Category Archives: political news

national news, political news

This isn’t sounding ‘presidential,’ Donald

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFaH9Y2Mtmo

Donald J. Trump made a lot of promises along the campaign trail, which is no surprise, given that politicians do that sort of thing while they campaign for public office.

One of them was that he would be more “presidential” if voters elected him to the highest office in America.

This video is of the president-elect’s latest “thank you” rally. It took place in Orlando, Fla.

I’m waiting for him to start sounding “presidential.” He didn’t do so at this rally. He hasn’t done so at any of these events he’s held after winning the presidency.

Trump hasn’t changed his tone one tiny bit. He’s still spouting the buffoonery that won him so many fans all along the campaign trail.

The tenor of these rallies is filling me with interest in precisely how the next president is going to address the nation after he takes the oath of office.

Donald Trump well might deliver one of the more, um, memorable inaugural speeches in the history of the Republic.

entertainment news, national news, political news

Is this one of those ‘brilliant people’?

aalcfup

Donald J. Trump promised Americans that he would surround himself with “brilliant people” as he formed his government, not to mention when he actually began governing as president of the United States.

His latest high-profile hire for his transition team, though, is a head-scratcher.

Omarosa Manigault has joined the Trump transition team. The president-elect made a bit of a show of the hire. Manigault was a contestant on “Celebrity Apprentice,” the show that Trump ran before he became a politician.

I’ll stipulate that I never watched the show. I don’t know much about this young woman, other than what I’ve read — which isn’t much.

She worked for Trump’s campaign as an African-American outreach advocate. She sought to boost the Republican nominee’s standing with black voters.

She reportedly then let slip that Trump was keeping an enemies list. We older folks remember an earlier enemies list, which President Nixon formed to keep track of those who opposed him.

“Let me just tell you, Mr. Trump has a long memory, and we’re keeping a list,” she said.

Well. There you have it.

Back to my original point. Omarosa’s role with the Trump transition has me wondering: What in the world does she bring to the forming of the next government?

Is she one of the brilliant people? Just askin’, man.

national news, political news

FBI joins CIA in fingering Russian hackers

bbh9xcg

What do you know about that?

FBI Director James Comey has concluded that the CIA analysis is correct, that the Russians hacked into our nation’s electoral process and might have helped Donald J. Trump win the election over Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Oh, the irony is amazing.

Just to be clear, I am not going to suggest that Comey’s conduct near the end of the presidential campaign cost Clinton the victory most of us thought she would win. The letter to Congress about those e-mails may have contributed some to Hillary’s defeat. Was it decisive? Did it doom her campaign by itself? I don’t believe so.

But now we have the FBI climbing aboard the CIA hay wagon, endorsing the spook agency’s findings that the Russians sought to do the very thing Comey has been accused of doing.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/fbi-backs-cia-view-that-russia-intervened-to-help-trump-win-election/ar-AAlEvfm?li=BBnb7Kz

I don’t know all the facts about how the FBI works. I damn sure know even less about the CIA and the work its agents and analysts do to compile intelligence information. I probably don’t want to know.

When two pre-eminent intelligence and law enforcement agencies draw the same conclusion, though, that’s a huge deal.

If only the president-elect would exhibit some respect for the work these professionals do every day, rather than dissing them while denigrating their findings.

Indeed, the candidate who himself questioned the integrity of the electoral process — remember how the president-elect proclaimed the system to be “rigged” against him? — ought to be among the loudest voices demanding a full accounting of what the Russians have done … allegedly.

International news, national news, political news

Smooth transition running into serious bumps

russian-hacker

There goes my trick knee again. It’s throbbing. My gut is grumbling. My fingers are tingling.

Something is telling me that the “smooth and seamless transition” from the Obama administration to the Trump administration is going to become a lot less smooth and seamless.

Why? Gosh. Let me think. Oh! It’s that Russian hacking thing, I reckon.

Donald J. Trump is dismissing — and dissing — the intelligence community’s assessment that Russian spooks hacked into our cyber network and sought to affect the presidential election.

President Obama, meanwhile, is declaring his intention before he leaves office in a little more than month to strike back at the Russians.

Who’s reacting correctly here, the president or the president-elect?

I’m going to go with the man who’s still on the watch in the Oval Office.

Trump’s stated view that the CIA is all wet and his belief that the Russians didn’t do anything wrong is a profoundly dangerous posture to take, given what we know about Russian President Vladimir Putin’s world view and his demonstrated ability to commit atrocious mischief whenever the opportunity presents itself.

Barack Obama is planning to take action against the Russians, while hoping for an easy handoff to the man who’ll succeed him.

The transition could be made a lot smoother if the new guy, Trump, would accept what the intelligence community already knows. The Russians aren’t our friends and they aren’t likely to become friends if they detect they have a patsy sitting behind that big desk in the Oval Office.

My hope, of course, is that the president retains the dignity he has brought to the office and ensures as smooth a transition as possible. If only, though, this Russian hacking matter hadn’t gotten in the way.

local news, political news

Amarillo mayor’s race produces a fascinating dynamic

9025332_G

Let’s focus for a moment on two individuals who might run against each other to become mayor of Amarillo.

One of them is Elisha Demerson, a member of the Amarillo City Council who is generating some community chatter about his apparent desire to be mayor. He might have a decision to make, given the announcement that came this week from the other individual I want to discuss.

That would be Ginger Nelson, who has announced her mayoral candidacy. Nelson is quitting her post on the Amarillo Economic Development Corporation to focus entirely on running for mayor.

Nelson also is producing a lot of buzz around the city. The business community appears to be rallying behind her. A banker friend of mine told me today that Nelson is the real deal: “She’s articulate, smart and has the city’s best interests at heart,” my friend said. Others with whom I am acquainted have said the very same thing about her.

Understand this, too. I don’t know Nelson. I haven’t met her. I’d like to visit with her at some point prior to the election. So, I just might do that.

Oh, and what about the current mayor, Paul Harpole? I’m hearing he’s going to call it a public service career and will make room for Nelson.

Where does all this political intrigue leave Demerson?

I believe it forces him to seek to retain his council seat rather than mounting a futile campaign to defeat someone with Nelson’s chops.

You see, much of the support for Nelson comes from those who believe the City Council’s dysfunction is unacceptable. That dysfunction began appearing immediately after three new council members took office after the May 2015 city election. The city manager and the city attorney quit. The assistant city manager retired.

One of the new council members was Elisha Demerson. Coincidence? I think not.

I know Demerson only a little. We’ve been acquainted for a number of years. His years on the Potter County Commissioners Court predate my arrival in Amarillo, but I’ve learned about the rocky time he had as county judge.

His brief tenure on the City Council also coincides with additional rockiness. Is there a pattern here … or what?

So, with the municipal election about six months away, we’re already getting set to view a bit of political drama.

As if we haven’t had enough of it already for the past two years.

political news, Uncategorized

The case for un-electing Donald Trump

trump

I’m such a fence-straddler on this one.

Our nation’s presidential electors are meeting Monday to choose the next president of the United States. Do they proceed with electing Donald J. Trump, who 306 electoral votes — 36 more than he needs — or do they deny him the votes and throw the election either to candidate he defeated or to the House of Representatives?

The Albany (N.Y.) Times-Union has declared in an editorial that the electors should deny Trump the presidency.

http://www.timesunion.com/opinion/article/Electors-reject-Mr-Trump-10796574.php

Oh, man. I’ve read the editorial twice; I’ll read it some more. The paper makes a strong argument for the electors to yank the presidency away from someone who is wholly unprepared, unqualified and unfit for the job.

Electors from most of the states, though, are bound by state rules that require them to remain faithful to the will of their states’ majority. Other state electors — such as those from Texas — aren’t bound by those rules.

The U.S. Constitution allows such a rebellion to occur. It doesn’t quite address the chaos that would ensue if electors were to deny the Electoral College winner the presidency.

It’s never happened in the history of the Republic, although the House has chosen a president: John Quincy Adams in 1824.

So help me, I cannot yet take that leap.

I agree with the Times-Union’s assessment of Trump’s ability to do the job. His campaign-style “thank you” rallies are troubling in the extreme; he should be spending his time learning about the details of governing a nation comprising more than 300 million citizens. He’s selecting a collection of individuals for his Cabinet who have limited experience dealing with the agencies they would lead and in some cases are openly hostile to the policies they are being asked to implement.

And we have this issue of alleged Russian tampering with our electoral process. Did the president-elect benefit directly from foreign interference?

It is true, as the editorial points out, that the founders set up the Electoral College to shield the nation against “foreign influence.”

The founders also set up a mechanism for Congress to act as a check against presidential overreach. It’s called impeachment. If a president crosses any one of the many boundaries set up to limit the power of the office, the House can intercede with articles of impeachment, followed by a trial in the Senate.

I’m going to give this some more thought. I might get to you later, before the Electoral College meets.

I’ve been watching the presidential electoral process closely for four decades and I’ve never seen questions like these raised prior to the transition of one presidency to another.

It’s beginning to stress me out.

local news, political news

Welcome to the fray, mayoral candidate Nelson

image529523_web1_ginger-nelson-img_4263

I do not know Ginger Nelson, other than what I’ve heard about her.

Solid citizen, seasoned lawyer, dedicated to Amarillo’s economic future, smart, idealistic, well-educated … and all the other good things one attaches to those who seek public office.

Nelson is running for Amarillo mayor. Hers is the first name on the municipal ballot that I expect will fill to the brim by the time registration closes for the May 2017 election.

The story I saw in the Amarillo Globe-News didn’t mention, though, a word about the current mayor, Paul Harpole.

http://amarillo.com/news/2016-12-14/it-s-official-amarillo-has-1st-mayoral-candidate

A little birdie or two has told me Harpole isn’t going to seek re-election. Officially, he’s undecided. My strong hunch is that he likely won’t run now that Nelson is running.

Nelson brings a good bit of civic involvement to this race, stemming mostly from her work on the Amarillo Economic Development Corporation, an organization near and dear to Harpole’s heart.

It stands to reason, therefore, that a candidate with strong AEDC ties likely could preclude the incumbent from seeking another term. Nelson said she’s quitting the AEDC to devote all her energy to winning the mayor’s seat.

I think this bodes well for a City Council that has been roiled in conflict since the May 2015 election. Harpole has been part of what former interim City Manager Terry Childers called the “dysfunction” at City Hall.

A fresh face and fresh ideas — along with a demonstrated commitment to economic growth and stability — might be just what the city needs at this juncture of its redevelopment. It’s been a rough ride at times during the past two years: the resignation of a city manager and the abrupt departure of his interim replacement; ongoing hiccups with downtown redevelopment and the relocation of a baseball franchise to Amarillo; occasional flaring of tempers among City Council members.

I’ll await along with the rest of the city’s residents Mayor Harpole’s decision on whether he intends to run. My grumbling gut tells me he’s out, paving the way for someone of Ginger Nelson’s leanings to seek to guide the city toward a bright future.

national news, political news

Here’s a possible constitutional crisis of major proportion

electoral-college-banner

Those 538 men and women who are set to meet Monday to elect the next president of the United States are poised to make some serious history, one way or the other.

Most of them come from states that voted for Donald J. Trump, the Republican, over Hillary Rodham Clinton, the Democrat. They comprise the Electoral College, which the nation’s founders established in the 18th century to choose the person who would govern the country.

Here’s the big-time catch: some of them are “faithless,” which means they aren’t necessarily bound by the dictates of their states’ majorities. Add to that some major-league questions about whether Russian intelligence agents and computer hackers influenced the outcome the election and you have a situation of monumental proportions brewing … possibly.

Enough of those electors might decide they can’t vote for Trump and, thus, deny the president-elect the 270 electoral votes he needs to take office in January.

What happens then if, say, not enough of them switch their votes to Clinton, making her the next president? The U.S. House of Representatives, controlled by the GOP, then gets to pick the next president.

I don’t believe this will happen. I believe Trump will collect enough votes from the Electoral College to take the oath on Jan. 20. He will become the 45th president of the United States; Mike Pence will become the vice president.

Trump likely will have the Cabinet chosen by then. The U.S. Senate committees charged with recommending whether these nominees should be confirmed will get to work and make those critical decisions.

But some of the electors have asked to be briefed fully by the U.S. intelligence apparatus on what the Russians did and whether they actually influenced the outcome of the election. Just suppose the spooks tell the electors that, yep, the Russkies succeeded in getting their man elected. What happens then if you’re an elector from a state that voted for Trump and you can’t in good conscience cast your vote for the winner?

Lots of answers yet to come forward before the big day next week.

This could be the most fascinating supposedly pro forma electoral procedure in the history of the Republic.

It could be …

International news, national news, political news

Anti-Iraq War president picks pro-war team

john-bolton-very-large

I am pretty sure I heard Donald J. Trump call the Iraq War a “disaster,” a “mistake,” a “terrible decision.”

It’s not clear to me, though, whether the president-elect actually opposed the war from its beginning, or during the period leading up to the first shots being fired in March 2003.

But during the 2016 presidential campaign Trump did criticize the Bush administration’s decision to go to war in Iraq.

Why, then, is he going to send a deputy secretary of state before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for confirmation?

John Bolton is a serious war hawk. He believes in regime change. He supported the Iraq War. He bought into the notion that the late Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction. He has called for going to war with Iran. At least one key Republican committee member, Rand Paul of Kentucky, says he’ll vote automatically against Bolton’s confirmation.

Bolton is hoping to join a State Department team headed by a designated secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, whose confirmation itself isn’t a sure thing. He’ll have to answer many questions about his friendship with Russian strongman Vladimir Putin, who Sen. John McCain has labeled a “butcher” and “murderer.”

But this Bolton character, a former U.N. ambassador, brings a serious dichotomy into play.

The president-elect opposed the Iraq War — he says — and yet he’s going to bring the hawkiest of hawks into his foreign-policy team?

I do not understand any of this.

My head is spinning.

International news, national news, political news

Here’s how you could have handled the Russia problem

President George W Bush visits CIA Headquarters, March 20, 2001.

Donald J. Trump didn’t ask me for my opinion on this, but I’ll give it to him anyway … not that it matters in Trump World.

CIA officials have concluded that Russian computer hackers had some impact on the 2016 presidential election. To what end, they haven’t disclosed; it’s highly classified at the moment.

They aren’t alone in that assessment. Other intelligence agencies and independent experts also have reached that conclusion.

So, what does the president-elect do? He dismisses the CIA’s findings. He says he doesn’t believe them. He says the Russians didn’t do what has been alleged. He blames Democrats for fomenting a false allegation. How does he know any of that? He doesn’t.

A better response would have been for Trump to do the following: Stand before the media and issue a statement.

Thank you, ladies and gentlemen of the press. I want to issue a brief statement. There’ll be no questions.

The news from the CIA is troubling in the extreme. I hereby join President Obama in calling for a full review of the findings and a public disclosure — to the extent that it is possible — of what, if anything, transpired in the Kremlin that might have had an impact on the election.

I am acutely aware of my statements throughout the campaign that the election would be “rigged” in favor of my opponent, Hillary Clinton. As I’ve noted on other campaign-related matters, I said some things for “dramatic effect.” The “rigged election” allegation was one of them.

I did not envision the “rigged election” charge coming back on me and my campaign in this matter.

Do I believe the Russians tilted the election in my favor? No. But you shouldn’t just take my word for it.

I remain confident that a thorough review of the evidence and the facts will determine we would have won anyway.

But let’s find out the truth of what happened, starting with the review that the president has demanded from the intelligence community.

He didn’t say anything like that. Instead, he has denigrated the intelligence community, as he has done with many other facets of government.

Trump’s stubborn denial of any possible hanky-panky — and his stated disbelief in the work of the CIA’s professional intelligence officers — only darkens the clouds forming over his administration.

The questions only will deepen the distrust many Americans are expressing at this moment over what might have transpired on Election Day.