Marjorie Taylor Greene and Gavin Wax are Guilty of Treason

    Haven't heard a word about charging them with treason, but Marjorie Taylor Greene and Gavin Wax are guilty of it. The Constitution defines treason, saying it is levying war against our country, adhering to our enemies and giving them aid and comfort.

  Greene and Wax are guilty of that. 

   Greene, a U.S. representative from Georgia, speaking Saturday at a gala sponsored by the New York Young Republicans Club, spoke favorably of the Jan. 6 insurrection at the Capitol, saying that if she and Steve Bannon had organized it, "we would have won." Those words reflect an adherence to U.S. enemies and giving them comfort. 

  Wax, president of the New York Young Republicans, called for "total war."

  No, I do not wish Greene and Wax to be arrested for treason. Give them their free speech. But, they are guilty of treason, the same.  

Sometimes, the Voices of Rebellion Come Right Out and Say It

    Sometimes, the voices calling for a revolt against America come right out and say it.

   “We want to cross the Rubicon (that means to pass the point of no return). We want total war. We must be prepared to do battle in every arena. In the media, in the courtroom, at the ballot box, and in the streets,” New York Young Republican Club president Gavin Wax said Saturday at a club gala in New York City.

   During the gala, at least one speaker lauded the attendance of members of an Austrian political party founded by World War II-era German Nazi party members.

  U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene took hold of allegations that she had led tours of the Capitol for those preparing the Jan. 6 insurrection. “I will tell you something, if Steve Bannon and I organized that, we would have won,” she said.  “Not to mention, it would’ve been armed.” (The point is that she believes in the rebellion against the U.S., and laments that it wasn't successful.)

  Though the Donald Trump Jrs. and the Rudy Giulianis (Trump Jr. and Giuliani were in attendance at the gala) of the world might agree and be comfortable with the spirit of rebellion against the U.S. displayed at the gala, hopefully most Republicans are not.  

Prisoner Exchange: Trump for Obama, Clinton and Biden

   I propose a prisoner swap: Democrats give up Donald Trump if Republicans release Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden. I know a three-for-one trade doesn't seem fair, but fair is what's on the table when you take it, so if the Republicans take the trade, it's fair.

  The trade will best be executed in the middle of the night. The Democrat populace will not be pleased to hear that Trump is going free, and the Republican base will be very upset that here they have fought all these years against Obama, Clinton and Biden just to have them set free. But, if their leaders say it should be done, it should. 

   And, it should. Republicans have been so insistent on sending Obama, Clinton and Biden to jail, and Trump is in so much trouble that he likely will end up in jail, that there just is no other path forward.

  Now, to rip this prisoner-exchange conversation from being pure silliness, and move it into the realm of reality, I would ask what "prison" am I talking about? The prison of public opinion, of course.  

There's a Scandal in Kansas City Like Few Others

There's a scandal in Kansas City. Call it the Golubski Scandal, and it taints the police there like few scandals have ever tainted police departments.

The question is whether there's a sincere effort to clean it up. Crime of this magnitude must be cleaned up. But, it might not happen in Kansas City.

Name it -- the scandal -- after Roger Golubski. He's the former detective who allegedly preyed on innocent women, sexually assaulting them, abusing them, and threatening to kill them. It was Golubski who allegedly protected drug dealers. It was Golubski who allegedly framed innocent people and sent them to jail.

So, you would ask, if it was just Golubski, why blame the whole department?

Start with the fact that Golubski spent 35 years in the department. Start with the fact that others in the department were well aware of his activity. Start with the fact that former police chief Terry Zeigler served as Golubski's partner for several years.

And take it from there.

A retired Kansas City detective, in a 2015 deposition, said it was well known throughout the department that Golubski was "having sex with Black, drug-addicted prostitutes."

Others knew.  

“Even if someone wants to argue it is just (Golubski), there’s an entire system that not only permitted him to do it, but supported him and promoted him,” said Tricia Rojo Bushnell, co-director of the Wrongful Conviction Clinic. 

Rojo Bushnell and a host of others have called for a federal investigation. The mayor, himself, once called for a federal investigation -- but that was when he was running for mayor. Once he was elected, he backed off.  “After talking and consulting with the law enforcement community here, if that’s something where I need to stand with them in that regard. I’m going to follow their lead because they’re the law enforcement professionals, not me,” Mayor Tyrone Garner said.

Somebody should remind him that when the wolf is guarding the chicken house, an internal investigation is not nearly enough. There should not only be a DOJ investigation, but a start to cleaning up the mess. You might say that is already underway, as a new police chief is conducting the internal investigation. 

My reply? The new chief is beholden to those over him. He's rubbing shoulders every day with officials who are persuading him everything is all right. When you are investigating your buds, that's called a conflict of interest. If you were a judge, you'd have to recuse yourself; if you are the chief, you should excuse yourself.

More than just that, what is the harm of a federal investigation? If you just want to get the truth, why ever would you say, "No, no, we don't want federal officers snooping around here. This is our job"? If you want the mess cleaned up, you welcome the federal officers. You say, "Yes, we are going to continue our own, internal, review, but of course you are welcome to also look. The more eyes that are on it, the better."

Coverups begin with those who try to keep things inside. Kansas City must not let that happen.

The Constitution Could Have Been Abused to Elect Trump . . . Legally

    Do not believe for a minute that I believed this way of getting Trump re-elected would have been just. It is ironic, though, that this past week he suggested throwing out part of the Constitution in order to get elected while the same document has hidden in it a path that could have elected him. If the state legislatures in a few states had thrown out the Democrat electors and appointed Republican ones in their places, what havoc and chaos it would have caused . . . yet how legal it would have been.

   I blogged three years ago today:

   An idea out of Georgia has potential to turn this election on its end, and sweep Donald Trump into office, after all.  

   It's hidden there in the Constitution. "Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors." Let those words echo, "In such manner as the legislature thereof may direct." The Constitution grants state legislatures power to select the electors to the Electoral College -- and it doesn't restrict the legislators in any way in how they go about it. It doesn't say they can't retract one set of electors in favor of another. It doesn't say they can't make the change after the popular election has already taken place. It doesn't say they have to abide the popular vote. 

   "In such manner as the legislature thereof may direct . . .  In such manner as the legislature thereof may direct . . .  In such manner as the legislature thereof may direct."

   It's all up to them. 

   While this idea has potential. It won't make it. Georgia's Governor Brian Kemp has issued a strong statement against the six legislators from his state who want to replace the existing electors. And, in no other state, to my knowledge, is there even a move to replace electors.  

   It wouldn't be just. But, it would be all so constitutionally legal.  

Farmers and Ranchers Should Be Allowed to Use Our Water

Salt Lake Tribune's Pat Bagley posted this cartoon on Facebook with the note, "Alfalfa slurps up 67% of Utah’s water, yet is only responsible for .2% of the Utah economy. What do you think?"

Pat, Can you complain about alfalfa taking the water while still running off to McDonald's to grab a hamburger?

I grew up on a farm in Idaho where we grew alfalfa. Raising sheep, we fed the hay to them, and then sold off the rest to cattle ranchers and dairymen. While a lot of the Bear River water does go to Idaho, I don't believe we used any. A large underground reservoir was discovered as the settlers were moving in, and it provided the irrigation water.
But, I sympathize with Utah farmers and ranchers. Yes, I can see outlawing the sale of alfalfa cubes to foreign countries, but what water is being used for our own crops and cattle should not be taken from the farmers, ranchers and dairymen. If you think otherwise, quit drinking milk.

We were warned that all our growth would eat up our water. I'm not against growth, per se, but if the projections tell you you are going to run out of water, yes, you should put a stop to the growth. I don't know whether alfalfa farmers slurp up 67 percent of our water, but it seems questionable. If we took away the alfalfa farmer and still had the urban growth, would we still have a water problem? I'm guessing we would. But, if we took away the urban growth but kept the alfalfa farmer, would we still have a water problem? Something tells me no.

 

The Subleties of Today's Memes

 There's a new meme circulating on Facebook. It comes with a picture of an American flag, a rainbow, a soaring eagle, and a shiny old-model pickup truck. "I miss the America I grew up in!" it says.

I would ask, what's changed? We still live in the land of the free. What is the purpose of such a statement? When a person reads it, they consider all the ways America was better back then. "I miss the America I grew up in"? Underlying that statement is the insinuation that this is not the same America; America is not as great as it was back then.

There are those who would stir up discontent and foment discord and lead us on a path to insurrection. We know they are using social media. We've been warned. Yet, when we see memes such as this, we fail to recognize them for what they are: subtle messages seeking to align us with those who would rise up in rebellion.