local news

Flaps up … almost!

Today has been a day of preparation for my latest trek away from the North Texas house I once shared with my bride.

This one takes Toby the Puppy and me eastward, to North Carolina and Virginia. My pre-launch prep has been more studied and careful since my previous one that occurred this past spring.

You see, Kathy Anne was the master trip planner. Indeed, she brought many skills to our 51 years of marriage and I learned on my journey out west that I had forgotten to take a few items with me. So … I had to purchase ’em on the run. I am certain KA was laughing out loud at me.

Not this time, folks. My approach to preparing for this journey has been measured, meticulous and so very thorough that I am afraid I might be taking more than I need.

Nahh … whatever.

The aim this time is the same as the previous trip. I just need to get away to clear my noggin. However, this trip will be different in one key regard. When I return home in a couple of weeks, I’ll have someone here to greet me. My son and his two cats — Marlowe and Macy — are living with Toby the Puppy and me for the time being. He is embarking on a drastically different career path from the one he left after nearly 25 years — and I will be anxious to hear how it is going when I get home.

Moreover, I will be glad to return to a house with a bit of noise in it instead of one that is silent … if you know what I mean.

I am happy to report that my journey through the sadness that occasionally overtakes me is getting a little easier each day. As family members and friends have told me repeatedly, all I can do is take each step daily. I am heeding their advice.

Meantime, the open road awaits.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

military news

Space Force: still legit?

The creation of the U.S. Space Force as a separate branch of the military was met in many quarters with plenty of skepticism.

You may count me as one who wondered whether we needed such a military arm, given the resources already dedicated to the U.S. Air Force to guard against ETs invading us from outer space … among other responsibilities.

Well, here is what I am wondering today as I ponder certain things in my retirement: When is the president of the United States, our commander in chief, going to name the Space Force commandant to become head of our Joint Chiefs of Staff?

The Space Force currently comprises about 8,600 active-duty military personnel. They are dedicated to protecting us from threats beyond our Earthly atmosphere. Congress approved its formation in December 2019. The Space Force is headquartered in Huntsville, Ala.

The Space Force then unveiled its working uniform that, and this really kills me, turns out to be “camouflage,” the kind worn by military men and women serving in, say, jungle climates. Oh, well … go figure.

I don’t really doubt the seriousness with which these individuals approach their duty. It’s a legitimate military mission, even though I still consider it to be a tad superfluous, given what the Air Force can do already, given its own space command. Indeed, the Army, Navy, Marine Corps and Coast Guard all have anti-space capabilities.

But, one day when the commander in chief appoints the Space Force commandant to become Joint Chiefs chair, then I’ll take a fresh look at this military branch as a full partner in the defense of our nation.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

crime news

Who ever thought this could happen?

Of all the political integrity I have witnessed over many decades of politics-watching, I never in a million years believed I would witness what might occur sometime in 2024.

It is that Republican Party primary voters might have to wrestle with deciding whether to nominate a convicted felon to run for the presidency of the United States.

Yes, it is entirely possible that we could have that choice presented to millions of American voters.

Donald Trump already has been indicted twice: by the Manhattan, N.Y., district attorney and by the U.S. Department of Justice.

There now appears to be that more indictments are sure to arrive … soon! The special counsel, Jack Smith, has advised Trump that he is a target of a probe into the 1/6 assault on the government. Indictment coming? Looks like it!

If Smith is able to persuade a judge to set a trial date, then it is possible we could get a decision to convict a former POTUS, who is running for the office again. That would put the burden clearly on GOP voters: Do they really intend to nominate a convicted felon?

Wow …

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

crime news

Walls closing in — again!

I heard it said today that federal prosecutors would “rather not bring a case than bring one that they cannot prove beyond a reasonable doubt.”

With that in mind, I am astonished today to learn that special counsel Jack Smith well might have the goods to drop on Donald John Trump as he concludes his probe into the 1/6 insurrection and assault on the federal government that sought to overturn the 2020 presidential election … which Trump lost to Joseph R. Biden Jr.

I say “astonished” not because I am surprised, but because I am overwhelmed by the gravity of what I now expect to happen.

Which is that Smith is going to indict Trump on a whole array of charges, which might include conspiracy to commit sedition, obstruction of justice and Lord knows what else.

Trump revealed over the weekend that he got a “target letter” from Smith, acknowledging that the special counsel has targeted the former president in his criminal probe.

Oh, brother.

What’s important to note there is that this case will not be tried by the same federal judge — Aileen Cannon — who is thought to favor Trump, who nominated her for the federal judgeship. It will fall onto the lap of another jurist. Cannon is presiding in south Florida over the case involving the classified documents — for which Trump has been indicted.

We are about to enter some mighty rough waters, ladies and gentlemen. Strap yourselves in.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

State news

Yes on gag order!

It’s rare when this blog offers a word of support for a policy decision coming from Texas Lt. Gov Dan Patrick … but today is one of those days.

I believe strongly that Patrick is correct in issuing a sweeping gag order on the Texas Senate, which on Sept. 5 will begin a trial to determine whether to remove Attorney General Ken Paxton from office after the Texas House impeached him in an overwhelming vote.

Patrick is acting as judge in the Senate, over which he presides as lieutenant governor. His order means that violators can be prosecuted, fined or even jailed.

Patrick’s concern is legit. He worries that statements made outside the chamber could cause undue influence and could taint the proceeding that will occur inside the Senate chamber.

AG Paxton’s defenders in the Senate have popped off needlessly already, as has one of the lawyers hired to prosecute the case, Rusty Hardin. Dan Patrick is having none of it, nor should he allow any comments to go unchecked prior to — and during — the Senate trial. Patrick, moreover, is acting within the trial rules approved by the Senate.

This is serious stuff, folks, and members of the Senate need to give these proceedings the serious attention it deserves.

Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick issues gag order for Paxton impeachment trial | The Texas Tribune

Nothing that anyone can say to me at this point is going to change my own mind. I made my mind up long ago, that Paxton needs to go. He is an embarrassment to the high office he occupies.

But I also believe in the sanctity of the process that is about to unfold. Senators who will act as jurors need to keep their thoughts to themselves … period!

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

 

media news

Hold ’em accountable

1 Comment

The seemingly pending demise of local journalism in communities across the country has me dismayed almost beyond measure.

I have been sharing email messages with a longtime Texas Panhandle journalist who endorsed my concern over the slow, steady and agonizing degradation of the Amarillo Globe-News, the newspaper where I worked for nearly 18 years before my career came to a halt in August 2012.

What is happening in the Panhandle is a tragedy. There’s no other way to describe it. The Canadian Record, a weekly newspaper of longstanding fame and tradition, shut its doors earlier this year, leaving that portion of the Panhandle with no voice.

The Globe-News no longer publishes a daily editorial page and it has gone to mailing its editions to consumers, a decision that, in my view, makes delivery of timely news an absolute impossibility.

The biggest loser in all of this, according to my friend and former colleague, are those who demand that local politicians be held accountable. My friend wrote this:

“The worst part of all this is that for a democracy to survive at its best, there needs to be scrutiny of the decisions of public officials, otherwise it’ll be easier for more of them to succumb to temptation with impunity, with little to no oversight. The public gets the short straw and honest, efficient government at all levels suffers terribly. There goes democracy as it’s supposed to work.”

The media are supposed to function as the public’s eyes and ears. It reports on what government does, what those who run our government say and on the results of those decisions to those of us who rely on government.

The media also are charged with being the voice of the public that consumes what the media report and then speak out either in favor of or against what government is doing for — or to — them.

This is what we always tried to do at every stop I made along my way through a modestly successful — and wholly gratifying — career in print journalism. We occasionally reported and commented on matters the public didn’t want to hear; and they let us know when that occurred. We also received applause when we earned it from the public that thanked us for being there for them.

That element is being stripped away piece by piece by this new age of journalism that is taking on a totally different look from what I remember.

It’s about the accountability … stupid!

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

crime news

Texas GOP: stand tall … OK?

Texas Senate Republicans are going to get a chance to demonstrate that they have the courage lacking in their national colleagues when a Texas attorney general whom the House impeached for a variety of alleged offenses relating to the conduct of his office.

U.S. Capitol Hill Republicans had the same opportunity — twice, in fact — when the House impeached Donald Trump. Both times, the GOP couldn’t muster enough guts to toss the POTUS out of office.

The signs in Austin are demonstrating a potentially different outcome, given the monstrous majority vote in the Texas House to impeach the AG. Many Republicans joined their House Democratic colleagues in endorsing the impeachment articles presented by the GOP-run House Government Investigations Committee.

Now, though, comes the Senate, which has a high bar to clear, just as the U.S. Senate had a high bar. The Texas Senate comprises 19 Republicans and 12 Democrats. One of the GOP senators, Angela Paxton, is married to the defendant and she will not take an active part in the deliberations and in the vote.

Still, the Texas Senate has a two-thirds majority requirement for conviction. The Senate well might be able to reach that majority, given the huge body of evidence that has been collected.

That, and the constant drumbeat of criticism that keeps coming from the AG’s office and all the legal difficulty that seems to find Paxton.

For my money, it doesn’t take courage to do the right thing, which would be to examine the evidence and then cast a vote. What’s more, Paxton doesn’t seem to engender the kind of blind and brainless fealty among Texas Republicans that Trump does among the national party.

Let the trial begin.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

legal news, local news, State news

Next up: Paxton trial

The Texas Senate has adjourned for the time being, until it convenes in early September to take up another matter that has nothing to do with legislating.

It has everything to do with good government and whether Texas deserves an attorney general who isn’t always under investigation for this or that alleged criminal activity.

The trial of impeached Republican AG Ken Paxton will commence Sept. 5. The House impeached Paxton in a decisive, bipartisan vote. This week, the legal team leading the prosecution gained an important Republican member, former Texas Supreme Court Justice Harriet O’Neill.

O’Neill, who returned to private law practice in 2010, calls the charges against Paxton “clear, compelling and decisive,” and she is looking forward to joining the legal team prosecuting the attorney general.

The multiple articles of impeachment cover a wide range of allegations, including bribery, abuse of office, obstruction of justice. The notion that O’Neill has joined the team isn’t lost on those involved with the impeachment.

According to the Texas Tribune: State Rep. Andrew Murr, R-Junction, who leads the House General Investigating Committee and the Board of Impeachment Managers, called O’Neill a “respected, conservative jurist.”

“As a longtime judge and elected official, she understands the gravity of this matter and its importance to the state of Texas,” Murr said in a statement.

Harriet O’Neill, retired Republican justice, joins team impeaching Paxton | The Texas Tribune

Indeed. She is far from alone in honoring the pending trial’s “importance to the state.” If he’s convicted, Paxton’s disturbing tenure as the state’s chief law enforcer comes to a halt. He’s been under state indictment almost since Day One on a charge of securities fraud. A team of whistleblowers alleged criminal activity.

Texans deserve far better than what they are getting from the state’s top legal eagle.

The hurdle for conviction is high. Texas needs two-thirds of senators to vote to convict the AG. I am going to hope we can get past the Paxton Era and move ahead with an attorney general who isn’t stained and sullied by scandal and corruption.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Sports news

‘No’ on review of calls

I will admit to being a professional sports fuddy-duddy, given all the technology being introduced to manage the conduct of various games.

Allow me this brief rejoinder to one of those elements: instant replay.

I attended a big-league baseball game Friday night in Arlington, Texas, where my friend and I watched the Texas Rangers blow out the Cleveland Guardians. What’s more, they did it without a lick of help from the umpires.

The Rangers filed one challenge to a play at the plate. A runner was called “out!” … and he was out, by a mile. The review of the video proved the call was the correct one.

Which brings me to my point. We should let the umpires do their job. They have to make decisions in a split second. You know what? They get it right about, oh, 99% of the time. It never ceases to amaze me how the momentum of games is disrupted by the challenges allotted to managers of both teams.

Well, the game we witnessed in Arlington was left to the athletes. It cheers me to no end to see the Grand Old Game played the way it’s intended.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

national news

Still ‘no!’ on term limits

With all the back and forth about political corruption and calls from prominent pols to enact term limits on members of Congress … my position on that matter remains fundamentally unchanged.

We don’t need mandated term limits for politicians who run for Congress. Indeed, we already have them. They occur every two years for House members and every six years for U.S. senators. They are elections.

I also want to disabuse you of the myth that Congress is overrun by longtime House members and senators who have been in office since The Flood. A Congressional Quarterly study done years ago pointed to a healthy turnover of politicians serving in Congress. The study showed that a tiny minority of lawmakers had been in office for more than, say, three or four terms.

As a practical matter, getting Congress to approve a constitutional amendment mandating term limits is problematic, to be sure. That is what it would take for such a proposal to become law. We have our share of pols who say they favor term limits, then they run for re-election to their umpteenth term. Some of them do so successfully; some do not.

There you have it. Term limits at work in Congress.

I once harbored the notion that we should repeal the 21st Amendment limit presidents to two terms. Enacted in 1951, the amendment was meant to prevent presidents from seeking more than two terms after President Roosevelt was elected to office four times. He died just a few weeks after taking office for his fourth term.

The office does take its toll on the occupant, as FDR’s demise — in his mid-60s — demonstrated. Therefore, keep the 21st Amendment on the books.

Members of Congress, though, do not need to be ordered out of office. The voters will have their say if enough of them think their congressman or woman is doing a lousy job.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Commentary on politics, current events and life experience