Of Yosemite Sam and Gun-Sniffing Dogs

 Guns ahoy! Anybody remember that varmint-killing cowboy known as Yosemite Sam? Didn't he give us a load of laughs as he chased Bugs Bunny around, trying to eradicate the rabbit but instead getting more gun powder in his own face than any human (I mean, cartoon character) has ever endured in all history?

Inocculous. Harmless. Just good Saturday morning humor.

Nope. Not innocuous. This Yosemite Sam was actually one of the myriad of influences that have shaped our nation into a gun-totting society. Just one, and perhaps just a small one. And, yes, he was a laugh a minute, good for all the humor you needed to set you off on a good day.

But, Same is also a reminder of that there are subtle influences around us, hundreds of them.

My mind shifts to a news story today about a gun-sniffing dog named Bolt that the Granite School District is employing. Place a gun in a desk, or wherever, and Bolt will sniff it out. Bring a weapon on campus, and Bolt is going to find it.

But, a lot the guns coming on school campuses are brought there by students who just want to protect themselves. They've learned from their parents and society that you need to defend yourself -- and you often need to have a gun to do that. Guns are good, guns are good, guns are good.

Is there be any question but what that is a value in today's society?  Every one from your mom and dad to the neighbbor next door teaches us that, everyone from Yosemite Sam to Clint Eastwood.

There's Such a Thing as a Level 4 Voter

 Introducing the four levels of voting. In which class are you? Are you a Level 1, a Level 2, a Level 3, or do you go all the way to the top as a Level 4 voter?

Level 1 is easy. All you have to do is show up at the polls, or mail in your ballot. You don't need to study or have any reason for voting for the people you do. Draw straws, go eenie, meenie, miney moe, or whatever.

Level 2 requires you to have just a little bit of reason for who you voted for. Maybe they sent you a political flyer, or you saw a yard sign, or they belong to the Democrat or Republican party. You don't need to know anything personal about the person, just their spending money or being the representative of your party is enough for you.

Level 3? Now we are getting somewhere. If you are a Level 4 voter, you study the candidates. You know their stands. You vote on the individual.

And, that brings us to the ultimate level, Level 4. Okay, I confess this is where I insert my own opinion of what is important in picking among the candidates. You go beyond just knowing their political views; you pick your person by -- get this --  his or her, morals, character, and integrity.

The candidate is going to face a lot of influences once elected. Lobbyists will try to coax them to vote their way based on contributions or personal gifts (did I say bribes?). They will face pressure to extend favors to family and friends. They will be tempted to use their office for personal gain. They will be drawn to wield domain over others. And, they might certainly be inclined to unjustly censor others, to condemn and be spiteful and hateful of others, to bicker and fight and demean.

Of course we should demand character of our candidates. If it is not important to us, we cannot expect it to matter much to them. We need leaders who will do what is right, regardless, and we won't get them if those things don't mean a lick to us.  

Who is the Greatest, Mohammed Ali or Donald Trump?

 "I am the greatest," said Muhammad Ali, one of the greatest -- if not the greatest -- boxers of all time. "Float like a butterfly. Sting like a bee."

Ali could back up his boastful, arrogant words. But, what of the current champion of such proud and boastful language? Can Donald Trump back up his words?

Yes, I said Donald Trump. And, if you don't know it, he has, indeed, proclaimed himself the greatest president of all time. "In the history of our country, nobody has done more than I have." "The most presidential person ever," "He's got me down as the greatest president in the history of our country," he once said, basking in the statement of a pundit, "including George Washington and Abraham Lincoln."

"I am going to be the greatest job president that God ever created. Remember that."

"In less than two years, my administration has accomplished more than almost any administration in the history of our country," he said, drawing a sprinkling of laughter from the audience.

"The greatest president of all."

Then, there are the pundits who agree with him:

"A man brave enough to stare down the sun."

"Not just America's greatest president, but the greatest leader of every country in the history of the world."

Float like a  butterfly, sting like a bee? His words are not beautiful, to me, but they do sting.

Through all the Years, There's still no Direct Evidence

Burisma, Burisma, Burisma. Republicans won't let it go. It echoes down through the years, the Republicans screaming at how corrupt, corrupt, corrupt the Bidens are. 

No, no, don't hang up. This is a story that needs repeating. Republicans need to know the full of the facts. If you let it go, well, they won't, and their version will win. The truth does not always have the loudest voice, but the loudest voice is usually taken as the truth.

So, we've got to make our voice loud.

Let's start back in the day when one Viktor Shokin was prosecutor in the land of  Ukraine. Yes, our story shall begin with Viktor, Viktor Shokin. They hired Vik to investigate crime cases, large crime cases.

But, he wasn't doing much of a job.

Much of the international community could see he was derelict of his duties. Indeed, the public could see he was derelict. They raised up in protest, filling the area in front of the presidential palace to demand that Shokin be fired.

Oh, this will need to be checked out: "He never went after any corrupt individuals at all" and "never prosecuted any high-profile cases of corruption." That's according to Mike Carpenter, an advisor to then-Vice President Joe Biden. 

Surely, there is a record of his cases. Someone should check it out to see if he did prosecute any high-profile cases.

Enter a man named Joe Biden, who, as we said, was then the vice president. Joe went a visiting to Ukraine and got himself in trouble by demanding Ukraine fire Shokin. Biden didn't like Shokin. He, just like everyone else, wanted him canned. Now, Joe had some money to give Ukraine -- $1 billion -- so he decided to leverage it. Either the Ukrainians fire Shokin, or they didn't get the money.

Yes, Biden took heat and has been taking heat ever since for "bribing" the Ukrainians. And, as the story goes, Joe sought to get Shokin fired because Shokin was investigating Burisma Holdings, a company of which Joe's son -- that would be Hunter Biden -- sat on the board of directors.   

And, there is much of the tale of how Biden "bribed" Ukraine. All in a nutshell.

Time for a quote. We need to know if Shokin was investigating Burisma Holdings. Word is he was and word is he wasn't. We need the truth, here.

Here's what a CNN story had to say: "While there had been an investigation of the company, Shokin's former deputy, Vitaliy Kasko, has said that it was dormant at the time of Joe Biden's intervention. (The former US ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch, and the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs, George Kent, testified in Trump's impeachment inquiry that Shokin was corrupt; the US and its allies had made a coordinated effort to oust him.)" 

Kasko would have known if the investigation had went dormant. He said it had. That is pretty good evidence. 

It all leaves you wondering, doesn't it? And, hasn't this been investigated time and time again? 

Yes.

Republican Senate committees in 2020 found no evidence of wrongdoing by Joe Biden. Nor has the current Republican House committee investigation turned anything up as of this month, per Wikipedia.

"There's no evidence that Joe Biden got money, or that Joe Biden, you know, agreed to do something so that Hunter could get the money," one GOP lawmaker told CNN. "There's just no evidence of that."

After Shokin was fired, Ukrainian prosecutors went back and audited the old cases, including Burisma, and found no evidence of wrongdoing by Hunter Biden.

There are tons of voters who don't like Biden. That's cool. But laying an accusation on him that has no evidence behind it is not fair. Just say you don't like Biden, and leave it at that, without smearing him with false accusations.

Trump Praises Dictators, but Degrades Washington and Lincoln

 It is possible that Donald Trump does not believe in democracy, but has been cast into a land filled with it. I think of how he has spoken highly of Vladimir Putin, and of other dictators.

1. Of North Korea's Kim Jong-un: "We fell in love.”
2. Of Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan: "He’s become a friend of mine. . . . He’s running a very difficult part of the world. . . . He’s getting very high marks.”
3. Of Chinese President Xi Jinping: "I like President Xi a lot. I consider him a friend . . . a strong guy.”
4. He quoted Benito Mussolini in a tweet: “It is better to live one day as a lion than 100 years as a sheep.” The tweet ended with "#MakeAmericaGreatAgain." Nice to know what "Make America Great Again" means to the guy who created the phrase.
5. He boasted of how he "made a lot of money" working with Moammar Gadhafi and suggested he should explore more business ventures with him.
5. Of Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi: "We agree on so many things. . . . We are very much behind President el-Sisi."
6. In an interview with Sean Hannity, Hannity three times asked Trump if he thought Vladimir Putin was an evil guy, and each time Trump dodged the question and failed to say.

   After reading all the praise he has heaped on foreign dictators, don't you wonder how many times Trump has been so quick to laud George Washington or Abraham Lincoln? He's done the opposite; he has degraded them. When on tour of Mount Vernon, he criticized Washington for not naming it after himself. “If he was smart, he would’ve put his name on it,” Trump said. He has questioned Lincoln's legacy of helping Blacks, suggesting that he, Trump, has done more for them than Lincoln. Why does he not at least throw in a comment of what great leaders Washington and Lincoln were? He has offered such kind words for dictators, but has not offered them for American's greatest leaders. 

Biden has Nefarious Plan to Dictate how Much Alcohol is Too Much

Americans are being told how many beers they can drink, reports Fox News, citing a far-right conservative congressman who says the government has no business doing that.

You know those cans of soup you buy? And how they list the daily recommended amounts you should eat? My can of Campbell's Chunky Old Fashioned Vegetable Beef tells me it contains only 5 percent of the fat I should hold myself to in a day, but it has 83 percent of the sodium. (Whew, I'm in trouble on that one.)

Well, its the same way with beer. the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism has cut the amount of beer it recommends you hold yourself to. Two cans a day has been fine up till now, but now "Biden's beer czar," as Texas Republican Troy Nehls calls him (making sure you know it is the Biden administration doing this to you) "has no business advising 'guidance' on alcohol consumption."

Two cans of beer? That's all? Someone is going to accuse me of being sober. That's like sticking your toe in the water once a week, but never being allowed to go swimming.

And, it is not just the Biden administration that is inflicting this on us; it is all the democrats. "This is who the Democrats are," Nehls says. "They want to control every aspect of your life."

Okaaay. 

I wonder if I could take my can of Chunky Soup to Nehls and tell him I agree. It says it has 83 percent of the sodium I should hold myself to. Do you hear me? It is trying tell me how to run my life; it is trying to control my life. I will not be marginalized like this.

Forgive me, Rep. Nehls. I know I am mocking you. I do dismiss what you are saying as silly. The idea that your freedom is being lost because somebody tries to warn you not to imbibe too much alcohol is, well, silly. 

Will Trump Use the Constitution as a Wedge Against Democracy?

Donald Trump plans to return to power as "an elected king who has power over everything but can be prosecuted for nothing," writes Brynn Tannehill of The New Republic.

Dismiss the idea not too quickly.

He's coming with a vengeance. He fell from power, and he's not going to let it happen again.

Tannehill suggests the next Trump presidency will reach to justify their actions with what is called the "unitary executive theory." You've heard of that, I guess. No? Well neither have I. But, I read it takes its roots in the Constitution. "The executive Power shall be vested in a President," says the Constitution. "The President shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed," says the same Constitution.

Sounds fair, sounds right, sounds wise and makes sense, right? Who would question the Constitution?

But, is Trump planning to use the words of the Constitution as a wedge to break apart America as we know it?

"In practice," writes Tannehill, "this could mean, for example, the president personally instructing the Department of Justice and the IRS to investigate and prosecute anyone he directs them to. According to people who study how democracies die, this would serve as a big, flashing neon light that says the democracy is either dead or dying. But the American public doesn't seem to notice, or care."

Trump could fire any military officer standing in the way of his using the military for his personal ambitions. He could fire anyone under the roof of the Executive Branch and exert his influence to overthrow the Judicial Branch, as well. The Legislative Branch? It is within range that Republican majorities could be achieved in both cameras, and be loyal to Trump.

Confessedly so, there is speculation in all this. One of the writers on this topic has said, "This is not just speculation," but it is. Or, is it? It is based on Trump advisors saying they plan to draw on the power of the unitary executive theory. That Trump will actually use it to fire everyone and bring in his minions and henchmen is yet to be seen.

Drain the swamp, Trump promised long ago. Tannehill notes that, "In the run-up to the 2020 election, Trump repeatedly talked about a third and fourth term." He will not willingly relinquish power ever again, Tannehill writes.

Where there's smoke, there's fire, it has been said.

Seven of Nine Republican Candidates Assault this American Institutiton

Six of the eight participants in Wednesday's presidential debate raised their hands when asked if they would support Donald Trump even if he is convicted of a crime. 

Six of eight. Add Trump, himself, and that's seven of nine.

What does it mean? It means the people running for the highest office in the land do not trust, support, and have confidence in our legal system. America was founded on its institutions, including the court system. If you can undermine the faith in the court system, you can start a movement to get rid of it or put a controlling force over it.

And, what would replace it if it came to that? What would be placed on top of it? Look no further than the forces aiming to bring down our institutions. Look no further than those who are saying our American institutions are not working. And, leading the charge against our legal system is Trump, himself.

How would he and the extremists go about about dismantling our court system? Replace all the judges and replace them with those who will do their bidding? That might not be an idle threat; it could happen. Though they are appointed by the Constitution, Trump and his followers certainly believe they should be replaced. 

Yes, seven of the nine Republican candidates do not believe in our court system. Are our institutions of democracy under assault? The proof is in the pudding.  

Don't Relax, America

There are those who are pointing out that greenhouse emissions in the U.S. are down. But, don't relax, America.

There are more greenhouse emissions in the atmosphere than any time in the last 800,000 years. Carbon dioxide concentrations are substantially up since the beginning of the industrial era. 

Still, it is correct -- if we just take the U.S. -- that pollutants have declined by just more than 2 percent since 1990. Unfortunately, we were so high at that time, that our emissions footprint is still three times that of the global average. And, alas, we are starting to slip, again. Emissions increased 1.3 percent in 2022 compared with 2021. 

(Index -- Climate change info)

Utah Republican Party Members Yield Up the Privilege of Thinking

 "When men yield up the privilege of thinking, the last shadow of liberty quits the horizon." -- Thomas Paine

 August, 2023, it was. In Utah. The state Republican party voted to forego a presidential primary and just name their presidential candidate without letting their voters decide.

The last vestige of thinking on that front. The party Utah Republican Party members yielded it up. No longer did they need to concert their energy thinking about who their party nominee would be; the party leadership would do it for them. 

One can look around the country, wondering if this has ever been done before. Has a party machine in any other state -- Republican or Democrat -- ever taken the right to vote in a presidential primary away from the public?

Perhaps so. And, if it ever has happened before, it does not make it any righter, or nicer. Stealing democracy is still wrong.

 

Outlining a Tent City or Homeless Park

    How about zoning just for the homeless? Two zones: homeless residential and homeless commercial/service.

  We'll take a one-block square where currently a public park sits and zone it homeless residential. Now, this zone is not housing. We are not going to put them up in apartment housing; that can be done elsewhere in town. All we are going to do here is give them a place to throw their tents and sleeping bags, and provide restrooms and showers. Maybe have coin-operated power.

  Kind of a camping ground. Maybe even call it that, a Homeless Camping Ground. Or should we call it a Homeless Park? Or, just a Tent City?

  Then, on the opposite sides of the street, have a convenience store or small market. Have a used bicycle shop. Maybe a dollar store. Maybe a little guitar shop. Have work service offices. Have free mental help service. Offer dental and maybe even a small medical provider. Maybe a center that teaches and translates into English. Hmm. A foreign consulate office might even be helpful. Have a small police station.

  That would be your homeless commerical/service zone. 

Trump Becomes a Prophet

    Ninety-one indictments are not enough. Four different cases are not enough. Losing a court case that found him as a sexual predator is not enough. Having been twice impeached is not enough.

   His popularity only grows and soars. The gap between him and the pack only widens and expands. In a crowded race, Trump now commands 62 percent of Republican voters.

   That's his best showing yet.

   "I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn't lose any voters, okay?" Trump famously said during his first campaign for office. "It's, like, incredible."

   It is.

   As John Lennon would tell us, "Most peculiar, momma. . . . Nobody told (us) there would be days like these. Strange days, indeed."

   We shake our heads in disbelief. What part of truth doesn't the public understand? The answer, I'm sure they'd tell us, is the part that isn't true -- which is all of it, all 91 indictments, that sexual assault thing, and the two impeachments.

   All lies in the eyes of the Trump faithful. 

   And, the media who are reporting all this? You can't trust them. The media are nothing but a bunch of liars.

   And, Mike Pence? Even he could not go along with the narrative of the 2020 election being stolen.

   Yeah? well, Pence was a traitor. 

   Trump lost 32 court cases back then. Thirty-two times he attempted to get the courts to find improprieties in the election. In an email uncovered later, one of his own campaign advisors sized it up: "You can see why we're 0-32 on our (court) cases. I'll obviously help on all fronts. But it's tough to own any of this when it's all just conspiracy sh-- beamed down from the mothership."

   Trump once said he could stand in the middle of street in broad daylight and kill someone, and the people would still vote for him? Seems that prophecy is coming true. 

Little Utah has all the Solar Potential to Care for it's Own

   Little Utah, all by itself, if it were to exert the effort, could provide all the electricity needed for the entire country.

   And, it could do it with solar energy, alone.

   Yes, take this state's solar capacity not for granted. It ranks as one of the top 10 states for most sunny days. It has been listed as one of seven states with the best potential for solar. The Bureau of Land Management once identified 17 "solar energy zones" in the U.S. -- areas with the best potential for solar energy creation.

   And, Utah had three on the list. Yes, three of the best solar energy areas in all the U.S. were right here in Utah (one in the Escalante Valley, one in Milford Flats, and one in the Wah Wah Valley in Beaver and Millard Counties).

   There are no less than 18 million acres of BLM land in Utah that are available for solar panels -- with another 1.9 million with variances. 

   Think solar. And think how Utah could be a leader in turning the nation green.

   The state has already taken some relatively small steps. There are the solar farms in the Spanish Fork and Mona areas that the Utah Municipal Power Agency has. There are the farms rPlus Energies has developed and is developing. Appaloosa Solar 1 commenced construction in Iron County in November. The Graphite Solar project in Carbon County is also under construction. There's already a solar farm in Wellington. And, the Three Peaks project in Iron County that opened in 2016. 

   Then, there's what is being hailed as the largest solar project to come to Utah, the Green River Energy Center in Emery County. It will come with a battery storage facility. Seems some people think solar energy can only be used from sun up to sunset, but batteries provide an extension that carries through the night.

   Cove Mountain Solar in Iron County, provider for Facebook's Eagle Mountain center, is currently the largest solar farm in Utah.

   That list probably isn't complete; I'm sure there are other solar farm projects I'm just not aware of.  

   No, Utah's grand solar potential is not going to actually provide all the electricity needed for the full of America. But, if we tried hard enough, we could certainly provide enough for our own, and still have plenty to export to California and other states. 

(Index -- Climate change info)

Utah Republicans Ready to Rip Voting Away from Citizens

 The Republican presidential primary in Utah is off, at least in Utah. Party officials have decided they are not going to allow voters to make the decision, but will be making if for them, picking the the candidate in convention to save the voters from having to make the decision on their own.

It'll save money, said one state official. (I'll spare him from being identified.)

Hold on. In a nation where we elect our leaders, where voting is a basic right, the party is nixing the same?

We think back to how the Trump machine attempted to disenfranchise the voters in the 2020 election, creating alternate slates of electors and attempting to disqualify voters. That was more severe than what is happening now, but it is along the same lines: don't let the voters decide, but instead put the election in the hands of the Trump machine.

Can we not see how this erodes our freedom? The right to vote is one of the biggest freedoms of all. Take away the right to vote and you don't even have a democracy.

The counter argument would be that voters will still vote, just not until the general election. I see that argument. But, what are you saying? A half democracy is all the democracy we need?

Ban Coal from Producing Electricity, but Let Other Uses Remain

Soap, aspirin, plastic, and nylon all are derived from coal. And coal is needed for components used in the military industry. We don't need to kill coal. We don't need to and don't want to end the mining of it.

But, yes, we do want and need to quit burning coal to create electricity. That use should be out.

And, if we kill coal-fueled power plants, will that kill the economies in some towns? Yes, it could -- if we don't pivot those communities just a little. How about shifting the manpower now employed at coal-powered plants to factories manufacturing soap, nylon, military products and so forth?

Here's a regulation that perhaps hasn't been thought of: No more coal mining unless the coal is used for household, medical, military, or other essential products.

  

  

The Rest of the Story: When it Comes to Urkraine, Trump is Guilty, Not Biden

 This is the old Burisma thing. Seems the years have gone by, but the far right is still banging on this drum. They say it is proof that Biden is corrupt and should be arrested, not Trump.

Interesting how different people can look at the same event and see exactly the opposite things. Bless us both. Many of you believe what Biden did was very wrong and what Trump did was not. I'm in a boat sailing the opposite direction, believing Trump violated his office, not Biden.

Could we discuss this? Trump withheld money from Ukraine that that country needed for weapons in attempt to get Ukraine to come up with dirt on one of his political foes -- Joe Biden, no less. But, wait, isn't it Biden we are told withheld money in an act of bribery? Did he? No. Biden withheld money because Ukrainian prosecutor Viktor Shokin needed to be fired because he wasn't doing enough to investigate corruption. Biden didn't want Shokin fired because he was investigating corruption, like the far right would have you believe. And, the desire to have Shokin removed originated not with Biden, but with other officials. One reason those U.S. officials wanted Shokin removed was that he was not investigating Hunter Biden's Burisma enough.

Shokin was viewed as being so corrupt that there was a public protest (the same month as Biden's speech in which he said he was withholding money from Ukraine), hundreds of people gathering outside the presidential quarters demanding the president (this was a president before Zelenskyy) be removed from office. Though President Trump praised Shokin in the telephone conversation with Zelenskyy, this Shokin clearly was not one of the good guys. He needed to be ousted. Biden's joining his voice with those of so many others in calling for Shokin to be removed was good thing, not a bad one. It was a case of Biden fighting corruption, not supporting it.

Ukraine was known as one of the most corrupt places on earth. Viktor Shokin was much of the problem. He had been brought in to investigate all the corruption, but he wasn't doing anything. Among other things he should have been investigating, he wasn't investigating the company Hunter Biden worked for. Everyone was upset.

The same month Biden went before the Council of Foreign Relations and bragged about what he had done -- getting rid of Shokin, the people assembled in front of the presidential palace to protest against Shokin. This same Shokin was praised by President Trump in his phone call to Ukraine's new president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Imagine, U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovich and everyone else calling for Shokin to be fired, and Trump fires Yovanovich, instead, and praises Shokin. That's what happened.

And there's the rest of the story, all the details the far right doesn't want you to know. To this day, they spew lies against Biden while it was there own man who was guilty of bribing Ukraine.

All reac

You Ask for Evidence? Here are the News Stories

These things I suggested in my other post are not just me saying they're so. There are news stories -- evidence -- to back them up. Of course, you can, if you want,  simply dismiss the news stories as lies. Please don't. No, this list is not complete, but it is complete enough to show that my narrative is accurate.

Did Trump withhold money from Ukraine Did the Ukrainian people protest to get Shokin removed?
1.) https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/16/trump-administration-broke-law-in-withholding-ukraine-aid.html
2.) https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-whistleblower/white-house-acknowledges-strings-attached-in-trump-withholding-ukraine-aid-idUSKBN1WW1BG
3.) https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2019/12/politics/trump-ukraine-impeachment-inquiry-report-annotated/

Were the Bidens cleared by a Ukrainian prosecutor?
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-16/ukraine-prosecutor-says-no-evidence-of-wrongdoing-by-bidens

Did the FBI look into the charges by a foreign informant that the Bidens received bribe money? Did they conclude the charges lacked any evidence? Did Republicans acknowledge those charges were unverified?
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-66272217

Did an investigation by Senate Republicans clear Biden of charges of improper influence and wrongdoing?
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/23/us/politics/biden-inquiry-republicans-johnson.html

Did the Ukrainian people protest to get Shokin fired?
1.) https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-protest-prosecutor-shokin-dismissal/27639981.html
2.) https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/why-poroshenko-s-support-for-shokin-is-dangerous/

Who was Marie Yovanovitch and did Trump fire her?
From Wikipedia: "Yovanovitch was respected within the national security community for her efforts to encourage Ukraine to tackle corruption and during her tenure sought to strengthen the Ukrainian National Anti-Corruption Bureau which had been created to bolster efforts to fight corruption in Ukraine. . . .Giuliani confirmed in a November 2019 interview that he believed he "needed Yovanovitch out of the way" because she was going to make  his investigations difficult. . . . Trump ordered Yovanovitch's recall."

Did Trump pressure Zelenskyy to come up with dirt on Biden, saying that the U.S. has been good to Ukraine, and now, in this important matter, it was important that Zelenzkyy help him? 
From the transcription of the Trump-Zelenskyy phone call: "I will say that we do a lot for Ukraine. We spend a lot of effort and time. . . . the United States has been very, very good to Ukraine. I wouldn't say that it's been reciprocal necessarily because things are happing that are not good, but the United States has been very, very good to Ukraine. . . . We are ready to continue to cooperate for the next steps. specifically we are almost ready to buy more Javelins from the United States for defense purposes.  I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. . . . I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike. . . . There are a lot of things that went on -- the whole situation. . . . I would like to have the Attorney General call you or your people and I would like you to get to the bottom of it. . . . There’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it.

Did Trump praise Shokin? Did he oppose Shokin being fired?
In the phone call to Zelenskyy, he said: "I heard you had a prosecutor who was very good and he was shut down and that’s really unfair. A lot of people are talking about that, the way they shut your very good prosecutor down." 

Do we have a timeline on how the call with Zelenskyy fits in with when Trump released the money to Ukraine?
https://publicintegrity.org/national-security/timeline-how-trump-withheld-ukraine-aid/

McCarthy and Carlson Conspired Against America

 Let's go back in history, not too many months, to the time House Speaker Kevin McCarthy and Fox News host Tucker Carlson betrayed the American people. What happened then points to the direction our nation could be headed.

McCarthy released the Jan. 6 footage to Carlson -- exclusively. No other news service was allowed to have it. None. McCarthy chose only a news outlet that was friendly to former President Trump. You don't need to look very far to see where that kind of a practice takes place: Russia. Putin can pick and choose, when he wants to. He can exclude the free press and release the info only to the official government news agency. So, McCarthy and Carlson were in good company, right? Practicing the release of information the same way it is often practiced in Russia.

But, it doesn't end there. When Carlson aired the videos to the public, he filtered out much of the footage so he could give his own spin on the Jan. 6 attack. Based on the footage he did release, he was able to tell his viewers that it was mostly a peaceful event. Tucker! There were about 140 police officers assaulted! Just assaulting a single one of them should be a concern. Assaulting 140 hardly accounts for what anyone should be passing off as a peaceful event. 

That Carlson edited out all the damaging footage just so he could put a false spin on the event is also reminiscent of how they do things in Russia. This should concern us --greatly. Such a matter as the McCarthy-Carlson affair clearly indicates how close we might be to losing our freedom. 

McCarthy could still do the right thing. He could still post all the footage on YouTube so we could see for ourselves whether there was violence. Why doesn't he? In our nation as we speak, there are many who are outraged that the FBI is not releasing body cam footage of the killing of a person who threatened President Biden's life. Why don't those same people call for footage of J6 to be released?

A free and open society requires no less. 

Craig Robertson Case Shows the Nation is a Little Bit of a Police State

Depending on how you look at it, yes, we live in a police state. You live in a police state if the police are unfettered, if they take little precaution against killing a suspect, and if they hide behind laws that protect them unjustly. 

If they can get away with things that others cannot, that is a little bit of a police state. If they avoid wearing body cams in order to avoid liability, yes, that is wrong. The term "suppression of evidence" comes to mind. 

The case of Craig Robertson has the nation abuzz. Are the FBI no more than a modern-day gestapo? I think that takes it a little too far, but they take their rights as police officers a little too far. They are also "peace officers." They should endeavor to keep the peace. They should seek to avoid killing if it is unnecessary.

Could the FBI have gone about their arrest in a better fashion -- one that would have resulted in an arrest without Robertson being killed? How about a siege? Just wait for the guy to come out. Wait and wait. Patience. Sooner or later, he has got to come out. You knew he was setting things up for suicide by cop. You should not want to accommodate him. Perhaps, when he did come out, he would be brandishing a gun and you would have to shoot him, anyway. But, at least that would be out in the open where there would be witnesses. You don't want to hide things. You want them to be visible. You aren't there to escape the law; you are there to enforce it. 

Another possibility would be to send a social worker in. Don't come in with bullhorns a blaring, and armored trucks. Send the social worker in, and, if he doesn't answer the door, let the social worker wait until Robertson came out. Don't even have the FBI within sight. Given that the neighbors probably would have messaged Robertson and warned him the FBI were hiding in the bushes, this probably wouldn't have worked.

But, maybe.

You expend all your efforts to make a peaceful arrest, before you make one that is more likely to end with the criminal being killed.

If we do not change our laws so the police are more accountable, we make a grave mistake. Freedom from unjustified police brutality is one of the most vital freedoms of all. 

Illegal Search and Seizure? The Constitution Frowns on That

Someplace called Marion, Kansas. Farm town, I suppose. A lady and her husband were having a big row. The newspaper, the Marion Register, found out she didn't have a valid driver's license, evidently just from reviewing public records.

The newspaper didn't publish the story initially, but it did turn the information over to the police. The police department's response? It raided the home of the newspaper owners, saying there was probable cause that the paper was involved in identity theft. They confiscated a computer file server, other computers, phones, and other equipment.

Illegal search and seizure? The Constitution frowns on that. 

The next day, one of the owners, who was 98 and thus vulnerable to stress, passed away.

It's a situation where the public should be standing up. The police chief and judge who issued the warrant likely would go scot free if no one fought for the paper. The press defends the public and the public needs to defend the press. We lose our freedoms when people don't stand up for what's right.

FBI Shooting of Robertson Reaffirmed What We Already Knew

 The Craig Robertson tragedy revealed a stark truth. Okay, it didn't reveal it, it reaffirmed it.

  Whole communities are caught up in Trumpism -- LDS communities included. No, it is more than that: LDS communities are especially prone to having a high percentage of extreme conservatives.

   Robertson, "was understandably frustrated and distraught by the present and ongoing erosions to our constitutionally protected freedoms and the rights of free citizens wrought by what he, and many others in this nation, observed to be a corrupt and overreaching government," the family said in a statement it issued to the press. Reading the news articles, it became clear many of his church friends felt the same way as the family. 

   Aside from whether it is good or bad that so many LDS communities identify with the far right, it is a simple fact that they do. They are packed with gun activists. They are believers in "the Great Steal." They are apologists for Jan. 6. They are climate deniers.

  Just saying they are. 

  And though to many it isn't a negative, to me it is. Like many of you, I am LDS, and to me, it is to be lamented. I love the bunch of you. As it is said, we should be able to disagree without being disagreeable. I hope I haven't come across as disagreeable. Bless us both. 

Friends and Family Could have Helped Craig Robertson

Family and friends of Craig Robertson, shot and killed by the FBI, should have talked him down. They knew he had an arsenal of guns. Many of them knew he was making threatening statements. Sometimes we might pass if off when someone says, "Somebody ought to take that scum out," but we shouldn't take it so lightly. If it reached that point, someone should have  stopped Robertson and said, "Craig, we love in our church. We love our enemies, even if they are democrats. We don't 'take them out.' I love you, bro, but you don't want to talk like that. Please. Thoughts become words and words become actions. Please, please, please don't talk like that."

We listen to those who love. Robertson had plenty of people who loved him and they could have made a difference.

If we have a friend who drinks, we take the keys away from him. This is no different. We should step in to discourage and dissuade. If we are a true friend -- if we truly love them -- that's what we will do.

Robertson was a cherished member of his community, a much-loved member of his church congregation. Perhaps he didn't need to die. Those who love can turn their friends around. Nobody is perfect in this world. Robertson wasn't. But, friends and family could have perhaps helped him overcome his flaw of hating Democrats who were national leaders to the point that he spoke of killing them. 

Stab #2 at Determining if Nuclear is a Good Idea

My last effort at determining if nuclear power is a good idea was a quick one. I wrote:

Five things against nuclear power -- and we'll leave meltdowns out:
1.) It is expensive.
2.) It has a long construction time, and with the need to move swiftly to energy sources free of greenhouse gases, that is critical.
3.) It requires harmful uranium mining and use, the extraction, refining, and reactor processes polluting the air and water.
4.) It produces dangerous waste that must be stored or buried for years, and sometimes centuries, before becoming safe.
5.) It cuts into the development of renewable energy, as nuclear projects are pushed by proponents as a means of reducing wind and solar.

I received a lot of pushback on items 2 through 4. At this point, I believe much of the pushback was justified. But, I continue to study. I am not ready to take a definitive stance, but feel I have prolonged an update on my feelings and it is time to post something.

First, concerning meltdowns -- nuclear accidents. They draw media attention, but have not proven very harmful in the past. And new safety precautions have further reduced the chances of meltdown tragedies.

Second, it is said today's nuclear is enclosed in thick metal containers -- so thick that the could not be breached by a 9-11 type airplane attack. Missiles could not blow them open. So, it would seem they might be safe from terrorist and military attacks. But, I find Greenpeace, as recent as 2022, writing:

"Nuclear factories and plants are easy targets for malevolent acts: terrorist threats, the risk of unintentional or voluntary airliner crashes, cyberattacks or acts of war. The enclosures of plants and certain ancillary buildings containing radioactive materials are not designed to withstand this type of attack or shock."

I'm guessing Greenpeace is wrong, but don't know for sure.

Third, as President Biden announced the Ancestral Footprints Monument in Arizona, much to the happiness of the Native Americans there, those who did not like the area being designated a monument noted it will take a large reserve of uranium away, forcing us to rely on foreign (such as Russia and China) sources. I read in one place that only 1.3 percent of the nation's uranium is in the area of the Ancestral Footprints Monument, but opponents of the monument maintain that is a significant amount in terms of our needs.

But, here's the trick: I've been told uranium is recycled these days. This has been used as an argument that we do not need to do much mining, as the nuclear plants don't require much uranium. If we don't need to do much mining, why the urgency of using the reserves in the new monument?

Lastly, it appears the mining process does pose a danger. Some say it doesn't, but my understanding is that it does. Mining in the days of the Cold War has been linked with kidney disease, cancer, and more. "We know from firsthand experience the damage that can be caused by yellow dirt contaminating our water and poisoning our animals and children," said Buu Nygren, president of the Navajo Nation.

Has the mining process become cleaner? I don't know that it has.

(Index -- Climate change info)

In the Same Day, One Assassin Kills, While a Would-be One Gets Killed

High in the Andean foothills, constructed on the foundations of an ancient Incan city, sits Quito, a city whose nickname is, "Light of the Americas." This passed day, that light was dimmed, an assassin working his way in to gun down a presidential candidate. 

This same day, in Provo, a city nestled high in the foothills of the Rocky Mountains, the FBI gunned down a man who boasted he would assassinate a U.S. president. Provo is nicknamed, "Happy Valley." On this date, Provo was not a happy place.

Who knows the connection between the two events. Societal illness? A hatred in the hearts of the people that leads them to thirst for the blood of others?

But, there are differences. In Ecuador, the nation was united in calling for an end to a rampant wave of violence. "The Ecuadorian people are crying and Ecuador is mortally wounded. Politics cannot lead to the death of of any member of society, said the campaign manager of the fallen candidate. 

The many candidates united in decrying the assassination. "When they touch one of us, they touch all of us," said the front-runner. 

And, in the U.S. how did the populace react? Was the president considered a precious part of society?  "Did anyone say, "Politics cannot lead to the death of any member of society"? Did the two parties join together in calling out the would-be killer?

Of course many Americans must have been touched with concern for the life of the president, but I find myself not sure we could use the word, "most." Well, did most Americans feel anguish that their president was targeted?

On Facebook, I came across a post showing the threats the madman had posted on social media. There were 500 people who hit the laugh, ha-ha icon. Of the 604 who reacted, another 73 hit the like button. 

Wow! Send me to Ecuador where life is at least respected.

Sit Up and Take Notice of the Mendenhall Glacier's Outburst

 The Mendenhall Glacier, one of the largest in the entire continent, is melting away. Now, glaciers melting is not usually breaking news. No, it is one of the most-documented things going on in climate change.

But, this past week, the Mendenhall Glacier swept into the news. Well, "swept" might be a little too strong of a word. It hardly received the news recognition it should have. 

When glaciers melt enough, they often overflow the banks of the bodies of water they are in, causing flooding and havoc.

Mendenhall Glacier is a tourist attraction in Juneau, Alaska. People are attracted to see this sprawling 1,500-square-mile body of ice. But, like so many of the world's great glaciers, it is melting. This past weekend, the the melting water from the great glacier over spilled its boundaries, pouring out a massive outburst of water that flooded Juneau, taking out entire homes and forcing officials to declare a state of emergency.

Glacier outburst can be like tornados and earthquakes -- no warning, just devastation.

Outbursts have been becoming more common around the world -- in Pakistan, India's Kashmir region, the Himalayas, and in Iceland. Come the end of the century, half the world's glaciers could disappear. That might not sound like a fast melting, but consider that these are glaciers that have stood for millennia. 

We are reaching a point where it will not prevent the devastation even if we do quit using fossil fuels. There will be enough carbon in the air -- emissions that hang in the atmosphere seemingly forever -- that there will be no turning back. Enough of them will be there that global warming will not turn back.

So, we should sit up straight with boggling eyes when we hear of the glacier outbursts such as there was in Juneau last weekend. 

(Index -- Climate change info)

We Should Thank and Commend the U.S. Women's Soccer Team

They took a beating, the U.S. Women's National Soccer Team did, not only on the field, but on the streets of America, where many ridiculed them, laughed at them, and demeaned them. 

Instead, we should be thanking them and lauding them.

They limped into the knockout rounds in weak fashion. barely qualifying. Mind you, this is a team that has dominated women's international soccer. winning four World Cups since 1991. And, that is just to mention one of their many laurels.

But, they went down hard in the first round of the knockout stage, the earliest exit for the team in its history.

And, the barbs and jabs came flying:

"This has got to be the most embarrassing moment in sports since the Sidney games of 2000."

"A conglomeration of uninspired, self-interest peddling athletes who were obviously more concerned with their political activism than performing."

"This was the worst performance by a USA women’s team in World Cup history." 

"No one I know wanted to cheer for them. They deserved to lose and should all be fired. All of them."

"The USA team couldn't have played any worse."

And those are just the quotes from a single news story and the comments below it. 

No, the coaching wasn't perfect, and, yes, the selection of players was questionable. But, the talent in other nations is catching up with the U.S. And, this edition of America's team didn't lose to a lousy team -- Sweden was the #3 ranked team in the world. The Americans were riddled with injuries, five key players out, yet they fought and almost won.

Thank this team. Praise them. They represented America, and gave their best effort. We do not need to trash our team, but to support them. 

In Wake of Recent Killings, We Need to Get Tougher on Crime

The past weeks surge of murders in our nation's capital -- including the killing of three people Saturday night.

 “We all need to continue the conversation about how current laws can be further strengthened," U.S. Attorney Matthew M. Graves said in reaction to the DC shootings. 

Tougher laws are needed. The DC police chief leaving office a month ago said at the time that gun ownership in the city was way up. More guns, more deaths. The city needs to get tougher on crime.

As does the nation. 

Lee Plotted to Overthrow the U.S. Government

Utah Sen. Mike Lee says it is "dangerous" to prosecute Donald Trump. While in power, he cannot be held liable for crimes, Lee suggests. 

Not so. Not at all. Yes, the Constitution does have a provision that congressional members shall not be arrested while going to and fro from their attendance in the House and Senate -- a rule that protects them from being arrested by a president who might attempt to subvert them from casting votes not in accord with his wishes -- it has no such provision for the president. 

Mike Lee's conduct has been dangerous. It called for, in essence, the overthrow of the U.S. government. Emails to the White House that have been uncovered show him saying, “If a very small handful of states were to have their legislatures appoint alternative slates of delegates, there could be a path (to overturning the election).” Lee said that. He said it on Dec. 8. He said it to keep Trump in power. The election was over. The Constitution does not offer an alternative path just because you don't like the way things turned out. When the election has already taken place, that is it. There is no legal, no constitutional path to overturn it. Lee might have been sincere, or he might just have been desperate to keep Trump in power. Either way, he was still plotting the overthrow of the government. You are not innocent just because you are well-meaning. You commit a crime, you are guilty of a crime. You plot to overthrow the U.S. govenment, you are guilty of plotting to overthrow the U.S. government.

Reality is a Stark Matter when it Comes to Trump.

Did we get this straight -- Donald Trump has been indicted and arraigned for seeking to overthrow the government of the United states? A coup. A conspiracy. 

And, the majority of Republicans still support him?

I want to apologize -- for ever having had any misgivings about whether he was guilty. I want to apologize for ever having had any feelings that we should just let bygones be bygones and put this behind us. We need to be peacemakers, I said, and forgive this Mr. Trump.

But, you are making a big mistake if you try to make peace with someone who is thrusting a knife in your back. We should look at the gravity of what he has done -- and the reality of it. With apologies to my friends who see this as a political witch hunt, and as the weaponization of the Department of Justice, go back and look at what has happened, what evidence there is against this Mr. Trump. Look at the truth and accept it. 

The only way to put this behind us is to put Trump in jail.

Arraigned, Arraigned, and Arraigned

    Like many of you, I wonder how many times former President Trump has been arraigned on criminal charges.

   First off, of the 46 people who have served as president, none of the others ever faced criminal charges. None. Trump is the first. 

   And, how many times, then, has he been arraigned? Three. In April, he was arraigned on charges of paying hush money to porn star Stormy Daniels to keep quite about an affair. In June, he was arraigned on charges of keeping classified documents. And now, in early August, he has been arraigned of charges of subverting an election. 

   A forth case looms. Before the end of the month, prosecutors are expected to file charges that he illegally meddled in the election in Georgia.

  Then, there is the civil case in which he already has been found liable of sexually assaulting advice columnist E. Jean Carrol. In another civil case, this one yet to be tried, Trump is accused of misleading banks and tax collectors about the value of his assets.

  Such a collection.

'Truth' from the Lips of Donald Trump is the Kiss of Death

When truth is filtered through politics, all that remains is the absence of truth. Or, so it often seems. It becomes a shouting match, a contest of accusations.

Truth has no chance when it enters the ring with a politician. Yes, once again, so it often seems, though in reality, there are many honest politicians.

With apologies, I do not view Donald Trump as one of them. He's not an honest man, but one bent on elevating himself to power.

I consider all the damning charges being brought against him. And yet, polling has him but becoming more and more popular among Republicans. Trump simply shouts back, indignant, rallying the forces behind him.

It has been said that it is not guns that will save this nation, but whether we choose the right person to march behind as we carry them. And, most gun advocates are marching behind Trump. If private guns do end up playing a roll in whether our freedom remains, it seems they will be carried by those marching behind a politician . . .

One who filters the truth through his desire to return to office. We have a charlatan with a large following -- one who has fooled the people -- and he threatends to destroy the truth, our freedom, and our future. Take 'truth' from the lips of this politician and it will be the kiss of death. 

A List of Grievances Against the Committee System in Congress

Okay, let's do away with all the Congressional committees and subcommittees and caucuses. I will confess I'm not privy to how they operate and how they are influenced. But, I wonder deeply if they are but a rich vein for lobbyists. If you want to peddle influence, you don't need to be slowed by having to approach each Congress member individually. You can persuade them as a group if you can just get them together in a meeting. 

Yes, what are we doing -- accommodating the lobbyists?

I don't like the rich and privileged having access to our Congress members more than the common people do. I don't. Never have. If you are going to cater and listen to the rich, slice some time out of your meeting to hear from and listen to the general public, as well.

Committee meetings also foster pack mentality, if I can call it that. Everybody hears the same message, the same presentation, so they are inclined to reach the same conclusion. Peer pressure also becomes greater. You tend to go along with the other members of your party. If you want independent thinking, let much of the decision process come as the Congress person sits in his office, doing his own homework, studying the issues and coming up with his or her own decisions.

Committees also lend themselves to favoritism, as the speaker of the House, or whoever, decides who gets the assignments. It gives one person a wedge of power that I do not like.

And, committees exclude Congress members from participating in all the issues. If you are not on the committee, you have no participation until it comes before the whole camera. 

You think I'm done railing on committees? I'm not. I've got one more complaint, and it might just be my biggest one. Committees tie up the process. Why do we have so much of a logjam on Capitol Hill? In part, because everything has to wind its way through committees before it can ever reach the floor. Circuitous, I think they call it. Dragging things out. Things get lost in the process when the process is too long. They don't even reach the floor. In a way, it's a form of bureaucracy, adding hoops to jump through and ladders to climb that don't need to be there. For the Congress members, its just more meetings to go to. Don't they ever suffer meeting fatigue?

So, let's kiss the committee system goodbye.

Okay, I'm through. All I'll say, is we shouldn't keep committees unless we find a way to overcome so many of the negatives.