Due Process

Florida has a statute that could have had Cruz hauled in, legally, based upon "probable cause" and held until bail could be made. His weapon[s] could also have been seized as evidence. A lot of folks seem to be upset with Trump for his statement today, 'Take the guns first, and go through due process second'.
Some folks are confused about what is in the 4th & 5th Amendments & are doubly confused by the Due Process Clauses. "Unreasonable" & "Arbitrary" are your key words. You might want to bone up on this a bit before accusing anyone of unreasonable or arbitrary application of Due Process.
BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY 9th edition. Arbitrary: depending on individual discretion, determined by a judge rather than by fixed rules; procedures or law of a judicial decision founded on prejudice or preference rather than on reason or fact.
Black's Law Dictionary Free Online Legal Dictionary 2nd Ed. When is SEARCH AND SEIZURE UNREASONABLE? 1. An unlawful search conducted with no legal authority 2. A search that is harsh and intense that violates rights of the person being investigated.
I take no exception with Trump’s quote. That’s how it works folks. If there is objection, take it to the court and let them sort it out. In the meantime, the firearm[s] are locked up in evidence.

The Constitution and the Bible

There are two items in my library that I consider the most important in understanding who we are, why we are who we are and why we are not what this Democratic Party envisions. What our forefathers achieved is unprecedented and the most important works ever achieved by mankind. As with Jefferson, the Bible is the penultimate in understanding.

I have a book entitled, "Thomas Jefferson: On Democracy", collated by Saul K. Padover. It is a book containing 282 pages of letters written by Thomas Jefferson. If one reads it, it will be abundantly clear the mind behind the Constitution and this Republic. He made it clear the distinctions with Republics, Democracies, Monarchies, etc. There are facets of both Republics and Democracies inherently designed in our system. For those of you who think we are a Democracy, you are correct. The House of Representatives is your Democracy, elected by popular vote. The Senate was never designed by Jefferson to be elected by popular vote and for good reasons. Each Senator was appointed by the legislatures of each state, making them beholden to the State, not by popular vote. That remained true until the greatest mistake made in our history, the 17^th Amendment. In fact, there are no useful Amendments beyond the original Bill of Rights.  It should be repealed and it is my hope that it will be. By design, the Senate, the Executive Branch and the Judiciary checked the Democracy and formulated the Republic. It is drawn out in our Constitution, as Amended, and that design was the mind of Thomas Jefferson.

Jefferson was our Ambassador to France, primarily, at the time the crafting was done, largely by its author, James Madison, another Virginian; one of 6 from that Commonwealth who served as President.

Madison not only authored the Constitution, he took copious notes on the entire process, which are the minutes of the ratification process. Thomas Jefferson was his protégé in all things, but most especially with respect to the Constitution. It is these notes/ minutes that are the other of the most important documents in my library.

What you will come to understand by reading both is why we are what we are. You will also come to understand his words are even more pertinent today than they were even then. You will understand that the arguments on every issue today are the exact same as they were then. You will further most likely agree that no Amendment beyond the Bill of Rights has a useful place in that Constitution. It was complete in 1789. It is simply the lack of understanding the Bill of Rights that gave us all the rest.

The arguments made back then between the Convention delegates from New York and Virginia are the same we have now. I should also point out that also holds true between the presidents elected from those two states. The arguments divide between the minds of Jefferson and Hamilton; the same divide between Federalists and Democrat-Republicans. It should be pointed out however that the latter party became divided by President Jackson in philosophy and understanding in 1820. That same divide exists in that party today.

Jefferson wrote letters on every subject pertinent today as it was then. Give me a subject and I will provide you with a letter from TJ. Jefferson did not just write these letters willy-nilly. They were solicited; before, during and after the Ratification. The great minds of that time of Enlightenment still were seeking his wisdom until his death. Some of us still are point of fact. There is no mind short of our creator that has a match to his mind, before, now or since. Hamiltonians remain jealous of his mind and continue to argue against him to no real avail. They win some battles but always lose the war in the end—the pendulum swings to and fro but always comes down to balance, as it is right now.

Hamiltonians hate the electoral process while Jeffersonians love it and for the same reasons then and now. We are a Constitutional Republic and it is that electoral process that maintains that distinction. It is that same electoral process that makes it difficult to amend the Constitution. It is amended by the States, by design, not a popular vote. Folks who wish we were a Democracy need to get over it. Democracies are a worldwide dime a dozen and most reside south of our border. What Jefferson said about them is neither complimentary nor politically correct but it is the damned truth. The same can be said of his views on mass immigration—they are neither complimentary nor politically correct but it is the damned truth. PC was not in Jefferson’s vernacular nor is it in my own. If you want PC, get a hamster with which to argue.

There seems to exist today an argument of Hamiltonians, a preoccupation if you will. Below is what Jefferson stated on the matter and it is instructive. It also provides a glimpse of his larger mind on the subject. Please note too that the issue is the same today as then. It is the SOS—Hamilton vs. Jefferson, north vs. south, east vs. west. It is the electoral process that stands between these United States and becoming a socialist banana republic like Venezuela. It is only that which prevents our being as ignorant as they have been kept by their priests and their despotic leaders. “Ignorance in South America may keep the people enslaved” TJ. I think I can stipulate that it has. Jefferson goes into much greater detail on our differences with South America. Again, it is none too flattering but it is as true today as it was in his day and it is self-perpetuating. It is steeped in abject ignorance and poverty. If you think money drives our politics, just turn, face south and thank God that you live in a Federal [Federation] Representative Democratic Constitutional Republic. They have one religion and one leader, the Aristocracy. Keep up with your nonsense and we might be just like them one day.

Thomas Jefferson – from “Notes on the State of Virginia”

But are there no inconveniences to be thrown into the scale against the advantage expected from a multiplication of numbers by the importation of foreigners? It is for the happiness of those united in society to harmonize as much as possible in matters which they must of necessity transact together.

Civil government being the sole object of forming societies, its administration must be conducted by common consent. Every species of government has its specific principles. Ours perhaps are more peculiar than those of any other in the universe.

It is a composition of the freest principles of the English constitution, with others derived from natural right and natural reason. To these nothing can be more opposed than the maxims of absolute monarchies. Yet, from such, we are to expect the greatest number of emigrants. They will bring with them the principles of the governments they leave, imbibed in their early youth; or, if able to throw them off, it will be in exchange for an unbounded licentiousness, passing, as is usual, from one extreme to another. It would be a miracle were they to stop precisely at the point of temperate liberty.

These principles, with their language, they will transmit to their children. In proportion to their numbers, they will share with us the legislation. They will infuse into it their spirit, warp and bias its direction, and render it a heterogeneous, incoherent, distracted mass.

I may appeal to experience, during the present contest, for a verification of these conjectures. But, if they be not certain in event, are they not possible, are they not probable? Is it not safer to wait with patience 27 years and three months longer, for the attainment of any degree of population desired, or expected? May not our government be more homogeneous, more peaceable, more durable?

Suppose 20 millions of republican Americans thrown all of a sudden into France, what would be the condition of that kingdom? If it would be more turbulent, less happy, less strong, we may believe that the addition of half a million of foreigners to our present numbers would produce a similar effect here. If they come of themselves, they are entitled to all the rights of citizenship: but I doubt the expediency of inviting them by extraordinary encouragements.

I mean not that these doubts should be extended to the importation of useful artificers. The policy of that measure depends on very different considerations. Spare no expence in obtaining them. They will after a while go to the plough and the hoe; but, in the mean time, they will teach us something we do not know. It is not so in agriculture. The indifferent state of that among us does not proceed from a want of knowledge merely; it is from our having such quantities of land to waste as we please. In Europe the object is to make the most of their land, labour being abundant: here it is to make the most of our labour, land being abundant.

Query #8

Was Cruz Subject to Arrest in This Case?

The Court [Elonis vs. US] noted that had Elonis typed these words out and “snailmailed” them to his ex-wife, it would almost certainly constitute a criminal threat, because it was made directly to the intended victim and thus counts as evidence of mens rea. (The Court didn’t use the term “snailmail”, of course—and referred to Facebook as a “social networking Web site.”) Presumably, if the text was emailed—or maybe direct-messaged?—it would also, thus, be a criminal threat. The Court itself didn’t go to the First Amendment protections, it instead basing its ruling purely on the federal criminal statute. 18 US Code, various paragraphs.

Most crimes require what attorneys refer to as "mens rea," which is simply Latin for a "guilty mind." In other words, what a defendant was thinking and what the defendant intended when the crime was committed. Mens rea allows the criminal justice system to differentiate between someone who did not mean to commit a crime and someone who intentionally set out to commit a crime.

The US Supreme Court disagreed and overturned the decision 7-2. Threatening language is not enough. Targets feeling threatened is not enough. Criminal law requires mens rea, an “evil mind,” and in this case, the Court held that there must be some specific intention to threaten. Since that wasn’t established in this case (and since Elonis assiduously denied having it) the Court threw out his conviction.

Would the Cruz threats have been sufficient to establish a specific intention to threaten? How about this, arrest his ass and let POTUS decide. Hell, if you squirrels have no more nuts than to send Martha Stewart to prison and not Cruz, you are even more evil than Cruz!

Who Were the Sumerians

Question: "Who were the Sumerians?"

Answer: The Sumerians were an ancient people that occupied Sumer, that is, the southern region of Mesopotamia, which is now southern Iraq. It is unclear when the first settlers of the region arrived, but they were a non-Semitic people that historians believe may have come out of the Samarra culture in northern Mesopotamia or Assyria. The Sumerians established many city-states in southern Mesopotamia, and their culture thrived there until around 1700 BC when Babylonia subdued the Sumerians and took control of the region during the reign of Hammurabi, the last Sumerian king.

The Sumerians are credited with creating one of the first forms of writing, cuneiform, which is made of a series of wedge-shaped marks carved into clay with a stylus. The famous Epic of Gilgamesh was written in cuneiform and took archeologists a long time to decipher. Once it was translated, they found the Epic of Gilgamesh to be a heroic story about a Sumerian king. The manuscript describes the daring adventures of Gilgamesh and Enkidu, a wild man who was first created by the gods to fight against Gilgamesh but who befriends him and fights alongside him. The epic also contains a fascinating account of a great flood with many similarities to the Genesis account.

The Sumerians were also the builders of the city-state of Ur and the Ziggurat of Ur, an impressive structure built in the worship of the Sumerian moon deity, Nanna. Archeology suggests that the Sumerians were powerful warriors, skilled at agriculture, architecture, and literature.

The Sumerians farmed the fertile land by the Tigris and the Euphrates Rivers, and historians have even classified the Sumerians as “proto-Euphrateans.” The Tigris and the Euphrates are two of four rivers mentioned in Genesis 2:14 that flowed from the Garden of Eden. Today, these rivers still have a common source, in the mountains of Turkey, from which they flow through Syria and Iraq. That area later became known as the “Fertile Crescent” and the “cradle of civilization” because agriculture flourished there and the peoples of that region developed glass, the wheel, and irrigation techniques.

The Sumerians have a connection with biblical history. In the Bible, Ur is mentioned as the birthplace of Abram, or Abraham, who became the first Hebrew patriarch and later the spiritual father of all those who would have faith in the Lord (Genesis 17:5; Acts 3:25; Romans 4:12, 16). The Bible does not tell us Abram’s nationality, but he was likely a Sumerian, or perhaps a Babylonian. Abram was living in Mesopotamia when the Lord spoke to him and told him to leave his family and the land of his fathers and go to a new land (Genesis 12:1). By faith (Hebrews 11:8–9), Abram took his wife, Sarai; his nephew Lot; and all their possessions, and they left Ur and traveled to Canaan, which is present-day Lebanon and Israel. Many scholars also see the Bible’s references to “Shinar” [Ur] in Genesis 10:10 and 11:2 to mean Sumer.

Now, there is an obvious anomaly in this characterization. If Abram was returning to “the land of his fathers”, clearly he was Israelite. Period, enough of the silly postulating and speculating. If he was Babylonian, he was not at the same time an Israelite. Who were the Sumerians really, living in the land of Ur. Historically, the Israelites have lived alongside many non-Semitic populations, sometimes even “mixing” with those populations. They certainly did following the first Diaspora when they removed largely to E. Anatolia. Additionally, the Torah is about Israel/ Israelites, with others being mentioned ONLY with respect to their interactions with Israel/ Israelites. We do know Ur was on the Northern Tip of the Persian Gulf. It is here the 3 great rivers, mentioned in connection with Eden, empty.

Who/ What was Ur:

https://www.ancient.eu/ur/

It should also be noted that Shem, one of the sons of Noah, known as Father of the Semetic people settled here originally. Shem is called “the father of all the children of Eber,” meaning the Hebrew people. The word Hebrew means ‘of Eber,’ or ‘descended from Eber.’  Gen. 10:25.  To Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg, for in his days the earth was divided, and his brother’s name was Joktan.    The Hebrew race has therefore descended from Eber in two branches: Peleg and Joktan.  The name Peleg means division, (indicating the division of mankind in Babylon, Gen. 11:7-9), and the name Joktan means diminished, (indicating the diminished lifespan of mankind at that time).

 Joktan’s family of thirteen sons is the largest family of early Bible times.  Only
Joktan’s first-generation lineage was recorded; Gen. 10:26-29; I Chron. 1:19-23.
(Even this much is unusual because Joktan’s descendants are not mentioned in
later Bible history.)  All later Bible history is based on Peleg’s lineage (Gen. 11)
so readers have traditionally thought Peleg’s descendants are the only existing
Hebrews.  Peleg’s lineage has more visibility in the Bible because it led up to
Abraham—and God took Abraham’s people to lead the Bible narrative.  But the
descendants of Joktan made another even larger branch of Hebrews.  The total
disappearance of Joktan’s people from the Bible narrative means that his family
left west Asia entirely and migrated to another land far away. 

For over a century Noah and the Flood survivors were migrating in the east,
(eastwards of the Euphrates River plain, which is Shinar).  Gen. 11:2, “And as they migrated from the east, they came upon a plain in the land of Shinar [This would be Ur] and settled there.”

http://www.eifiles.cn/oo-en.htm

So, all things considered, who were the Sumerians? I would respond by saying they were many descendants of Noah and many who were not. There would be many admixtures of DNA, some Israelite, some not.

It is a well-known phenomenon in the story of DNA referred to as mutations and these can occur at any time, from brother to brother. Shem fathered Elam, Asshur, Arphaxad, Lud and Aram, father of the Aramaeans. From Arphaxad come the Hebrews, Israelis and Jews. Please note that these are not at all lumped into one grouping, nor are the Aramaeans. The Israelites are no more homogenous than Europeans. The DNA will have root characteristics but with Mutations occurring every so often over time. The Aramaeans are no less Semitic than are the Israelis. So, were they Jews, Hebrews, Israelis? They spoke the same root language and wrote much the same on sticks at one time. Go figure…

It should be fairly clear that Sumerians and the Sumerian writings were devolved from Shem, who descended from Noah. Please do not tell me that all who descended from Noah were deaf mutes, without written and linguistic communication. They carved their writing on sticks. That would be Coel Bren, literally, writing on sticks. Writing on sticks has at least 30 references in the Bible. So, did Moses write the Torah on sticks or scrolls? Think about it.

Did Moses Write the Torah?

It is written:

And Moses wrote down all the words of the LORD… Exodus 24:4 (ESV)

Moses wrote down their starting places, stage by stage, by command of the LORD… Numbers 33:2 (ESV)

Then the LORD said to Moses, “Write this as a memorial in a book…”Exodus 17:14 (ESV)

There are others, but you get the drift. Even more importantly, at least to me appears in the New Testament, in red letters mind you. I believe John to be the most important of all books canonized. It is at one time, more cryptic, with more symbolism and coded than all the books canonized. Having said that, it is most like the Gospel of Thomas which was not canonized due to what was written in one verse: “It is within you”. That is a remarkably important verse and it was not in keeping of the dogma of the day. However, the canonization missed the same allusion in John. They missed it due to their own arrogance. This is what Christ said with respect to Moses:

For if you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote of me. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe my words?” – John 5: 45-47 (ESV)

I would have to review the Gospel of Thomas again to make certain but I am pretty sure that appears in Thomas as well.

I have it on good authority and it is in black and white that Moses was the author of the Torah. That being the case, I require incontrovertible evidence to think otherwise. There is none. There are a lot of scientists who reject the idea for various and sundries reasons. However, all they have are theories, hypotheses. Some scientists actually believe when they postulate a hypothesis that it is proof. Not! My bachelor of science and graduate studies tells me that ain’t science.

See my accompanying post, “Who Were the Sumerians”.

Federal Budget Surplus Record Tax Revenue for January

Federal Budget Surplus

Record Tax Revenue for January:

During January, the Treasury collected approximately $361,038,000,000 in total tax revenues and spent a total of approximately $311,802,000,000 to run a surplus of approximately $49,236,000,000.

When you hear from members of Congress that we will be recording record deficits and adding to the debt, just remember that lawyers are not economists and have no idea of what they speak. When you unleash the economic engines of the US economy by abolishing a stranglehold of useless rules and regulations, slash corporate and individual taxation and most importantly of all, provide for an unprecedented consumer/ business confidence, you provide a certain path for recovery and growth. Congressional Budget Office projections do not consider the above factors in their budget estimates because their economic school of thought went with the Studebaker. OMB on the other hand utilizes a very different set of assumptions which do consider the above factors. Economists do not practice law; lawyers should consider giving up on practicing economics.

We are founded in Anglo-Saxon Common Law since 1607

Read 'em and weep, Lawrence Tribe. We are founded in Anglo-Saxon Common Law since 1607, you doof:
Common law, also called Anglo-American law, the body of customary law, based upon judicial decisions and embodied in reports of decided cases, that has been administered by the common-law courts of England since the Middle Ages. From it has evolved the type of legal system now found also in the United States and in most of the member states of the Commonwealth (formerly the British Commonwealth of Nations). In this sense common law stands in contrast to the legal system derived from civil law, now widespread in continental Europe and elsewhere. In another, narrower, sense, common law is contrasted to the rules applied in English and American courts of equity and also to statute law. A standing expository difficulty is that, whereas the United Kingdom is a unitary state in international law, it comprises three major (and other minor) legal systems, those of England and Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland. Historically, the common-law system in England (applied to Wales since 1536) has directly influenced that in Ireland but only partially influenced the distinct legal system in Scotland, which is therefore, except as regards international matters, not covered in this article. The legal systems in the United Kingdom have, since 1973, experienced integration into the system of European Union law, which has direct effects upon the domestic law of its constituent states—the majority of which have domestic systems that have been influenced by the civil-law tradition and that cultivate a more purposive technique of legislative interpretation than has been customary in the English common law. The regime of human rightsrepresented by the European Convention on Human Rights (1950) has exercised a similar influence in the United Kingdom since the passage by Parliament of the Human Rights Act 1998.
Source: Encyclopedia
NOT Snopes :-)

Democratic Party--From Dirty Tricks to High Crimes and Misdemeanors

You know, I have certainly participated in opposition research and dirty tricks in my history with the Democratic party. However, things are very different when dirty tricks include felonious conspiracies to gut the opposition party, no less integral to this Republic than my own party. What is most frightening is that, if HRC had won, no one would have been the wiser. The bit players in all of this remain stiff-necked, arrogant and as unrepentant as their leaders who concocted these crimes, leaving their sycophants to hang. They would throw any one of them under the bus, without exception. That is why I want all of them indicted under the RICO Statute and make it a clean sweep, top down. These people threw the Constitution under the bus long ago and they spit on you as well. They would spy on you in your bedroom if they thought it would advance their ignoble cause. I believe the FISA Statute should be repealed post haste. Our Intel agencies cannot be trusted and in fact, were part and parcel of this conspiracy. Please note, there is no smiley emoticon punctuating this post.

Elective Despotism

Jefferson feared that it would only be a matter of time before the American system of government degenerated into a form of “elective despotism” (1785). 
Because Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826) thought it would be only a matter of time before the American system of government degenerated into an “elective despotism,” he warned that citizens should act now in order to make sure that “the wolf [was kept] out of the fold”:
Mankind [should] soon learn to make interested uses of every right and power which they possess, or may assume. The public money and public liberty, intended to have been deposited with three branches of magistracy, but found inadvertently to be in the hands of one only, will soon be discovered to be sources of wealth and dominion to those who hold them… They [the assembly] should look forward to a time, and that not a distant one, when a corruption in this, as in the country from which we derive our origin, will have seized the heads of government, and be spread by them through the body of the people; when they will purchase the voices of the people, and make them pay the price. Human nature is the same on every side of the Atlantic, and will be alike influenced by the same causes. The time to guard against corruption and tyranny is before they shall have gotten hold of us. It is better to keep the wolf out of the fold, than to trust to drawing his teeth and talons after he shall have entered.
About this Quotation:
1785 seems rather early for Jefferson to be making such dire predictions about the unhappy fate of the new American government, yet his worry that democracy might turn into a form of despotism has proven to be correct if some 200 years later and “not a distant” time as he originally thought. What is interesting about this quote is also the use of animal imagery, this time seeing government as a “wolf” whose teeth and claws would need to be pulled if liberty were to survive.
NOTE: In this present time, it was the wolf that used the means of FISA Warrants to accomplish this corruption. I do not care if we ever again are able to spy on one foreign “terrorist”, when the wolf is the real terrorist. That is the nature of the beast. Our Intel Agencies are now as corrupt as the wolf who appointed them to the task.

Trump's Budget Authorization Hoodwinks Democrats, AGAIN!

We are hearing from the unwashed that the GOP has lost its conservatism with respect to federal spending. That is just spin to throw cold water on the budget resolution, step 2 in the budgetary process. What just passed was the "up to" budget authorization. Don't believe everything you hear from MSM who has no idea of this process. I have a feeling the congressional leadership knows exactly what it is doing. Step 3 will be what is termed "budget reconciliation" or "markup" of the Appropriation Committees in each chamber. The final step in the legislative process will be the final Appropriation of budgets provided by the 12 Appropriation Subcommittees. Of late, all 12 are thrown into an "Omnibus Appropriation Bill". You say, if you are Tingly Leg Boy, Chris Matthews [No relation, hopefully], that the GOP has lost its conservative way. If you believe that, you are hopelessly naive about the wily ways of Washington. I say however, once again, the Ds have been comically hoodwinked. A Budget Resolution simply states the maximum that may be spent in the Appropriation process. Does that mean they will appropriate all that has been authorized under the Resolution. Absolutely not! Defense will get every penny they wish. Discretionary spending, so giving the Ds that tingly feeling up the leg however, will be short-sheeted. It should also be known that, even if funds are appropriated, it is not require that they be spent. The Rule is that any appropriated funds now spent are returned to the General Fund--so much the better. It is already fairly known that certain agencies, created by the Obama Administration, will never see a dollar and by default will just disappear from planet Dearth. HOODWINKED AGAIN!

Obstruction Junction

Eric Holder says Trump committed Obstruction of Justice in firing Comey. That is rich. Eric Holder was AG under Clinton. It was during that Administration when both the Special Counsel, Fiske, AND the FBI Director, William Sessions, were fired in the midst of various investigations of the Clinton Administration, White Water no less and of course, lest we forget, "Devil with the Blue Dress". So, Eric, aren't we guilty of Obstruction of Justice under your rationale? 

Infrastructure and Economic Development

Are you hearing what I am hearing? This is something I have been begging to hear for 30 years. In the open meeting today at the White House regarding Infrastructure and Economic Development, we are hearing from Governor after Governor—great stories especially from the governors of NM, WI, SC, who have all stated that they will be using their Vo-Tech systems to train the employees in advance of the plant sites being even completed. This is what States do and Oklahoma is the premier such program in the USA. OK Vo-Tech sets up sites, equipment, systems etc. and train plant hires to hit the ground running when the plant doors open. The Governor of Wisconsin told of 13,000 direct jobs at their new plant [Foxconn] being trained right now. I speak of economic and employment multipliers quite often. In this case, WI projects another 22,000 indirect jobs from this investment. The economic multipliers can generate a factor of 4-5 per each dollar of direct investment. SC of course landed that $350 Billion plant from iPhone. There will be thousands of new direct jobs, also with economic/ employment multipliers. SC also announced major plants by BMW, Volvo and Samsung.
Another crucial factor that I am hearing is the state permitting problem for major construction projects for infrastructure. Remember these words: Prevailing Wage Law [PWL]. THAT is THE problem. The WH infrastructure plan will leverage federal dollars in the amount of $200 Billion with state and private sector dollars for a total investment of $1.5 Trillion. The most important factor is that the WH will demand that permitting time to be cut from 15-17 years to 2 years and maybe get it down in finality to 1 year. Here’s the catch: If you can’t get your permitting times down to that 2 year cycle, you will not be sharing in the federal funding. Your Fed funds will simply go back into the pool for states that can comply.
Here are a few of the states that will not be able to comply, due to their ridiculous permitting systems [PWL]: California, Connecticut, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York and likely Maryland. These states should look quite familiar to you, pursuant to the 2016 election. Too bad! Elections have consequences. Welcome to Washington! You might say, he needs those states. No, firstly, he will never get them and the Electoral College says he does not need them this election past nor in 2020.
Just as importantly, what the WH proposes earmarks an amount certain for rural infrastructure development, including broadband infrastructure so they are no longer left out.
BRILLIANT! By the way, as you might expect from someone who has been involved in permitting and construction project finance, Trump already knows how he is going to pay for it. I have been waiting for 3 decades to finally have someone in the WH who understands this. It is great to have an adult in the WH for a change.

Seat Obama Before Grand Jury Under RICO

The benefits of having a special prosecutor charge the Obama administration, before a Grand Jury, under RICO is that you avoid having to prove a criminal act by leadership. You can take the whole administration down. "Improperly Surveilled Due Process". Bingo!

The RICO Act was first used by the U.S. Attorney's Office in the Southern District of New York on September 18, 1979, in the United States v. Scotto. Scotto, who was convicted on charges of racketeering, accepting unlawful labor payments, and income tax evasion, headed the International Longshoreman's Association. During the 1980s and 1990s, federal prosecutors used the law to bring charges against several Mafia figures. The second major success was the Mafia Commission Trial, which resulted in several top leaders of New York City's Five Families getting what amounted to life sentences. By the turn of the century, RICO cases resulted in virtually all of the top leaders of the New York Mafia being sent to prison.

Obama would at least be in tall company :-)

Always Follow the Money

Uranium to Putin aka Hotcakes for Putin

Let them eat cake…

Hot Springs was running “yellow cake”, and the guys from Indonesia, James Riady and John Huang of Indonesia's Lippo Group, shoveled cash to the Mullahs while the Russian Mafia moved the enriched uranium to Iran which most likely traveled to North Korea. Has anyone seen Eric Schmidt or Gov. Bill Richardson [Los Alamos Bill] lately—sure is quiet out there? The final paper trail ends with the Clinton Foundation in the form of in-kind contributions.

This Democrat Party Is Not My Democrat Party

When I read of the quotes in email exchanges between Mark Warner and a lobbyist tied to HRC and a Russian Oligarch, I was absolutely bowled over. I know US Senator Mark Warner. He was instrumental in electing Doug Wilder as Governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia. He later served on his staff, as did my late wife. His explanation of the matter described just does not wash with me and it is of someone other than the Mark Warner than I knew. Mark co-chairs a Committee investigating the Russia debacle. What Mark describes as his "excuse" is specious. No matter how you cut it, that is double-dealing and outside the realm of honesty in the investigation. So Mark, if you don't like what you learn from the lobbyist, you just don't bring it to the Committee because it might implicate HRC? You consider that appropriate, honest? You are now tainted and should resign your co-chairmanship, although I seriously doubt you can be replaced by any other member of the minority party who would be any less dishonest. This party does not even resemble the Democratic Party I know. Mark Warner, I know Democrats and you are no Democrat.