RUTHFULLY YOURS

Lately, we have been seeing lots of stories about how voters who supported President Trump are moving away from supporting Republicans because of Trump’s policies and that they are going to vote for Democrats in the midterm elections. Isn’t it amazing that as Trump’s approval ratings gradually go up, we get these stories of Republicans running away?

A huge majority of the journalists writing these stories don’t like Republicans or Republican policies, and the purpose of the stories is to push Republicans to change their votes instead of inform.

The latest theme is that Republicans are going to lose big, and one of the major storylines being repeated over and over again is that Midwestern farmers will vote against Republicans because of Trump’s trade policies.

Are farmers going to go back to Democrats and have their top income tax rate on their farm income raised to 39.6% from 29.6%? Are they going to embrace the party of endless regulations? Would they really give up the tax cuts and the reduced regulations because of temporary tariffs meant to finally pressure China? My guess is most farmers recognize the long-term benefit of Trump’s policies and will vote accordingly.

I believe that worldwide demand for soybeans and corn will be the same, and somehow the product will be shipped to other countries and then shipped to China without the tariffs. Have Democrats traditionally been free traders? Here is what the press is reporting:

From his dairy farm in southeastern Nebraska, lifelong Republican Ben Steffen believed Donald Trump meant what he said on the campaign trail about ripping up U.S. trade agreements.

So Steffen, who produces milk, beef, soybeans, corn and wheat, wasn’t shocked when Trump pulled America out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership pact, began renegotiating NAFTA or announced his intent to impose aluminum and steel tariffs on China that have drawn the threat of retaliatory sanctions on American products.

In Washington a picture is emerging of an eerie and lack-of-candor railroading of Donald Trump conducted by the likes of James Comey and Andrew McCabe. The abuse of power by government officials who refuse to acknowledge the authority of the duly-elected chief executive is not limited to the FBI. And such abuse has inspired one of the President’s harshest critics to raise an alarm.

Warnings about an out-of-control “deep state” of bureaucrats who resist constitutional political authority have become standard fare in conservative media; this week brings a compelling new addition to the genre from a media outlet on the other end of the ideological spectrum.

Writing in the left-leaning British publication The Guardian, Harvard law professor Jack Goldsmith affirms that the improper exercise of executive authority by government officials pursuing their own agendas is not merely a figment of red-state imagination. According to Mr. Goldsmith:

America doesn’t have coups or tanks in the street. But a deep state of sorts exists here and it includes national security bureaucrats who use secretly collected information to shape or curb the actions of elected officials…

Since Trump was elected, unusually sensitive leaks of intelligence information designed to discredit him and his senior leadership have poured forth from current and former intelligence officials in the deep state.

It’s worth pausing here to note that while Mr. Goldsmith is not nearly as far to the left as most Guardian editors, he has been among the establishment Republicans most hostile to the President. CONTINUE AT SITE

The facts about America’s prison system are startling. The U.S. has 4% of the world’s population, but roughly 25% of the world’s prisoners. Federal and state prisons hold some 1.5 million inmates, and 6.2 million people are in local jails, on parole or on probation. Of the 650,000 people who leave prison every year, two-thirds will commit a new crime within three years.

By reforming federal prisons, Congress has the opportunity to help give former inmates a second chance to become successful, contributing members of society. This is an issue that could unite Americans across the ideological spectrum. Sensible and just prison-reform legislation would direct government resources toward reducing crime, enhancing public safety and increasing opportunity.

Prisoners face significant barriers to re-entering society in a meaningful way, and they have too few tools to help them succeed upon release. After years or even decades in prison, inmates often are disconnected from their families, have no place to live, lack relevant job skills, and need counseling for addiction or mental-health problems. Many don’t have even a photo identification, much less the skills necessary to succeed in a job interview. To help solve this problem, lawmakers can promote comprehensive and proven rehabilitation strategies. They include expanding access to prison work programs so that inmates can develop job skills. CONTINUE AT SITE

Operations when death is all but assured are called suicide missions, and it’s beginning to look as if Rear Admiral Ronny Jackson was sent on a political version. The nominee to run Veterans Affairs has been under siege from the agency’s bureaucracy, anonymous press leaks, and on Tuesday even friendly fire from the President who nominated him.

The Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs on Tuesday postponed Dr. Jackson’s Wednesday confirmation hearing amid allegations of misconduct during his nearly five-year tenure as physician to the President. The charges have been mostly vague and anonymous, such as running a hostile work environment, which could mean anything or nothing.

Late Tuesday afternoon news leaked about a 2012 Inspector General report that found “unprofessional behaviors” from Dr. Jackson and another physician in a power struggle. But if this is accurate, why did President Obama promote him? Senator Jon Tester (D., Mont.) in a press interview said some of Dr. Jackson’s colleagues alleged he had been “repeatedly drunk” while on duty, among other claims.

The public has little way to evaluate the merits, and Dr. Jackson deserves at minimum to know who is shooting at him. Committee Chairman Johnny Isakson and Ranking Member Mr. Tester wrote to the White House requesting more information, including communications with Defense Department IGs. There may be more to learn from the documents the White House produces.

The reality is that Dr. Jackson wasn’t vetted or adequately prepared for the VA post, and by all accounts wasn’t seeking it when President Trump chose him. Dr. Jackson also doesn’t appear to have a background in Washington’s treacherous politics of veterans.

Just as the first casualty of war is truth, so, too, the first casualty of hyper-partisan politics is civil liberties.

Many traditional civil libertarians have allowed their strong anti-Trump sentiments to erase their long-standing commitment to neutral civil liberties. They are now so desperate to get Trump that they are prepared to compromise the most basic due process rights. They forget the lesson of history that such compromises made against one’s enemy are often used as precedents against one’s friends. As Robert Bolt put it in the play and movie A Man for all Seasons:

Roper: So now you would give the Devil benefit of Law!

Thomas Moore: Yes, what would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?

Roper: I’d cut down every law in England to do that?

Thomas Moore: And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country’s planted thick with laws from coast to coast — man’s laws, not God’s — and if you cut them down — and you’re just the man to do it — d’you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I’d give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety’s sake.

But today’s fair weather civil libertarians are unwilling to give President Trump – who they regard as the devil — the “benefit of law” and civil liberties.

Consider the issue of criticizing Robert Mueller, the Special counsel. Any criticism or even skepticism regarding Mueller’s history is seen as motivated by a desire to help Trump. Mueller was an Assistant US attorney in Boston, the head of its criminal division, the head of the criminal division in Main Justice and the Director of the FBI during the most scandalous miscarriage of justice in the modern history of the FBI. Four innocent people were framed by the FBI in order to protect mass murdering gangsters who were working as FBI informers while they were killing innocent people. An FBI agent, who is now in prison, was tipping off Whitey Bulger as to who might testify against him so that these individuals could be killed. He also tipped off Bulger allowing him to escape and remain on the lam for 16 years.

What responsibility, if any, did Robert Mueller, who was in key positions of authority and capable of preventing these horrible miscarriages, have in this sordid incident? A former member of the parole board – a liberal Democrat who also served as mayor of Springfield, Massachusetts – swears that he saw a letter from Robert Mueller urging the denial of release for at least one of these wrongfully convicted defendants. When he went back to retrieve the letter, it was not in the file. This should surprise no one since Judge Mark Wolf (himself a former prosecutor), who conducted extensive hearings about this entire mess, made the following findings:

“The files relating to the Wheeler murder, and the FBI’s handling of them, exemplify recurring irregularities with regard to the preparation, maintenance, and production in this case of documents damaging to Flemmi and Bulger. First, there appears to be a pattern of false statements placed in Flemmi’s informant file to divert attention from his possible crimes and/or FBI misconduct….

Second, contrary to the FBI’s usual policy and practice, all but one of the reports containing Halloran’s allegations against Bulger and Flemmi were not indexed and placed in an investigative file referencing their names. Thus, those documents were not discoverable by a standard search of the FBI’s indices. Similar irregularities in indexing and, therefore, access occurred with regard to information that the FBI received concerning an extortion by Bulger of Hobart Willis and from Joseph Murray concerning the murder of Brian Halloran, among other things.

When legal bloodhounds and baying critics fail to take out Trump, what’s next? The Resistance wants Trump’s head — on the chopping block.

On the domestic and foreign fronts, the Trump administration has prompted economic growth and restored U.S. deterrence. Polls show increased consumer confidence, and in some, Trump himself has gained ground. Yet good news is bad news to the Resistance and its strange continued efforts to stop an elected president in a way it failed to do in the 2106 election.

Indeed, the aim of the so-called Resistance to Donald J. Trump is ending Trump’s presidency by any means necessary before the 2020 election. Or, barring that, it seeks to so delegitimize him that he becomes presidentially impotent. It has been only 16 months since Trump took office and, in the spirit of revolutionary fervor, almost everything has been tried to derail him. Now we are entering uncharted territory — at a time when otherwise the country is improving and the legal exposure of Trump’s opponents increases daily.

First came the failed lawsuits after the election alleging voting-machine tampering. Then there was the doomed celebrity effort to convince some state electors not to follow their constitutional duty and to deny Trump the presidency — a gambit that, had it worked, would have wrecked the Constitution. Then came the pathetic congressional boycott of the inauguration and the shrill nationwide protests against the president.

Anti- and Never-Trump op-ed writers have long ago run out of superlatives. Trump is the worst, most, biggest — fill in the blank — in the history of the presidency, in the history of the world, worse even than Mao, Mussolini, Stalin, or Hitler.

Next was the sad effort to introduce articles of impeachment. After that came weird attempts to cite Trump for violations of the emoluments clause of the Constitution. That puerile con was followed by plans to declare him deranged and mentally unfit so that he could be removed under the 25th Amendment. From time to time, Obama holdovers in the DOJ, National Security Council, and FBI sought to leak information, or they refused to carry out presidential orders.

As the Resistance goes from one ploy to the next, it ignores its string of failed prior efforts, forgetting everything and learning nothing. State nullification is no longer neo-Confederate but an any-means-necessary progressive tool. Suing the government weekly is proof of revolutionary fides, not a waste of California’s taxpayer dollars.

Anti- and Never-Trump op-ed writers have long ago run out of superlatives. Trump is the worst, most, biggest — fill in the blank — in the history of the presidency, in the history of the world, worse even than Mao, Mussolini, Stalin, or Hitler. So if Trump is a Hitler who gassed 6 million or a Stalin who starved 20 million, then logically Trump deserves what exactly?