IMPEACHMENT AND WHAT ITS ALL ABOUT

                                            
     By Florida Bill                        
                                             Stumbling and slurring her words, sanctimonious Speaker Nancy Pelosi continues on her ill-fated mission to bring down the nation's duly elected 45th President. But, she says that she still "prays for him." 
                                             Standing with Pelosi are her malleable point men in the House of Representatives--- the bug-eyed lying machine, Rep. Adam Schiff of California, and the hypocrite of record, "Fat Jerry" Nadler of New York.  Also out front in the impeachment effort are the screaming Trump-hater, Mad Maxine Waters and the flatulence-afflicted and mouthy Eric Swalwell, a Pelosi comrade from California.
                                             Every Democrat in the Democrat- controlled House, except for three, voted in favor of impeachment, and every Republican, joined by the errant Democrats, voted against impeachment. Shamefully, it was the most partisan act for impeachment in the history of the republic.  
                                            The case against the the President is contained in two feeble Articles of Impeachment.  One accuses the President of pressuring the president of Ukraine to do his (Trump's) bidding or suffer the loss of about $400 million in U.S. foreign aid; and the second Article asserts that the President abused his office by obstructing congress in its oversight duties.
                             The alleged Ukraine wrongdoing is a fantasy created by Democrats driven not by a duty to country, but because of a basic dislike and even raw hate for Republican Donald Trump who belittled, ran over and defeated Hillary Clinton for the high office three years ago. 
                             In neither article did the Democrats articulate and point to a crime committed by the President, or to any conduct in violation of a federal statute.   In Article Two, House accusers alleged that the President thumbed his nose at Congress  by declining to respond to subpoenas for documents from Trump or from members of his family, friends and administration, worded so as to invent something to show criminal behavior.
                            The inanity of Article Two is blind to the fact that the constitution empowers the President to exert executive privilege as a right, and if his detractors wish to prevail with their subpoenas, they must seek resolution from the federal court.  Pelosi's Democrats did not exercise that option, and the result is that Trump's order to ignore the subpoenas as part of a "hoax" and a phony "witch hunt" stands unchallenged. 
                            Article one accuses the President of pressuring  President Zelensky of Ukraine to do his (Trump's)  bidding and investigate former Vice President Biden and Biden's cocaine- addicted son, Hunter, or suffer the loss of $400 million in USA foreign aid. The allegation is grounded on a July 25, 2019, telephone call which Trump made to the Ukraine president  and became the subject of a so-called "Whistle Blower" complaint by an intelligence officer in the state department who was a close friend of  former Vice President Biden.
                           Despite weeks of hyping, and a televised House "inquiry" supervised by the disingenuous Schiff, an actual  transcript of the call was released for public consumption  by Trump and it showed that there was no "pressuring" spoken or insinuated by him.  The Democrat charge of a Trump "quid pro quo" went up in flames totally when the Ukraine president held a news conference in which he praised President Trump and confirmed that there was no "pressuring" of him  and that he was unaware that millions in foreign aid had any relevance to the conversation.
                           It would seem that Pelosi Democrats with a moral compass would have dropped the matter upon hearing from the Ukraine president, but they did not and instead disgraced themselves further by passing off to the "never Trump" media allegations that President Trump was guilty of "bribery" and "extortion," and then delighted as the false allegations were repeated on CNN, NBC and other Trump-hating stations.   
                           Pursuant to the Constitution, the voted Articles of Impeachment must be delivered to the Senate so that a trial can be held on the charges. But the misguided, teary-eyed Pelosi has elected instead to sit on the articles with a demand that she have a say in how the Senate proceeds with the trial of President Trump. She said that she would do nothing with the articles and accusations until later in January after congressmen return from celebration of the holidays. 
                             The constitution, along with abundant case law, gives to the Senate, the upper house of Congress, the total and sole authority in how an impeachment trial is to be conducted.  The House has no voice in determining the rules for the trial. There may or may not be witnesses testifying other than by those whose testimony during the "inquiry"powered the Articles  of Impeachment. 
                              President Trump has said that he favors a full trial in which his defenders would bring on witnesses to testify; and that those witnesses should include former Vice President Biden and his cocaine addicted son Hunter, who the President has called "stone-faced corrupt."    Other witnesses,  urged by the President and Republican congressmen, should include the Whistle blowing friend of Biden's, and fact witnesses, to include Adam Schiff who allegedly counseled  the whistle blower and and may have actually composed the formal complaint which was filed.     
                              The Senate would also have the option of examining the articles from a legal position, and could simply dismiss them for their failure to state a cause of action. If there is a trial, a finding of guilty would require a yes vote by two-thirds of the sitting 100 senators.    
                                

                                                    xxx    
                             
                                             

Pelosi "Prays" for the President

. 

              By Florida Bill                              

                                   In Nancy Pelosi's recent news conference, she announced to the press that its full speed ahead, and that she has given the order to the Judiciary Committee chairman, Jerrold "Fat Jerry" Nadler  to draft Articles of Impeachment against the nation's 
45th President. 
                                  She had a sanctimonious aura about her as she informed the press and those listening in on television that impeachment would go forward.  It is with "confidence and humility" that I now speak to the need to take the president down in accord with the constitution.                
                                   But as she turned haughtily, and prepared to leave the stage,  Reporter James Warren, a tough, no-nonsense newsman for Sinclair TV, stopped her in her tracks with the question: "Speaker, do you hate the President?"  It was a rhetorical question for sure and Warren knew the answer.  If the 79-year-old Pelosi was a slave to honesty, she would have responded, "Yes, I do--and he ought to be in prison." 
                                 But telling the truth is not part of the Pelosi playbook, as her accusations that President Trump is a criminal and an  "imposter" who has violated his oath to the constitution are so disingenuous and far-fetched that her ability to be truthful about anything is suspect.  She is the first and only woman to serve as Speaker of the People's House and in that role she is the powerful, central figure in the completely partisan attack by Democrats on the Republican President. 
                                 But then, instead of exiting the platform in the face of Warren's question, Pelosi did an about face and exhibited an even more  sanctimonious face;  and then avowed that she does not "hate" the president..."Do not accuse me," she snapped.  She was raised a Catholic, she told the news reporters, and was taught not to hate anyone.  And in this case,  she does not "hate" the President.  She actually thinks of him every day and  "prays for him."  
                                 Though not hating him, she added:  "I think the president is a coward when it comes to helping our kids, who are afraid of gun violence." I think he is cruel when he doesn't deal with helping our Dreamers, of whom we are very proud.......and he denies climate change. She avoided saying that he belongs behind bars as she has said in the past.  
                                Her voice was low and a bit raspy as she poured out this political drivel, acting as though she was fighting her emotions. That teary-eyed drama is a technique often used by politicians trying to make a point, and to escape ridicule for embarrassing blunders. At that point, she turned her big gun on Warren and castigated him for his arrogance and for his daring to ask such an insulting question.   Acting as though she was  speaking to an underling in the great halls of Congress, she told the veteran reporter: "Don't mess around with me with those kind of words."  On that note, Pelosi turned and left the room. 
                                 Very likely that Warren, a veteran reporter that has been at odds with bureaucrats in the past, was not particularly moved by the emotions from the aged speaker whose overall political performance has been dismal and way too partisan for any capable leader. He observed to Pelosi that he was merely asking a legitimate question, and then made notes of her meltdown..  
                                                               The House with its 233 Democrats are expected to vote yes on impeachment of the President. All 197 Republicans in the chamber have said they will vote against impeachment.   The partisan effort runs contrary to two previous impeachment efforts by Congress.  With President Clinton, Republicans and Democrats voted in favor of impeachment.  President Nixon,  who resigned prior to formal action by the House, was facing bipartisan demands that he be impeached. 
                                  If the articles of Impeachment are voted, those charges will be sent to the Senate for trial and two thirds of that body, 66 senators, would be needed for a conviction. The Senate is controlled by the Republicans and acquittal of President Trump is regarded as a certainty.
                                  President Trump has called the entire impeachment attack on him a "hoax" and a political "witch hunt" pushed by Democrats " who have gone completely insane" because  Hillary Clinton was the loser in 2016.  President Trump's attorneys have said that if there is a trial, Republican defenders of the President are prepared to "mess around" with Democrats; and will  subpoena everyone with relevant information and that will include Congressmen Schiff and Nadler as well as former Vice President Biden and his cocaine addicted son, Hunter; and other lying   individuals in "the swamp" who participated in the disgraceful effort to attack a duly elected President. 
                                                 xxx                                 

Dems Losing big time

,                 

  By Florida Bill  

                       It must be difficult for the media and the "never,never Trumpers" to watch the "impeachment inquiry" going down in flames.  According to polls and reports, the inquiry designed to  portray the 45th President as a criminal, has turned off the lion's share  of Americans, leaving only loons to do the screaming.    Actually, it is kind of funny for a number of reasons.
                       Basically, the media, lead by the New York Times, the Washington Post and virtually every TV station except Fox News, carve up and deliver each and every story about the President in a negative way.  Even his search and destruction of the world's number one terrorist, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, was said to have been handled improperly; and the President's Thanksgiving day visit to Troops in Afghanistan was "troubling," just a photo opportunity for Trump.  Regular reports continue that President Trump is prevaricating at the rate of about 20 times daily, and that is according to "fact checkers."
                        To underscore the case against President Trump, the media recently reported that the President's wife, Melania, had been booed during an appearance, with the innuendo that everything close to the President is evil.   
                      Last July 25, President Trump made a telephone call to the President of Ukraine which spurred demands from unprofessional and biased Democrats that he must be impeached and booted from office.  His criminality and "high crimes" were that he had pointed to former Vice President  Joe Biden and his cocaine addicted son, Hunter. as "cold stone corrupt"; and that he  sought to have the new Ukraine president expose Biden's misdeeds in 2016 when Trump  was a candidate for President. 
                   At that time, Biden had been successful in bringing about the firing of a prosecutor who was investigating the conduct of Biden's son who was a director of a corrupt gas company, and was earning $83,000 a month. In firing the veteran prosecutor, the Ukrainian President Poroshenko bowed to the wishes of Biden, America's point man to the Ukraine. 
                  Foreign aid of about $400 million, earmarked for Ukraine, was never an issue in President Trump's discussion with President Zelensky.  In fact, after false charges were made by Democrats that Trump had "squeezed" the Ukraine President,   Zelensky even held a news conference in an attempt to set the record straight.  He explained to news men that the July telephone call was a friendly chat with President Trump and that the idea that Trump had exerted undue pressure on him or laid down a "quid pro quo" was preposterous.   
                          Presently, the nation is being told that articles of impeachment are being prepared by "Fat Jerry" Nadler, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. Nadler wears a different jacket today than he did 20 years ago when he was the staunchest defender of President Clinton who was the target of articles of impeachment by the House.  He argued that Clinton was pure as snow even  though Clinton's  semen was found on the blue dress of one of his young Oval office visitors;  and that he never really lied  to a grand jury or to the nation about the relationship. 
                       Nadler is being assisted by Rep. Adam Schiff, a walking liar who chairs the House Intelligence Committee.  Schiff  prepped  and counseled a "whistle blower" in a complaint about Trump's call to the  Ukrainian president.  Their cooked-up case against the President for bribery and high crimes and misdemeanors is based solely on assumptions, opinion and second hand talk and  unless there is a pull-back, accusing articles of impeachment will be delivered to the  Senate where there will be a trial in which the  Democrat conspiracy will be exposed and the Upper House of Congress will promptly acquit President Trump of any wrongdoing.  
                         Next November President Trump will be running for a second term and prognosticators say that he will be reelected by a wide margin and that embarrassed Democrats will wind up with egg on their faces, losing the Presidency as well as a majority in the House of Representatives. 

                                              xxx    






 in                                                

Ukraine, Foreign Aid--and Why Trump Wins.

 
    
                                                   By FLORIDA BILL 

                             In recent years, the USA has been spooning out some 50 billion dollars annually to other nations in the form of foreign aid. 
                               Recipients of America's largess touch some 76 per cent of nations on the planet and gifts are large or small depending upon need, and other factors.  Foreign aid is designed to help countries in both domestic and military areas.  Among nations feeling the generosity of the USA, is Ukraine, a European country with a population of about 42.2 million residents.
                                Earlier this year, Ukraine voters elected Volodymr Zelensky whose campaign centerpiece was his promises to root out corruption.  Officials around the world have said that corruption inside Ukraine which borders and feels the pressure from Russia and its oligarchs, is among the most corrupt countries in the world. Corruption there is "endemic," according to some American diplomats.   

                               The USA and President Trump, with congressional authority, were prepared to deliver about $400 million dollars in aid to the Zelensky government and to its  new President who had vowed to investigate and bring to justice those corrupt officials and oligarchs that had been ripping off funds and cheating its residents for many years. 
                               President Trump who believes that America must be careful in providing funds to reckless nations, wanted a public declaration from Zelensky that he was going to follow through with his pledges to root out corruption.  "America is not the planet's piggy bank," Trump has said many times.  
                              Part of the Ukraine corruption, in the judgment of President Trump and his advisers, was the misconduct by Ukraine officials during the 2016 USA presidential election where Ukraine underhandedly and corruptly endeavored to assist Mrs.Clinton in defeating then candidate Trump.   
                              In March 2016. VP Biden who was the point man in Ukraine for the Obama administration, demanded the firing of a prosecutor who was investigating a company at which his son, a crack cocaine addict, was a member of the board of directors earning $83,000 per month. The prosecutor who had been a Ukraine employee  and investigator for more than 30 years, complained of the conspiracy which led to his termination. Without the discharge, asserted Biden, the USA would withdraw promised aid of a billion dollars to the country.  The Ukraine president then fired the prosecutor and aid was given to Ukraine. That incident was the definition of a "quid pro quo."  
                             The discharged prosecutor has signed affidavits (under oath)  confirming that Biden and his son  were the focus of his investigation. He said there were questions as to Vice President Joe Biden influencing  decisions in his role as the Ukraine "go to"  man.  
                              Democrats, with an assist from the dishonest media, have claimed that allegations of any Biden misconduct have been "debunked." Many lawyers, including President Trump's personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, assert that the charges of wrongdoing against Biden and his son are strong and are not going away.  "And I can and will prove them,"  Giuliani has said.  Giuliani said that Joe Biden has been corrupt his entire life.particularly when he was vice president under President Obama, and the point man on Ukraine.  
                               Trump sought a public statement from President Zelensky that he (Zelensky) would do what he promised to do in his campaign.  There was no public statement ever given by President Zelensky, but President Trump received assurances in meetings that he (Zelensky) would keep his campaign promises, and clean up Ukraine and "leave no stone unturned."  Subsequently, the funds were released and given to Ukraine. 

                                 There was no "quid pro quo," extortion or bribery on the part of the President Trump.  Zelensky even held a news conference to announce that there was no "quid pro quo" or pressure of any kind in his conversations with President Trump, and that the foreign aid of $400 million to Ukraine was not conditioned on anything that he was to do  or to not do, other than clean up the corruption in the nation.  

                                            Dishonest and biased Democrats led by  Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff and "Fat Jerry" Nadler are  promising to  impeach President Trump. The House Intelligence Committee, chaired by Schiff,  recently held five days of public hearings and heard testimony from chosen diplomats who Schiff claimed would accuse president Trump of conditioning foreign aid upon Zelensky investigating Joe and Hunter Biden. Biden is a candidate for USA President in 2020 and if he becomes the Democratic nominee, will likely oppose President Trump who will  be seeking reelection to a second term.  
                                     Anointed diplomats subpoenaed by Schiff  as a means of demonstrating criminal conduct by the president in seeking a quid pro quo from Zelensky, failed miserably.  Their testimony consisted entirely of second hand talk, hear say, opinions and assumptions and was insufficient  in demonstrating that the President had done anything which would constitute bribery, extortion or any kind of wrongdoing.  
                                          Nevertheless, Schiff, and Speaker Pelosi aver that the House of Representatives intends to impeach the President.  Currently, it has been reported,  not a single republican in the House will join democrats in voting for impeachment.   
                                         If the Democrat controlled House votes to impeach, there will be a trial in the Senate presided over by the Chief judge of the Supreme Court.  Conviction would require a two-thirds vote of sitting senators and since  Republicans dominate the Senate, it is a given that the President will be acquitted of any alleged crime. 

                                             The conduct of dishonest Democrats, aided and encouraged by a biased and unprofessional media, is shameful, and historians will likely record the attempted impeachment as a political sham promoted by unprofessional politicians who despise the President.  As to President Trump,  experts are predicting that he will  be reelected by a wide margin in 2020. 

                                          xxx

Welcome Home, Lt. Lorance.

 By Florida Bill                                

                                    The curtain has gone up and there is sunshine for U.S. Army Lt. Clint Lorance who has been pardoned from a murder sentence for a make-believe war crime committed in Afghanistan. He had served six years of a 19-year sentence. 
                                    President Trump issued a full pardon for the 34-year-old officer, a career soldier  in command of a nine man platoon in the rugged Afghanistan mountains for only three days when the so-called war crime took place. His men opened fire on a trio of Afghans on an approaching motorcycle, whom he had reason to believe were terrorists hell bent on a suicide bomb mission against Americans.  His order to his men to "engage the enemy" was a split second decision. 
                                     Lorance was pressed into the command position following injuries to the former squad leader from a bomb hidden by cyclists.  Senior officers who had recruited Lorance for the platoon leadership had warned him to be on guard against Afghans pretending to be allied with American interests, but in actuality were working with the Taliban. They were more than willing to kill themselves as long as they could take  Americans down with them--all in the name of Allah. 
                                  Lorance had to make a split second decision when he ordered his men to fire upon the cyclists, who refused to halt when ordered and ignored a warning shot.  If he acted too soon, it was an error in judgment during war, and making him into a murderer and sending him to prison was simply the wrong thing to do.  Freeing Lt. Lorance was the right and moral thing to do, and the President did it.  
                                     Taliban terrorists cannot be identified by uniform and generally are indistinguishable from Afghans who reside peacefully in villages.  They simply look the same and dress the same.  To army officers leading a platoon, danger and death are always imminent, and mulling over a decision or seeking a diplomatic solution to a threat can never be an option.      
                                     Lorance was convicted of two counts of second degree murder 13 months after the incident in 2012 and sentenced to 19 years at Fort Leavenworth prison. For the past six years he has occupied a cell alongside terrorists, army deserters and enemies of the country.  Among his compound cellmates was Major Nidal Hasan who, in 2009, in an explosion of Islamic violence, shot and killed 13 fellow soldiers and injured some 30 others during an assembly at Fort Hood, Texas.  It took four years to bring Hasan to trial, although he admitted and even bragged about his killings in the name of Allah.  He was convicted of premeditated murders and sentenced to death.   He awaits execution while his mandatory appeals move through the appellate courts.  
                                    Thousands of Americans saw the  injustice of Lt. Lorance's conviction, and  signed petitions for clemency that were given to President Obama, and later to President Trump.
                                    Obama, whose disdain for the military is well known and a matter of record, threw the Lorance plea for clemency into the wastebasket, yet he looked favorably on many others as he exited his office as President and as Commander-in- Chief in 2017.  Obama  granted clemency to nearly 2,000 drug pushers and users,(231 in a single day) and he freed and commuted  the sentence of the traitorous Pvt. Bradley (now Chelsea) Manning who served just 3 years of his 35-year penalty for his betrayal of America by publicizing highly classified data. 
                                 Army prosecutors were too quick to find fault with Lt. Lorance, after it was determined that the men on the motorcycle were not in possession of any weapons, although attorneys for Lorance have said that the men on the motorcycle had terrorist connections.  The actual soldier or soldiers who shot the Afghans (it wasn't Lorance) could have declined an improper order from their lieutenant, but they did not, and weapons were fired in response to the lieutenant's order.  Other soldiers in the Lorance platoon were granted immunity from prosecution so long as they testified and laid the blame entirely on Lt. Lorance for acting recklessly and with malice for Middle Easterners. 
                                                Clint Lorance was 28 years old and had been a soldier for 10 years.  A native of Oklahoma, he had enlisted after high school and was making the military his career.  He loved the army, and his country and he sought to make his family proud, his mother has said. His family and his friends praise his character and devotion to duty.  As a soldier, he studied and eventually obtained a commission as a second lieutenant and later was promoted to first lieutenant.  No matter how you wish to examine this case, Clint Lorance  is no murderer and does not belong in a military prison.
                                                Lt. Lorance has been supported by many members of Congress and combat veterans as well as the more that one hundred thousand people who signed the petitions to the President seeking clemency.   
                                                On November 15, Lt. Lorance packed up whatever gear he had and left Leavenworth in full uniform with his silver bars on his shoulder after receiving a telephone call from Vice President Pence.  He was greeted at the gate by friends and family members, including his mother who worked diligently for his release. Asked about his future plans, Lorance said that he intended to remain  an officer in the army of the United States, and that despite his travail had no bitterness for the military.   
                                                Upon signing the pardon papers,  President Trump said that when "our soldiers have to fight for our country, I want them to have the confidence to fight," and know that we are  behind them. Welcome home, Lieutenant. 

                                             XXX

ABC apologizes

                            BY FLORIDA BILL 

                              When pornographic material was surging and there were efforts by legislators to control it, a Supreme Court justice observed in a decision in 1964 that he would have trouble defining that which constitutes pornography.  " I know it when I see it," he asserted.
                            Those comments by the late Associate Justice Potter Stewart reminded me of the ongoing controversy over what is  "fake news." Is this a delusional figment in the mind of President Trump, as his critics charge, or is there such an animal as "fake news."  
                             Would you know it if you encountered it?  Would ABC or CNN or MSNBC or NBC know a phony news report aimed at the President?   You Might ask them if the following qualifies.
                             Recently ABC television aired a segment which it entitled "Slaughter in Syria" and the video showed exploding bombs which lighted the sky and the voice-over told of the new war in Syria precipitated by the incompetence of President and wrong call of the nation's President who betrayed Kurdish allies who helped the USA destroy ISIS. The film  aired on "Good Morning America and World News Tonight which was viewed by millions of Americans. 
                              As it turned out, the video was a 24 Carat fake and the films were actually made by ABC cameras in 2017 during the annual gun shoot celebration in Knob Creek, Kentucky.  Apparently the station which been outspoken in its hate for the nation's President, dipped into the station archives and posted the video in an underhanded effort to attack the President. 
                              ABC might have gotten away with the fraud except for an eagle eyed viewer who recognized the films as not from any bombing in a border town in Syria by Turkish soldiers, but rather homemade films of years ago selected to persuade listeners that America's Commander in Chief, President Trump, was sucking up to his friend, the Turkish President, and giving a helping hand to the Russians pursuing their own interests in the Middle East. 
                               So when the hoax was revealed, what did ABC do?  On October 13, a few days following the revelation that ABC had posted phony films, the network "tweeted" an apology, and a lame one to say the least. It read: 
                               "We’ve taken down the video that aired on “World News Tonight" Sunday and “Good Morning America” this morning that appeared to be from the Syrian border immediately after questions were raised about its accuracy.  ABC News regrets the error." 
                               So far as I know,there was no explanation as to how the mistake had occurred and  there was a dearth of reports on the incident from other corners of the media.  Fox News' Tucker Carlson reported the "mistake" made by ABC, and noted that it was a part of the media's its continuing disingenuous machinations to discredit and bring down President Trump.
                              It is hard to believe that the network station, which clearly despises the President would actually stoop so low as to intentionally post a two-year old video which had been stored in its archives as a way of driving a knife into the President. But it happened.  Citizens can decide for themselves how it might have happened. 
                              Ever since the election of Trump, the media, electronic and print, have ganged up on the President and accused him of lying (7-10 times a day according to some critics); and of being a racist because of his promotion of border security.
                              Efforts are underway by Democrats in the House to put together Articles of Impeachment, but with all of their windy and sanctimonious statements have been unable to show any crime which the president has committed.  Allegations of colluding with Russia and obstructing justice are democratic fantasizing and have fallen as part of the "fake news" agenda against the nation's 45th President. 
                                                xxx










                              

Who's side is Brennan on?

  By Florida Bill                                                          
                                           
                                      Former CIA Director John Brennan is an old Obama favorite who shows up periodically on various forums attacking President Trump for alleged inefficiency and for having held hands with the Communist Russians who helped him become the nation's 45th president.  
                                     In one recent TV interview,  Brennan blistered Trump for having said he was honored to have met Russian President Putin--to Brennan that was a "dishonorable thing to say."  He indicated contempt for Putin and the Communist way of life, but his contentions might belie real feelings. 
                                    The 62-year-old Brennan is a controversial figure whose past appealed to President Obama, but to others he is seen as questionable in his fealty to Uncle Sam.
                                     In 1976, Brennan, fresh out of college, endorsed and voted for Gus Hall, Communist candidate for President, over Democrat Jimmy Carter, and the incumbent Republican Gerald Ford.  Four years later, in 1980,  and despite his pumping for Hall and a radical new government for America, he applied for and was accepted for a position in the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). 
                                      He was a member of the spy circle in the CIA for 25-plus years.  He worked in the Middle East, near  east and in south Asia, and as an analyst and a station chief in Saudi Arabia.  Also he served as director of the National Counter-Terrorism Center. He was an assistant to President Obama for Homeland Security from 2009 to January, 2013, when Obama selected him to be CIA chief. 
                                      In March of 2013, the Senate approved Brennan's appointment as CIA director, but his 1976 push for Communist Gus Hall was not known to senators or considered in weighing his credentials.  There were other reasons for tough opposition to his appointment to the country's highest and most sensitive intelligence post. One called into question his position on the country's use of drones against terrorists abroad and inside the USA, and another involved criticism from a former FBI agent that he leaned too strongly in favor of the Muslim world  and could not be trusted. 
                                      It was not until 2016 that Brennan's support in 1976 for a radical communist became widely known. Brennan himself made the unabashed revelation when he was speaking during a conference of the annual Congressional Black Caucus Foundation. He told of his political activism after college and his dissatisfaction with the state of affairs in America at that time, but that he was not a registered member of the communist party.  Political activism, he pointed out proudly, should never disqualify a person from serving in the intelligence division of government, and he noted that he was living proof of that.
                                      James Guandolo who was an FBI agent in the Middle East from 1996 to 2008 lobbied against Brennan's appointment as head of the CIA since he said he cannot be trusted.  He said that Brennan who was fluent in the Arabic language, was a "closet" Muslim who had converted to Islam in 2008 and was continually lobbying President Obama to employ more Muslims in high government jobs. 
                                       Guandolo claimed that Brennan had been persuaded by the Saudi King to convert and he did, and he subsequently fulfilled his Islamic duty by making the pilgrimage to Mecca which is a requirement and a privilege to be exercised only by pious Muslims.  Despite criticism of his appointment  and  challenge to his loyalty, and a filibuster, Brennan was approved by the Senate by a vote of 63-34. 
                                      Guandolo's assessment of Brennan lacked some strength since he had resigned from the FBI in 2008 under a cloud in the midst of charges that he had engaged in a sexual affair with a woman in the agency. After leaving, he formed a successful company designed to provide training for police and security officers in assisting them in recognizing and identifying terrorists, and he remained steadfast in his opposition and criticism of Brennan's trust worthiness. 
                                       Skepticism over the character and loyalty of Brennan inside the intelligence agency did not end with confirmation by the Senate.  In fact, it intensified when he declined to be sworn into office by placing his hand on the Bible.  Instead, Brennan insisted on using an 1787 version of the Constitution which did not contain the entire Bill of Rights on which to pledge his loyalty. The complete  Constitution, used today, was approved in 1791, and replaced the 1787 draft.
                                       The abbreviated version selected by Brennan did not contain Amendments 1,4,5 and 6 and in effect technically invalidated his obligation to "protect and defend" those civil rights guaranteed in the constitution. Those amendments guarantee to citizens rights of free speech, religion and press; and provide protections against government arrest and prosecution.                                               Through the years there have been a small number of United States officials who have declined to be sworn into a high office with the Christian Bible.  Included in those rare occasions were Congressman Keith Ellison of Minnesota, and Judge Carolyn Walker Diallo of Brooklyn.  In 2006 Ellison, and in 2015, Walker-Diallo pledged their loyalties to the United States with their palms on the Koran, the Islamic bible. 
                                       When CNN and NBC and CBS call, Brennan reports and feathers the media agenda to oppose and impeach President Trump.  In the NFL controversy,  Brennan praised the players who drop to one knee while the National Anthem is playing.  He asserts that the athletes are actually respecting the flag, as they call attention to the mistreatment of their Black brothers. The President's travel bans are too "simplistic," he says, and are heavy against Islam and do nothing to protect the country against visiting terrorists.  When the President  praised fallen CIA officers, Brennan described his words as a "despicable display of self-aggrandizement." 
                                         No one knows the core values of Brennan, but they are suspect. An FBI agent and former Marine officer who worked closely with him in Saudi and in other parts of the Middle East says that he cannot be trusted. As Brennan continues his attack on the "America First" President, be aware of his buried past as he digs in.   

                                               XXX


                                                                                                 
                                                
                                                 














































                                   
                                   
                                    

GENEROUS CITIZENS

          BY FLORIDA BILL  

                       While going through a stack of mail that had piled up over several days,  I was hit with the realization that almost every letter was a solicitation for a cash contribution from various organizations.  A wide variety of  persons, places and things are in dire need of assistance and I wondered how come they they are all zeroing in on me.
                        Maybe I am just one of the names and addresses taken from the voting lists or from the telephone directory, or whatever.  It is more likely that I made a contribution to someone in the past and my name was put on a list that was sold to others as a potential giver; and resold and then resold again. Presto, I am really, really  popular and my mail box in Sun City is overflowing.  So, if you ever make a charitable or even a political contribution, look out, my friend.  There is big "X" on your back, and you are marked as a potential donor for  all time, and for almost everything. !!!
                        Conservatively speaking, and aside from the usual bills, I figure that I am the recipient of  about 300-350  letters a month which are in the category of "help us" mail 
                        In this latest batch of letters, there were solicitations from veterans' organizations,  churches and religious societies, and animal welfare and rescue groups. Others came from children's homes and shelters, and from centers which provide meals to the needy. One urgent request called for  at least $27 to provide "soothing treats" for recently rescued Orphan Donkeys. In return you are given a deck of cards with pictures of donkeys on them. 
                     What it boils down to is that if you don't contribute, they'll keep bombarding you with requests until you do. If you are generous and do contribute, you will receive a thank you letter and for sure the solicitations will continue.  Your name is in the "positive" column and you will continue to receive requests for donations until the end of time.  
                         And lest I forget, there are the unending notifications from politicians and political parties.
                        Even though federal elections are not until November of next year, office holders are gearing up for reelection; and there are men and women throwing their hats and bonnets into the ring--looking for money. I guess that's the way a democracy works, and I respect it.  But, it can become annoying with requests from unheard of candidates from other states that one has no reason to support.                       
                          Strangest of all are the packages containing goodies to encourage your generosity, such as coins, ranging from nickles to half dollars to checks made out in your name. Or you might get shaving cream and toothpaste--but  these are not for you, they are to be returned and forwarded to veterans and soldiers; with the money donation retained by the solicitors. Calendars and name stickers for envelopes arrive almost daily.
                        Things really heat up around Thanksgiving and Xmas.  Solicitations begin pouring in by late summer and the requests arrive in thick envelopes with gifts for the giver which are often Xmas cards, 2020 calendars, calculators and pens.  Here it is, nearing the fall  and I have acquired some 30 calendars and countless  Christmas cards as the holiday season approaches   
                         I am an ex-GI and have  a soft spot for the military and for the faithful dogs that served with them. Disabled Vets,  Blind Vets, Wounded Warriors, Mutts on a Mission and scores of similar organizations seek donations. The causes are worthy, but who can contribute to every one of them, and who knows which ones are legitimate or if there is a worthier cause.  Very often the stories are sad and tug at the heart strings.  Perhaps that explains why Americans are so generous in sending out checks. 

                         Countless police organizations which have been castigated since the death of George Floyd have hired companies to seek help from the public in repairing the damage. Families of policemen accused of misdeeds, but probably were only doing what police should do, seek funds for paying legal fees.                

                         Organizations such as the Charity Navigators remind citizens to be careful of scam artists out there. They try to monitor charities and estimate what percentage  of contributions actually go go to the causes, but many groups do not reply to their inquiries or can't be trusted and new ones pop up every day.  
                       This whole world of fund raising, with letters, phone calls,  emails, and gifts smacks of big business. Yet I had no idea just how big.  I decided to do a little research and try to get a handle on just what is going on. And hey, nickel and dime stuff,  it isn't.
                        According to the National Center for Charitable Statistics (NCSS) there are more than one and one-half million   non-profit charities registered in the United States.  If you have a particular activity which you feel passionate about, your donation can find a happy home.  And in one recent year, charitable giving in the United States totaled $427.7 billion dollars, with 68 percent of that huge bundle coming from individuals.  The average annual donation is about $120. 
                         That is some huge amount of giving by generous Americans, and for the record, it even dwarfs the America's foreign aid, of some $50 billion annually.
                          There are admonitions about giving, say the charity experts. Don't succumb to  "knee jerk" generosity or sob stories--give some thought to the charity and check into its operation.  Also, hang up on on the telephone solicitor who calls around dinner time. Too many telemarketers get a credit card and a commitment out of the homeowner between  bites at supper.  In the end, only a few cents on the dollar wind up with the charity, and the rest lands in the pocket of the fund raiser and his aids.
                            Compensation paid to CEOs and presidents and financial directors of large charities sometimes top $500,000 for a year.  These sky high salaries are often the subject of criticism, but these administrators of  these billion-dollar enterprises claim they have as much responsibility and as many costs as any titans of industry.                        
                             So, open your mail and look over all those begging you for help. Go ahead, contribute to disaster zones and abused animals and lonely soldiers and sick and needy children. But if you want to feel  good about it,  make sure  the charities you choose to endow are deserving of your generosity. Pick a few, check them out, and concentrate on those, instead of sending money to everyone that tells a sad story. 
                            The lion's share of your largess should wind up with those who need your help, and not just provide happy times for the fund raisers.


                                             xxx

• 
  

LGBTQ curriculum

                                     BY FLORIDA BILL 


                   Grade school children in Illinois, beginning next July, will be given lessens on the "history and contributions" of the LGBTQ community to American society. 
             Pursuant to a new law signed by Gov. Pritzker, the story of  lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and the "Q" community is being made a part of the curriculum in all public schools in Illinois.  It is the fifth state in the nation to mandate such controversial elementary school studies.
              Gay marriage and homosexuality and the morphosis of male to female and female to male are among key elements of the teachings so that children will know "people come from different backgrounds and are entitled to the same opportunities as everyone else."proponents of the new law have said.  
             Basically, it is a new twist to the story of the "birds and bees," imparting to children of a very delicate age, the understanding that there are families with two moms and/or two dads; and that some girls will become boys and some boys will become girls.  Their contributions to a better America will be discussed and  some homosexuals will even be spotlighted for their marriages and their celebratory status as part of the description of  contributions to a better America. 
             Strong motivation for the teachings arises from the demands of the gay community which followed a U.S. Supreme Court decision legalizing same sex marriages.  
              State Sen. Heather Steans of Chicago a sponsor of the legislation, said that this inclusive curriculum will not only teach an accurate version of history, but will also promote acceptance of the LGBTQ community and help overcome intolerance through  education and exposure to different people and viewpoints. 
                 Detractors see the new law as disturbing and deeply worrisome as to the psychological  health of the nation's children. It is a new ethos which does not just recognize homosexual lifestyle,  but instead actively endorses a whole range of bisexuality, transgenderism and transsexuality. 
                 There is a broad segment of society which believes strongly that the entire concept is a lot of unnecessary nonsense, and serves to fill very young minds with concerns, ideas and problems that they never knew they had; and that it is confounding that trained educators see value in such programs.  

                                                 xxx


t

i





  

honor flight

 
                          BY WILLIAM JUNEAU

                   There are times when even a cynic like me has to step back and say, "That was a great day." 
                   Recently,  it was my good fortune to be among 100 military veterans who were hosted and saluted by Honor Flight Chicago on a one-day tour of war memorials in Washington D.C.                       There's no cost to the veterans, and every convenience is anticipated.  Maybe you are not up for a lot of walking around in the heat of August in DC.?  Not to worry, you have a volunteer companion at your side all day, and a wheelchair if needed. Luxury buses, guided by police escorts, take you from memorial to memorial. Meals are provided.
              And there is virtually no end to the accolades. Strangers
thank you for your service and shake your hand at every turn. The tributes were warm and emotional and unforgettable for the ex-servicemen. I was more moved than I thought possible.
              We took off from Midway Airport, where we rallied at 4 a.m., and set off for the nation's capital, after a round of cheers from a flag-waving crowd. 
               Honor Flight doesn't ignore any memorable detail of military life. We were all surprised by a Mail Call on the flight home, in which we were handed letters and cards from family and friends, public officials and other "notables"  thanking us for our long ago sacrifices.
            On our arrival back at Midway, we were greeted by more hoopla and a big surprise. Bag pipers led our group through a crowd of our own cheering family and friends, waving flags, and encouraged to show up by the local Honor Flight planners. 
           There were only three WWll vets, who are in their 90s by now, and a rather large contingent of Viet Nam vets, who were perhaps the most poorly treated by the public on their arrival home. There was a smaller group of Korean vets, and I fell into that category.
              Way back in the 1950s, I was a soldier in Korea. The armed conflict between the north and the south had come to an end with an armistice, but the post war tension was causing concern and GIs were put on alert on a number of bases in South Korea.  Me--I was in a Quonset hut in a base in Ouijonbu, just a few miles south of the demilitarized zone, and 30 miles from Seoul.  We were part of the eighth army known as I-Corps.                      
                     I walked guard duty on the post from time to time with my rifle slung over my shoulder and for most of the time I was accompanied by my faithful dog, Maggie, who helped watch for any interloper onto our base. 
                     We did not face combat, but we spent 16 months of our lives in a place we did not want to be. By our very presence, we kept the enemy from making incursions into the rest of the pennisula. Left behind was a new wife, and all the conveniences of American life. We lived in a hut warmed by a pot belly stove, we and used outhouses located a good distance from our shelter.  Showers were rigged up from pipes connected to a water tank, and hot water was just a memory.  
                     After 16 months of counting the days on my calendar,  I returned in one piece to the USA and was discharged.  With the army behind me, I found employment, had children and grandchildren and and my days as a soldier became a distant memory. 
                    That is, until Honor Flight Chicago, one of many such volunteer Honor Flight organizations nationwide, supported by donations and corporate sponsors, stepped up. 
                  They reminded us that what we did way back then was worthwhile, and deserving of the appreciation of a grateful nation.  Thank you, Honor Flight, for YOUR service.

Time is up for the Fort Hood killer

 
                          BY FLORIDA BILL 
                               
                                      The Attorney General has announced that the federal government has decided to resume executions of individuals who have been sentenced to death in a court of law. 
                        Certainly at the top or near the top of those on death row is Major Nidal Hasan, the army psychiatrist who killed 13 persons, including 12 fellow soldiers, and wounded 32 others in an explosion of Islamic rage on November 6, 2009, at Fort Hood, Texas. 
                        As the massacre was being carried out, Major Hasan, a medical doctor, screamed "Allahu Akbar (Allah is the greatest) as he fired his gun and watched the soldiers and civilians fall like dominoes. After he had fired scores of rounds, he was taken down by gunfire from an American soldier. 
                        Now 49, Hasan, a paraplegic as a result of a bullet which hit his spine, has been incarcerated and cared for in Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, since the shooting and his  trial and conviction in a military tribunal four years later. 
                       The former army major and doctor who had been trained at government expense, has admitted the killings which he has said in interviews gave him a "good" feeling, and he looks forward to martyrdom as a SoA, (Soldier of Allah).                       .  
                          Confined to a wheelchair, Hasan has written countless letters. Among his missives was  a letter to ISIS leader, Abu Bakr al Baghdadi informing him that it would be "his honor" to join the Islamic caliphate; and another missive to Pope Francis in which he praised Islamic Jihad.  He always signed his letters using his SoA acronym.
                           In an interview with the NYT, he said he did not regret the massacre and that his actions would help atone for the sins of his mother who once operated a small store and sold alcohol in contradiction to the command of Allah. 
                            The government has now lifted the prohibition to the death penalty which had been in effect for several years. The ban on implementing the penalty had been ordered because of the fear that an innocent defendant might be executed in error. With Hasan, there is no doubt that he is a murderer.                         
                         The U.S. military has executed 135 persons since 1916.  The last was the execution of army Pvt. John Bennett in 1961 for rape and attempted murder.
                         In Hasan's case, he acknowledges his violence and his Islamic rage; and the screams of "Allahu Akbar" were witnessed and heard by scores of fellow soldiers and civilians. Hasan has earned the penalty of death and there will be no misgivings when it is carried out.  The hope of Americans and of the relatives of victims of his rage is that execution of this madman will take place without further delays.

                                                xxx