Category Archives: national news

national news

Will cowardice prevail?

By JOHN KANELIS / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

The evidence, some circumstantial and some of it tangible, keeps piling up.

Donald Trump is looking more each day like someone who incited a coup d’ etat against the U.S. government.

His allies in both congressional chambers are now admitting to being duped into thinking Trump would concede the 2020 election if he lost. Then he actually lost it bigly to President Biden and he then challenged the outcome of the vote. He called it rigged; he trotted out phony vote fraud allegations.

McConnell: Trump Tricked Me Into Backing His Coup (nymag.com)

Then came the events of the Sixth of January. He exhorted the mob of terrorists/rioters to march on Capitol Hill and “take back” the government. The terrorists attacked with force.

The House of Representatives impeached Trump a week later. He now is preparing to stand trial in the Senate even though he no longer is in office.

The question keeps boiling up: Will the Senate Republican caucus muster up the guts to convict Trump of inciting an insurrection or will it hide behind the dubious defense that the trial is unconstitutional because Trump is no longer in office?

I await the outcome with a keen eye and ear.

national news

Let’s clear this up

By JOHN KANELIS / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Folks, we need to clear up a thing or three about the U.S. Senate trial that awaits us next week.

Donald Trump’s legal team is arguing that the trial is unconstitutional because a former president cannot be impeached. Hold on, ladies and gentlemen!

Donald Trump vacated the U.S. presidency on Jan. 20. The House of Representatives impeached him a week earlier, on Jan. 13. The impeachment occurred one week after Trump incited a riotous mob to storm Capitol Hill, seeking to prevent Congress from fulfilling its constitutional duty to certify that President Biden won the 2020 election.

House Democrats Make Case for Convicting Trump (msn.com)

Do you see where I’m going with this? Talk of impeaching a “former president” misses the mark by a Texas mile. The House did not impeach someone who had already left office; Trump was still in office when the House delivered the “yes” vote on impeachment.

So, let us remove impeachment from the discussion. It was done legally and constitutionally.

What’s at stake is the Senate trial, which is a separate quasi-legal/political function.

What does the Constitution say about that? It says that the Senate has the sole authority to put a president on trial. A conviction can result in no punishment greater than removal from office, the document notes; that means, as I read it, that it can convict a former president and can establish in a separate vote whether that individual should be barred from seeking public office in the future.

Let us cease conflating impeachment with the trial. The first event has happened. The second one will commence soon.

national news

Compromise anyone?

By JOHN KANELIS / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Let’s see how this plays out.

President Biden wants Congress to approve a $1.9 trillion COVID relief bill that kicks out more money for families and helps educators, while speeding up the vaccinations aimed at killing the pandemic.

Congressional Republicans want a $618 billion package that is more “targeted” for specific needs.

Here’s a thought. Why not meet in the middle? Congress could approve a $1.2 trillion package, which is just about the mid point between the president’s pitch and the counter offer from the GOP.

Isn’t that what effective legislation is all about? Compromise, anyone?

DC riot, national news

Dad would be enraged!

By JOHN KANELIS / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

You know already that my father wasn’t a particularly political individual.

Pete Kanelis and I did not talk much about politics, or even much about current events. Dad didn’t have an attention span that would allow him to digest the complexities and nuance of public policy.

He did, though, believe deeply in this country. He loved the U.S. of A. He was a patriot’s patriot. Dad signed up to fight in World War II on the very day that the Japanese attacked our fleet in Hawaii.

Dad spent the bulk of his combat duty fighting the Germans and the Italians in the Mediterranean Theater of Operations … which brings me to what Dad would have thought had he seen the terrorists who attacked the Capitol Building on the Sixth of January.

My father would have flown into a frothing rage at the sight of the t-shirt that bellowed “Camp Auschwitz.”

Dad knew who the enemy was when he suited up for the Navy. He endured constant bombardment from Nazi fighters and bombers while serving in the Med. He also knew that Adolf Hitler was a tyrant and a demon who needed to be crushed. Dad did his level best while he was thrust in harm’s way to crush that monster.

Auschwitz, the infamous Nazi death camp, didn’t become known to Americans until nearly the end of World War II. Dad certainly knew then the nature of the beast he enlisted to fight.

I cannot help but think of the anger that would boil up inside him had he been around to witness the insurrection we all saw unfold … and the nature of the morons who ransacked the seat of our democracy while wearing an emblem that salutes Auschwitz. 

national news

Time to ‘move on’? Not just yet!

By JOHN KANELIS / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Republicans in Congress want to “move on” from the events of the Sixth of January. They are calling now for “unity” in the nation, that Americans do not want to see Donald Trump put on trial for inciting an insurrection against the government of this great nation.

I don’t think I will move on. Nor should any of us put the horrendous events of that terrible incident behind us. We need a full, thorough hearing on what the nation witnessed in real time and the U.S. Senate needs to put all its members on record on whether they believe Donald Trump committed a crime on that momentous day.

The Senate is preparing to conduct the second impeachment trial on Donald Trump’s conduct as president. The Senate acquitted him in early 2020 on charges of abuse of power and of obstruction of Congress.

Now comes this event. To my way of thinking, what Donald Trump did on Jan. 6 was tantamount to launching an attempt coup against the government. The terrorist mob marched on Capitol Hill with many terrorists intent on harming Vice President Mike Pence and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Their “crime”? They were presiding over Congress’s sworn duty to certify the results of the 2020 presidential election, which Joe Biden won.

Is it really time to “move on” from this incident? Do we just throw up our hands and say that none of it matters any longer just because Trump is no longer in office? Good God in heaven, no!

I say this understanding that Trump is likely to walk away once again with an acquittal. That outcome will cause me some internal grief, but I’ll get over it.

There must be a full hearing of what Trump did that day. What the mobsters did in response to his egging them on. The consequences of what could have occurred had they achieved their stated aim of overturning a free and fair election.

They attacked our democratic process.

Once we hear it all, every detail of it, only then can we move on.

national news

Trump team bales out?

(AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana)

By JOHN KANELIS / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Under normal, legal circumstances the decision by Donald Trump’s legal team to bale out of a pending defense of their client would have me clapping my hands.

As idiotic as the former president’s strategy reportedly is playing out, though, I am going to withhold any hope that there might be an actual conviction coming from the upcoming trial in the U.S. Senate.

Trump is getting ready to stand trial on a charge that he incited the insurrection that occurred on the Sixth of January. He did as has been accused. I saw it. You saw it. The world saw Trump whip the crowd into a frenzy before it marched on Capitol Hill. The House impeached him for it. The Senate will put him on trial even though he has left office.

Trump’s legal team exited the scene reportedly over a disagreement with its client on defense strategy. The lawyers wanted to defend Trump on the basis of a constitutional argument, that the impeachment trial doesn’t fit the Constitution’s provision for removal from office if a conviction is the result. I believe that’s a long shot legal argument.

But then we have Trump wanting the legal eagles to argue on the basis of The Big Lie, that there was widespread vote fraud in the 2020 presidential election. They declined. Then they walked. Who can blame them? Trump’s argument is moronic in the extreme.

So now Trump has no legal team to defend him against the House impeachment. Should he sweat it? No. Why? Because this isn’t strictly a legal trial being conducted in a court of law. The Senate is going to deliver, more than likely, a political verdict. Senators likely already have made up their mind. Heck, 45 GOP senators voted that the trial is unconstitutional, which suggests to me that the Senate is far from likely to convict, given that the Constitution calls for 67 senators to vote for it; a 50-50 Senate split requires 17 Republicans to make that call.

About the only thing the reporting of the lawyers bugging out tells me is that Trump is clinging to a ridiculous notion that has nothing to do with the issue at hand: Did he incite the terrorist mob to attack the Capitol with the intent of stopping Congress from certifying President Biden’s victory in the 2020 election?

Umm. Yeah. He damn sure did!

national news

Elections have consequences!

2 Comments

By JOHN KANELIS / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

If I hear it one more time my head is likely to explode.

It is that Donald Trump’s supporters’ mantra that their guy pulled in 74.2 million votes in the 2020 presidential election, which means — by God — that they won’t be silenced.

OK. I got it. Here is another truth about that election: President Biden garnered 81.2 million votes, 7 million more than Trump; moreover, he won the Electoral College with 306 votes, needing 270 to win the presidency.

Biden won. Trump lost. Elections, as the saying goes, have consequences!

A democratic society requires that losing candidates accept defeat, congratulate the winner, pledge to work together … and yes, also keep pushing for whatever agenda he or she sought during a losing campaign. Donald Trump didn’t do that. He hasn’t done that yet. He apparently will never do any of it.

Instead, he is leading his minions on some sort of call of defiance, ginning up their enthusiasm for a campaign that did not resonate with most Americans who voted in record numbers.

I know what some of you might be thinking. What about the 2016 election when supporters of Hillary Clinton yapped about their candidate getting more votes than Trump? There is no parallel. Clinton pulled in about 3 million more votes than Trump, but lost the Electoral College by the same amount that Trump lost to Biden. There were those who said their voices needed to be heard. Why? Because their candidate collected more rank-and-file support than the actual winner. I was not one of those individuals.

Yes, I was highly critical of Donald Trump during his term as president, but I also recognized that the Constitution prescribes a certain way that candidates win presidential elections, and in 2016 Trump met that standard.

The 2020 result was clear cut. The actual vote comported with the Electoral College vote. So, when the Trumpkin Corps yaps about their guy winning 74.2 million votes, I am left to shrug and say: So fu**ing what? 

The other guy got more votes than your guy! Your guy lost. The Trumpkins have every right to express their point of view; the Constitution is clear about that. But … do not rely on the tired mantra that just because the losing candidate for president won a lot of votes that it means he can still have his way.

Donald Trump said it himself after hearing the gripes of those who supported his opponent four years ago: Elections have consequences.

national news

Trump library? Really?

By JOHN KANELIS / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

This thought comes from a member of my family, but it’s so good I have to share it here.

We talked about whether Donald Trump is going to build a presidential library. My own thought is that it is impossible to couch this man’s tenure in office in any positive light, given the horrendous end he brought to it: the insurrection that capped off his refusal to accept defeat at the hands of President Biden, not to mention the two House impeachments and Senate trials.

However, the conversation this morning turned to this idea: Donald Trump won’t build a free-standing structure, but instead will have a room set aside in one of his posh hotels.

As my family member noted: He can put it between the workout room and the breakfast buffet.

I now open the floor for comments. I happen to think that is a workable idea.

national news

Censure the loony bird

By JOHN KANELIS / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Marjorie Taylor Greene certainly has made a name for herself in just a few days in public office.

Her name is, well, mud. She is a Republican congresswoman from Georgia who is aligned with the QAnon comprising conspiracy nut jobs and lunatics.

What does the House of Representatives do about this moron in its midst? Jack Shafer, senior media writer for Politico, has an interesting idea: censure her and then let the voters in her congressional district decide whether to keep her in 2022.

Not a bad idea. As Shafer writes in Politico: Nowhere in the Constitution—and this is excellent news for freshly sworn-in Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.)—does it stipulate that a House member must have the mental capacity to cook on all four burners.

This is in keeping with the Framers’ general idea that only the lowest bars should be set for officeholders. They declined to cordon off Congress with credential and qualification roadblocks, stating in Article I, section 2, clause 2 that House members need only be 25 years old or older and a U.S. citizen for at least seven years. This left plenty of room for the daft, the moonstruck, the brainsick, the rabble-rousing and the witless to run for the seats. And they have, often gaining office, as Rep. Greene recently did, to the horror of many.

Opinion | Expelling Marjorie Taylor Greene Is Just Crazy Talk – POLITICO

The House has punished members for making untoward statements. Former Rep. Steve King, the Iowa Republican who repeatedly spoke fondly of white supremacy, was stripped of his committee assignments. All he could do for the remainder of his term was cast recorded votes on the floor of the House. The voters in his House district took care of King’s political career … by voting him out of office.

That well could happen to Marjorie Taylor Greene, if the House has the gumption at the very least to censure her.

media news, national news

Vowing to hear all sides

1 Comment

By JOHN KANELIS / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

It is time for your friendly blogger to make a solemn, sincere and honest vow.

I hereby pledge to read more political commentary with which I disagree. The Age of Trump has given way to the Age of Biden. The change in political tone and tenor in Washington thrills me greatly.

However, I need to make a confession. I didn’t listen to as many arguments that favored the tone that Donald Trump set during his term as president as I should have done.

Now that Trump has holed up in his glitzy south Florida resort, I intend to examine more carefully the conservative antidote to the surprisingly progressive tone that President Biden is striking as he seeks to take control of the crises that awaited him.

I look at a number of Internet sites each day. The one that provides the widest range of views is RealClearPolitics.com, which I scan daily. The RCP site is chock full of progressive, centrist and conservative thought. They’re all reputable and I now intend to examine those views that differ from my own bias.

RealClearPolitics – Live Opinion, News, Analysis, Video and Polls

Do I expect to “come out” as a born-again conservative? Hardly. I just believe I should practice what I occasionally preach to those who take time to read my rants on High Plains Blogger. One of my occasional rant topics deals with narrow-mindedness.

As my dear mother used to say, “That guy is so narrow-minded, he can look through a keyhole with both eyes.”

I don’t intend to be “that guy.”