Mitch McConnell: Acquittal Vindicated the Constitution, Not Trump

U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Joseph Story (1779-1845), Daguerreotype portrait by Matthew Brady’s Studio c.1844/45

Joseph Story (1779-1845) was an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, nominated by President James Madison, who served in office from February 3, 1812 until September 10, 1845.

He was also: Republican Congressman from Massachusetts, 1808-1809; Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, 1811-1845; Acting Chief Justice, 1835-1836, 1844; Professor of Law Harvard University 1829-1845.

He is perhaps most renown for his work “Commentaries On The Constitution of the United States” which was first published in 1833, though he authored several other books on the law, and Constitution.

The United States Constitution states in part as follows:

Article I, Section 3, Clause 7:
Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.

Article II, Section 4:
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

Justice Story wrote about the matter of impeachment at great length, and in part wrote that:

§393. It is obvious, that, upon trials on impeachments, one of two courses must be adopted in case of a conviction; either for the court to proceed to pronounce a full and complete sentence of punishment for the offence according to the law of the land in like cases, pending in the common tribunals of justice, superadding the removal from office, and the consequent disabilities; or, to confine its sentence to the removal from office and other disabilities. If the former duty be a part of the constitutional functions of the court, then, in case of an acquittal, there cannot be another trial of the party for the same offence in the common tribunals of justice, because it is repugnant to the whole theory of the common law, that a man should be brought into jeopardy of life or limb more than once for the same offence. A plea of acquittal is, therefore, an absolute bar against any second prosecution for the same offence. If the court of impeachments is merely to pronounce a sentence of removal from office and the other disabilities; then it is indispensable, that provision should be made, that the common tribunals of justice should be at liberty to entertain jurisdiction of the offence, for the purpose of inflicting the common punishment applicable to unofficial offenders. Otherwise, it might be matter of extreme doubt, whether, consistently with the great maxim above mentioned, established for the security of the life and limbs and liberty of the citizen, a second trial for the same offence could be had, either after an acquittal, or a conviction in the court of impeachments. And if no such second trial could be had, then the grossest official offenders might escape without any substantial punishment, even for crimes, which would subject their fellow citizens to capital punishment. [emphasis added]

§394. The constitution, then, having provided, that judgment upon impeachments shall not extend further, than to removal from office, and disqualification to hold office, (which, however afflictive to an ambitious and elevated mind, would be scarcely felt, as a punishment, by the profligate and the base,) has wisely subjected the party to trial in the common criminal tribunals, for the purpose of receiving such punishment, as ordinarily belongs to the offence. Thus, for instance, treason, which by our laws is a capital offence, may receive its appropriate punishment ; and bribery in high officers, which otherwise would be a mere disqualification from office, may have the measure of its infamy dealt out to it with the same unsparing severity, which attends upon other and humbler offenders.

– Joseph Story, “Commentaries On The Constitution of the United States” §393, §394, p278-280, Book III, chapter X; 1833

How the cowardly, weasel-like jellyfish of a man “Moscow Mitch, the Bitch” McConnell could POSSIBLY use the word “vindicate” in reference to the United States Constitution is beyond the scope of imagination – however derelict and perverted it may be – and it is definitely most perverted.

McConnell wrote “Our job wasn’t to find some way, any way, to inflict a punishment. The Senate’s first and foundational duty was to protect the Constitution.” -and- that “The text is unclear” about impeachment, whether “the Senate can try and convict former officers.”

McConnell had also earlier written a “dear colleague” letter to his fellow Banana Republicans in the Senate, in which he wrote in pertinent part that “I am persuaded that impeachments are a tool primarily of removal…”

His mind is like concrete – thoroughly mixed, and permanently set.

The cases of Tennessee United States Senator William Blount – impeached July 7, 1797, on charges of conspiring to assist in Great Britain’s attempt to seize Spanish-controlled territories in modern-day Florida and Louisiana, tried December 17, 1798–January 14, 1799 – and Ulysses Grant’s Secretary of War William Belknap – who tendered his resignation March 2, 1876 only moments before the House impeached him, was tried March 3–August 1, 1876 – demonstrate very clearly that officials may be tried on impeachment charges after they’re out of office. Or else, it completely absolves any official of any responsibility for any act of criminal wrong-doing while in office. It is the intellectual and moral equivalent of saying “so-and-so doesn’t live in Texas anymore, and moved to Minnesota 10 years ago, so s/he can’t be tried for murder or any crimes committed while residing in Texas.”

To assert as much is so absurdly preposterous that it defies imagination.

It’s an ethically reprehensible, morally wrong and judiciously untenable to deny anyone – including society – justice. And that is, in effect, what has happened with Donald Trump; society has been denied justice for the reprehensible, morally repugnant, and outright illegal acts of Donald Trump while in office as the President.

McConnell claims that Trump can be tried in other courts, and cites Justice Story’s writing that:

“There is also much force in the remark, that an impeachment is a proceeding purely of a political nature. It is not so much designed to punish an offender, as to secure the state against gross official misdemeanors. It touches neither his person, nor his property ; but simply divests him of his political capacity.” –– §406, chapter X, book III, p289

“And the final judgment is confined to a removal from, and disqualification for, office ; thus limiting the punishment to such modes of redress, as are peculiarly fit for a political tribunal to administer, and as will secure the public against political injuries. In other respects the offence is left to be disposed of by the common tribunals of justice, accord- ing to the laws of the land, upon an indictment found by a grand jury, and a trial by jury of peers, before whom the party is to stand for his final deliverance, like his fellow citizens.” –– §407, chapter X, book III, p290

But, rest assured: Trump is completely free and clear of any charges related to impeachment. However, there are other charges at the state level which he may face for things he did while in office, including most notably, attempting to persuade Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensberger to manipulate the results of the election in that state to throw the election to Trump’s favor. The Fulton County District Attorney, and Georgia State Attorney General are investigating that matter.

And just to be utterly and absolutely certain, the word “vindicate” is defined as meaning:

1. To clear of accusation, blame, suspicion, or doubt with supporting arguments or proof: “Our society permits people to sue for libel so that they may vindicate their reputations” (Irving R. Kaufman).
2. To defend, maintain, or insist on the recognition of (one’s rights, for example).
3. To demonstrate or prove the value or validity of; justify: The results of the experiment vindicated her optimism.
4. Obsolete To exact revenge for; avenge.
(American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition.)

1. to clear from guilt, accusation, blame, etc, as by evidence or argument

2. to provide justification for: his promotion vindicated his unconventional attitude.

3. to uphold, maintain, or defend (a cause, etc): to vindicate a claim.

4. (Law) Roman law to bring an action to regain possession of (property) under claim of legal title

5. (Historical Terms) Roman law to bring an action to regain possession of (property) under claim of legal title

6. rare to claim, as for oneself or another

7. obsolete to take revenge on or for; punish

8. obsolete to set free
(Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged, 12th Edition 2014)

1. to clear, as from an accusation or suspicion: to vindicate someone’s honor.

2. to afford justification for; justify.

3. to uphold or justify by argument or evidence.

4. to maintain or defend against opposition.

5. to claim for oneself or another.

6. Obs. to avenge.

7. Obs. to free.

8. Obs. to punish.
(Random House Kernerman Webster’s College Dictionary, © 2010)

“Moscow Mitch, the Bitch” McConnell is a Banana Republican from Kentucky, Senate Minority Leader, the biggest weasel in Washington, D.C., and an ardent, though oblique, supporter of the Cult of Trump.

---

Acquittal Vindicated the Constitution, Not Trump

wsj.com
Sunday, February 14, 2021
by Mitch McConnell

January 6 was a shameful day. A mob bloodied law enforcement and besieged the first branch of government. American citizens tried to use terrorism to stop a democratic proceeding they disliked.

There is no question former President Trump bears moral responsibility. His supporters stormed the Capitol because of the unhinged falsehoods he shouted into the world’s largest megaphone. His behavior during and after the chaos was also unconscionable, from attacking Vice President Mike Pence during the riot to praising the criminals after it ended.

President-elect Donald Trump leaves a meeting with Republican Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, at the U.S. Capitol November 10, 2016 in Washington, DC Zach Gibson/Getty Images

I was as outraged as any member of Congress. But senators take our own oaths. Our job wasn’t to find some way, any way, to inflict a punishment. The Senate’s first and foundational duty was to protect the Constitution.

Some brilliant scholars believe

Impeachment v2.0 Day 3: The Devil Made Me Do It

“Trump told us to do it.”

Trump’s MAGA supporters rioter-insurrectionists who were assembled at the White House Ellipse Park January 6, 2021 quickly became violent exclusively because they believed that Trump was asking them to do so – that they were doing his bidding.

“He said, ‘Be there.’ So I went and I answered the call of my president.”

House Impeachment Managers cited social media posts, recorded video, and court documents which reflected as much.

“I Answered the Call of My President.”

Impeachment Managers also extensively documented that several months BEFORE the election, Trump was laying the groundwork for convincing his cult of followers that the November presidential election was fixed, and that his victory was stolen because of

Senate Banana Republicans Will Let Trump Go Free, And In The Process, Damage Themselves

Banana Republicans in the United States Senate do NOT, and will NOT need, “smoking gun evidence” to convict Donald Trump of Insurrection, because in their warped imaginations, he did nothing wrong.

Those feckless individuals have not merely bowed the knee to Trump, or fallen prostate at his feet to lick his boots and the ground he walks upon, but by so doing, they have unambiguously signaled that they are not merely corrupted, but are traitorously and treasonously aligned, as well.

Allan Lichtman

Their fealty, their loyalty, their oath, though it may have appeared so, is NOT to the Constitution, but to some other nation, some other government, one that is NOT the United States of America – The Cult of Trump.

The benighted Moscow Mitch McConnell and his equally benighted Kooky Kentucky Klown pal Rand Paul are still up to no good.

---

Here Is The Smoking Gun Evidence To Back Impeachment Of Donald Trump

By Dr. Allan Lichtman, PhD, opinion contributor
02/08/21 10:00 AM EST

Allan Lichtman is a Distinguished Professor of History at American University, and an election forecaster. He is the author of “The Embattled Vote in America: From the Founding to the Present.” He tweets @AllanLichtman.

While the House impeachment managers have focused on events leading up to the Capitol breach, it was the real time response from Donald Trump to the rioters which yields smoking gun evidence of his intent to incite the insurrection. Trump failed to promptly call off his followers or to summon timely assistance for the police, despite pleas from his fellow Republicans caught up in the mayhem. His final words that day connect his incendiary statements about a “stolen election” to the storming of the Capitol.

As he watched the insurrection unfold on television, with some delight according to witnesses, Trump made no immediate demand that the rioters leave the Capitol. He failed to heed the pleas of Republicans in Congress, who desperately tried to call him with no response. “We are begging essentially, and he was nowhere to be found,” Representative Anthony Gonzalez of Ohio said. We know Trump did call Senator Tommy Tuberville of Alabama after mistakenly dialing Senator Mike Lee of Utah. Trump called Tuberville not to ask about his safety or to offer assistance, but to discuss a strategy for objecting to the count of electoral votes.

When rioters breached the Capitol in full view of cameras, Trump did not appear on television to denounce them or tell his followers to cease and desist. Instead, he stoked the incitement with a tweet to attack his vice president and double down on claims about a stolen election. He wrote, “Mike Pence did not have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our country and our Constitution, giving states a chance to certify a corrected set of facts, not the fraudulent or inaccurate ones.”

Trump later sent a tweet in the passive voice, “Stay peaceful!” He sent a similar message more than half an hour later. He still had not appeared in person on any medium at this point. Trump eventually released a video that told his supporters,

Trump To Be “Most Impeached President… EVER!” With Impeachment Article To Be Introduced Monday

Looks like he’ll get his wish!

The ONLY President to EVER be impeached TWICE – and, on his way out the door!

What a miserable piece of filthy waste he is.

Hell will yawn wide to receive his worthless, wormy corpse.

---

CHARGE:

“Incitement of Insurrection”

“Incited by President Trump, a mob unlawfully breached the Capitol, injured law enforcement personnel, menaced Members of Congress and the Vice President, interfered with the Joint Session’s solemn Constitutional duty to certify the election results, and engaged in violent, deadly, destructive, and seditious acts.

“In all of this, President Trump gravely endangered the security of the United States and its institutions of government. He threatened the integrity of the democratic system, interfered with the peaceful transition of power, and imperiled a coordinate branch of government. He thereby betrayed his trust as President, to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.”

---

House Democrats to Introduce Article of Impeachment Against Trump

by Catherine Lucey, Natalie Andrews
Wall Street Journal
Friday, January 8, 2021

---

WASHINGTON—House Democrats plan to introduce an article of impeachment against President Trump on Monday, according to two Democratic aides, as lawmakers intensified calls to remove him from office after he encouraged a mob that later stormed the Capitol in an effort to disrupt the certification of his election loss to President-elect Joe Biden.

More than 150 House Democrats, well over half of the caucus, have signed on to the article of impeachment written by Reps. David Cicilline of Rhode Island, Ted Lieu of California and Jamie Raskin of Maryland that focuses on the breach of the Capitol complex and accuses the president of inciting an insurrection. If passed, it would make Mr. Trump the first president in the nation’s history to be impeached twice.

“This conduct is so grave and this president presents such a clear and present danger to our democracy, I don’t think you can simply say let’s just wait it out” until Mr. Trump leaves office, said Mr. Cicilline in an interview. Mr. Biden’s inauguration is Jan. 20.

While House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) said Friday the House will

Rand Paul Reads Disallowed Impeachment Question On Senate Floor

Kentucky Republican Senator Rand Paul today read his disallowed question from the Senate Impeachment Trial of Donald J. Trump, President of the United States.

His pertinent comments while on the Senate floor are excerpted, in part, below.

The essence of what he is saying, is alleging by questioning (asserting, would be more like it), is that, there was an impeachment conspiracy being cooked up by governmental officials against the President, long before the President’s now-infamous July 25th phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

He points to several faults with the FISA Court system, and what was very likely FBI abuse of that court system to “spy,” as he puts it, upon American citizens, and extrapolates from there.

To further bolster his case, Senator Paul points to open testimony given to the Senate by then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper on March 12, 2013 in response to a question by Ron Wyden, an Oregon Democrat.

Senator Wyden asked, “Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?”

Mr. Clapper replied, “No sir … not wittingly.”

We knew that Mr. Clapper lied because he later obliquely stated that he did in an interview with NBC’s Andrea Mitchell who asked him why he answered the way he did.

Clapper answered saying, “I thought, though in retrospect, I was asked ‘when are you going to … stop beating your wife’ kind of question, which is … not answerable necessarily by a simple yes or no. So I responded in what I thought was the most truthful, or least untruthful, manner by saying, ‘No.’”

Senator Wyden had also earlier given Mr. Clapper advance notice that he would ask that question, so in a sense, he was “putting him in a box,” and expecting him to either deny it, or admit it in his testimony. Senator Wyden is a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, so he was regularly briefed on Top Secret programs, and knew the answer would be ‘YES’ before he asked it. He was simply giving Director Clapper an opportunity to be forthright about the matter. Director Clapper could have answered more circumspectly, or even use more finesse in his response, though he did neither.

But more to the point, Kentucky Senator Rand Paul does raise some interesting questions, although, on the whole, it certainly seems as if he’s

Lamar Alexander And Lisa Murkowksi Vote To Acquit Charles Manson

United States Senator from Tennessee, Lamar Alexander

Tennessee’s United States Senator, Lamar Alexander (b.1940), a 3-term Republican who is retiring this year, recently said of his decision to vote to acquit the President in the Impeachment Trial of Donald J. Trump, that, “I’m going to vote to acquit. I’m very concerned about any action that we could take that would establish a perpetual impeachment in the House of Representatives whenever the House was a different party than the president. That would immobilize the Senate.”

Alexander’s remarks were made in an interview on the NBC News program “Meet the Press” which aired Sunday, 02 February 2020.

He had previously issued a press release 30 January 2020, which stated in part that,

“It was inappropriate for the president to ask a foreign leader to investigate his political opponent and to withhold United States aid to encourage that investigation. When elected officials inappropriately interfere with such investigations, it undermines the principle of equal justice under the law. But

Did Trump ever express concern for Ukraine corruption BEFORE Joe Biden started campaigning?

While the news reporting outlets (aka “media”) do their best to report on the goings-on of the Senate Trial of the Impeachment of Donald John Trump, President of the United States, they are hampered significantly because Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has disallowed electronic devices in the chambers – even for Senators – and the press is squirreled away in a little cubby corner of the viewing gallery on the 2nd floor.

The only cameras are 2 television cameras owned/operated by the Senate. Even C-SPAN (the Cable-Satellite Public Affairs Network) must carry the Senate’s broadcast version of the public proceedings.

Majority Leader McConnell did that specifically to limit exposure of the event to the press, which in turn reports to the public. He claimed that it would prevent “grandstanding” and “preening” by the Senators to the press, some of whom have a well-known-and-deserved reputation for being attention hogs.

West Virginia Senator Robert C. Byrd’s body lies in repose in the United States Senate Chamber. Pool photograph by Stephen Crowley/The New York Times

As an aside, the Senate is, as groups go, a very stodgy group of curmudgeonly old White men (primarily). Unlike the more vigorous (some say rancorous) House of Representatives, they are very “straight-laced,” and sticklers for the rules – which Majority Leader McConnell enforces with an iron fist. Aside from the C-SPAN cameras during Senate proceedings, they do not allow (and have not allowed) photography. During the funeral for Senator Robert C. Bryd (D-WV), the longest-serving Senator, a rarity of a still camera was allowed to make a few limited photographs of the event.
Read the related story here: https://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/07/01/behind-46/

“The very Senate that has defied still photographers and an independent television camera asked both Sotomayor and Kagan in their confirmation hearings if they would support camera coverage of Supreme Court proceedings,” Mr. Crowley said.

As it is now, he said, “every image you see out of the House and Senate, except the State of the Union, is controlled by the government.”

“They would say, ‘Senator Byrd doesn’t want any technology in there.’ They used him as an excuse.”

“With respect to Senator Byrd,” Mr. Crowley said, “I hope the leadership of both chambers will revisit the issue.”

Often, try as they might, the media doesn’t get it 100% error-free, though to their credit, they often acknowledge that their transcriptions are rushed, and for that reason, may contain errors. Thus, the only spot-on word-for-word transcript of the days proceedings are to be found in the Congressional Record of the Senate, which is published daily.

The following is excerpted from the CRS. The “S663” refers to the page number in the journal from which it is taken, and refers specifically to the Senate’s proceedings. The “116” in the url refers to the 116th Congress, while “CREC” in the url refers to “Congressional RECord.”

Congressional Record – Senate S663 January 29, 2020

https://www.congress.gov/116/crec/2020/01/29/CREC-2020-01-29-pt1-PgS645-2.pdf

–––––

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. Chief Justice.

The CHIEF JUSTICE. Senator.

Ms. COLLINS. I send a question to the desk on behalf of myself and Senator MURKOWSKI.

The CHIEF JUSTICE. Thank you. The question is to counsel for the President: Witnesses testified before the House that President Trump consistently expressed the view that Ukraine was a corrupt country. Before Vice President Biden formally entered the 2020 presidential race in April 2019, did President Trump ever mention Joe or Hunter Biden in connection with corruption in Ukraine to former Ukrainian President Poroshenko or other Ukrainian officials, President Trump’s cabinet members or top aides, or others? If so, what did the President say to whom and when?

Mr. Counsel PHILBIN. Mr. Chief Justice, Senators, thank you for that question. Of course, I think it is important at the outset to frame the answer by bearing in mind I am limited to what is in the record, and

GAO: Trump Violated Law

Ukraine, schmookraine.

Who gives a rats rip what Trump did, eh?

Seriously.

And yet, that is precisely the attitude that some have about the matter in which the President has found himself placed, which has also led to his impeachment.

Some say, “Ukraine got their money. What’s the big deal?”

Yet others say, it’s all water under the bridge, or worse.

So, let’s examine the matter more fully in order to understand exactly what’s going on, and what’s at stake.

And, for the most part, we’re going to ignore many remarks the Democrats have been making. Well, at least much of them. We’re concerned with the basis for the claim. As it turns out, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) is also concerned with that matter – that matter being the question, “Did the President of the United States violate any law in the Ukraine affair?”

But before we proceed further, let’s first answer a couple of important questions about the Government Accountability Office:

What is the GAO, what do they do, and what authority do they have?

The GAO states this about their agency:

“The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) is an independent, nonpartisan agency that works for

GOP: Laws Do Not Apply To POTUS Trump

Where in America can you, I, or anyone, go to be immune from the law?

It’s a “trick question,” or… is it?

And yes, it’s a VERY serious question; in fact, it is an argument of which – believe it, or not – Federal Appeals Court Judges are considering the merits.

POTUS John Adams (1735-1826) c.1800-1815, painting by Gilbert Stuart (175-1828)

One simply can’t imagine the notion – that in our nation, a nation of laws, and not of men, that anyone could be above the law – and yet… here we are.

In February 1775, John Adams published a collection of essays entitled “Novanglus” – popularly known as the Novanglus Essays – where the idea that foundling nation which became “The United States of America” was a nation of laws, and not of men – was first known to be expressed.

James Harrington, oil on canvas, feigned oval, circa 1635, on display at Gawthorpe Hall, Burnley

Historians argue that the idea, or thought, was almost certainly derived from James Harrington (1611-1677), an English political philosopher, whose most renown work, “The Commonwealth of Oceana” (1656) was owned by Adams (3rd edition-1747), contains his signature on the title page, and is found in The John Adams Library of Boston Public Library, and may found online here:
https://archive.org/details/oceanaotherworks00harr/page/n5

On page 38 of the work, in the essay entitled “Oceana,” Harrington wrote in part that,

“Government, according to the Ancients, and their learned Disciple Machiavelli, the only Politician of later Ages is of three kinds: The Government of One Man, or of the Better Sort, or of the Whole People: which by their more learned names are called Monarchy, Aristocracy, and Democracy. These they hold, though their proponents to degenerate, to be all evil. For whereas they that govern, should govern according to Reason, if they govern according to Passion, they do that which they should not do. Wherefore as Reason and Passion are two things, so Government by Reason is one thing, and the corruption of Government by Passion is another thing, but not always another Government: as a Body that is alive is one thing, and a Body that is dead is another thing, but not always another Creature, though the corruption of one comes at length to be the Generation of another. The Corruption then of Monarchy is called Tyranny; that of Aristocracy, Oligarchy; and that of Democracy, Anarchy. But Legislators having found these three Governments at the best to be naught, have invented another consisting of a mixture of them all, which only is good. This is the Doctrine of the Ancients.”

So it seems almost certain that Adams derived that idea from James Harrington, but it was Adams’s use of the phrase which popularized it. Of note, Adams also wrote the clause “government of laws, and not of men” in the Declaration of Rights drafted for the Massachusetts Constitution in 1780.

Continuing…

In pertinent part, Adams wrote in Novanglus Essay No. VII, that,

“If Aristotle, Livy, and Harrington knew what a republic was,
the British constitution is much more like a republic than an empire.
They define a republic to be a government of laws, and not of men. [emphasis added]
If this definition be just,
the British constitution is nothing more nor less than a republic,
in which the king is first magistrate.
This office being hereditary,
and being possessed of such ample and splendid prerogatives,
is no objection to the government’s being a republic,
as long as it is bound by fixed laws,
which the people have a voice in making,
and a right to defend.
An empire is a despotism,
and an emperor a despot,
bound by no law or limitation but his own will;
it is a stretch of tyranny beyond absolute monarchy.
For,
although the will of an absolute monarch is law,
yet his edicts must be registered by parliaments.
Even this formality is not necessary in an empire.
There the maxim is quod principi placuit legis habet rigorem,
even without having that will and pleasure recorded.
There are but three empires now in Europe,
the German or Holy Roman,
the Russian,
and the Ottoman.”

George Santayana

The aphorism written in 1905 by philosopher/author George Santayana in The Life of Reason, vol. 1: Reason in Common Sense, seems apropos here:

“Those who cannot remember the past
are condemned to repeat it.”

And so, that begs the question…

How could we have possibly gotten to this so very corrupted point?

Samuel Johnson

Again, let the words of the wise guide us, because when ideas or thoughts are repeated, it re-emphasizes their importance.

Renown lexicographer Samuel Johnson (1709–84) expressed that idea as much in Rambler No. 2 (24 March 1750) when he wrote in part that,

“Men more frequently require to be reminded than informed.”

It is of unimaginable necessity that it is incumbent upon us to recollect this saying made by a GOP Presidential nominee candidate upon the campaign trail heading toward the Republican national convention:

“I could
stand in the middle of 5th Avenue
and shoot somebody,
and wouldn’t lose any voters…
okay?
It’s, like, incredible.”

POS45

–– Donald J. Trump, then-candidate for the Republican nomination as President, at a campaign rally 23 January 2016 at Dordt College, in Sioux Center, Iowa

On October 23, 2019, William S. Consovoy, an attorney defending Trump against a suit filed by the House of Representatives seeking his tax returns, told the three-judge panel (en banc) of the Second United States Circuit Court of Appeals that Trump was LITERALLY immune from ANY type of prosecution.

Judge Denny Chin asked Mr. Consovoy, “What’s your view on the Fifth Avenue example? Local authorities couldn’t investigate, they couldn’t do anything about it?”

Mr. Consovoy replied, “I think once the president is

Trump is NOT above the law.

It has begun.

Debate will last 6 hours – 3 hours each for Democrats -and- Republicans.

This is SERIOUS stuff.

It is NOT a “witch hunt,” “fake news,” or any other absurd claim which Trump, his GOP sycophants, or his other blind supporters have made.

AND… “YES!”

Michigan’s U.S. Representative Rashida Tlaib (13-D) said, “And when your son looks at you and says, ‘Mama, look, you won. Bullies don’t win,’ and I said, ‘Baby, they don’t’ – because we’re gonna go in there and we’re going to impeach the motherfucker.”

Why would she ever say such a thing?

Because our nation’s Intelligence and Investigative services ALL KNEW that the Russians had interfered in our election to aid Trump and get him elected.

Her remarks were made AFTER the Director of National Intelligence, the FBI, the CIA, and ALL 17 Intelligence Services concluded the exact same thing – Russians directly interfered in the 2016 General Election to elect Donald Trump.

They – the Russians – were successful.

And WHY?!?

Why did the Russians do that?

Precisely to bring about division and confusion in our nation which is now painfully present.

The Russians have won Phase One of their War Against Freedom – destroy your enemy from within, get them to destroy themselves. Bullets need not be fired, troops need not be dispatched.

The only bomb that been dropped is not just Trump’s election, but the revelations that the man who has long been known to be a skilled and chronically habitual liar – Donald John Trump – lied about what he did, despite overwhelming testimony to the contrary from numerous honorable men and women who have faithfully served in various offices – ranging from our Armed Services, Intelligence Services, to the Diplomatic Corps, and more – in our nation for decades.

Some say that the “Cold War” is over, since the Communists are now apparently gone from Russian government. They claim that since Russia is no longer called the USSR (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics), that Vladimir Putin, who for many years was the head of the KGB – their Secret Police – (now known as the GRU) and is now “President” of Russia, is some benign benefactor or friendly power to which we should bow.

The lyrics of British rock group “The Who” in their 1971 song “Won’t Get Fooled Again” perfectly and succinctly express the present condition in Russia:

“Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.”

The Russians have NEVER been our friends, even though

Electing a god

Some Republicans and Trump voters/supporters have realized something that the Democrats, in large part, have not:

Their chosen candidate is not perfect – no, far from it.

And, that’s okay.

As I consider Mayor Pete, Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren, former VP Joe Biden, and Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders — the top four Democratic nominee contender-candidates — each one of them has increasingly been attacked, either by another candidate (though not by name), or by the media/press who pointedly critique their ideas and prospective policy platforms as if they were already done, set in stone, or otherwise enacted into law, though those same media critics neither offer, nor point to, nor counter any idea, or offer with any prospective alternative solution(s) themselves.

In other words, rather than offer constructive criticism, the press just bitches, gripes, moans, groans, and complains.

That’s not good.

Somehow, over the years (and more so in recent history), the “media,” as it’s called nowadays, has come to think of, and present themselves as, impartial arbiters, seemingly non-critical thinking, individuals who are neither opinionated, nor fraught with their own biases, however hidden (or not) they may want others to believe that they are. That somehow, they — and only they — know the truth, and only they can be trusted to always tell the truth at all times, in all circumstances, forever and ever… amen.

That’s just simply not the case, nor has it ever been.

The “Fourth Estate,” as it has long been known (though it’s now often simply monikered as “the media”), consists of the Press which

It IS Possible for Republicans and Democrats to get things done For The People

It IS possible for Republicans and Democrats to cooperate, collaborate, and otherwise get along with each other to get things done For The People.

For the record, I am not now, nor have I ever been, a member of any political party.

I am the proverbial GDI – God Damn Independent – and always have been. I’ve never been a part of any “Greek” or social fraternity, exclusive club, nor secret society, neither before, during, nor after university graduation. And, I have always sought to support, advocate, and do the thing that would benefit the most – if not all – people… and still do.

Many, if not most, people do not have the interest in participating in political process, because, in large part, they feel alienated, isolated, and ignored, despite their history of voting. Thus, they feel, and are effectively, disenfranchised from participating in Constitutionally-mandated self-governance practices.

When asked by a friend, “Why do we tolerate any of them?” (“them” being politicians), I replied:

“Because we need government, but are too complacent to act, we have thus become prisoners here, of our own device, thus perpetuating the worst, most egregious examples of self-governing behavior.”

I answered the follow-up question, “How are to act against it?,” thusly:

“Become ACTIVE in self-governance, not only by regularly voting, but by advocating for/against issues, for candidates, and encouraging other to do similarly.

“That includes making voting easier, and inclusive, establishing term limits for public elected offices, and limiting the inevitable corrupting influence of money by mandating widespread public reporting, and changing other rules governing money in politics to provide openness and transparency.

“Tennessee, for example, is to be commended for enacting law mandating early voting, and allowing voting at any polling location for a full week in the voter’s county of residence, and by enacting paid leave of 3 hours to vote, which cannot be denied by the employer.” (Tennessee Code Annotated, §2-1-106, was enacted in 1972.)

“However, Tennesseans and other states – notably in the Southeast – could do more, as could the nation, by requiring Voter Registration in High School, enacting Balloting by Mail, and other forms of voting participation, such as making General Election Days paid holidays.

“Some, I know, do not vote for religious conscience reasons, such as our Jehovah’s Witnesses brethren, but mandating Voter Registration is NOT mandating voting, and thus, they and others like them with such religious compunctions, would not be violated.”

The exchange continued briefly with a retort that, “It’s hard to

House Judiciary Committee Votes to Impeach Trump, Senate Likely Won’t Convict

The House Judiciary Committee has concluded Voting on Articles of Impeachment.
Read them here:
https://docs.house.gov/meetings/JU/JU00/20191211/110331/BILLS-116755ih-U1.pdf

Article 1 – Abuse of Power: 23 Ayes, 17 Noes
Article 2 – Obstruction of Congress: 23 Ayes, 17 Noes

As expected, based upon the evidence, the Democrats have voted to impeach POS45, and the GOP denies anything ever happened.

To be reported to the House.
Committee is adjourned.

The House, with 235 Democratic members, has the majority over Republicans’ 199. Presumably, all Democrats will vote to approve the Articles of Impeachment.

From there (the House), if approved by the House, the Articles of Impeachment would go to the Senate for a Trial, which would be presided over by SCOTUS Chief Justice John Roberts.

Senate votes to watch:
1.) Mitt Romney-UT, R
2.) Cory Gardner-CO, R, Class 2, up for re-election
3.) Tim Scott-SC, R,
4.) Susan Collins-ME, R, Class 2, up for re-election
5.) Angus King-ME, I
6.) Rand Paul-KY, R
7.) John Kennedy-LA, R
8.) Lisa Murkowski-AK, R, Class 2, up for re-election
9.) Martha McSally-AZ, R, up for Special Election in 2020, appointed to fulfill John McCain’s (Class 3) term, following John Kyl’s resignation. General Election will be in 2022.
10.) Lamar Alexander-TN, R, Class 2, retiring

Senator Alexander issued a written statement about impeachment October 8, 2019 as follows:

“It’s inappropriate for the president to be talking with foreign governments about investigating his political opponents, but impeachment would be a mistake. An election, which is just around the corner, is the right way to decide who should be president. Impeachment has never removed a president. It will only divide the country further.

“If the House impeaches the president, the Senate would be the jury. There would be many twists and turns between now and a Senate trial. Therefore, as a potential juror, I will have nothing more to say about impeachment until all the evidence is presented and all the arguments are made.”

All are GOPers, save Angus King, who defected from the Democrats to become independent in 1993, though like Bernie Sanders, he caucuses with them.

There are 53 GOP Senators, and to convict, and thereby remove from office, requires a Constitutionally-mandated ⅔ vote of members present (Article I, section 3). The VP CANNOT participate.

I sincerely doubt the Senate will vote to convict

– even on Obstruction of Congress charges –

despite overwhelming open evidence that he did,
and his own public admissions that he did.

The Constitution requires a 2/3 vote of all Senators present to convict. If all 100 are present, that’s 67 votes.

There are 53 GOPers in the Senate (and 2 Independents, who caucus with the 45 Democrats), which would mean that, in order to obtain the 67 necessary votes, 20 GOPers would have to vote with the Democrats and Independents (who presumably will vote to convict). And, there are 4 GOP Senators retiring in 2020 – which is important, because they could vote their conscience to convict, and not be concerned about re-election.

Even if all 10 votes to watch (as mentioned above) voted with the Democrats, there’d still be 10 more GOP votes needed to convict, and that most likely ain’t gonna’ happen.

This is STRICTLY a power play, and the ONLY reason the GOP tolerates Trump is because of a line in the Bob Seger song “Night Moves”:

“I used her, she used me; neither one cared.”

However, come November, there’ll be several Senators up for re-election, and five announced retirements, and in at least one

Famous Last Words

Brought to you by Twitter.

The right 2 pursue impeachment is an indispensable power that Congress has 4 holding government officials accountable 2 the American people

— Rep. Jim Jordan (@Jim_Jordan) December 6, 2016

Jim Jordan is a Republican who has represented Ohio’s 4th Congressional District since 2007.

It – the blatant hypocrisy – would be funny, if it weren’t so sad.

Representative Jordan continues to be an outspoken critic of the Impeachment Investigation which the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (aka the House Intelligence Committee) has been conducting over the past couple weeks. The committee has been investigating allegations that President Trump abused the office of the President and betrayed the American people, and possibly even violated law, by withholding Congressionally-mandated and approved monies specifically appropriated for Ukrainian defense against our common enemy, Russia.

In 2014, Russia invaded Crimea, an independent autonomous territory in the Southern Ukraine bordering the Black Sea, following civil unrest there. At the time, Ukraine was in the midst of socio-political turmoil as a national revolution was under way.

Then-former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, who was friendly to Russia, had requested assistance from Russian President Vladimir Putin to

Political Blotter for Week Ending 24 November 2019

After weeks of public hearings, bipartisan political theatrics, and Tweets, POTUS Trump’s “ass is in a sling” after Gordon Sondland, his Ambassador to the European Union, and political donor who gave $1 million to Trump’s inaugural committee, testified before the United States House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and said that “I know that members of this committee have frequently framed these complicated issues in the form of a simple question: Was there a ‘quid pro quo?’ As I testified previously, with regard to the requested White House call and White House meeting, the answer is ‘yes’.”

Ambassador Sondland further testified that, “They knew what we were doing and why. Everyone was in the loop. It was no secret.”

Regarding any official explanation for why POS45 held up the Congressionally-mandated money for Ukraine, he said, “I tried diligently to ask why the aid was suspended, but I never received a clear answer.”

Of course, POS45 had to deny it all and had the unmitigated gall and audacity to say of Sondland – again, whom he appointed as Ambassador to the European Union after Sondland donated $1 million to Trump’s inaugural committee – that, “This is not a man I know well.”

Aside from the obvious bomb drops which’ve occurred this week in the Impeachment Investigation being conducted by the United States House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence – which include testimony by:

• Gordon Sondland, Ambassador to the European Union,
that
“yes,” there was “a quid pro quo.”

• Dr. Fiona Hill, Former Deputy Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Europe and Russia and Senior Director for Europe and Russia, National Security Council,
that
“It is a fiction that the Ukrainian Government was launching an effort to upend our election, upend our election to mess with our Democratic systems.”

• Lieutenant Colonel Alexander S. Vindman, Director for European Affairs, National Security Council,
that
“supposed Ukrainian involvement in partisan support of candidate Clinton and in opposition to President Trump,” was a “key element of that particular narrative that developed… that the Ukrainians would have to deliver an investigation into the Bidens,”
-and- that,
“in the President asking for something, it became — there was — in return for a White House meeting, because that’s what this was about. This was about getting a White House meeting. It was a demand for him to fulfill his — fulfill this particular prerequisite in order to get the meeting.”

• Ambassador P. Michael McKinley, Former Senior Advisor to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo,
that,
“I was concerned about what I saw as the lack of public support for Department employees,”
and that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s continued refusal to interact, or respond to him on the firing of U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch, or of his own intent to resign,
“indicated a lack of support that was broader than simply a question of statements.”

• William B. Taylor, Jr., Chargé d’Affaires Ad Interim for U.S. Embassy in Kyiv, Ukraine,
that
“That was my clear understanding, security assistance money would not come until the President [of Ukraine] committed to pursue the investigation,”
and
“that President Trump would like to hear about the investigations” of the Bidens, that “it was becoming clear to the Ukrainians that, in order to get this meeting that they wanted, they would have to commit to pursuing these investigations. And Mr. Danyliuk, at least, understood — and I’m sure that he briefed President Zelensky, I’m sure they had this conversation — believed that openingthose investigations, in particular on Burisma, would have involved Ukraine in the 2020 election campaign. He did not want to do that,”
-and- that
“In a regular, NSC secure video conference call on July 18th, I heard a staff person from the Office of Management and Budget say that there was a hold on security assistance to Ukraine but could not say why. Toward the end of this otherwise normal meeting, a voice on the call, the person who was off screen, said that she was from OMB and her boss had instructed her not to approve any additional spending of security assistance for Ukraine until further notice,”
-and- that
“President Trump did insist that President Zelensky go to a microphone and say he is opening investigations of Biden and 2016 election interference, and that President Zelensky should want to do this himself. Mr. Morrison said that he told Ambassador Bolton and the NSC lawyers of this phone call between President Trump and Ambassador Sondland.”

And then, there’s this – though it’s not now receiving much press – which recently happened:

Lev Parnas Helped Rep. Devin Nunes’ Investigations
“The indicted Giuliani associate helped arrange meetings and calls in Europe for the Republican congressman in 2018.”

by Betsy Swan, Political Reporter
Updated Nov. 21, 2019 3:16AM ET
Published Nov. 20, 2019 7:58PM ET
https://www.thedailybeast.com/lev-parnas-helped-rep-devin-nunes-investigations

“Lev Parnas, an indicted associate of Rudy Giuliani, helped arrange meetings and calls in Europe for Rep. Devin Nunes in 2018, Parnas’ lawyer Ed MacMahon told The Daily Beast.

“Nunes aide Derek Harvey participated in the meetings, the lawyer said, which were arranged to help Nunes’

Jim Jordan’s “landslides” are dangerous.

During his times speaking at the impeachment inquiry, Ohio Representative Jim Jordan (R-4) continues characterizing Trump’s Electoral College (EC) victory as a “landslide.”

Winning 304 (56.5%) to 227 of 538 total EC votes is hardly a “landslide.”

Winning 30 states (60%) to 20 is hardly a “landslide.”

And losing 62,984,828 (46.1%) to 65,853,514 (48.2%) popular votes is by no means a “landslide.”

Nixon’s 1972 re-election, however, was a landslide, with 520 EC votes (96.65%), 49 states carried (98%) -and- 60.7% of the popular vote.

Of course, you know what happened during Nixon’s second term.

Ambassador William Taylor’s opening statement UNAMBIGUOUSLY and WITHOUT QUESTION detailed EVERY Criminal Act which President Trump committed – extortion, bribery, etc. -and- in excruciating detail, dates, times, quotes… the whole 9 yards. Giuliani, and Ambassador Sondland (a Trump donor & appointee) in those activities.

Mr. Taylor is the Chargé d’Affaires ad interim for Ukraine in June 2019, assuming the role from the Deputy Chief of Mission, Kristina Kvien, after Marie Yovanovitch departed Ukraine.

I have concluded that the ONLY reason that partisan GOPers are supporting Trump (even though they may privately loathe him) is for

“Dad… Don’t worry, I will be fine for telling the truth.”

“Dad, my sitting here today, in the US Capitol talking to our elected officials is proof that you made the right decision forty years ago to leave the Soviet Union and come here to the United States of America in search of a better life for our family. Do not worry, I will be fine for telling the truth.”

Alexander S. Vindman, LEFT, (who was born 9 minutes before his brother) with his twin brother, Yevgeny, at the Pentagon in 2016. They are both Lieutenant Colonels in the Army. Yevgeny, who goes by Eugene, also serves on POTUS Trump’s National Security Council, as an attorney handling ethics issues. (Credit Carol Kitman)

— Lt. Col Alexander Vindman (US Army), concluding opening comment 19 November 2019 in the impeachment investigation. LTC Vindman and his family emigrated to the United States from Ukraine, then part of Russia, when his father was aged 47, and he was then-aged 3-and-a-half in 1979. LTC Vindman has shed blood for our nation, having been awarded the Purple Heart for injuries sustained in an October 2004 Iraqi roadside attack. He previously served on the Pentagon’s Joint Staff from September 2015 to July 2018, and is currently assigned to the National Security Council as a foreign area officer specializing in Eurasian political-military operations, specifically including Ukraine. He earned his Bachelor’s degree from Binghamton University, and his Master’s in Public Administration from Harvard.

The Army records LTC Vindman’s awards, which include:
Purple Heart, Defense Meritorious Service Medal (2^nd award),

Literacy Is Way Overrated

Apparently, literacy is way overrated.

At least, that seems how some see it.

</sarcasm>

“There had been a whistleblower complaint and a partial transcript of a phone call between President Trump and the president of Ukraine. Both could be read as damning, even dramatically so. But both were documents. To be outraged, you probably had to read them. Most people didn’t.“

 

Impeachment May Gain Momentum From First Big Moment

https://www.npr.org/2019/11/01/775259234/at-long-last-launch-impeachment-may-gain-momentum-from-first-big-moment

 

“There had been nothing like the thunderclap in September 1998. That’s when a flotilla of black SUVs came to the Capitol bearing the report of Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr, with 18 boxes of evidence, and President Bill Clinton’s impeachment became all but inevitable.”

Gotta’ hand it to the Republicans.

They know how to manipulate public opinion using media and showmanship.

That’s a somewhat diplomatic phrase meaning to pull the wool over your eyes, or “fool you.”

Just look at their current president.

He’s a goddamned Liar in Chief.

And a true scumbag, if ever there was one.

Democrats gotta’ feel the outrage and get emotional.

So, I’m all for this:

“LET US IN!” House Republicans LITERALLY Scream

While for many years it has been common practice to exclude some Members of Congress from sensitive Congressional investigations if they are not committee members – such as when Republicans began an investigation into the 2012 attack upon the U.S. embassy in Benghazi, Libya – apparently, Republicans think the rules don’t apply to them, and when things don’t go their way, behave like petulant children.

About 2 dozen House Republicans staged a protest outside the closed-door, secure room committee where depositions were ongoing, and screamed “LET US IN! LET US IN!”

Flanked by about two dozen House Republicans, U.S. Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., argues that all GOP lawmakers should have access to closed-door depositions in the impeachment inquiry. Committee rules dictate that only those on the panels conducting the probe can attend.
Image by Alex Wong/Getty Images

The area is designated as secure — meaning that classified materials and witness testimony is discussed there, and only select lawmakers and a small number of staff are allowed entry.

Republican lawmakers tried to enter with their cellphones, which is a violation of the rules for a secure information facility and a breach of national security protocols. Rep. Ted Lieu (CA-33, D) said that the Republican effort to enter the secure area without authorization was

Dorian Is Trump’s “Perfect Storm”

Hurricane Dorian will be the “perfect storm” to end President Donald Trump’s autocratic regime.

His administration has mishandled the events in Puerto Rico with Hurricane Maria. Those American citizens STILL haven’t recovered, and his anemic administration has kept the FEMA from doing their job.

Maybe it’s because they’re one of his so-called “shithole countries.”

Imagine that. Puerto Ricans are American. But again, his racism is also equally well known.

But he did toss them some paper towels. That’s been a BIGLY HUGE help. Maybe this time, he’ll airdrop a planeload of them from Air Force One to affected areas.

He has wasted the summer break by not campaigning, and all polls show his approval ratings are well under water. With the storm surge predicted from Hurricane Dorian, it’ll be the end of the USS Trumpanzee in Chief.

There’s great irony in the fact that hurricanes come from Africa. And Hurricane Dorian is

Corruption Runs Amok In Alabama

Update: Saturday, 20 February 2021
NOTE: TO THE READER: As you read any story mentioning, involving or written by Donald V. Watkins, Sr., it must be borne in mind that he is now a Federal Convict, and along with his son, Donald V. Watkins, Jr., was found guilty of numerous charges. “Donald Watkins Sr. was convicted of seven counts of wire fraud, two counts of bank fraud and one count of conspiracy. Donald Watkins Jr. was convicted of one count of wire fraud and one count of conspiracy.” As of the date of this note, he is in Federal Custody at Oklahoma City Federal Transfer Center, an administrative security facility, having been relocated away from the minimum security Federal Prison Camp on Maxwell Air Force Base in Montgomery, Alabama.

DONALD V. WATKINS
Register Number: 36223-001
Age:	72
Race:	Black
Sex:	Male
Located at: Oklahoma City FTC
Release Date: 01/10/2024

Department of Justice, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Alabama
FATHER AND SON SENTENCED TO PRISON IN MULTIMILLION-DOLLAR INVESTMENT FRAUD SCHEME
Tuesday, July 16, 2019
https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndal/pr/father-and-son-sentenced-prison-multimillion-dollar-investment-fraud-scheme

Here also is the SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT dated December 2018 entitled as:
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. DONALD V. WATKINS, SR. and DONALD V. WATKINS, JR. – 2:18-cr-166-KOB-TMP
https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1116081/download

See also: Donald Watkins, Son Sentenced For Federal Fraud Convictions
Updated Jul 16, 2019; Posted Jul 16, 2019
https://www.al.com/news/2019/07/donald-watkins-son-to-be-sentenced-for-federal-fraud-convictions.html

See also: Donald Watkins’ $1.5 Billion Question: Was It Ever Real?
Updated Feb 23, 2019; Posted Feb 23, 2019
https://www.al.com/news/2019/02/donald-watkins-15-billion-question-was-it-ever-real.html

---

To be certain, few are likely as concerned that Alabama’s Republican Governor Robert Julian Bentley was maritally unfaithful to his wife, as they are that in the process, he abused, and misused the power and authority of his office to attempt to cover it up, and to deceive citizens and others about it. And that in that process, he is believed to have violated state, and very likely, Federal laws. The ordeal is, as things go, a drama of Shakespearean proportion and caliber.

The full report of the Impeachment Committee may be found online, and downloaded FREE from:
http://BentleyInvestigation.com/report.pdf

 

—EDITORIAL—

Whoring for Governor Bentley and Rebekah Mason

By Donald V. Watkins
©Copyrighted and Published (via Facebook) on April 9, 2017
Used with permission

A lying, corrupt, and depraved Republican governor of Alabama is counting on Black members of the state legislature, all of whom are Democrats, to rise up and save him from impeachment.  No, this is not a Hollywood movie.  It is a real life drama that is playing out in real time in the Alabama State House.

The governor is Robert Bentley, who is generally regarded as the laughingstock of the nation today. Not only did Bentley engage in widespread public corruption and ethics violations with his married girlfriend, Rebekah Caldwell Mason, but the governor also (a) trashed the state’s two historically Black state universities, (b) deprived Black and poor Alabamians of adequate healthcare, (c) discriminated against Black voters in the state’s legislative redistricting plan, and (d) erected massive barriers to Black voter participation in the state’s electoral process.

In this Tuesday, November 4, 2014 file photo, retired physician, and Republican Gov. Dr. Robert Bentley, MD listens to a phone call as Rebekah Mason, right, announces his win for a second term as Alabama Governor, in Montgomery, AL. Bentley defeated his opponent, retired physician Democrat Dr. Parker Griffith, MD. (AP Photo/Brynn Anderson, File)

Yet, Bentley and Mason still exercise a shocking degree of dominion and control over many of the state’s Black lawmakers, including some of the ones who serve on the Judiciary Committee that is conducting Bentley’s impeachment proceedings.

For a fleeting moment in time, Bentley even had Judge Greg Griffin, a Black state circuit court jurist, thinking that he had the power and authority to lawfully block the Alabama Legislature’s impeachment proceedings. The Alabama Supreme Court overturned Judge Griffin’s ruling in record time. Griffin is a Bentley appointee to the bench.

Bentley has a well-known record of treating Black lawmakers like his personal servants.  When he is not whipping them for what he perceives as “bad” behavior, the governor is making these compromised souls carry his dirty, smelly political baggage.  They dutifully accommodate the governor’s commands for a mere pat on the head.

Alabamians will witness Black lawmakers engage in political servitude to Governor Bentley this week.  Please pay particular attention to

The @GOP’s Love/Hate Relationship With @realDonaldTrump Is Beginning To Show Hair

November 12, 2016
Day 4: The shit’s starting to hit the fam… er, fan

Donald Trump, the GOP Presidential nominee who appears to have won the 2016 General Election, has reportedly made remarks that he might not, after all, as he proclaimed in his “Contract with the American Voter” that he would “5.) Repeal and Replace Obamacare Act. Fully repeals Obamacare and replaces it with Health Savings Accounts, the ability to purchase health insurance across state lines…”

Strike One:
According to his first post-election interview, which was exclusive to the Wall Street Journal, “President-elect Donald Trump said he would consider leaving in place certain parts of the Affordable Care Act,” and that “Mr. Trump said he favors keeping the prohibition against insurers denying coverage because of patients’ existing conditions, and a provision that allows parents to provide years of additional coverage for children [up to age 26] on their insurance policies.”

Regular readers will recall that yesterday I had made the same observation, that portions of the law are worth keeping.

President-elect Donald Trump leaves a meeting with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), at the U.S. Capitol November 10, 2016 in Washington, DC Zach Gibson/Getty Images

Strike Two:
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (KY, R) has pointedly said he opposes and will refuse Trump’s first order of business in his Contract with the American Voter which is “Constitutional Amendment for Congressional Term Limits.” The Senator, who has been in office since 1984 (32 years), said, “I would say we have term limits now. They’re called elections. And it will not be on the agenda in the Senate.”

Strike Three:
Furthermore, McConnnell has also said that he’s opposed to