We need to say goodbye to the Democratic Party

I have been a Democrat all my life; yes, even as a very young boy I remember my father talking about the Democrats and FDR, his New Deal. My dad came from a well-off family in the South, a family at one time I am almost sure had slaves. But the South was Democratic then, all the way, and it was just the right thing to be left leaning. That's changed in the last few years and the Republicans have taken over the South and turned the people there into a conservative stronghold that had a major effect on the 2016 Democratic Primary, particularly for Bernie Sanders.

Did you know Franklin Delano Roosevelt was a Democratic Socialist?

But the Democrats today hardly resemble those of FDR's era; in fact you can't even draw a close parallel these days between what they call the Party and what the Dems started out to be. FDR wasn't a Party starter for Democrats, Andrew Jackson has that honor, but Franklin Delano Roosevelt was the epitome of the Democratic Party, having served four terms in office until his death in 1945. This man set the tone for what the term liberal meant, and followed through with actions that give him a place in history as one of the greatest Presidents of all time.

Here are snippets from the democratic Platform of 1936, three years into FDR's presidency...

• Protection of the family and the home.
• Establishment of a democracy of opportunity for all the people
• Aid to those overtaken by disaster
• Safeguard the thrift of our citizens by restraining those who would gamble with other peoples savings
• Early formation of the Social Security concept
• Expansion of consumer electricity through creation of Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA)
• Making homes available to people of meagre incomes 
• Just treatment of war veterans and their dependents

There are other issues like taking farmers off the road to ruin, worker's pay was increased and hours shortened, actually saved banks and paved the way for a better financial foundation, gave youth the opportunity to stay in school and get an education, which 12 years of Republican neglect had closed, and help for the unemployed. There's more and you can read the complete 1936 Democratic Party Platform here. I want to point out that in every case but one, above, the programs are for the average person, not corporations or the wealthy.

FDR, although born into a wealthy New York family, was a president of the people and his programs substantiated this, but considering the 1929 stock-market crash, some feel he could have paid more attention to a struggling economy; The Great depression lasted until 1939. It is worth noting that the Dow Jones industrial average didn't return to its summer 1929 high until 1954. But as a catalyst, Roosevelt combined a stimulus project with his goals for social equity and created the Rural Electrification Administration to wire the countryside. Perhaps FDR could have used Janet Yellen.

And why take you back all these years down the reminiscing trail to a time some 84 years ago when many of you weren't born or were too young to care what politics was all about? Well, dang it, to illustrate the stark differences in that period, that I might remind you was closer in time to that of the Founding Fathers of this country, that FDR based a lot of his concepts on. As an example, when it comes to corporations...

"To say that the founding fathers supported corporations is very absurd. Its quite the opposite in fact. Corporations like the East India Trading Company were despised by the founding fathers and they were just one reason why they chose to revolt against England. Corporations represented the moneyed interests much like they do today and they often wielded political power, sometimes to the point of governing a colony all by themselves like the Massachusetts Bay Company did."

We've come a long way from Franklin Delano Roosevelt and the journey has ended in a disjointed, confused, and divided Democratic Party that seems not to know how to repair itself. Well, it is my opinion that the Democratic Party is irreparable, therefore, dump it and start over. Progressives, in number, passed liberals a few years ago and seems to be the real new face of the Party. It appears that hard party liners like the Clintons, even Obama, do not want to accept this fact and continue to stick to ideology that just doesn't work anymore with a new generation.

It is a fact that Democrats lost more than 1,030 seats in state legislatures, governor's mansions and Congress during Barack Obama's presidency. It can't all be blamed on the man because it was Debbie Wasserman Schultz who neglected the Party as DNC head for five years, until she was recently fired, and these losses finally added up to a catastrophe for Democrats. But it is still hard to understand how the upper echelons of the Party could sit by and watch over 1,000 of their legislative and governor's seats just evaporate. To me, this is the ultimate of political incompetence.

Bernie Sanders, a Vermont Independent, ran for President as a Democrat in 2016, but lost in the Primary due to the killing machine of Debbie Wasserman Schultz as DNC chair. There were many of us who were supporters of the Bern, and many of us believe today that, until he is given the reins of the Democratic Party, it will remain in its quagmire. Bernie was asked by New York Times Magazine what the Party stands for. His response...

"You’re asking a good question, and I can’t give you a definitive answer. Certainly there are some people in the Democratic Party who want to maintain the status quo. They would rather go down with the Titanic so long as they have first-class seats."

The article indicates that his answer is partially for effect, since he does have his own liberal values for what he thinks the left should stand for. And Sen. Elizabeth Warren joins Sanders in a call for revamping the Party, but one still wonders why she didn't swallow what establishment pride she had during the Primary and throw her backing behind the Bern. It could have turned everything around, but she didn't and it didn't. And the 2018 midterms will only be a fight against the Trump administration and for congressional seats to block his legislation. First things first.

Latest Trump administration imbecile, Mick Mulvaney, skewered

The Washington Post did it, a clever writer by the name of Alexandra Petri has thoroughly lanced Donald Trump's new Office of Management & Budget Director, Mick Mulvaney, for the almost absurd new budget introduced by the Trump administration. Although Mulvaney in this case is just the messenger, he is known so far for comments like this in a press briefing last Thursday...

"White House Budget Director Mick Mulvaney defended the Trump administration's proposed deep cuts to social welfare programs like free school lunches and Meals on Wheels as 'about as compassionate as you can get" for taxpayers.'"

More...

"'Meals on Wheels sounds great,'" Mulvaney said, adding 'we're not going to spend [money] on programs that cannot show that they actually deliver the promises that we've made to people.'"

From SF Gate...

"Meals on Wheels is a nonprofit group that receives funding from the federal government, state and local governments and private donors. 'We serve more than 2.4 million seniors from 60 to 100+ years old each year,' the organization writes. 'They are primarily older than 60 and because of physical limitations or financial reasons, have difficulty shopping for or preparing meals for themselves.'"

Mick Mulvaney will go down in history as just another one of Donald Trump's peons who signed up to say just what the new monarch tells him to say.

But on now to Alexandra Petri's very creative rendering of just what the new Trump administration budget will accomplish.

Cut the State Department by 29%...

"Right now, all the State Department’s many qualified employees do is sit around being sad that they are never consulted about anything. This is, frankly, depressing, and it is best to put them out of their misery. Besides, they are only trained in Soft Diplomacy, like a woman would do, and NOBODY wants that. There's more here...

 Environmental Protection Agency...

"We absolutely do not need this. Clean rivers and breathable air are making us SOFT and letting the Chinese and the Russians get the jump on us. We must go back to the America that was great, when the air was full of coal and danger and the way you could tell if the air was breathable was by carrying a canary around with you at all times, perched on your leathery, coal-dust-covered finger. Furthermore, we will cut funding to Superfund cleanup in the EPA because the only thing manlier than clean water is DIRTY water.

Here's a summary of more quips. Re. Commerce dept., Budget will make us strong enough to fight all natural disasters on our own; Don't need Labor Dept. Future labor will all be on the backs of the women. Forget Healthcare, just punch disease in the nose. Why should we fund Historic Sites. Trump hates parks he doesn't own. Who needs Public Broadcasting or the Bird? Just listen to "audio footage of a Trump son shooting a rare land mammal." U.S. Institute of Peace: Too "wimpy" for this administration. U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness, will just make them tougher.

Okay, you get the idea and you'll be glad if you peruse the whole article at The Washington Post.

In an opinion piece by Jay Bookman of the Atlanta Journal Constitution, his headline screams, "Trump budget an exercise in stupidity." The words stupid, idiot, and similar descriptions of the genre of the Trump administration have had a field day, and this is a classic example of being right on target. Since Trump's budget's largest item is defense, this is Bookman's comment...

"We spend more on our military than the next eight countries combined, even though five of those next seven countries are strong U.S. allies such as Britain and France. We spend three times as much as China and nine times as much as Russia. In fact, just the increases in military spending requested by the Trump administration — $30 billion for the current fiscal year, and $54 billion next year — swamp Russia’s total annual military budget of $66 billion."

That paragraph should send any level-headed person into an incredible vertigo of confusion when you look at the slashes to programs designed to help the American public that are being drastically reduced or cut altogether. Bookman summarizes how Donald John plans to get all the money for the $54 billion increase...

"...by gutting scientific research, medical research, foreign aid, the State Department, community block grants that support Meals on Wheels and similar programs. The EPA, which today operates on the same budget it had 15 years ago, and with 2,000 fewer employees, is targeted for 31 percent budget cut."

And here's an outstanding point that is just one in a long line of screw-ups this President has made internationally; what will the rest of the world think? Do we yank the helping hand that so many countries depend on to just survive in the name of building a defense program designed entirely for the purpose of spending money to make the corporate world even richer? It gets more ridiculous and more pathetic with each passing day with the outlook even bleaker.  

Populism Bernie Sanders:YES-Populism Donald Trump:NO

Steve Bannon

Steve Bannon's populism seems sketchy from his past, so why is he where he is now, leading ring-nosed Donald Trump down the path for his style of populism and nationalism? Both Trump and Bannon have evoked the name of Andrew Jackson because of his populist beliefs, but Jackson also had to deal with sectionalism between the North and the South, due to the stark difference in economies. The North was industrial, the South agricultural. This became highly complicated when Congress passed the Tariff of 1828, favoring the North.

The reason I bring this up is that, although he would tell Congress what he was going to do, then do it, regardless of their concerns, he did things with a background from experience that had led to his first election in 1828. Andrew Jackson won with and governed with a substance neither Donald Trump nor Steve Bannon could ever claim. So why all the comparisons? It is Bannon's obsession with Jackson's populism and nationalism that the White House adviser intends to steer in the direction of his own version that includes white nationalism along with racism and general bigotry.

Andrew Jackson is from Tennessee. I am from Tennessee. Jackson's view on white nationalism and racism does parallel both Trump and Bannon, according to U.S. News...

"...Jackson's belief that democracy and race were inextricably bound together, that whiteness was a prerequisite for self-governance, fits neatly with Trump's own worldview – a worldview that is coming to define not just Trump's administration, but also the Republican Party."

We also know that Andrew Jackson was also a co-founder of the Democratic Party. And Democrats regularly paid tribute to Jackson for years, until the issue of racism came into focus. You see...

"His policy of 'Indian removal,' an act of ethnic cleansing that killed thousands, moved to the forefront of his legacy, as did the fact that he held nearly 300 enslaved people, the source of his significant wealth."

It was then that Andrew Jackson began to tank with the Democratic Party. It was obvious that, "For Jacksonian democracy to work, non-white people had to be subjugated, either through their removal or their enslavement (and, in later eras, through Jim Crows old and new)." But if the Democrats now shun Jackson, Republicans in the present form of Donald Trump and Steve Bannon have picked up the gauntlet and are running with the white nationalism, tinged with racism and feminine hatred. Old Hickory surely had his faults but nothing to compare with the Trump/Bannon debacle.

Concourse tries to explain the insanity of Steve Bannon. The younger Bannon blames it all on the financial hard luck of his father...

"...a hardworking man who spent 50 years working for AT&T, accumulating as much AT&T stock as he could during that time in the belief that it would constitute a safe inheritance for his kids—saw the value of those shares crater during the 2008 financial crisis, and sold them at a loss in a panic."

As an afterthought Stevo contends that he was "outraged" that no one went to jail in the financial community over the chicanery during the Geo. W. Bush administration, Hell, so was I and millions more, but we didn't take it out on people of color nor did we debase women. Hamilton Nolan, the Concourse writer states...

"I am in no position to judge Steve Bannon’s honesty, so I’m willing to assume it’s true that the crash is indeed what spawned his political philosophy. If so, Steve Bannon is an insane man. Has he helped to fix the root causes of the 2008 financial crisis by guiding Donald Trump into the White House? No. He has helped to put in power an ignorant billionaire who has vowed to slash Dodd-Frank and other regulations designed to help prevent another financial crisis, and who has turned the regulation of Wall Street over to a coterie of Wall Street insiders and deregulation zealots."

The Daily Beast reported that Trump's fascination with Andrew Jackson only began in 2013, and there was another short conversation about the former president when there was talk during the 2016 election about removing Jackson from the $20 bill. DB says...

"But the reason Jackson has taken on such a physical and rhetorical presence in the Trump White House is, in fact, primarily because of Bannon, Trump’s chief strategist and the former head of Breitbart. According to officials in the Trump campaign, presidential transition, and administration speaking to The Daily Beast, Bannon would often discuss Jackson’s historical legacy and image with Trump on and after the campaign trail, and how the two political figures were a lot alike."

Bannon even gave Trump a suggested reading list on Jackson. And Trump placed a biography of Andrew Jackson on his desk he frequently pointed out to reporters, but no one could ever confirm that he had read it. All nice window-dressing for an administration in the throes of taking this county back to the dark ages of racist hangings, house burnings, and a Ku Klux Klan that gave rise to the 784 hate groups that now reside in the U.S. Thanks in great part to Donald Trump adviser, Steve Bannon. Let me leave you with this from the Daily Beast...

"The simplest explanation for Steve Bannon’s actual political philosophy is 'He is racist, xenophobic, and has deep-seated resentments and anger issues with origins that we can only begin to explain.'”

God help us all! 

Trump's new budget exposes lies-Here's big one

Well, it's common knowledge what Donald trump thinks about women from the statements he made during the 2016 Presidential campaign. Remarks like...

"You know I’m automatically attracted to beautiful — I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it, you can do anything.
Grab them by the p***y, you can do anything."

"About Rosie O'Donnell he said that she was 'disgusting, both inside and out' and that if he were running her show he'd 'look her right in that fat, ugly face of hers and say, 'Rosie, you're fired.'"

He said about Carly Fiorina, "Look at that face. Would anybody vote for that?"

There's more you can see here but the above shows clearly Donald Trump's disdain for women.

Fast forward to Donald John's first address to a joint session of Congress when he "...promised the American people that he was going to spend his term granting wishes..." then added. "...that he’d invest in women’s health." But along came the emperor's new budget which made his promises look like Pinocchio with a two-foot nose. Lower income and older women are hit very hard with womens' advocates contending...

"...that if the AHCA were to be enacted as-is, Trump’s promised investment in women’s health would be a comical falsehood."

You might say that this statement ["comical falsehood"] pretty much reflects the total of the Donald Trump experience so far. The Daily Beast has been condemning the monarch's budget through the interpretation of the Congressional Budget Office analysis released this past Monday. For starters...

"...24 million kicked off insurance and an additional $880 billion gouged from Medicaid, all in the name of a measly 1 percent reduction in the deficit."

DB says the numbers are really not representative because of the different math between Obamacare and the American Health Care Act. What it comes down to is the fact that this large number will lose their health insurance and older Americans will see increases they simply will not be able to afford. Daily Beast says...

"Allowing premiums for older people to shoot skyward means that a 64-year-old making $24,000 per year will see half of their income go toward the cost of covering medical insurance."

The outset is a family on the cusp of retirement that all of a sudden is bankrupted by their health care costs, and the Republican health care plan leaves them nowhere to turn. Here's another opinion...

“'[Republicans] are doing nothing to invest in women’s health,' Jamila Taylor, senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank, tells The Daily Beast.
Taylor is particularly concerned with the one-two punch the AHCA gives low-income women and women of color."

 And on the same subject, the GOP is hell-bent on defunding Planned Parenthood, the main entryway for low income women to get the health care they need. The Senate's biggest idiot, Joni Ernst from Iowa, has a bill to redirect their funds. Here's one reaction...

"'If passed, these bills will cause a national health care crisis, leaving millions with nowhere to go for basic care,' said Dana Singiser, vice president of public policy and government affairs for the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, in a statement."

As you can see, the "comical falsehood" has now turned into a serious tragedy, and it will all be on the head of Donald Trump. 

Big mouth Trump scuttles his own travel ban legislation

Hawaiian judge, Derrick K. Watson, has shot down Donald Trump's latest attempt to keep immigrants out of the United States. His decision had a great deal to do with the running off at the mouth by Donald John and his bootlicking advisers. To backtrack, the way this man was elected was to trash the America we know and tell all his followers he could make America better, in his words "Make America Great Again." It is his bluster and buffoonery that these poor souls follow, so it is just natural to keep up the act to maintain his popularity. At the expense of our country, of course.

Had he and his minions tempered their statements following the introduction of the second travel ban, Judge Watson might have given it more serious thought, although his decision would have probably been the same, based on substance. This is very similar to Trump's claims of Trump Tower wiretapping, where, against seemingly insurmountable odds, he continues to pursue his charges. The Washington Post reported...

“Based on the information available to us, we see no indications that Trump Tower was the subject of surveillance by any element of the United States government either before or after Election Day 2016,” the Democratic and Republican chairmen of the Senate Intelligence Committee said Thursday in a statement.
“He stands by it,” White House press secretary Sean Spicer said of Trump’s original claim.

 Politico says, "The federal courts were poised to hold the first version unconstitutional. But it’s not at all clear that the new order will survive judicial scrutiny, either." However, liberal lawyer, Alan Dershowitz, says Trump could win before the Supreme Court. In both cases, just another example of the fact that Donald Trump thinks he can never be wrong, and to carry out his hissy fits he ties up departments of government to carry out his unfounded charges. It is a classic case of putting an oversized ego in front of what is best for his country, and it is totally pathetic...again.

Republican Congress stopped dead in its tracks...by Republican?

Trump's latest political mess

I guess the first question is, is Donald Trump a Republican? We know he isn't a Democrat. Or is there some non-party designation for his highness that was put into play by the political establishment when his eminence somehow became President of the United States? The latter we may never know. The former is displayed every day in a White House that seems committed to confusion and chaos. All travel bans have been shot down by the courts, the repeal of Obamacare, engineered by Speaker Ryan, is floundering, the Mexican wall seems to be going nowhere.

And now this headline from the Washington Post re. Donald John's budget released on Thursday: "Capitol Hill Republicans not on board with Trump budget." Here's how WP described it...

“President Trump on Thursday will unveil a budget plan that calls for a sharp increase in military spending and stark cuts across much of the rest of the government including the elimination of dozens of long-standing federal programs that assist the poor, fund scientific research and aid America’s allies abroad.”

Some in Congress have complained that the budget doesn't have enough defense spending, but no one even mentions the fact that there will be drastic cuts to the welfare system. Based on the year 2015, each night 564,708 people were experiencing homelessness. And over 500,000 veterans still wait more than 30 days to see a doctor, in a system rife with incompetence and under funding. If Medicaid is turned over to states, especially those like Arizona, there's no guarantee these people will have adequate coverage, if any at all.

In addition, WP reports there are massive cuts to the arts, scientific research and aid to our allies overseas...

"A Budget Blueprint to Make America Great Again,” would increase defense spending by $54 billion and then offset that by stripping money from more than 18 other agencies. Some would be hit particularly hard, with reductions of more than 20 percent at the Agriculture, Labor and State departments and of more than 30 percent at the Environmental Protection Agency."

""It would also propose eliminating future federal support for the National Endowment for the Arts, the National Endowment for the Humanities and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Within EPA alone, 50 programs and 3,200 positions would be eliminated."

I don't believe there is anyone out there, I don't care how liberal you are, that will argue with the fact that the government is top heavy and overspends. But there are many on both side of the aisle that question this amount of spending on defense. And we know there are tax cuts for the wealthy on the way, plus, remember all that "pork," those projects in congressional districts that are done for the sole purpose of getting someone reelected. No one talks about this anymore. So, what we are left with is a budget that represents Donald trump's version of Republican ideology.

During the 2016 election, Trump supporters were bellowing the fact that, if an outsider like Donald Trump, a supposedly savvy businessman, took over the White House, he would change things so it would run like a top. Well, here's what the Washington Post had to say...

"Trump was only the latest in a long line of political figures who argued that if someone from outside politics took over the government, he’d whip it into shape with his business savvy and management expertise. The result has been the most chaotic and incompetent White House anyone can remember. As Politico reported Wednesday, 'A culture of paranoia is consuming the Trump administration, with staffers increasingly preoccupied with perceived enemies — inside their own government,' creating 'an environment of fear that has hamstrung the routine functioning of the executive branch.'”

Finally, White House Office of Management and Budget Director Mick Mulvaney said “You can’t drain the swamp and leave all the people in it.” As a Trump appointed member of the team and a conservative republican, I'll let you decide.

Trump cronies getting restless-Looking for blood?

Are the good ole boys of Congress finally tiring of Donald Trump's incessant tweeting, making claims that he cannot back up, and putting the American government in the position of having to explain why we have a lunatic running the country? It would seem so when the Washington Post publishes a headline like this...

"Republicans are threatening to expose Trump as the emperor with no clothes"

Here's a part of the accompanying Washington Post story...

"...a spokesman for House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) threatened to subpoena the Trump administration to produce evidence of Trump's claim that President Barack Obama wiretapped Trump Tower during the campaign. The White House has declined to produce this evidence publicly, offering various excuses, including the Constitution's separation of powers and — most recently on Monday — arguing that Trump wasn't speaking literally when he made the claim."

 And there's a downside to all this Twitter activity anyway. Apparently Donald John's aides have been deleting select tweets, which could be illegal, according to Reps. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) and Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), chairman and ranking member of the House Oversight Committee. They have sent a letter to Trump re. the "...administration’s record keeping habits and its nontransparent use of social media and other forms of electronic communication." This numb nuts thinks the office he holds means that he can do what he pleases, when he pleases.

Huff Post reports that, “The need for data security, however, does not justify circumventing requirements established by federal recordkeeping and transparency laws." It would appear that the confusion and chaos of this administration has finally reached the point that those high in government feel the free-wheeling has got to stop, or at least slow down. You can see Chaffetz and Cummings letter to the White House Counsel on the above HP site above. Speaker Paul Ryan has admitted that he does not believe the claim that there were wiretaps.

In addition to the letter from the two representatives, Devin Nunes had required the Justice Department to submit evidence to him of Trump's claim that President Barack Obama wiretapped Trump Tower during the campaign by this past Monday. When he didn't get it he indicated he might resort to a subpoena if it wasn't received by the committee's March 20 hearing. Now we can remember Congress threatening several actions against Barack Obama when he was in office, but it was the opposite party. In this case, it is all Republicans, supposedly Trump's party

Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.), who chairs the subcommittee looking into the wiretapping...

"...asked the Justice Department and the FBI to provide copies of any warrants or court orders related to the alleged wiretapping. Having not received anything, Graham said he may push for a special committee."

While all the GOP members who are supposed to be on his side continue to question the bizarre behavior of the White House wacko, loudmouth keeps right on tweeting away.

Steve Bannon repeatedly endorses extreme racism...again

This is like talking about gun violence; no one seems to care anymore, or something would be done. The "this" I am talking about is Donald Trump's top White House adviser Steve Bannon, who continues to espouse white nationalism and racist beliefs. He is now joined by Steve King, House representative from Iowa, who makes me sorry I ever called the state full of common sense. If he is any example, it has just become feudal. The two of them have recently endorsed the highly racist book, The Camp of the Saints, the "favorite racist fantasy of the anti-immigrant movement."

That's what the Southern Poverty Law Center says, a non-profit that tracks hate organizations across the country. Steve King probably can't do much harm, his Iowa district is losing population anyway...understandable. But Steve Bannon? Everyday he remains in office is a threat to what the United States of America stands for.

Bernie Sanders nails it in this video...

Remarkable Kellyanne speaks again...about microwaves

What is remarkable is the fact that Kellyanne Conway is still a spokesperson for Donald Trump. Although his statements parallel hers in stupidity, Conway just manages to come off more as a simpleton. Her latest is to suggest, when asked specifically about surveillance and wiretapping of Trump Tower, there are all sorts of ways to surveil...like through microwaves. This was her answer when being interviewed by the Bergen Record...

Is Donald Trump's presidency biggest scam since Bernie Madoff?

Newt Gingrich, early Trump backer

I spent 35 years in the junk mail industry where a new scam was born almost every day. There was even a selection of mailing lists of names from those who responded to those offers that looked...well, almost too good to be true. We called them the GULLIBLES. That's pretty bad for the consumer when you can target individuals with a product you want to sell, and they don't really need it, but will want it just because of the sales letter you sent them. This, of course, is not as bad as the famous one, The Nigerian Scam, also known as 419.

The 419 was from some Nigerian family to move a lot of money from their country to the U.S. in your name, from which you will benefit in ridiculously large amounts of cash, all for helping in the transaction. As the experts put it...

"They will use your emotions and willingness to help against you. They will promise you a large cut of their business or family fortune. All you are asked to do is cover the endless 'legal' and other “fees” that must be paid to the people that can release the scammer’s money."

Does "using your emotion" sound familiar? There are nine more scams can see here, but that isn't what this post is all about. It asks the question, "Is Donald Trump's presidency biggest scam since Bernie Madoff? The Washington Post thinks so and, after highlighting all the issues promised by Donald Trump in his candidacy, says...

"...little by little, as Trump seeks to make good on his promises, Trumpism — as sold by the man himself — is being revealed as fraudulent to its core."

"Fraudulent to its core," is not like, well, you're falling a bit short of the public's expectations. When you go to the core, you have arrived, described in Dictionary.com: "the central, innermost, or most essential part of anything." So, Donald John has missed the boat on the main issues that affect America. WP continues as an example, the health-care bill that Trump promised the people has been short-circuited by his endorsement of the new House GOP health-care plan...

"The bill, experts said, falls far short of the goals President Donald Trump laid out: Affordable coverage for everyone; lower deductibles and health care costs; better care; and zero cuts to Medicaid. Instead, the bill is almost certain to reduce overall coverage, result in deductibles increasing, and will phase out Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion."

There's more about additional issues you can read in the WP article, above. And there are more signs that Donald Trump is bad for this country. The Associated Press (AP) announced, "...the Trump administration's immigration policies are hurting tourism."

"The nonprofit industry organization said in a statement that there are 'mounting signs' of 'a broad chilling effect on demand for international travel to the United States.'"

Don't watch this on an empty stomach...

Disputed by White House spokeswoman Lindsay Walters, "...the non-profit, the U.S. Travel Association's statement added to a growing chorus of concern from the travel industry over the impact of Trump administration policies on tourism." New York city is forecasting 300,000 fewer visitors compared to 2016. Here's another fact...

"The Philadelphia Convention and Visitors Bureau told the Philadelphia Inquirer this week that it had lost out on an international meeting with 3,000 attendees that decided to go to Canada or Mexico instead."

According to Statistics & Facts...

"The travel and tourism industry is one of the largest industries in the United States, making a total contribution of 1.47 trillion U.S. dollars to GDP in 2014."

Here's more...

"A Jan. 30 op-ed piece in the Toronto Star newspaper encouraged Canadians to "boycott vacations to the U.S." until Trump is no longer president."

With problems like this, the tourism industry could bring the country's economy to a screeching halt. The AP also reported that, "Last year, the U.S. Commerce Department predicted a record 78.6 million international visitors would come to the U.S. in 2017. That forecast is usually updated in May." CNN is saying there are...

"...people influential with the most powerful man in the world are publicly raising concerns that there is a cabal of entrenched bureaucrats hidden in the bowels of the nation's government who are intent on his political demise."

Sean Spicer said...

"I think that there's no question when you have eight years of one party in office, there are people who stay in government and continue to espouse the agenda of the previous administration. So I don't think it should come as any surprise there are people that burrowed into government during eight years of the last administration and may have believed in that agenda and may continue to seek it. I don't think that should come as a surprise."
Spicer dismissed the idea that the CIA is working to identify those people and remove them from government.

Translated..."Made in"

But one of Donald John's biggest problems could be our southern neighbor, since a primary campaignThe Huff Post says...
promise was to build the wall between the U.S. and Mexico...and make them pay for it.

"US President Donald Trump, who has relentlessly intimidated and humiliated Mexico since before he was sworn in, evidently enjoys playing the ogre. He has repeatedly demanded that Mexico treat the US “fairly and with respect” while blaming it for “taking advantage” of its northern neighbour."

It's actually the other way around because "President James Polk invaded Mexico in 1846 and stole 55% of its land, including Texas and California." There's more that makes Donald Trump look like a dimwit...

"As recently as July 2015, the US government was praising Mexico as a “critically important” partner in America’s well-being; 14 years prior, George W Bush acknowledged that the US has “no more important relationship in the world” than the one it has with Mexico."

If the Trump administration and its "Trumpism" isn't the biggest scam since Bernie Madoff, then the total White House staff should go to Hollywood. What was that other politically historical play that was one of the biggest hits ever on Broadway. Maybe Donald Trump is another "Hamilton." Nah...you could never put music to this man. Wait though, maybe Kellyanne Conway could fill in.

The NRA part of Trump's Russian debacle

 Dmitry Rogozin

The National Rifle Assn. (NRA) in 2014 met with Dmitry Rogozin, one of Vlaimir Putin's top deputies and the head of Russia’s defense industry and longtime opponent of American power. This was eighteen months after he was sanctioned by the U.S. for the invasion of Crimea and eastern Ukraine. Rogozin is chairman of the Russian Shooting Federation, and obviously had significant influence on gun relations between the two countries. So why was the NRA, who was Donald Trump’s most powerful outside ally during the 2016 election, there...

"The NRA had previously objected to the parts of the U.S. sanctions regime that blocked Russian-made guns from import into the United States."

Tim Mak, author of the Daily Beast article says the meeting has not been previously covered by the American media. Why not? I ask. Mak says the meeting was "one strand in a web of connections" between Trump, his staff and Cabinet appointments. Mak explains it this way...

"Attorney General Jeff Sessions and former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn both denied speaking with the Russian ambassador, which turned out to be untrue; former campaign manager Paul Manafort supported pro-Russian interests in Ukraine; Secretary of State Rex Tillerson won an “Order of Friendship” from Putin; and then, of course, there’s the hacking campaign that U.S. intelligence agencies say Russia launched to tilt the election in Trump’s favor."

Rogozin is prominent in many areas of the Russian government, as well as being a leader in gun rights; he is "particularly interested" in cyberwarfare and its ability to target with the speed of light. BINGO! But does Rogozin plus all these American connections from Donald Trump to the NRA add up to the hacking of the 2016 election to favor the candidacy of Trump? The million-dollar question.  Rep. Mike Quigley, a member of the House Intelligence Committee, which is investigating Russia’s attempts to influence the 2016 presidential elections...

“Due to the NRA’s opposition to sanctions, it defies credulity that they wouldn’t have discussed sanctions and their extraordinary support for Donald Trump’s campaign.”

 The top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee panel that oversees the CIA, Rep. Eric Swalwell...

Russia is not America’s friend. And it’s stunning to hear that while they were attacking our democracy, one of the largest organizations supporting Trump [the NRA] was cozying up with a sanctioned Russian in Moscow.”

Conspiracy, killings and new President

It is true that National Rifle Assn. head, Wayne LaPierre and his minions will go to any length to getSeven children and teens (age 19 or under) are killed with guns in the U.S. on an average day. Rogozin having been sanctioned by the U.S. had apparently no effect on the NRA gang, which included David Keene, the former NRA president, board member Pete Brownell, top NRA donor Joe Gregory, and Trump supporter Sheriff David A. Clarke. Mak reports further...
guns on the streets of the United States, even when it results in the murder of our children:

"The National Rifle Association’s support for Trump was unprecedented—and it seems to have paid off. The organization backed Trump in May 2016—much earlier than they had endorsed other candidates in previous election cycles, and before he had even been officially named the Republican presidential nominee.
The NRA spent $30.3 million to elect Trump—more than even the top Trump super PAC, which spent just $20.3 million, according to OpenSecrets."

And it was right after the election that Donald John rescinded a move by Barack Obama in the last days of his election "that banned lead ammunition in various hunting and fishing areas." The NRA, of course, did a back flip.

Since the NRA nor its associates that attended these Russian meetings have ever mentioned it publicly, is there something to cover up? The fact that they were there to begin with, considering the sanctions, is bad enough, but if there was an ulterior motive, other than just gun business, someone should find out. But they won't, as long as Republicans are in charge of the government. Wayne LaPierre basks in this kind of glory while there still continues to be 12,000 gun homicides every year. Purely pathetic when you consider guns' rights are placed above people's lives.

Gun nut finally gets just results

Former Police Captain Curtis Reeves

The sane population of this country is battling the gun nuts that have been given the right-of-way to do just about anything they want with their guns. In Arizona, they can even carry them into bars where fights, even brawls break out occasionally. Now, by sane, I don't mean just staunch gun control advocates like me, it also includes those innocent people without guns that just don't want to be shot and maimed, possibly killed. Here are some appalling figures from the gun advocacy organization, Everytown for Gun Safety...

1. Data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) show that on an average day, 93 Americans are killed with guns.
2. On average there are nearly 12,000 gun homicides a year in the U.S.
3. For every one person killed with guns, two more are injured.
4. Seven children and teens (age 19 or under) are killed with guns in the U.S. on an average day.
5. In an average month, 50 women are shot to death by intimate partners in the U.S.
6. America’s gun homicide rate is more than 25 times the average of other high-income countries.

There are more you can see on the Everytown for Gun Safety site. But I ask you gun nuts out there, which of the above figures do you want to argue with. They are confirmed by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), that organization your leader, Wayne LaPierre, who heads up the National Rifle Assn, (NRA), tried to keep quiet for years. LaPierre and the NRA backed legislation that has blocked gun violence research for 20 years. What you are seeing above are raw figures supplied to the CDC by hospitals, doctors, police departments and other groups. The NRA would stop this if they could.

Chad Oulsen's wife, Nicole speaks out...

The idea for this post came from a CNN article titled, "Judge denies 'stand your ground' defense in movie theater shooting," which covers the death of  Chad Oulson in a Florida movie theatre at the hands of retired police captain, Curtis Reeves. Here is the CNN version...

The case dates to January 14, when Reeves, then 71, confronted a man in a suburban Tampa movie theater about texting during the previews before a showing of "Lone Survivor." The two argued, and then Reeves walked out of the theater to complain to an employee. When Reeves returned, he and the man, Chad Oulson, began arguing again.
Oulson threw a bag of popcorn at Reeves, according to a criminal complaint, and Reeves then took out his handgun and fired at Oulson, killing him.

The Judge established through evidence that Oulson did not throw a cell phone at Reeves, charged by the complainant, and Oulson's actions were not considered aggressive enough to qualify under Florida's 'Stand Your Ground' law, which also figured in George Zimmerman's 2013 trial in the killing of Trayvon Martin. Prosecutors played audio of Reeves talking to detectives shortly after the shooting...

"As soon as I pulled the trigger I said, 'Oh shoot, that was stupid.' If I had to do it over again, it would have never happened," he said. "If I had to do it over again, it would never have happened. I wouldn't have moved. But you don't get do-overs."

Reeves' hearing has just started.

Enough said...just another gun nut.

It was learned later that Oulson was checking his phone to text his daughter's babysitter.

‘World’s Greatest Healthcare Plan of 2017’ stinks

While millions risk losing their health insurance, perhaps dying as a result, Rep. Pete Sessions (R-TX), chairman of the powerful Rules Committee, thinks he has the perfect replacement for Obamacare in his POS ‘World’s Greatest Healthcare Plan of 2017.’ Sessions thought he would slip his legislation in as a model for what Speaker Paul Ryan  and the rest of the House plan to do. "Instead, Speaker Paul Ryan and his team modeled their initial bill on legislation authored by former
Rep. Tom Price." This is what Price had to say...

"...that that bill as currently written is a “work in progress,” and that future legislative and regulatory fixes will be necessary to address all of the health-care policies that Republicans hope to implement."

But the health care industry doesn't want anything to do with any of it. Seven groups speaking for hospitals, health systems and medical colleges collectively added their “significant concerns,..."

"...to the growing opposition, focusing on the prospect of sharply lower numbers of insured Americans if the GOP plan becomes law. Separately, the American Medical Association, a powerful lobbying group for physicians, rejected the bill for the same reason."

Based on health care specialists who have analyzed the Republican House bill, millions will lose coverage with Americans in their 50s and 60s as the most likely to not be able to afford the coverage. By 2020 the premium subsidies based on income would be gone, according to the New York Times. The current system would be replaced by tax credits of $2,000 to $4,000 per year, based on age. But this would leave a significant deficit from current coverage plans under Affordable Care Act requirements. Meaning, many would have to give up their health insurance.

Here's a statement from a major health care provider...

The central issue is the tax credits are not going to be sufficient, admits Dr. J. Mario Molina, chief executive of Molina Healthcare who offers coverage through Obamacare marketplaces in California, Florida and several other states. 

One unhappy Trump voter says she thought he would make her health insurance more affordable not more expensive. Under the House Plan, she would get $5,188 less each year than she did under the Affordable Care Act. "I'm scared," she says. Although there are no official figures yet, a report from Standard & Poor's claims that somewhere from 2 million to 4 million people will leave the insurance because, in their 50s and 60s, aren't old enough for Medicare but can't afford the new Republican House Plan. Brookings Institution estimates even higher losses.

With this new round of opposition nationwide, the GOP is finding new resistance at every corner. The health care groups also challenged the proposed changes to Medicaid...

"...warning that they would mean lost coverage and funding cuts for a program charged with caring for vulnerable children, elderly and disabled Americans."

"AMA chief executive James L. Madara, a doctor, wrote a letter to congressional leaders released Wednesday expressing the same sentiment: 'We cannot support the AHCA as drafted because of the expected decline in health insurance coverage and the potential harm it would cause to vulnerable patient populations.'”

How many more of you get the feeling, and this dates back for years, that Republicans don't give a shit about those in need of assistance from others? I'm betting plenty. Yes, there are those who take care of the welfare system but that is limited based on expenditures by welfare recipients. And here are 7 lies about welfare that many people believe are fact. AARP has come out against the GOP bill, and even some conservative advocacy groups like Heritage Action for America, FreedomWorks and the Club for Growth have also rejected it. It's proving a bummer, hands down.

Let's talk the Republican Healthcare Plan...

The Republican Plan will have a huge effect on Alan Lipsky of Arden, N.C. Lipsky is 60, his wife in her 50s, and they would lose $13,664 annually under the new plan. He thinks that Obamacare could be improved on, as do most of the Act's supporters, but at least it's baseline. And the GOP bill is taking this away from him with what's left unaffordable, he says. Bu the healthcare wrecking crew are determined to do it their way...

"House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) expressed confidence the bill would eventually pass, even though some conservative House GOP members have railed against it, complaining it does not undo the ACA aggressively enough."

Also on the chopping block, he financial assistance available to low income people with out-of-pocket costs like deductibles and co-payments. There are some large deductibles under the Affordable Care Act but the cost-sharing reductions that are available are a big protection for low income people that end up with huge medical bills that would otherwise cause financial disaster. The insurance market itself could be in harm's way by the elimination of the individual mandate, hated from the beginning of the ACA, but evntually found to be practical.

In 2016, The Washington Post called Paul Ryan's health care plan, "flimsy." Here's their commentary...

"IT HAS been more than six years since the Affordable Care Act passed and nearly three years since its major provisions began phasing in. During that time, the rate of uninsured Americans has plummeted to a historic low. Also during that time, Republicans have blamed the law for practically every problem with the health-care system, the economy and more. But they have infamously not united behind a credible alternative."

Then Paul Ryan, who should just go back to Wisconsin and stick to making cheese, came out with his version which has ended up, along with Tom Price's version, as what Republicans are going with. But listen to this, two weak points that are pointed out by WP in the 2016 rendition...

The proposal does not say how valuable the credit would be, nor the rate at which it would increase.

The document also does not predict how many people it would cover, nor how much the plan would cost.

Whether these weaknesses were addressed in the latest bill that just cleared the first hurdle in the House and is now being debated in Committee, hasn't been revealed. Ryan, who is beginning to mirror Donald Trump in misinformation, stated "Because of Obamacare, Medicare is going broke." NPR says, "In fact, the opposite appears to be true — Obamacare may actually have extended the life of Medicare."

This year's Medicare Trustees Report says the program would now be able to pay all its bills through 2028, a full 11 years longer than a 2009 forecast — an improvement Medicare's trustees attribute, in part, to changes in Medicare called for in the Affordable Care Act and other economic factors.

What is occurring here, from the top down, is the use of lies and deception from the Republicans to

sell their programs, with healthcare just the latest issue. It rose to popularity in the days of George W. Bush and Karl Rove when prevarication was the norm. It hasn't changed. But apparently Paul Ryan hasn't differed as much as he thought in his bill with Obamacare. Here is what the experts are saying...

"And the irony of the Ryan Medicare plan, say some health policy analysts, is that it would turn the government program into something that looks very much like the structure created for insurance plans sold under the ACA."

"'The way it works is comparable to Obamacare,' says physician and conservative policy analyst Avik Roy, founder of the Foundation for Research on Equal Opportunity." 

There is no way to predict just where and how far the Republicans will take their drive to get rid of the Affordable Care Act, or what they will come up with as a replacement, if they are successful. What we do know is that the American public will not be the beneficiary. It will be the wealthy and big business.

Kellyanne Conway to star with Anderson Cooper New Year's Eve

Rumor has it that when the producers of the Anderson Cooper/Kathy Griffin CNN New Year's Eve show saw the video below, they decided to replace Kathy Griffin with Kellyanne Conway, because Conway could make Anderson laugh tons more than his current co-host. Kathy Griffin even agreed and said she might even decide to apply for a job with the Trump administration.. You have to see this video...

Did George Orwell predict Donald Trump in 1984?

Donald Trump-George Orwell

I am an ardent fan of George Orwell's work including, Animal Farm and 1984. Animal Farm is political satire at its best, depicting the unrest of the animals at the Manor farm because they are treated poorly. Mr. Jones, the farmer, was a mean and drunken man who exploited them, leading to a rebellion by the animals that eventually gets out of hand. It's a short read that will illustrate the kind of uprising that is imminent when people, or animals, are unhappy with their situation. Or their government. It's an issue I'll cover later using the book to draw similarities with the U.S.

But 1984 offers a multitude of possibilities for comparison with the new Donald Trump admin., even as it completes just over a month of tenure. The timing only emphasizes the number of conspiracy theories Donald John has been able to concoct in such a short amount of time. They are numerous and at times so bizarre that they defy the reality that the man that has just been elected to the presidency of the United States is the one who spawned them. It is more likely that we would expect such disjointed discourse from Jack Nicholson in One flew Over the cuckoo's Nest. Examples...

1. Trump's phones in Trump Tower were tapped
2. Said there was Rampant voter fraud in 2016
3. Anti-Trump protesters are paid
4. Obama is coordinating the [Trump] protests
5. There were 1.5 million people who attended his inauguration

In none of these cases has Donald John come up with any corroboration for the statements he made, with the most blatant number five. This was where Trump cried to the heavens how much larger his inauguration crowd was than Barack Obama's in 2008, when independent photos proved him wrong. But the freakish behavior of Donald Trump isn't the basis for this post, rather just some background and sidebars to explain the aberrant nature of the man who has risen from mediocrity to the President of the most powerful nation n the world. And how Orwell's 1984 has its parallels.

This isn't the first post or article on this issue, there have been several, but, notably, believe mine is the first to use the Orwell Today site in drawing these comparisons and cross-referencing with Jackie Jura's excellent notes and correlations with the future. On March 5, CNN's headline blazed, "The President of the United States traffics in conspiracy theories," then goes on to document Donald Trump's ongoing perpetuation of lies and misinformation. Jackie Jura n Orwell Today has a section on "Conspiracy Goes Mainstream," which chronicles history's most unique conspiracies. 

But time now to look at George Orwell and then Donald trump through the eyes of "Orwell Today." And the only way to begin is to start with Orwell's most imposing creation, Big Brother. It was the Proles who marched through the streets with placards celebrating Big Brother’s ability to 'Make Oceania Great Again.' Fast forward to the 2016 campaign when Trump followers with red hats were marching everywhere with signs that said, 'Make America Great Again.' Now Donald Trump is not Orwell's Big Brother, but he is the epitome of his oligarchs. 

1984's Winston character tries to recall the past when everything had been better but today's world was the remnants of a society that was free and uncomplicated, unlike 1984, and the new world order where the world was broken into three super-states. Steve Bannon has three tenets on which he plans to build the new "Trumpism" and, although they aren't geographical like Orwell's three nations, they do represent the kind of one-nation ideology of a country that is at the current time highly divisive. They are Capitalism, nationalism, and “Judeo-Christian values.”

It was the plan of the 1984 autocrats to "Keep the Masses Down" in order to maintain a hierarchical society that could only be possible through the proletariat's poverty and ignorance. Although not directly related to Donald Trump, it is the policy of the Republican Party to amass the wealth in only a few (1% of the population) and keep the rest in the dark over what the Party is really doing, in order to maintain the blind votes of their followers. Like Orwell's world, Donald John and the GOP feel their complete survival depend on collectivism.

1984's "Ministry of Truth" must have been the prototype for Donald Trump's communications dept. with Sean Spicer playing the part of the book's character, Winston, whose job it was at the Ministry to take news items he received and turn them around to mean what the higher-ups in the Party wanted said. To be certain, the Ministry of Truth was only the front for a persisting procession of lies to the citizens of Oceania, tied in a neat bundle that, when exxhibited, was meant to be bona fide. Well, in 2017, as in 1984, there is nothing truthful about Donald John's Ministry of Truth.

Orwell's "Falsification of the Past" follows closely to the Ministry of Truth in the fabrication of any information that is granted to the public. If Trump doesn't like what has already been said, he will change it to fit what he wants. Like right after the inauguration when he removed the term "climate change" from the official White House website. In Oceania there was Oldspeak and "Newspeak," when translated corresponds to the civil tone coming from the White House during Barack Obama and earlier presidents, compared to Donald John's crude and sometimes lewd rhetoric.

PoliticoMagazine talks of the multitude of contradictions of Donald Trump: "Has anyone ever disagreed with Donald Trump more than Donald Trump?" The Inner Party in 1984 was governed by adherence to a common doctrine of "Doublethink," which means "the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them." Here are Politico's examples...

“I have no intention of running for president.” (Time, September 14, 1987)
“I am officially running for president.” (New York, June 16, 2015)

 “I don’t want it for myself. I don’t need it for myself.” (ABC News, November 20, 2015)
“I wanted to do this for myself. … I had to do it for myself.” (Time, August 18, 2015)

“Politicians are all talk and no action.” (Twitter, May 27, 2015)
“I’m not a politician.” (CNN, August 11, 2015)
“I’m no different than a politician running for office.” (New York Times, July 28, 2015)

Orwell's "Ministry of Love" is like other of his poetic symbols that mean the opposite of what they
say. This one is actually a torture chamber for people who have been picked up by the Thought Police for thinking bad things against Big Brother. Now Donald John has no thought police per se, except for his minions who try to unsuccessfully control the media, but he does have a lot of love he spews on a regular basis, like how much he loves women. How much he loves immigrants. How much he loves blacks. And then he degrades each with a vehemence not found when expressing the love.

I could go on for some time but it will be much more interesting for you to browse Jackie Jura's Orwell Today site and come up with your own conclusions of how George Orwell's book, 1984, corresponds with the idiocy of the Donald Trump administration. Check the 45 topics she has documented on the left-hand side of the site. and when you go to something like "Big Brother" be sure and take advantage of the notes and analogies she has referenced as they will often point directly to current events. Good Reading!

Stephen King's latest horror story: Donald Trump

Donald Trump is in deep doo doo the Russian interference in the 2016 election and whether or not his election campaign staff was involved, while at the same time he must defend the lowlife Jeff Sessions he nominated for Attorney and a gutless Republican approved. So, does he do what any self-respecting individual would do--especially the President of the United States--build a palatable defense for each with facts? And since the world knows there is no defense for what has been done, what's left. Simple, we go on the offense with more lies and misinformation. Trump's tweet 3/4...

“How low has President Obama gone to tapp [sic] my phones during the very sacred election process. This is Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy!”

First of all, the man is illiterate when it comes to spelling, and second, as has been the case with past accusations, he gives absolutely no proof. Here's what the master of handed-over misinformation, Sean Spicer, had to say 3/5...

“Reports concerning potentially politically motivated investigations ahead of the 2016 election are very troubling.”

What the hell are these people talking about? Fact checker asked for evidence of this "dramatic claim" but received nothing. The Washington Post reports that possibly Spicer's "reports" refer to news stories and not concrete information. But, "The Washington Post for months has sought to confirm this report of a FISA warrant related to the Trump campaign but has been unable to do so." More so, WP assumes other major news media have done the same and also come up empty. The gist of the matter is that month of FISA for information on Russian hacking have been denied.

McClatchy reported in January...

"The FBI and five other law enforcement and intelligence agencies have collaborated for months in an investigation into Russian attempts to influence the November election, including whether money from the Kremlin covertly aided President-elect Donald Trump, two people familiar with the matter said."

"The agencies involved in the inquiry are the FBI, the CIA, the National Security Agency, the Justice Department, the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network and representatives of the director of national intelligence."

 FISA court (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act), has been approached from about every direction including the former White House, for the purpose of uncovering Donald John's connection to the Russians in the 2016 campaign, not for the purpose of wiretapping Trump Tower. There is more investigation into how money transferred from the Kremlin "may have been used to pay some email hackers in the United States or to supply money to intermediaries who would then pay the hackers. More from McClatchy...

"On Jan. 6, the director of national intelligence released a declassified report that concluded Russian President Vladimir Putin had ordered an influence campaign to “undermine faith in the U.S. democratic process,” damage Hillary Clinton’s election prospects and bolster Trump’s. The campaign included the hacking of top Democrats’ emails and fake news distributed by Russian sources."

But the real story here is horror writer Stephen King's assessment of Donald John... 

“A Trump presidency scares me more than anything else. I’m terrified that he’ll become president.”

This, of course, was pre-election, and sounds like he may be comparing the then coming election of Donald Trump with books of his like Carrie, It, and Misery. If you lump all of King's chillers together, they wouldn't equal the repugnance of the Trump administration. Stephen King likens the Trump presidency with his 37-year-old book, Dead Zone, about a salesman who fights the establishment to run for president. He doesn't make it but King has some interesting tweets mocking Donald John's charges over Obama's wiretapping of Trump Tower...

"Not only did Obama tap Trump's phones, he stole the strawberry ice cream out of the mess locker."

"Populist demagogues like He Who Must Not Be Named aren't a new thing; see THE DEAD ZONE, published 37 years ago."

"Obama tapped Trump's phones IN PERSON! Went in wearing a Con Ed coverall. Michelle stood guard while O spliced the lines. SAD!"

It is pretty pathetic when one of the greatest writers of all time spends part of his valuable time to poke fun at the new president of the United states, not in a playful way, but to point out the absurdities and lunacies of this new administration. Avi Selk, in the Washington Post story once again reiterates...

An Obama spokesman and a former intelligence director said there was no wiretap. Some speculated that Trump was referring to claims on talk radio and the conservative website Breitbart that Obama used “police state” tactics against him. Others accused Trump of trying to distract from reports that his staff covered up conversations with Russian officials during the campaign.

On the legal side, FBI Director James Comey feels there is no credibility in Trump's claims that Barack Obama wiretapped Trump Tower phones and told the Justice Department to refute the charges. Donald John fired back refusing to "acknowledge" Comey's judgment, probably leading to some kind of confrontation with the head of the nation's leading law enforcement agency. The New York Times is leery of the fact that Trump would fire Comey because that could very well backfire into a cover-up over his campaign connections with the Russians.

Although Sean Spicer has made several comments stating Donald Trump's conclusion that former President Barack Obama did in fact wiretap trump Tower during the 2016 presidential campaign. He offered no evidence at the time, nor has Donald John since his accusations. Yet the two of them are adamant it happened. But not so sure are others in the White House, including Sarah Huckabee Sanders who pretty much hedges on most of Spicer's and Trump's allegations. This is why Spicer didn't really want to talk about this...

"During an at-times-painful interview with ABC's Martha Raddatz, Huckabee Sanders repeatedly suggested that Trump's allegation was worth looking into but declined to vouch for it. Raddatz pointed this out repeatedly, and Huckabee Sanders responded by saying 'if this happened,' 'if this took place,' 'if it did' and 'let's find out.'”

Martha Raddatz is one of those reporters that gives no quarter when it comes to getting the truth and

Martha Raddatz-Sarah Huckabee Sanders

didn't relent with Huckabee Sanders continued use of the preposition "if" when Raddatz finally exclaimed, “If,” “if,” “if,” “if.” Huckabee Sanders reply, ""I agree." Raddatz added...

"Let me just say one more time. The president said, “I bet a good lawyer could make a great case out of the fact that President Obama was tapping my phones in October.” So the president believes it is true?"

HUCKABEE SANDERS: I would say that his tweet speaks for itself there.

In a nutshell, Donald Trump "trumped" up this conspiracy theory of Barack Obama wiretapping Trump Tower during the 2016 campaign, solely for the purpose of diverting attention away from the issues that he and his staff were in cahoots with Putin and the Russians in 2016 to aide his election chances and damage Hillary Clinton's, And the other issue, the skaggy lowlife he nominated for AG, Jeff Sessions lying about his contact with the Russians during the election. With a lack of support from his FBI Director, now some of his staff, where does the American public draw the line?