Tuesday, September 19, 2017

DACA - A Perspective

A large percentage of the political class uses the argument that “The children should not be PUNISHED for the illegal behavior of their parents”.  The opposite argument that “The children should not be REWARDED for the illegal behavior of their parents” is conveniently ignored.  To me, this is the crux of the problem.

There is no question that the DACA children, many of who are now adults and many of whom know of their parents illegal actions, have received substantial benefit from the American taxpayers.  From schools, healthcare, housing, food, and welfare, they are far better off than they would have otherwise been.  In other words, they have reaped the reward of law breaking thanks to the American taxpayer.

Supposedly, we are a nation of laws and not of rulers.  At times, this means that tough decisions have to be made to right wrongs, even when those wrongs seem innocent.  By the way, try telling a judge “I didn’t know” as the response is likely to be “Ignorance of the Law is no excuse”.  Sadly, we had a president, Obama, who recognized he did not have the constitutional legal authority to grant some form of amnesty yet, as any imperial ruler would do, he did it anyway.  Moving on:

It is difficult to find out just how many DACA individuals are in the country.  The figures quoted for a total number of such individuals in America is about 800,000 but it could easily be a couple of million.  Nobody knows for sure, but the lower number favors amnesty because the political class will argue that it is but a relatively small number.  If the truth is in the millions, they will just “ho hum” and issue a “we didn’t know” apology that really isn’t an apology at all

The next question is how many work and how many are on welfare.  The numbers again vary quite a bit but about half seems reasonable based on an Internet search of a variety of sources.  Actually, the number could be quite a bit higher but 400,000 working DACA individuals seem reasonable.  However, to be honest, it could be half or less of that number (unless there are actually millions of DACA individuals in the country).

The next question is how many DACA individuals are skilled and how many are unskilled.   I am sure the Bureau of Labor statistics could provide some numbers but the definitions continue to change so providing a number would be misleading.  However, since most of the DACA folks are relatively young, it seems reasonable to assume that most are going to be unskilled.  Thus, they directly compete with American citizen children seeking a first job and entry level unskilled Americans who may try to get off welfare and into the workforce.

The final vexing question is what to do with the DACA individuals.  The conventional wisdom is they can’t be thrown out of the country.  This is, of course, quite untrue as it happened in the past after WW2.  One can argue about the effectiveness of the “Operation Wetback” but not about whether it happened.  At this point, the political class, against the wishes of a large percentage of the American citizenry, seems destined to either grant some form of legal presence for the DACA individuals, all the way from semi-permanent restricted legal status to outright amnesty.  Of course, being the champions of virtue that they are, the political class may just do nothing.

If Congress, in its infinite wisdom or lack thereof, creates a pathway to legality for the DACA individuals, there will almost certainly be wave after wave of future refugees who will eventually overwhelm the country as has happened in California and is now happening throughout Western Europe.  The USA of the future will likely lose its history, its constitution, and its individual rights.  (The seeds of historic destruction are being sown now in places like Charlottesville, Berkeley, Boston, and others.)

By Bob W. CARMA Member

Tuesday, September 5, 2017

FBI's Comey, and Candidate Clinton Rigged From The Start

By Steve Cortes  (Fox News)

Published September 02, 2017
Newly disclosed evidence that then-FBI Director James Comey began working on a statement to reject criminal charges against former Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton months before she and other key witnesses were interviewed by the FBI shows that President Trump was right to fire Comey.

The evidence proves that Trump and his supporters were correct to say throughout the presidential campaign that Washington operates on a “rigged” crony system that serves the interests of the powerful and rewards corporate globalists to the detriment of the American people.

As evidence of the rigged system, voters sided with Trump during the campaign in often citing Clinton’s apparent immunity from consequences regarding her unsavory acts as secretary of state, especially her hidden emails on a private server, as well as corrupt Clinton Foundation dealings. 

Given what we learned in recent days about Comey, the investigation he oversaw of Clinton represented the very worst of the rigged process. Instead of acting as an impartial, honest fact-finder on behalf of the American people, Comey behaved like a partisan hack.

The former FBI director’s reprehensible behavior both during and after his tenure surely validates the judgment of President Trump in firing a man totally unfit to oversee our most revered law enforcement agency in our nation.

The new evidence is revealed in a letter sent Wednesday to FBI Director Christopher Wray from Republican Senators Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina. The letter is a bombshell, and didn’t get anywhere near the media attention it deserves.

The evidence disclosed by Grassley and Graham comes from the Office of Special Counsel, a government agency that investigated whether Comey violated the law when he was FBI director. The investigation was closed after Comey was fired. The new evidence shows that Comey drafted a memo exonerating Clinton of wrongdoing as early as April 2016, even though Clinton was not interviewed until July 2016.

As Grassley and Graham correctly stated in their letter:  “conclusion first, fact-gathering second – that’s no way to run an investigation.”

In fact, after Comey wrote his “nothing to see here” draft absolving Clinton of wrongdoing, the FBI still interviewed a total of 17 key officials. In addition to Clinton herself, State Department Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills, who was appointed by Clinton and served under her, was also questioned. Mills received a very unusual immunity agreement from investigators. 

How is it possible that Comey had ascertained, at such an early date, that the evidence would not incriminate Hillary Clinton? Such a prejudicial judgment certainly reveals a shocking level of bias and a dangerous willingness to engage in partisan politics.

Understandably, President Trump reacted to the new evidence with indignation, tweeting Friday: “Comey exonerated Hillary Clinton long before the investigation was over … a rigged system!” 

Many Americans had already concluded that Comey’s investigation of Clinton was a sham. The majority in a July 2016 Washington Post/ABC News poll disagreed with Comey’s decision to not seek an indictment against her.

The American people were poorly served by an FBI director who shirked his duty as a public servant. They thankfully delivered their verdict on Clinton’s suitability for the Oval Office at the ballot box last November.

Adding insult to injury, Comey’s deceptive practices extended beyond his FBI tenure.  Once he was fired by President Trump, he again showed his true colors by leaking confidential information to the media with the expressed intention of triggering a special counsel investigation

Comey’s pattern of unethical bias, plus his personal ties to Special Counsel Robert Mueller going back many years, seriously tarnish Mueller’s standing.

Donald Trump triumphed in 2016 because he promised to “drain the swamp” in Washington.  Sadly, the swamp has proven resilient, from Capitol Hill to James Comey in obstructing the president’s transformational agenda.

In the end, the will of the people must prevail and smash a rigged system that has stolen the dignity and prosperity of Americans.

Steve Cortes is a Fox News contributor, former Trump campaign operative and spokesman for the Hispanic 100. For two decades, he worked on Wall Street as a trader and strategy.
Reading this article and then opening the “in a letter” hot link in the body of the article—and you see in a quick scan of the letter that Comey was floating for months to FBI reviewers versions of drafts to let Hillary off the hook.  And notice the dates of the witness interviews are all after Comey had been floating the exoneration memo for her.

And finally, notice that Comey didn’t bother to follow proper procedures with the Hillary interview just before he announced that she shouldn’t be prosecuted.  If this looks to us that it clearly stinks—what would an FBI professional assigned to the investigation feel about the Comey pre-judgment documented in the Grassley letter?  Logically Trump was briefed on all of this before he fired Comey.

Ron L. CARMA Member

Monday, August 28, 2017

A Short History Lesson on Robert E. Lee

Robert E Lee was married to George Washington's granddaughter. He worked with Grant during the Mexican-American war and became a decorated war hero defending this country. He believed slavery was a great evil and his wife broke the law by teaching slaves to read and write. After the civil war he worked with Andrew Johnson's program of reconstruction. He became very popular with the northern states and the Barracks at West Point were named in his honor in 1962. He was a great man who served this country his entire life in some form or other. His memorial is now being called a blight. No American military veteran should be treated as such. People keep yelling, "You can't change history." Sadly you can. This is no better than book burnings. ISIS tried rewriting history by destroying historical artifacts. Is that really who we want to emulate?

As they tear down this "blight" keep these few historical facts in your mind. No military veteran and highly decorated war hero should ever be treated as such. This is not Iraq and that is not a statue of Sadam.

IN ADDITION:: Lee was also very torn about the prospect of the South leaving the Union. His wife’s grandfather George Washington was a huge influence on him. He believed that ultimately, States rights trumped the federal government and chose to lead the Southern army.

His estate, Arlington, near Washington DC was his home and while away fighting the war, the federal government demanded that Lee himself pay his taxes in person. He sent his wife, but the money was not accepted from a woman. When he could not pay the taxes, the government began burying dead Union soldiers on his land. The government is still burying people there today. It is now called Arlington National Cemetery.  Do they want to tear that up also?

Saturday, August 19, 2017

Benghazi & Stinger Missiles - From Wikileaks...

From WikiLeaks -

Benghazi & Stinger Missiles

So here's the REAL story. 

Amb. Stevens was sent to Benghazi in order to retrieve US made Stinger missiles supplied to Ansar al Sharia without Congressional oversight or permission. 

Hillary brokered the deal through Stevens and a private arms dealer named Marc Turi.  Then some of the shoulder fired missiles ended up in Afghanistan and were used against our own military. 

It was July 25th, 2012 when a Chinook helicopter was taken down by one of our own Stingers, but the idiot Taliban didn't arm the missile and the Chinook didn't explode, but had to land anyway. 

An ordnance team recovered the serial number off the missile which led back to a cache of Stingers being kept in Qatar by the CIA. 

Obama and Hillary were now in full panic mode and Stevens was sent in to retrieve the rest of the Stingers.  This was a "do-or-die" mission, which explains the stand down orders given to multiple commando teams. 

It was the State Dept, not the CIA, that supplied them to our sworn enemies, because Petraeus wouldn't approve supplying these deadly weapons due to their potential use on commercial aircraft.  Then, Obama threw Gen. Petraeus under the bus after he refused to testify that he OK'd the BS talking points about a spontaneous uprising due to a YouTube video. 

Obama and Hillary committed treason and THIS is what the investigation is all about, why she had a private server, (in order to delete the digital evidence), and why Obama, two weeks after the attack, told the UN that the attack was the result of a YouTube video, even though everyone knew it was not. 

Further...the Taliban knew that this administration aided and abetted the enemy without Congressional approval when Boehner created the Select Cmte, and the Taliban began pushing the Obama Administration for the release of 5 Taliban Generals. 

Bowe Bergdahl was just a pawn...everyone KNEW he was a traitor.  So we have a traitor as POTUS that is not only corrupt, but compromised and a woman that is a serial liar, perjured herself multiple times at Congressional hearings.  Perhaps this is why no military aircraft was called in...because the administration knew our enemies had Stingers.  Forward this until everyone reads the true story.


Monday, August 7, 2017

Bits Of Historical Knowledge For You

Early aircraft  throttles had a ball on the end of it, in order to go full  throttle the pilot had to push the throttle all the way forward into the wall of the instrument panel. Hence "balls to the wall" for going very fast. And now you know the rest of the story. 

During WWII, U.S. Airplanes were armed with belts  of bullets which they would shoot during dogfights and on  strafing runs.  These belts were folded into the wing compartments that fed their machine guns. These belts measure 27 feet and contained hundreds of rounds of bullets. Often times, the pilots would return from their missions having expended all of their bullets  on various targets. They would say, I gave them the whole nine yards, meaning they used up all of their ammunition.  
Did you know the saying "God willing and the creek don't rise" was in reference to the Creek Indians and not  a body of water? It was written by Benjamin Hawkins in the late 18th century. He was a politician and Indian diplomat. While in the south, Hawkins was requested by the President of the U.S. to return to Washington. In his response, he was said to write, "God  willing and the Creek don't rise." Because he capitalized the word "Creek", he was referring to the Creek Indian tribe  and not a body of water.  
In George Washington's days, there were no cameras. One's image was either sculpted or painted. Some paintings  of  George Washington showed him standing behind a desk with one arm behind his back while others showed both legs and both arms. Prices charged by painters were not based on how many people were to be painted, but by how many limbs were to be painted. Arms  and legs are 'limbs,' therefore  painting them would cost the buyer more. Hence the expression, 'Okay,  but it'll cost you an arm and a leg.'  (Artists know hands and arms are more difficult to paint.)  
As incredible as it sounds, men and women took  baths only twice a year (May and October). Women kept their hair   covered, while men shaved their heads (because of lice and bugs) and wore wigs. Wealthy men could afford good wigs made from wool. They couldn't wash the wigs, so to clean them they would carve out a loaf of bread, put the wig in the shell, and bake it for  30 minutes. The heat would make the wig big and fluffy, hence the term 'big wig'. Today we often use the term 'here  comes the Big Wig' because someone appears to be or is powerful and wealthy.  
In the late 1700's, many houses consisted of a large room with only one chair. Commonly, a long wide board folded  down  from the wall, and was used for dining. The 'head of the household' always sat in the chair while everyone else ate sitting on the floor. Occasionally a guest, who was usually a man, would be invited to sit in this chair during a meal. To sit in the  chair meant you were important and in charge. They called the one sitting in the chair the 'chair man.' Today in business, we use the expression or title 'Chairman' or 'Chairman of the Board.'  
Personal hygiene left much room for improvement.  As a result, many women and men had developed acne scars by  adulthood. The women would spread bee's wax over their facial skin to smooth out  their complexions. When they were speaking to each other, if a woman  began to stare at another woman's face she was told, 'mind your own bee's wax.' Should the woman smile,  the wax would crack, hence the term 'crack a smile'. In addition, when they sat too close to the fire, the wax would melt. Therefore, the expression 'losing face.'  
Ladies wore corsets, which would lace up in the front. A proper and dignified woman, as in 'straight laced' wore  a tightly tied lace.  
Common entertainment included playing cards. However, there was a tax levied when purchasing playing cards but  only  applicable to the 'Ace of Spades.' To avoid paying the tax, people would  purchase 51 cards instead. Yet, since most games require 52 cards, these people were thought to be stupid or dumb because they weren't 'playing with a full deck.'  
Early politicians required feedback from the  public to determine what the people considered important. Since  there  were no telephones, TV's or radios, the politicians sent their  assistants to local taverns, pubs, and bars. They were told to 'go sip some Ale and listen to people's conversations and political  concerns. Many assistants were dispatched at different times. 'You go sip here' and 'You go sip there.' The two words 'go sip' were eventually combined when referring to the local opinion and, thus we have the term 'gossip.'  
At local taverns, pubs, and bars, people drank  from pint and quart-sized containers. A bar maid's job was to  keep an  eye on the customers and keep the drinks coming. She had to pay close attention and remember who was drinking in 'pints' and who was drinking in 'quarts,' hence the phrase 'minding your  'P's and Q's'.  
One more: bet you didn't know this! In the heyday of sailing ships, all war ships and many freighters carried  iron cannons. Those cannons fired round iron cannon balls. It was necessary  to keep a good supply near the cannon. However, how to prevent them from rolling about the deck? The best storage method devised was a square-based pyramid with one ball on top, resting  on four resting on nine, which rested on sixteen. Thus, a supply of 30 cannon balls could be stacked in a small area right next to the cannon. There was only one problem.... how to prevent the bottom layer from sliding or rolling from  under the others. The  solution was a metal plate called a 'Monkey' with 16 round indentations. However, if this plate were made of iron, the  iron balls would quickly rust to it. The solution to the rusting problem was to make 'Brass Monkeys.'  
Few landlubbers  realize that brass contracts greater and much faster than iron when it's chilled. Consequently, when the temperature dropped too far, the brass indentations would shrink so much that the iron cannonballs would roll right off the monkey; Thus, it was quite literally, 'Cold enough to freeze the balls off a brass monkey.' 

(If you don't refer this fabulous bit of historic knowledge to any and all your unsuspecting friends, your hard drive will kill your mouse.)