Category Archives: Public Policy

Trump’s Line in the Sand

Posted on by

Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer met with President Trump to talk about the budget. They got a couple of surprises in the meeting.

The President had press in the room with the cameras rolling. He made introductory remarks about positive legislation such as Criminal Justice Reform that had support of Republicans and Democrats alike.

He also gave a status on several areas where portions of the border wall were complete. Illegal traffic into the United States was down where the wall was in place.

San Diego dropped 92%. El Paso dropped 75% and then when the wall was up, dropped 95%. Tucsan dropped 92%. Yuma dropped 96%. President Trump pointed out that the only reason it was not 100% was because illegal entrants would go to the unfinished areas and go around.

Normally after a few introductory remarks, the President would excuse the press and continue with a private meeting. This time he did not do that. The cameras kept rolling.

Like a pit bull with a bone, President Trump hunkered down on his position. He made it clear to Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer that border security was non-negotiable.

Nancy Pelosi realized what was going on. She complained that it was unfortunate that the cameras were rolling. Pelosi said, “We came in here in good faith and we are entering into this discussion in the public view.”

President Trump simply replied, “It’s called transparency.”

Both Pelosi and Schumer insisted that they did not want to have a government shutdown. Schumer said that President Trump had called 20 times to shut down the government.

In the past, Republicans have recoiled in fear and retreated when Democrats threaten a government shutdown. Pelosi and Schumer got an unexpected response.

President Trump did not recoil and retreat. On the contrary, he picked up the gauntlet and ferociously charged ahead. When Schumer said that President Trump would be responsible if there was a shut down, President Trump boldly took ownership and leadership.

I’ll take it. You know what I will say? Yes. If we don’t get what we want one way or the other, whether it’s through you, through a military, through anything you want to call, I will shut down the government. And I am proud.

I’ll tell you what, I am proud to shut down the government for border security, Chuck. Because the people of this country don’t want criminals and people that have lots of problems and drugs pouring into our country.

So, I will take the mantle. I will be the one to shut it down. I’m not going to blame you for it. The last time you shut it down it didn’t work. I will take the mantle for shutting it down and I will shut it down for border security.

President Trump drew a line in the sand. Republicans in the House and Senate need to stand up with him. The American people are standing with him.

The only ones who are not standing with him are the mainstream media and some Democrats in Congress. This time they will be the ones who make the compromise.

FacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailFacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Tribute to Chuck Wade, the Old Man in the Woods

Posted on by

On November 27, this world lost a prophetic patriot. Chuck Wade of Taylor County, Georgia stepped into eternity.

Every Thursday, like clockwork, the e-mail showed up from Chuck Wade. The subject line always began with three letters, “LTE”

It was Chuck’s weekly letter to the editor in the Taylor County News. It was not just any old letter to the editor. It was was rarely sweet and syruppy.

It was a passionate, pointed, view of our state of affairs in the greatest nation in the world. I told Chuck that he was the Jeremiah of political affairs.

Chuck introduced to me to a couple of words. I do not know if he coined them himself or if he picked them up from someone else.

They both described the same thing. He used the term, “uni-party” to describe the power establishment in Washington. The members of the Uni-Party were the “Washingtonians.”

From Chuck’s perspective, there was really no difference in the Republicans and the Democrats. He believed that the debates and campaigns between the parties are more like the choreographed professional wrestling matches.

The candidates do not fully realize it at first, but after election, they are introduced to the way things really work. He saw how easily elected officials got hooked on the opioid of power and prestige.

Ever so gradually, elected officials began to see themselves as the saviors of the people, not the servants of the people. Chuck saw the foundation of individual rights, personal responsibility, and trust in God being undermined.

I told Chuck that I called him Jeremiah because he wrote like a prophet. He did not try to pump up his readers with bright optimism for the future.

He journaled the slippery slope on which the Constitutional foundation of the American Republic was sliding. He became cynical about the motives of nearly all elected officials.

I once told him that I felt that even if I were in office, he would soon turn on me because things did not change as fast as he wanted. He reminded me that our nation is in a crisis and most politicians refuse to clearly and loudly shout it out like Paul Revere.

He did find a glimmer of hope in the election of Donald Trump. At the same time he wondered if it was too little, too late.

Chuck did not simply sit and complain. He communicated regularly with his elected officials.

Although he sometimes felt his efforts were futile, he did it anyway. I believe that he carried more influence than he realized.

He also invested his money and time into his church, First Baptist of Butler, the Georgia Sheriffs’ Association and the Georgia Sheriff’s Youth Home, and the Kiwanis Club.

Chuck served our nation with honor, retiring as a Lt. Col. in the National Guard. He continued to serve our nation by steadfastly proclaiming the truth week after week, often referring to himself as just the “Old Man in the Woods.”

His LTE in the Taylor County News and Butler Herald that I received on November 8 presents a good synopsis of his analysis and candid outlook for the future. I am reprinting it below.
*****************************************
Dear Editor,

Who is to blame for the current madness that defines American Politics? There are two candidates for this shameful honor. Politicians are blameworthy, but ultimately, it is voters who bear the responsibility for the upside down world in which we find ourselves.

Politicians have forgotten that they are representatives of the constituents who bother to vote in the electoral process. America is a Constitutional Republic wherein citizens grant to certain men and women the awesome responsibility to support and defend that which makes the United States the most unique nation that has ever existed in all of human history.

Clearly, the politicians have failed and continue to fail to do their duty. Why the pols reject their duty is the question of the ages.

Politicians seldom question their voters as to how votes should be cast on important issues. The ‘business approach’ and the ‘I will bring your values’ to Washington evaporate after the election like a morning dew in July.

This is because upon elevation to office, the reps assume that what they think is what matters and voters can be ignored. This is conscious, wrongful behavior among those who are supposed to vote in accordance with the will of the people who elected them.

The will of the people, carried out by the electeds, must be done in accordance within the limits placed on government and the reps by the Constitution.

The reps cannot be totally blamed for our problems because the great majority of voters consider that by voting they have fulfilled their civic duty. Too many voters avoid involvement in politics until the next election.

They voted, they assume their guy will do the right thing and they ignore the day to day shenanigans of the politicians. Ignoring what they do is a serious mistake. This avoidance allows the politicians to do whatever they please.

Upon election, the pols assume a very low profile, avoid involvement in serious issues and bring home the free stuff to their unwitting constituents. Failure of voters to question their elected officials and hold them accountable is the real reason for the sorry state of politics in America.

Fewer and fewer voters have any idea of the limitations placed on government by our Constitution. How can anyone be expected to defend something he or she does not understand?

This writer believes that the only change possible is that politicians will make things worse for all of us. Without accountability to the voters, the politicians will continue to do whatever pleases them, enhance their financial status and continue the façade that they are working hard to maintain our way of life.

Unless and until politicians fear their voters more than they fear their party leaders, nothing will change. Informed voters can control the politicians. Maybe someday they will.

There is little evidence to indicate as much for the foreseeable future. Some citizens vote, consider their civic duty done and hope that the political insanity ends. This does not bode well.

Chuck Wade
Butler
**********************
Funeral services for Chuck Wade will be on Saturday, December 1, 2018 at First Baptist Church of Butler, GA. Visitation is at 10:00 AM and the service is at 11:00 AM.

Signature-Donald E. Cole

I appreciate you taking the time to read my thoughts. Please forward these to your friends and share on Facebook.

Sign up to below to get my commentaries sent directly to your in-box.

I promise, you won’t get a bunch of junk and I will not share your e-mail address with anyone. When you get an e-mail from me, you can be assured that it will be easy to read, informative, and usually short. Thank you again for reading.

Subscribe to our mailing list

* indicates required

 






FacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailFacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

How I am Voting

Posted on by

First, let me thank everyone who asked how we did through the hurricane. We were very fortunate. No trees down and no damage to our house. A light pole and part of our fence blew down.

Many others in Southwest Georgia were not as fortunate and many are still without power. Farmers were hit hard. Continue to pray for those impacted by Hurrican Michael.

Early voting is going on for the next two weeks. Your vote is vital in this election and I encourage early voting. There is no reason to risk something happening that could keep you from voting so go vote.

I have been asked about ballot questions. In a nutshell, I voted yes for the Constitutional amendments and the referendum questions.

Amendment 1 – Creates the Georgia Outdoor Stewardship Trust Fund – This is basically a designated fund using 80% of sales tax revenues collected from sporting goods stores to fund outdoor stewardship programs. Currently the funds go to the general fund and then the legislature goes through the appropriation process. This designates the funds for the specific purpose. In order for the legislature to use the funds for any other purpose, it must do so specifically. I vote yes.

Amendment 2 – State-Wide Business Court – my initial leaning was no. Currently the Superior Courts handle business related cases along with criminal, family law, and others. This establishes a court specifically for business related matters. Judges are appointed for 5 year terms and the legislature establishes the jurisdiction of the courts. Business law issues and litigations are complex and would benefit from courts focusing on business issues. I vote Yes.

Amendment 3 – Forest Land Conservation Use Property for Ad Valorem Taxation Purposes. This amendment allows the legislature to establish a new category of property for the purposes of property taxes. The new category would be known as “qualified timberland property.” The owner of qualified timberland property would enter into a conservation agreement. The value of timber of on the property would still be taxed at fair market value. I vote Yes.

Amendment 4 – Victim Rights – This constitutional amendment is currently in general law. The amendment would make it more difficult for the legislature to change the current victim rights law. The amendment focuses on the rights of victims of crimes to, upon request, be notified of scheduled court proceedings, arrest or release of an accused perpetrator, the right to be heard in court proceedings, and the right to not be excluded from court proceedings. This is already in law and the amendment elevates it to a state constitutional right. I vote Yes.

Amendment 5 – Authorizing Referendum for a Sales and Use Tax for Education. This amendment is focused on counties that have multiple school districts. A single district or combination of districts having a majority of students in the county may vote to call for a referendum for a 1 percent sales tax for education. If the referendum passes, the taxes collected would be distributed to all school districts based on a per student basis unless the school districts in the county reached a different agreement. This amendment provides for a simple formula for calling for a referendum and distributing the funds. I vote Yes.

Referendum Issue 1 – Homestead Exemption for Certain Municipalities. This referendum applies only to the City of Atlanta. My first reaction was an automatic No to anything for the City of Atlanta. However, this referendum could more accurately be called the Atlanta Home Owner Protection Act. It is about the home owners in the City of Atlanta, not the politicians. So, to my Atlanta friends, take note of this and remember before you criticize rural Georgia. If this passes, it was those of us in rural Georgia that had your back as a homeowner in Atlanta. I vote Yes.

Referendum Issue 2 – Exemption of Ad Valorem for Non Profit Homes for Mentally Disabled. Homes for the mentally disabled owned by individuals or non-profit organizations are currently exempt from property taxes. This referendum question focuses on financing for construction or renovation. This allows a private home for mentally disabled that is already exempt to maintain its exemption when the ownership is placed in an LLC for the purposes of financing improvements in the home. After improvements are completed and paid, the home would revert back to the private ownership. Without approval of this referendum question, the LLC would not be eligible for the exemption and be taxed. This for all practical purposes would force closure of the home and require the mentally disabled occupants to move out of their home to another location. This referendum issue allows a broader capability of financing. I vote Yes.

That is how I voted on these questions. My primary focus in this election is to defeat every Democrat and elect every Republican. So, if you have not voted – Go Vote Republican.

Signature-Donald E. Cole

I appreciate you taking the time to read my thoughts. Please forward these to your friends and share on Facebook.

Sign up to below to get my commentaries sent directly to your in-box.

I promise, you won’t get a bunch of junk and I will not share your e-mail address with anyone. When you get an e-mail from me, you can be assured that it will be easy to read, informative, and usually short. Thank you again for reading.

Subscribe to our mailing list

* indicates required

 






FacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailFacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

They Were Supposed to Quit

Posted on by

They were supposed to quit. It didn’t happen. A few hours from now, the Senate will be voting on the confirmation of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the United States Supreme Court. According to the Democrat playbook, this vote was never supposed to take place.

It worked for them in the past. This time something happened to the Republicans in the Senate and the Democrats do not know what to do.

The strategy was simple. Even before the nomination, Democrats announced opposition because the nominee was out of the main stream. It did not matter who the nominee was. It did not matter what the nominee’s record was. Whoever the nominee was, would be too far to the right.

Added to that the Democrats pointed to the upcoming mid-term elections and invoked the Merrick Garland case from 2016. The fact that President Trump asked for conservative think tanks to help him identify candidates gave Democrats even more ammunition.

By the time the confirmation hearings began, the mainstream media was already saturated with stories of how Kavanaugh did not fit with mainstream America. This was followed by calls from Democrat leadership for the President to withdraw his nomination and submit another nominee who could be confirmed by both sides of the aisle in a bi-partisan manner that would make America proud.

In the past, Democrats were successful with this strategy. Democrats could always find a few Republicans who appeared to be most concerned about what the mainstream media talking heads said about them. They would wring their hands in anguish at the division and contention. These Republicans were quick to chastise both sides in general terms but generally only pointed the finger at fellow Republicans in specific terms.

This time it was not working. President Trump supported his nominee and Kavanaugh indicated that he intended to stay.

The hearings ended and Democrats saw that confirmation was likely unless something drastic happened to derail the vote. Senator Dianne Feinstein had been holding a letter from Dr. Christine Blasey Ford alleging that Brett Kavanaugh sexually assaulted and attempted to rape her when they were in high school.

While only a few Democrats and no Republicans knew about the letter, somehow it was mysteriously leaked to the press. Kavanaugh immediately asked to testify again to clear his name and meanwhile more reports started flowing in.

Democrats cried that the seriousness of the allegations made him unfit. They demanded investigations to get to the truth. Of course, the investigations could take months or years. They called on the President to clear the cloud, withdraw Kavanaugh, and submit another nominee.

The Judiciary Committee scheduled a hearing for Ford and Kavanaugh to testify. Judge Kavanaugh gave a powerful statement of his innocence. Democrats pressed for a thorough FBI investigation.

When it was time to vote, Republican Jeff Flake said that he would vote yes to send it to the floor of the Senate but stipulated that he wanted the FBI to do another background investigation related to this allegation. He said that it should be done in a week.

The additional week gave the Democrats more time to oppose the confirmation. When it became increasingly clear that there was zero evidence to corroborate any of the allegations, the argument turned to judicial temperament.

Democrats provided talking points and paid protesters flooded the capitol shouting profanities and creating chaos. The obvious solution to end the chaos and bring peace was for Kavanaugh to withdraw.

To the relief, (and quite frankly, amazement,) of conservatives across the nation, Senate Republicans stood together. Lindsey Graham gave a scathing speech during Judge Kavanaugh’s testimony. Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley pointedly called out Feinstein for holding the letter from Dr. Ford for weeks and not allowing it to be confidentially investigated. Majority leader Mitch McConnell steadily and methodically kept the process moving forward. Even Senator Susan Collins, in a measured and reasonable presentation, chastised the Democrats for vowing to fight the nominee before even knowing who was nominated.

The Democrats believed that Kavanaugh would throw up his hands in disgust at the vile ugliness of the negative publicity. They believed that some Republicans would acquiesce and join them to lift the cloud of uncertainly by rejecting Judge Kavanaugh. They believed that perhaps the President would withdraw his nomination. Not one of those things happened.

The bright light of truth revealed the nauseating Democrat strategy in its stark nakedness. There will be a vote today. There will be another vote on November 6 and the American people will pass judgment at the ballot box. Democrats and talking heads in main stream media will still be muttering to themselves, “They were supposed to quit.”

Signature-Donald E. Cole

I appreciate you taking the time to read my thoughts. Please forward these to your friends and share on Facebook.

Sign up to below to get my commentaries sent directly to your in-box.

I promise, you won’t get a bunch of junk and I will not share your e-mail address with anyone. When you get an e-mail from me, you can be assured that it will be easy to read, informative, and usually short. Thank you again for reading.

Subscribe to our mailing list

* indicates required

 






FacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailFacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

The Solution

Posted on by

I have the honor of serving as the pastor of First Baptist Church of Rochelle, Georgia during the interim time between permanent pastors. I received notice last Tuesday that the regular Wednesday midweek services were cancelled so that members could attend Fields of Grace 2018.

Crowd of people kneeling in prayer

Fields of Grace is a worship service, led by students in Wilcox County schools. In addition to Fields of Grace in the fall, they also have a service called Sermon on the Mound in the spring.

The student organization in the high school is Patriots for Christ. The elementary schools also have a program for students named, Little Patriots for Christ.

Local area churches support the school clubs as well as some of the teachers, coaches, and administrators outside of their duties for the school system. While there is support from these adults, the program is clearly student led.

The program last night featured the Big Brother and Big Sister mentorship program. A student from Patriots for Christ paired with a student from Little Patriots for Christ for several weeks before the service to teach and learn Scripture and Bible Stories.

Throughout the service, one after another, two students, one from high school and one from the elementary or middle school would come to the stage and have a conversation. Both introduced themselves and their grade in school.

Some selected favorite Bible stories. Some selected favorite Bible verses. The two students summarized the story or verse and then told how it helped them in their lives.

Some students sang a favorite song or shared a personal testimony of how Christ affected their lives. The students were not assigned verses. They made their own selection and the selections were independent of each other.

As I listened to them sharing testimony and Scripture, I began to see a pattern or theme of these verses. They spoke of a personal walk with God and a sense of confidence and courage. One read from the Psalm 23, “He leads me beside the still waters.” One read Philippians 4:13 “I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.” One read from Luke 18:27 “what is impossible with man is possible with God.”

One of the most moving parts of the service was not part of the program. A young boy asked for the microphone. He could not have been more than 10 years old. He said that one in his family had cancer and asked for prayer. Later, the entire field gathered at the front and humbly kneeled, praying for healing and freedom from worry and anxieity.

I titled this article, “The Solution.” In a small Southwest Georgia county, a new generation of leaders is coming on the scene. Teenage high schoolers are teaching the truths of God’s Word to single-digit-age elementary school students.

These young people are not demanding, “safe spaces.” They are growing as leaders to stand on the solid rock of eternal truth and they are passing the truth to the next generation.

These young leaders already face a hostile world but they face it with courage, confidence, and an unwavering committment. Fields of Grace 2018 is a reminder that, while the world may be going mad, God is still at work building leaders for the future of our nation.

Signature-Donald E. Cole

I appreciate you taking the time to read my thoughts. Please forward these to your friends and share on Facebook.

Sign up to below to get my commentaries sent directly to your in-box.

I promise, you won’t get a bunch of junk and I will not share your e-mail address with anyone. When you get an e-mail from me, you can be assured that it will be easy to read, informative, and usually short. Thank you again for reading.

Subscribe to our mailing list

* indicates required

 






FacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailFacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Randolph Did right

Posted on by

Southwest Georgia’s Randolph County board of elections did the right thing to abandon the plan to close voting precincts. The county hit the national news when the Elections Board considered a plan to close 7 of 9 voting precincts and consolidate them into two. The proposed plan was a local decision made by a local election board based on a recommendation from a consultant.

When Secretary of State Brian Kemp, the Republican nominee for Governor, heard about the plan, he was the first elected official to speak out against it: “we strongly urged local officials to abandon this effort and focus on preparing for a secure, accessible, and fair election for voters this November.” State Representative Gerald Greene, a Republican, also opposed the plan. But it was Democrat nominee Stacey Abrams and the Georgia Democrat party who saw the opportunity to make it a racial issue and blamed Republicans for attempted voter suppression.

Democrats seized on the news and shrewdly spun it as a sinister plan of Republicans to suppress the black vote. Randolph County’s population is 61% black and it is one of the poorest counties in the nation.

Chart of Precincts in Randolph County, GA

Precincts Won By Donald Trump in Red

In politics, perception is reality and the spin, based on misrepresentation, achieved the goal of attracting media attention and promoting a message that Republicans are the enemy of black Georgians. The truth is that President Trump won 5 of the 7 precincts that were on the list to be closed and nearly half his votes came from those precincts.

The Randolph County Elections Board has two members, one black female and one white male. The consultant’s recommendation was based on locations not being compliant with the Americans for Disabilities Act. It would have also presumably saved the county money by having two polling places rather than nine.

County Attorney, Tommy Coleman, who at one time was the Executive Director of the Georgia Democratic Party, told a reporter from the Washington Post, “I’m quite sure the Board of Elections didn’t intend to disenfranchise any voters. . . . This morphed into something that wasn’t their intention.”

The consultant apparently looked at voting as if it were a merely a mechanical process that could be done more “efficiently.” The recommendation to close 7 precincts and consolidate into one was not based on racial considerations. In a way, it was even more insidious. It was based on a philosophy that views public administration as a science that only professionals can understand. It is a philosophy that creates one-size-fits-all templates while losing sight of the importance of individuals and communities.

Following an outcry from the entire community, the Elections Board met a second time and quickly reversed their decision. They also terminated the consultant who recommended the plan. They did the right thing.

A process to hold and manage fair elections is a basic function of American government. In rural areas the small precinct represents a community. The best government is the government that is closest to the people. These small precinct voting places in fire stations, community centers, churches, schools, and similar gathering places are not just a place to gather votes. They are places where the freedom to vote is an open display of our great nation making the basic decisions on how we the people will govern ourselves.

The volunteer fire station where a small number of people come to vote makes a powerful statement. The elderly farmer, retired school teacher, young married couple, and single mom with a toddler walking by her side, go to the polling place. There they see other people that they know. They know the polling worker who has worked that same polling place for years. They cast their votes for everything from county commissioner to President of the United States. They take that action right there in their own community.

The money spent to provide polling places closer to the people is well spent and should be a priority in the local government budgets. Some voting precincts will be in more densely populated areas and therefore have more voters. Some will be in sparsely populated areas and have fewer voters.

Voting places in communities serve a vital role. They stand as a living witness at every election of the liberty and freedom we have as Americans. In a very real way, those tiny precincts in rural areas remind us that we are a nation of the people, for the people, and by the people. Randolph County did the right thing. I hope that other counties who might be considering similar actions will pause and ask the people before they make such a move. I also hope that counties which may have already taken such measures, will go back and reconsider reopening the smaller precincts in the less populated parts of the county.

In the Randolph County case, Republicans and Democrats wholeheartedly agreed. It was the right thing to do.

Signature-Donald E. Cole

I appreciate you taking the time to read my thoughts. Please forward these to your friends and share on Facebook.

Sign up to below to get my commentaries sent directly to your in-box.

I promise, you won’t get a bunch of junk and I will not share your e-mail address with anyone. When you get an e-mail from me, you can be assured that it will be easy to read, informative, and usually short. Thank you again for reading.

Subscribe to our mailing list

* indicates required

 






FacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailFacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Brennan Doth Protest too Much, Methinks

Posted on by

Last week, President Trump revoked the security clearance of former CIA Director John Brennan. Based on the reaction of Brennan and the media, one would think that Trump had erected a guillotine on the White House lawn.

Brennan served as CIA Director in the Obama administration and has been a constant critic of President Trump. Last July, Brennan tweeted that the President’s press conference in Helsinki, “rises to and exceeds the threshold of ‘high crimes and misdemeanors.’ It was nothing short of treasonous. Not only were Trump’s comments imbecilic, he is wholly in the pocket of Putin.”

Brennan regularly appears as a paid guest analyst on network and cable news shows. He speaks with the authority of someone who has access to insider information that others in news organizations do not have.

Brennan reacted to revocation with defiance and righteous indignation. He called the revocation abnormal, dangerous, suppressing freedom of speech, and punishing critics. He compared the President to foreign tyrants and despots.

Others reacted in a similar fashion. John Kerry referred to the revocation as “banana republic behavior.” Congressman Adam Schiff went as far as to say that the President’s decision was unlawful.

These loud protests are based on the faulty premise that the revocation is the suppression of their freedom of speech. Mr. Brennan and his fellow supporters need to consider the irony of saying that the President is suppressing their free speech.

They are all freely communicating their positions on the matter through numerous means of social media, television, radio, newspapers, magazines, open letters, statements from the halls of congress, and any other means that they choose. Those media outlets are widely dispersing those opinions. I don’t see any censorship, redacting, or other suppression of anyone’s right to free speech.

The obvious question to ask is why these people should continue to have access to our nation’s secrets when they are no longer in an official government role. Why are they so indignant and outraged over losing access to information that is frankly no longer their business?

They do not have a need to know and one wonders why they would even want to know. If they are needed for ongoing consultation, that should be addressed on a case by case basis.

The real problem here is that everything got turned upside down. Somewhere along the line, the security clearance became a lifetime entitlement tied to the individual rather than tied to the actual mission and need to know.

A security clearance is not an entitlement. The President does not have to give a reason for revoking the clearance of someone who no longer holds a government position and therefore has no need to know. It is the other way around.

If there is a need for a former employee to maintain a clearance, then it is up to the current administration to determine if there is justification to maintain the clearance for the mission need. If the mission does not require a need to know, then the clearance becomes inactive the day the individual leaves the government role that required the clearance in the first place.

This is common sense that the average American understands. When you leave a job, you turn in your keys and your access cards, your e-mail account is inactivated, and you are removed from any other access that you had.

You can’t log on to check the company bank account just to see how it is doing. If you come back to the office for some reason, you get a visitor badge and, in some cases, may even need an escort to go to certain areas.

Only in Washington can there be such a firestorm over what should be a routine action. To paraphrase Shakespeare’s Hamlet, “Mr. Brennan doth protest too much, methinks.”

Signature-Donald E. Cole

I appreciate you taking the time to read my thoughts. Please forward these to your friends and share on Facebook.

Sign up to below to get my commentaries sent directly to your in-box.

I promise, you won’t get a bunch of junk and I will not share your e-mail address with anyone. When you get an e-mail from me, you can be assured that it will be easy to read, informative, and usually short. Thank you again for reading.

Subscribe to our mailing list

* indicates required

 






FacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailFacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Waking Up the American Dream

Posted on by

The American Dream has awakened from its slumber. Last Friday the US Bureau of Economic Analysis relased it’s quarterly report on Gross Domestic Product. The US economy grew at a quarterly rate of 4.1 percent in the period of April through June of 2018. The United States is on track to hit economic growth that it hasn’t seen in over a decade.

Much of the credit for this growth goes to President Trump. His aggressive cuts in the stranglehold of federal regulations along with the tax cuts passed by Congress just before last Christmas were the wakeup calls for the American dream.

Money held by American companies with overseas operations was not coming back to the United States because of the high tax penalties associated with bringing the money back. Now that money is starting to come back. It is being invested here in America and it is creating jobs.

Unemployment has plumeted to 3.8 percent. This is the lowest unemployment percentage in 18 years. African-American unemployment is at historic low levels.

This is significant because, even though the Democrat party does not want to believe it, there were a lot of African-Americans who voted for Trump because of the hope of jobs in the private sector. Eight years of Barack Obama and nearly half a century of Democrat class warfare have proven to be empty rhetoric.

Trump asked, “What do you have to lose?” Many took his offer. Now they see real results. The so called “spokesmen” who continue to spew class warfare and play the race card represent a continually shrinking percentage of the African-American voters who buy in to the blame game.

For the first time ever, job openings exceed the number of people seeking work. Small business optimism is up. Manufacturing optimism is up. Over 95 percent of manufacturers in a quartery outlook survey said that they have a positive outloook.

How did this radical shift take place? President Trump took an aggressive, common sense, approach to freeing the private sector and especially the average American. For too long, Washington operated in a vacum that was filled by lobbyists and politicians who swallowed the lure of money and prestige.

A thirst for position and influence may have started as a desire to better serve the people back home. Over time; however, the focus shifted from the people who elected them to the people they met with, dined with, and listened to every day inside the beltway. 

Money is the addictive drug of influence peddlers in DC. President Trump does not need it and will not take it.

He also broke the mold by refusing to cower before the Democrats in Congress. He proved that they were more bark than bite. I am cautiously optimistic that Republicans in Congress will finally do the same.

The American dream has been awakened from its slumber. Now the American people must stay alert and keep the dream growing. We cannot afford to hit the snooze button.

Signature-Donald E. Cole

I appreciate you taking the time to read my thoughts. Please forward these to your friends and share on Facebook.

Sign up to below to get my commentaries sent directly to your in-box.

I promise, you won’t get a bunch of junk and I will not share your e-mail address with anyone. When you get an e-mail from me, you can be assured that it will be easy to read, informative, and usually short. Thank you again for reading.

Subscribe to our mailing list

* indicates required

 






 FacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailFacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

The OIG Report – Part 1

Posted on by

This commentary is a little longer than my average comments. I read the entire OIG report, all 500 plus pages, on the Clinton E-Mail investigation. My commentary on this just won’t fit in 500 words or less.

In his conclusion the OIG used a phrase of six critical words: “The damage caused by these employees’…”

A few powerful players at the top level polluted the entire investigation. The OIG was ultra cautious in concluding that he did not find “documentary or testimonial evidence” that there was political bias.

My conclusion after reading the full report is that political bias saturated this investigation like gravy on biscuits. This is not to cast a wide net over all of the FBI and DOJ personnel.

I want to share my observations of a few aspects of the report.

Director James Comey

With regard to political bias, I am willing to give Director Comey the benefit of the doubt. In his testimony and the testimony of others, it appears that Director Comey’s ultimate concern was the reputation of the FBI.

His problem was not political bias per se. His problem was (and still appears to be) a hyper-inflated sense that he is the only one in the universe who can determine what is “right.”

In July of 2016 when I watched Comey’s press conference, my first thought was, “Why is he making this announcement and not a US Attorney?” Comey’s decision to go on his own was pure and simple insubordination.

On page 245, the OIG report made a key point. “In our criminal justice system, the investigative and prosecutive functions are intentionally kept separate as a check on the government’s power to bring criminal charges.”

Comey willfully, knowingly, intentionally, tossed the checks and balances out the window. He made himself the chief arbiter of a decision that was never his to make.

In October, days before the election, Comey again made a decision to publicly re-open the Clinton e-mail investigation. In this case, DOJ was aware of his intention to notify Congress and requested that he not at that time. Again, Comey acted as if he alone had the integrity to make the “right” decision.

After President Trump fired Comey, he once again displayed his insubordination. He retained an official FBI work product after his termination of employment, and gave it to a college professor who had no business even knowing the document existed. The professor then leaked the document to the news media as a conduit for Comey.

Comey felt that his action was justified. It was not justified. It violated FBI policy, if not the law.

The FBI Director is part of the Executive Branch and as such is accountable to and subordinate to the Attorney General and the President. While Comey proclaimed his independence from outside meddling, in reality he was acting as a benevolent dictator. He should have been fired in July of 2016.

Peter Strzok and Lisa Page

The two lovebirds got a lot of attention over their text messages. Both held high positions of influence in the investigation. Incredulously, one of them, Peter Strzok is still employed by the FBI.

On July 31, 2016 Strzok sent a text to Page about the opening of the Russia investigation. He expressed his excitement to be on the investigation.

“And ____ this feels momentous. Because this matters. The other one did, too, but that was to ensure we didn’t ___ something up. This matters because this MATTERS. So super glad to be on this voyage with you.”

The most publicized exchange was on August 8, 2016:

Page: “[Trump’s] not ever going to become president, right? Right?!”
Strzok: “No. No he’s not. We’ll stop it.”

Strzok was not talking about organizing political activities to get out the vote for Hillary and assure her victory. He held a powerful role in an investigation of the Trump campaign. Based on his July 31 e-mail he appeared to believe at that time that the investigation would somehow stop Trump.

His belief is evident in a text one week later, on August 15, when Strzok wrote to Page:

“I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office—that there’s no way he gets elected—but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk. It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40….”

On May 17, 2017, Robert Mueller was appointed as Special Counsel. On May 18, Strzok wrote to Page,

“For me, and this case, I personally have a sense of unfinished business. I unleashed it with MYE [the Clinton E-Mail Investigation]. Now I need to fix it and finish it.”

Strzok also wrote about his career path. “Who gives a ___, one more A[ssistant] D[irector]…[versus] [a]n investigation leading to impeachment?”

On May 22, Strzok wrote another message to Page about her career path as part of the Special Counsel’s team: “This is yours. Plus, leaving a S[pecial] C[ounsel] (having been an SC) resulting in an impeachment as an attorney is VERY different than leaving as an investigator….”

These text messages reveal more than just a bias. In his role, Strzok had at his disposal assets from the intelligence community, the law enforcement community, and the Department of Justice.

Peter Strzok was texting about stopping a candidate in the American electoral process. Then he was texting about removing the duly elected President of the United States.

Every FBI agent takes an oath of office that begins with these words, “I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic…” Peter Strzok, in particular, needs to look into the mirror because his text messages reveal him to a domestic enemy of the United States Constitution. It is a travesty that Strzok is still employed by the FBI. The new Director needs to clean house, or he needs to go the way of James Comey.

I have a lot more to write on this report. Watch for my next Note from Don Cole with more on the OIG report.

Signature-Donald E. Cole

I appreciate you taking the time to read my thoughts. Please forward these to your friends and share on Facebook.

Sign up to below to get my commentaries sent directly to your in-box.

I promise, you won’t get a bunch of junk and I will not share your e-mail address with anyone. When you get an e-mail from me, you can be assured that it will be easy to read, informative, and usually short. Thank you again for reading.

Subscribe to our mailing list

* indicates required

 






FacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailFacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Pardon – Returning to the Constitutional Intent

Posted on by

President Trump raised eyebrows with recent pardons and reprieves. He needled his opponents by stating that the President even has the power to pardon himself if he wanted. He went on to say that in his case there was no need because he had done nothing wrong.

President Trump Signing Pardon (https://www.clickondetroit.com/news/politics/trump-pardons-boxer-jack-johnson)Two recent pardons are noteworthy. One was the posthumous pardon of Jack Johnson, former World Heavyweight Champion boxer. Johnson, an African American, was convicted in 1913 of a federal crime for taking his white girlfriend across state lines.

There was no question that the motivation for prosecution was simply because he was dating a white woman. Johnson served 10 months in prison. He died in 1946.

Johnson’s great great niece, Linda Haywood, asked President George W. Bush to grant a posthumous pardon. It never happened.

She had great hopes for a pardon during the Obama administration. She even had the support of Congress.

President Obama refused to act on the basis of a recommendation from the Justice Department. A Justice Department spokesman wrote that is is the “department’s position that the limited resources which are available to process requests for president clemency—now being submitted in record numbers—are best dedicated to requests submitted by persons who can truly benefit from a grant of the request.”

President Trump learned of the case of Jack Johnson, not from Justice Department lawyers, but from Sylvester Stallone. When the President looked into the case, he saw that this was wrong.

He righted the wrong. Contrary to the view of career lawyers in the Justice Department, Jack Johnson’s family and our nation truly benefited from the grant of this request.

Photo of Alice Johnson (Courtesy of Can-Do)President Trump’s other noteworthy use of his pardon authority was to commute the life sentence of a non-violent drug offender, Alice Johnson. She had served 21 years on conspiracy to possess cocaine and attempted possession of cocaine.

As in the case of Jack Johnson, this was not the first time a request had been made to the Office of the President. Three request were made during the Obama administration. Justice Department lawyers denied her petition. President Obama left it up to the Justice Department and never acted on the request.

Also, as in the case of Jack Johnson, it was not the Justice Department that brought the matter to the President’s attention. It was Kim Kardashian. When the President called for the record and examined the case, he gave Alice Johnson her freedom.

The power of the President to issue pardons is found in Article II of the Constitution. The President “shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offences against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.”

The power to pardon is the least limited power granted to the President in the Constitution. Impeachment is the only exception. That is because impeachment is a power granted to the legislative branch in Article I.

President Trump’s direct action on granting pardons and reprieves is a return to the original intent of the framers of the Constitution. Over the years, the power to grant pardons and reprieves gradually became a defacto power of unelected career employees in the Justice Department.

Justice Department lawyers do not have the power to grant a pardon, but for all practical purposes, they decided, made recommendations to the President, and the President signed the papers. President Trump put an end to that practice.

There were probably more than a few lawyers wringing their hands with angst. After all, this President had never spent a day in law school. How could he possibly be qualified to make such decisions? The answer is simple. He is qualified because the Constitution says so.

A pardon changes the status of the one receiving the pardon. In 1867, Supreme Court Justice Stephen Field wrote that the effect of a Presidential pardon on an individual, “makes him, as it were, a new man… so that in the eye of the law the offender is as innocent as if he had never committed the offence.”

The philisophical basis of the power to pardon is also the foundation of the Christian faith. In II Corinthians 5:17, Paul wrote, “Therefore if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creature; the old things passed away; behold, new things have come.” These words may have been in Justice Field’s mind when he wrote “makes him, as it were, a new man..”

In the case of Jack Johnson, President Trump righted a wrong that was over a century old. In the case of Alice Johnson, he showed compassion and grace to give her a second chance. I am glad to see President Trump putting the Constitutional human element back into pardons and reprieves.

Signature-Donald E. Cole

I appreciate you taking the time to read my thoughts. Please forward these to your friends and share on Facebook.

Sign up to below to get my commentaries sent directly to your in-box.

I promise, you won’t get a bunch of junk and I will not share your e-mail address with anyone. When you get an e-mail from me, you can be assured that it will be easy to read, informative, and usually short. Thank you again for reading.

Subscribe to our mailing list

* indicates required

 






FacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailFacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather