken of strength largely in terms of the deterrence and resistance of aggression and attack. But in today’s world, freedom can be lost without a shot being fired, by ballots as well as bullets. The success of our leadership is dependent upon respect for our mission in the world as well as our missiles — on a clearer recognition of the virtues of freedom as well as the evils of tyranny.
That is why our Information Agency has doubled the shortwave broadcasting powers of the Voice of America and increased the number of broadcasting hours by 30 percent, increased Spanish language broadcasting to Cuba and Latin America from one to nine hours a day, increased seven-fold to more than 3.5 million copies the number of American books being translated and published for Latin American readers, and taken a host of other steps to carry our message of truth and freedom to all the far corners of the earth.
And that is also why we have regained the initiative in the exploration of outer space, making an annual effort greater than the combined total of all space activities undertaken during the fifties, launching more than 130 vehicles into earth orbit, putting into actual operation valuable weather and communications satellites, and making it clear to all that the United States of America has no intention of finishing second in space.
This effort is expensive — but it pays its own way, for freedom and for America. For there is no longer any fear in the free world that a Communist lead in space will become a permanent assertion of supremacy and the basis for military superiority. There is no longer any doubt about the strength and skill of American science, American industry, American education, and the American free enterprise system. In short, our nation’s space effort represents a great gain in, and a great resource of, our national strength — and both Texas and Texans are contributing greatly to this strength.
Finally, it should be clear by now that a nation can be no stronger abroad than she is at home. Only an America which practices what it preaches about equal rights and social justice will be respected by those whose choice affects our future. Only an America which has fully educated its citizens is fully capable of tackling the complex problems and perceiving the hidden dangers of the world in which we live. And only an America which is growing and prospering economically can sustain the worldwide defenses of freedom, while demonstrating to all concerned the opportunities of our system and society.
It is clear, therefore, that we are strengthening our security as well as our economy by our recent record increases in national income and output — by surging ahead of most of Western Europe in the rate of business expansion and the margin of corporate profits, by maintaining a more stable level of prices than almost any of our overseas competitors, and by cutting personal and corporate income taxes by some $11 billion, as I have proposed, to assure this Nation of the longest and strongest expansion in our peacetime economic history.
This Nation’s total output — which three years ago was at the $500 billion mark — will soon pass $600 billion, for a record rise of over $100 billion in three years. For the first time in history we have 70 million men and women at work. For the first time in history average factory earnings have exceeded $100 a week. For the first time in history corporation profits after taxes — which have risen 43 percent in less than 3 years — have an annual level of $27.4 billion.
My friends and fellow citizens: I cite these facts and figures to make it clear that America today is stronger than ever before. Our adversaries have not abandoned their ambitions, our dangers have not diminished, our vigilance cannot be relaxed. But now we have the military, the scientific, and the economic strength to do whatever must be done for the preservation and promotion of freedom.
The strength will never be used in pursuit of aggressive ambitions — it will always be used in pursuit of peace. It will never be used to promote provocations — it will always be used to promote the peaceful settlement of disputes.
We, in this country, in this generation, are — by destiny rather than by choice — the watchmen on the walls of world freedom. We ask, therefore, that we may be worthy of our power and responsibility, that we may exercise our strength with wisdom and restraint, and that we may achieve in our time and for all time the ancient vision of “peace on earth, good will toward men.” That must always be our goal, and the righteousness of our cause must always underlie our strength. For as was written long ago: “except the Lord keep the city, the watchmen waketh but in vain.”
We remain the people who must be the watchers on the walls of world freedom, and our own freedoms.  We must defend our rights against any and all who try to limit or eliminate them.  I am thankful for our right to freely express ourselves in calling attention to what some in our nation's capital are trying to do to abrogate our rights.  Let us remain vigilant and outspoken in defending our rights.


Sunday, November 11, 2018

Presidential Medal of Freedom

Donald Trump has announced that he is awarding the Presidential Medal of Freedom to seven individuals.

Roger Staubach - Graduate of the Naval Academy.  Heisman Trophy winner.  Vietnam Veteran.  NFL Hall of Fame Quarterback.  Conservative Republican.

Antonin Scalia - D.C. Circuit Court Judge.  Supreme Court Justice.  Author of over 900 SCOTUS opinions.  Conservative Republican.

George Herman "Babe" Ruth - One of the five inaugural members of Major League Baseball's Hall of Fame.  Still holds the all-time career records in MLB for slugging percentage and on-base plus slugging percentage.  Held the MLB record for consecutive scoreless innings pitched in World Series games for decades.  Still holds 2nd place among Hall of Fame pitchers for career winning percentage.  Considered by some (including this writer) to be the greatest baseball player ever.  Some hit more home runs.  Some pitched longer and better.  None did both.

Elvis Aaron Presley - 31 films and 14 Grammy awards.  Known as the "King" of Rock and Roll.  Cultural Icon.  Tried to keep his political beliefs private, although in 1956 he did say he was voting for Adlai Stevenson.

Alan C. Page - Member of the College and Pro Football Halls of Fame.  Went to law school while still playing in the NFL.  Minnesota Special Assistant Attorney General.  Associate Justice of the Minnesota State Supreme Court.  Community Activist.  Philanthropist.  His judicial ideology was rated as "liberal leaning" by two Stanford University professors.

Senator Orin Hatch (R)-UT - Current President pro tempore of the Senate.  Chair of Finance Committee.  Has served in the Senate since 1977, making him the longest serving Republican Senator in history.  Reporter's Note:  I find it interesting that in his initial campaign for his current seat in the Senate, he was running against a three-term senator.  During that campaign he said "what do you call a Senator who has served in office for 18 years?  You call him home."  Staunch advocate of balanced budgets.  Strongly opposed to same-sex marriage for a long time, but those views appear to have softened.

Miriam Adelson, MD - Wife of billionaire Sheldon Adelson.  Substance abuse researcher.  Philanthropist.  Very strong supporter of Israel.

* * *

There is no question that at least some of the awards of the Presidential Medal of Freedom are politically motivated.  There is also no question that presidents get to make this award to anyone they believe worthy.

In its story announcing the seven honorees, the Las Vegas Review-Journal pointed out that among the people honored with the Presidential Medal of Freedom by President Obama were:

Warren Buffett
Ellen DeGeneres
Bruce Springsteen
Oprah Winfrey

They didn't mention Bill and Melinda Gates, both honored in 2016.  They did make mention of the fact that the Adelsons own the Review-Journal.

Because Dr. Adelson has a much lower "public profile" than most recipients of this honor, I got curious.  She established a medical research foundation along with the substance abuse treatment center that bears her name.  There is also an independent private school that bears the names of Dr. Adelson and her husband, the only such Jewish private school in all of Nevada.

* * *

My research shows the following non-profits established by Sheldon and Miriam Adelson:

Adelson Family Foundation
Dr. Miriam and Sheldon Adelson Charitable Trust
Dr. Miriam and Sheldon Adelson Educational Institute
Dr. Miriam and Sheldon Adelson Medical Research Foundation
Dr. Miriam and Sheldon Adelson Clinic Drug Abuse Treatment Research Inc.
Friends of the Adelson Drug Clinic

In 2016, the Adelsons contributed $145 million to their charitable trust.  The charitable trust donated $121 million to the Adelson Family Foundation.  The charitable trust donated $27 million to the Adelson Medical Research Foundation.  It also gave $50,000 to the Adelson Drug Clinic and $300,000 to the Friends of the Adelson Drug Clinic.

We get introduced to a gentleman named Michael Bohnen on the Form 990-PF for the Adelson Family Foundation.  On Mr. Bohnen's LinkedIn profile it lists his positions as President of the Adelson Family Foundation and as Of Counsel for a law firm in Boston.  He has been working for that law firm since 1972 and was a partner for a period of time that ended in 2006.

That Form 990-PF shows no compensation for Mr. Bohnen for his work for the Adelson Family Foundation, even though it shows he devotes an average of 35 hours per week in that position.  What does show is that this foundation paid a Delaware LLC named Interface Operations, LLC the sum of $524,696 for what is labeled as "Acctg, IT & Mgmt incl M. Bohnen Pres of $374,096 comp & benefits."

It appears that this is Mr. Bohnen's compensation for his work as president of this foundation.  So why is it being washed through a Delaware LLC that appears to be owned by the Adelsons?

The Form 990-PF of the Dr. Miriam and Sheldon Adelson Medical Research Foundation shows a payment to that same LLC, Interface Operations of $134,100 identified as "Mgmt inc VP ($123,000), Legal, Acctg."  The return lists one Steven Garfinkel as VP & General Counsel, indicating he spends an average of 5 hours per week working for this non-profit. If he's earning $123,000 annually for 5 hours of work per week, that's a hefty hourly rate of pay.

So why aren't these payments to people apparently employed by these non-profits being reported directly on the Forms 990-PF?  There may be absolutely nothing untoward about these payments, but the fact it looks like some kind of shell game for these payments seems odd.

* * *

In the end, Donald Trump has every right to give a Presidential Medal of Freedom to whoever he wants.  I admire the charitable works of the Adelsons, especially their commitment to dealing with opiate addiction.  But make no mistake, at least part of the reason she is being honored is because of their continued largess to Republican political campaigns.  Largess that according to the Center for Responsive Politics totals $113,036,500 thus far in just 2018.  That is more than twice as much as the next individual on the list.

Remember, this is nothing new.  Remember that back in 2001, on his final day in office, President Bill Clinton pardoned Marc Rich.  Rich's wife Denise donated $1 million to the Democratic Party, $450,000 to the Clinton Library Foundation and over $100,000 to the U.S. Senate campaign of Hillary Clinton before the pardon was issued.  After the indictment against Mr. Rich that could have resulted in his spending the rest of his life in federal prison, he fled the country.  He bought himself a ticket home.

Politics as usual.  Different system of justice for those who have the money to buy their freedom.


Veterans Day - 2018

The temporary occupant of the Oval Office, Donald J. Trump went to France and was scheduled to take part in a ceremony honoring those who fell at the Battle of Belleau Wood. But it was raining and the Trump administration claimed that Mr. Trump couldn't get to the ceremony without using a helicopter.  Did they not have a rain contingency?

Ben Rhodes was an adviser and speechwriter in the Obama Administration.




So is this a case of this administration being run without proper planning, or simply a case of a man who doesn't care enough about doing his job to deal with inclement weather.


That's President John F. Kennedy and French President Charles de Gaulle on May 31, 1961.  They are paying tribute, in the rain, at the tomb of the French Unknown Soldier.

* * *

Today is Veterans Day.  This is the day where we honor all who served, not just those who made the ultimate sacrifice.  This holiday began as Armistice Day in 1919.  On this date in 1918, at 11 minutes past the 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month, the guns of World War I fell silent.

It is a very important moment in the history of not just this nation, but the entire planet.  And because it might have mussed his hair, Donald Trump couldn't be bothered to go out into the rain and pay tribute to those who fell in a pivotal battle to end that war.

As some of you know, I try to find examples of military personnel who aren't well known to history to salute on this day.



That is a WC-130 aircraft, the kind that flies into the eye of hurricanes and typhoons.  The same type of aircraft that was being flown by a crew with the call-sign "Swan 38" on October 12, 1974.  They were part of the 54th Weather Reconnaissance Squadron (WRS) and were making a "penetration" of Typhoon Bess.  Six crewmembers aboard were never seen or heard from again after communications were lost.  Let us never forget their names:

Captain Edward R. Bushnell
1st Lieutenant Gary W. Crass
1st Lieutenant Michael P. O'Brien
1st Lieutenant Timothy J. Hoffman
Technical Sergeant Kenneth G. Suhr
Sergeant Detlef W. Ringler

My own 15 month tour on Guam was spent in a building near the end of the runway where the 54th WRS aircraft took off and landed as part of their mission as "Typhoon Chasers."  The squadron I was assigned to maintained their aircraft.

The men and women of our military do not let weather ever stop them from performing their duties.

What does it say when a Commander-in-Chief can't even deal with a little rain to pay tribute to those who laid their lives on the line?


Thursday, November 08, 2018

"People wouldn't understand them"

This came up during the press conference held by Donald Trump on November 7, 2018:



There is a grain of truth in that statement regarding whether or not people would understand the Trump tax returns.  That's because the income tax process is complex in general, which is why so many people choose to use professional tax preparers.  

But there are plenty of people who can fully parse every single detail of a tax return, no matter how complex.  Kelly Phillips Erb, a tax attorney who is a contributor to Forbes, wrote about this during the 2016 campaign.  She began by embedding a tweet from Mitt Romney:



Then she wrote this:

"Realistically, Romney is right. Trump could absolutely release those returns now - even in the middle of an audit. While an audit could result in a change (or two) to his returns, it does not change what Trump filed, signing "Under penalties of perjury, I declare that I have examined this return and accompanying schedules and statements, and to the best of my knowledge and belief, they are true, correct, and complete." In other words, no matter what happens as a result of the audit, what Trump submitted, he did so claiming that it was true at the time. If the IRS makes an adjustment (which happens, even with the best prepared returns), it shouldn't substantially change the nature of the returns. And if the IRS makes no adjustment, then there was no harm, no foul, in releasing those returns. Trump could release those returns at any time."  The key being the text in bold typeface.  He signed those returns under penalties of perjury.

Another member of the staff of Forbes who does understand tax returns is Janet Novack.  In 2012 she did an excellent job highlighting how other media outlets on both the left and the right got the facts wrong about a deduction Mr. and Mrs. Romney claimed on their 203 page 2010 tax return.

The 2011 individual tax return for Mr. and Mrs. Romney was even longer at 349 pages.  They also released returns for both 2010 and 2011 for three trusts and for their foundation.  They are complex but they are not beyond examination and having their information translated into simple language for all people to understand.

Neither are Trump's.  Just the two pages of Trump's 2005 tax return that were improperly disclosed by someone gave us a lot of information.  They told us he had a strong personal reason to get rid of the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT), as his AMT bill that year was $31.3 million.  His total tax bill for 2005 was $38.4 million with that AMT liability.  The math is obvious.

The average person would not fully understand the complexities and nuances of Trump's tax returns.  But there are plenty of experts who could explain what is in them.  Especially the returns from the years where the New York Times claims there was massive tax fraud going on.


"President Trump participated in dubious tax schemes during the 1990s, including instances of outright fraud, that greatly increased the fortune he received from his parents, an investigation by The New York Times has found.

Mr. Trump won the presidency proclaiming himself a self-made billionaire, and he has long insisted that his father, the legendary New York City builder Fred C. Trump, provided almost no financial help.

But The Times’s investigation, based on a vast trove of confidential tax returns and financial records, reveals that Mr. Trump received the equivalent today of at least $413 million from his father’s real estate empire, starting when he was a toddler and continuing to this day."
* * *

Monday, November 05, 2018

Monday Musings on Election Eve

Some random thoughts on a very early Monday morning, before what is likely the most important mid-term election in the last century (or longer).



Really?  Then please explain this:
Donald Trump: As projected in the FY 2019 budget, Trump plans to add $4.775 trillion, a 29-percent increase from the $20.245 trillion debt at the end of Obama's last budget for FY 2017.
  • FY 2021 - $1.119 trillion.
  • FY 2020 - $1.198 trillion.
  • FY 2019 - $1.225 trillion.
  • FY 2018 - $1.233 trillion.
Let's talk golf.



Really?  Then please explain this:



Oh yeah, Trump did mention the lies of Democrats, right?

In the month of October, Trump said 1,104 things that were totally or partially untrue -- more than double his next most prodigious month (September), according to the tireless cataloging by The Washington Post's Fact Checker blog.

I could go on and on, but the point is that this man lies over and over, accuses others of doing things that he does in far greater measure; and refuses to admit that he has ever been wrong or made an error.

The only way to throttle back his destruction of our way of life is to put Democrats in control of the House and the Senate, to be a check on his agenda.

VOTE BLUE