legal news

DOJ getting serious? Well …

The U.S. Justice Department has asked the 1/6 House select committee for transcripts. Lots of transcripts. They are taken from testimony collected by the panel in the search for the truth behind the insurrection and the riot that sought to undercut a free, fair and legal presidential election.

I can hear the progressives jumping for joy even from out here in Flyover Country. Fine. Let ’em jump.

Attorney General Merrick Garland has said time and again that he wouldn’t be bullied, coerced, pushed and prodded into acting prematurely in his search for the truth behind what Donald Trump knew on 1/6 and what he did or didn’t do to stop the rioters.

I am taking the AG at his word, which I consider to be quite honorable.

He also has pledged to follow the law “wherever it leads.” That means if he finds enough to recommend an indictment of the former POTUS, then that’s what he’ll do.

Let’s first try to get our arms around what Garland is trying to do. He is trying to gather information to help him determine what to do with it all. If there’s enough to indict Donald Trump, he’ll proceed. If there isn’t enough to do so, well, he’ll proceed down that particular path.

The progressive wing of the Democratic Party keeps yapping that Garland is moving too slowly. I wish they would keep their traps shut and let the man take care of business in the way that will guarantee a thorough outcome.

I trust the attorney general implicitly to conduct his investigation with due diligence and professionalism. That he is seeking transcripts from the 1/6 committee tells me the AG might be getting closer to making a key decision on the future of the 45th president of the United States.

My hope is that the future forestalls any effort for the ex-POTUS to seek public office ever again. Then again, I am not the individual in charge of making that call. I’ll leave it that matter to Attorney General Merrick Garland.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

national news

Silence is instructive

A gunman opened fire in a Buffalo, N.Y., supermarket, killing 10 people and injuring three others.

The condemnation of the shooter’s actions has come almost exclusively, or so it appears, from the left, from the liberal side of the political divide.

I am waiting — with decreasing patience — to hear something from the right wing, from the conservative wing of the great divide. It’s not coming. At least not within my earshot.

What the … ?

I am at this moment shuddering at the thought that thoughtful, conservative Americans have elected politicians who — for whatever reason — are afraid to speak out against the hateful actions of the individual who drove to Buffalo, staked out the supermarket and then opened fire. A white guy shot 10 Black people to death in a fit of rage over something called “replacement theory.”

Someone will have to assure me that these pols’ silence doesn’t equate tacit or even overt support of what took place.

I am waiting.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

crime news

Racism shows its ugliness

Racism is an ugly and hideous condition that needs to be eradicated from civilized society. Tragically, that won’t happen.

A gunman drove three hours from his hometown in central New York to Buffalo and shot 10 Black Americans to death while they were shopping in a supermarket.

I am left to wonder: How in the name of all that is holy do you stop someone from doing what this gunman did? We cannot execute them all. We cannot round them all up and send them to prison.

Our hearts are shattered. We are left to ponder this latest spasm of gun violence that is wrapped by the specter that the shooter is a filthy white supremacist. He wrote a lengthy manifesto reportedly taken from right-wing talking points about something called “replacement theory” that laments that white people are being replaced by people of color.

So, he went to Buffalo to take matters into his own hands … I suppose.

The gun violence debate will ratchet up, as it should. So will the debate over the racial bias condition of many millions of Americans.

I am left to wish for all I can that we can find a way to end the violence we have all witnessed in Buffalo, N.Y. That’s all I have at this moment.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

national news

Now … for my favorite

Those who read this blog regularly know that I have spent countless hours blasting politicians and assorted other public figures for reasons that run far and wide across the field of thought.

At this moment, I intend to take a look at another type of pol and public figure: the individuals who do good for us and those who fit the mold that comports with my own bias.

The most loathsome politician walking among us — hands down! — continues to be Donald J. Trump. I won’t waste my time — or your time, for that matter — rehashing what I already have put on the record about The Donald.

Who’s my favorite politician? I need to give that some serious thought.

What do I want in a politician? I want that person who is able to work with pols of both major parties. I want him or her to be able to compromise without surrendering his or her principles. I want my favorite pol to be aware of his or her place in history at all times. I want that politician to be able to make brave decisions in tough times.

I guess you could surmise I am talking about President Biden. Hmm. I might be.

I consider myself to be a “good government progressive.” I am not wedded to strict ideology. Being a 70-plus-year-old red-blooded American patriot, my strict ideology days are long behind me. I used to admire ideologues when I was in my 20s and 30s. Then I learned about all those shades of gray that color our arguments.

Let me ponder something for just a moment. My favorite politician or public figure?

I’ll take the plunge and declare it to be Joseph R. Biden Jr.

I want him to succeed. Given the goals he has declared for the nation, we all will benefit from his success.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

legal news

GOP embraces judicial activism

Republicans have done what I once thought was virtually impossible, that they would embrace a policy of judicial activism, that they would welcome judges who would, as they used to say, “legislate from the bench.”

We are witnessing — possibly — a case of judicial activism play out as the Supreme Court nears a decision on whether to toss aside what most of the court’s justice have called “settled law.” That would be the Roe v. Wade ruling handed down in 1973 that makes abortion legal in the United States.

Do you see it happening? Of course you do! The whole world is now aware of a draft opinion that suggests that Roe v. Wade isn’t long for this world. If the court follows through on what the draft suggests and tosses Roe into the crapper, then we are going to witness a first-rate case of judicial activism run amok.

The Supreme Court has upheld Roe many times since it became “settled law.” The current court, with its 6-3 super conservative majority, could change all of that.

Let us never forget what Donald Trump pledged when he was elected president in 2016. He said he would “appoint judges who will overturn Roe v. Wade.” In the case of the SCOTUS, he delivered on his promise. Justices Neil Gorsuch, Jeff Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett all must have given Trump some assurance they would follow his lead if he nominated them to the court.

Maureen Dowd: There is just too much church in the state (irishtimes.com)

Didn’t presidents usually refrain from applying these so-called “litmus tests” when looking for federal judges? Imagine the outcry from the right had a president vowed to appoint judges who were avidly pro-choice on abortion.

I guess it’s OK these days to declare your intent and to ensure that judicial candidates would in fact pre-judge cases before hearing the merits.

I won’t ring the death knell for a woman to control her body just yet. Still, I am left to wonder what in the world happened to a political party that once thought that judges shouldn’t “legislate from the bench.” Oh, I know what happened. That party was hijacked and turned into something none of us recognizes.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

local news, State news

Paxton not using his name? How come?

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, the indicted statewide elected official seeking re-election to a third term, has decided to go after his Republican Party primary runoff opponent using what I consider to be an odd tactic.

Land Commissioner George P. Bush is too “liberal” to be elected AG, the pro-Paxton TV ad says. A Texas pol named “Bush” — the nephew and grandson of two presidents of the United States — is too liberal? What a joke!

What’s curious is that the ad doesn’t mention Ken Paxton’s name. The ad is paid for by some political action committee that is supporting Paxton. But one doesn’t know the AG’s name if one relies only on the ad to make a determination on to whom to vote in the GOP runoff.

Hmm. It spurred my thought process. Why won’t the group divulge the name of the guy it is supporting?

I figure it’s because Ken Paxton’s “brand” is so sullied by the indictment, handed down in 2015 right after Paxton took office that it doesn’t want to remind Texas Republicans that they have an alleged crook running the state’s AG office.

A Collin County grand jury indicted Paxton on a charge of securities fraud. Through a series of delays and legal mumbo-jumbo the case still hasn’t gone to trial. Last I heard Paxton’s now supposed to stand trial in Collin County. The case has been tossed back and forth between Harris and Collin counties. What’s more, the FBI is investigation allegations of illegal activity in his office.

The guy actually should resign from the AG’s office. Now that he’s still running for re-election, I am left to wonder why the stern ad blasting George P.  Bush makes no mention of the guy the buyers of the ad are supporting.

I believe something is seriously wrong the Paxton brand.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

business news, national news

Looking for evil intent?

The right-wing goon squad that is on the hunt for evil intent involving President Biden and his son, Hunter, are going to stop at nothing to concoct some nefarious plot that — as I look at it — defies logic.

Hunter Biden went to work years ago for a Ukrainian energy company, serving on the board and raking in a lot of dough for doing, allegedly, nothing to earn it. I get that it doesn’t look good for someone to trade on his famous parent’s name for considerable profit. Hey, it happens; e.g.: Donald Jr. and Eric Trump.

What about dear ol’ Dad, though? Are we supposed to believe that a man who has spent virtually his entire adult professional life in public service is going to throw it all away with an obviously careless and corrupt practice? The right-wingers want us to believe that President Biden himself profited from Hunter’s association with the energy firm.

Yes, that the president of the United States of America hauled in cash and fattened his own bank account. How does someone with half a brain even think he can get away with such a thing when the public is watching his every move?

Joe Biden served for eight years as vice president in the Barack Obama administration. Prior to being elected VP, he served for 36 years as a U.S. senator from Delaware. Prior to that, Biden served on a county council as a Democratic representative.

I did the math: That’s 52 years of public service. 

And yet the right-wingers want us to believe that a man who’s been under the public’s prying eyes would be stupid enough to take money while his son is working as a board member for a foreign-based energy firm.

One more point. During the first impeachment inquiry into Donald Trump’s quest for a political favor from Ukraine, a prosecutor in that country declared categorically that neither Joe nor Hunter Biden committed any crimes.

Still, the hunt goes on. To what end? To seek to destroy the career of the man who defeated Donald Trump.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

national news

Don’t wait for ‘tipping point’

Bad news is tough to deliver, but I feel the need to deliver it to those who believe the Buffalo, N.Y., supermarket massacre is going to result in a “tipping point” that prompts legislation to prevent this kind of gun violence.

The nation grieves once again as it mourns the deaths of 10 innocent victims who were gunned down in a supermarket by someone who (allegedly) acted with intense racist intent. The suspect is a white teenager; virtually all of the victims are African-American. The suspect drove 200-plus miles to Buffalo to perform his dastardly act.

Tipping point? Will this event bring some Republicans in Congress to join their colleagues in seeking some sort of legislative remedy to this sort of senseless violence?

My “gold standard” for an event that would spur some action occurred in late 2012 in Newtown, Conn. A lunatic killed 20 first- and second-graders along with six educators at Sandy Hook Elementary School. He then killed himself.

It was the darkest day of President Obama’s time in office. The president’s eyes welled up with tears as he told the nation of the slaughter that occurred. Did that event — given the context — result in any sort of legislative remedy? No. It didn’t.

Congress’s failure to act turned out to be the biggest disappointment in Barack Obama’s two terms as president.

I wish I could predict that this latest spasm of violence would prompt action from those who represent those of us who demand action. I cannot go there!

My profound fear is that we’re going to express our horror, offer our prayers to the family members of the victims and then wait for the next explosion of violence.

Sickening.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

local news

Cruz engenders bitterness

It was a truly amazing thing to hear the parents of a young Texan who was released by his Russian captors tear into a U.S. senator for failing to lift a finger to secure their son’s release.

Then again, when the senator is Republican Ted Cruz, I am left to conclude that Cruz just gins up that kind of response from people, given his transparent aims to further his own personal agenda.

Trevor Reed is home now after spending more than two years in a Russian slammer for a crime he insists he didn’t commit. His father, Joey Reed, blasted Cruz to smithereens when Trevor came home, telling the world that Cruz didn’t do anything to secure his son’s freedom. Joey Reed thanked President Biden, Republican Sen. John Cornyn, GOP Reps. August Pfluger and Mike McCaul.

Ted Cruz got a raspberry.

This comes despite some tepid statements from Cruz indicating that he did lend a hand.

Not so fast, Joey Reed said, while saying that he would work to defeat Cruz in the senator’s future political campaigns, be they for the Senate or — gasp and gulp — for the presidency.

That’s fine with me. I detest Cruz, too.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

crime news

Gun carnage continues

Here we go … again.

A gunman walks onto a supermarket parking lot and opens fire. He takes his rage inside the store and continues firing. Ten people are dead, three more are injured.

The gunman is taken into custody and then we find out the loon has a history of racial animus against people of color. It happened in Buffalo, N.Y.

If the circumstances surrounding this act of utter insanity sound familiar to Texans, well, it should. It reminds me of the lunatic who drove from Allen — where our son and his family reside — to El Paso, where he opened fire at a Wal-Mart, killing several people.

In both instances, the alleged shooter is a young white man and the victims are African-American or Latino. Hate crime? Yeah. Looks as though we have another spasm of hate-inspired violence on our hands.

We’re going to hear the usual “thoughts and prayers” platitudes coming from politicians of all stripes. That isn’t nearly good enough to deal forthrightly with the issue of gun violence or with the issue of intense racial hatred.

The suspect in the Buffalo case reportedly intended to livestream his insanity. He was wearing tactical gear and was heavily armed with all manner of assault weapons and handguns. He drove more than three hours to Buffalo to kill those innocent shoppers.

I am at a stunned loss for words at this moment.

This much I know: I will not accept that we have become a nation where this kind of insanity is acceptable.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Commentary on politics, current events and life experience