No more red-light cams

This bit of news saddens me, even though I no longer live in the city I once called home for more than two decades.

Amarillo is shutting down its devices installed to protect motorists and pedestrians from those who disobey street signals that order them to stop. The city’s traffic department is dismantling its red-light cameras in accordance with a Texas Legislature mandate that prohibits cities from deploying them.

The Legislature had allowed cities that had the cameras in operation to keep using them until their current contracts expired. Amarillo’s contract has run out. The cameras are coming down.

It’s not that I want Big Brother involved in regulating our lives. It is only that in this instance, the cameras helped deter dipsh** drivers from breaking the law.

The most ridiculous argument against the cameras came from a lawyer friend of mine who argued that the cameras are an “invasion of privacy.” To which I reminded him that when you operate a vehicle in an unsafe manner on public streets, you surrender whatever “privacy” you thought you had.

I am reminded of what a former city council member, Ellen Green, once admonished critics of the cameras. “If you don’t want to pay the fine, then don’t disobey the light,” she said … or words to that effect.

I understand that the cameras did reduce the instances of red-light running in Amarillo. The city once thought they were important enough to install. I just wish the Legislature would have allowed cities to make these decisions for themselves.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

What-about-ism on full display

The noted right-wing blowhard Glenn Beck has been quoted suggesting that if the FBI felt compelled to search Donald Trump’s home for evidence relating to alleged criminal activity, then it should have done the same thing to Bill Clinton during an impeachment inquiry of the 42nd president.

Sheesh! Well, as usual, the Beckster has gone far afield in trying to attach moral equivalence to what Clinton supposedly did and what might await The Donald.

President Clinton got caught messing around with a young woman who was working in the White House as a temporary employee during a government shutdown. A special prosecutor got wind of it and then summoned Clinton to testify before a federal grand jury. The panel asked Clinton about the affair. He lied about it.

Thus, he broke the law by committing perjury. Therein rested the Republican Party’s pretext to impeach the president. He went to trial. The Senate acquitted Clinton.

What’s happening now is, shall we say, far more egregious.

Donald Trump is under investigation for a series of allegations: seditious conspiracy, violating the Presidential Records Act, dereliction of duty, a violation of his oath of office.

I might throw in treason, but that’s a bit of a stretch. So, I won’t go there.

Attorney General Merrick Garland is conducting a serious probe into whether Trump broke the law. The FBI obtained a warrant to conduct a search of the ex-POTUS’s home. Trump said it is unprecedented. He is right. Then again, so are the crimes for which Trump might be indicted. Right there is all the moral equivalence anyone should need to justify why the FBI did what it did.

As for any notion that another former president’s home should have been searched for evidence … well, there was nothing to seek. It was on the record with his grand jury testimony. Yeah, it was a phony and lame excuse to impeach a president, given what we’ve witnessed so many years later through the conduct of POTUS 45.

As for Glenn Beck’s assertion, I’ll just take it for what it’s worth, which is not a damn thing.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Reaction puzzles me

The initial Republican Party reaction to the FBI agents’ search for records within Donald J. Trump’s glitzy south Florida mansion has me a little bit puzzled.

I don’t hear much defense of the ex-POTUS’s conduct coming from the GOP faithful. Who out there is willing to say that it’s all right for a president to squirrel away classified documents taken from the White House? Who is willing to say it’s OK for a president — as it has been reported — to flush documents down the toilet or burn ’em in a fireplace?

No, we’re hearing instead are accusations about “weaponization” of the Justice Department and the FBI. Some GOP lawmakers are suggesting that Attorney General Merrick Garland needs to either resign or be impeached. For what? For following up on his pledge to ensure that “no one is above the law”? When the AG says “no one,” he means, well, no one, not even a former president of the United States.

The hysterical reaction from the hysterical right wing, though, is laughable … except that it ain’t funny.

What does make me chuckle — but only a little bit — is that the right-wingers just aren’t going to say that Donald Trump didn’t do anything wrong.

The man is as crooked as a dog’s hind leg.

As for the Justice Department’s search for wrongdoing, it would be foolish to believe that DOJ — at this juncture of the probe — is going to go easy on what appears to be a mountain of evidence that implicates the man who once took an oath to protect the Constitution, but who in reality launched an all-out attack on it.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Goodbye, stick shifts? Oh, my!

I just glanced at an article in The Atlantic that saddens me greatly. It’s because the article foretells the demise of stick shifts in motor vehicles. This is a terrible event in the age of the horseless carriage.

Here’s the article to which I refer:

The End of Manual Transmission – The Atlantic

I learned how to drive on a manual transmission. Mom taught me the ins and outs of operating a three-speed transmission in her 1961 Rambler. It was a brown-ish vehicle. It wasn’t very sporty, but it did allow me to learn the intricacies of actually operating a motor vehicle.

Mom advised me that “once you learn to master a manual transmission, you’ll be able to drive anything.” Oh, she was so right.

Not too many years after learning how to drive Mom’s Rambler, I returned home from Vietnam and spent the final few months of my Army tour of duty with an armored cavalry regiment in Fort Lewis, Wash. I got orders to report to a transportation company within the Third Armored Cav. They threw me into a five-ton cargo truck. And, yep, it had a manual transmission.

It was a piece of cake, man.

Ian Bogost writes in The Atlantic: But the manual transmission’s chief appeal derives from the feeling it imparts to the driver: a sense, whether real or imagined, that he or she is in control. According to the business consultant turned motorcycle repairman turned best-selling author Matthew Crawford, attending to that sense is not just an affectation. Humans develop tools that assist in locomotion, such as domesticated horses and carriages and bicycles and cars—and then extend their awareness to those tools. The driver “becomes one” with the machine, as we say.

Hey, it’s not “imagined.” The driver is in control.

My family members have known for years how I feel about stick-shift driving. I always have preferred to actually manipulate the clutch pedal and run the shifter through its paces over just sitting behind the steering wheel and guiding the car to wherever I have pointed it.

Hey, I’ll get over this sad news. It’s just going to take some time.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

FBI isn’t ‘weaponized’

I need to set the record straight in a brief response to one of the criticisms being leveled at the FBI in the wake of its searching Donald Trump’s Florida home for evidence of criminality.

It’s this idiotic notion that the FBI is being “weaponized” to hunt for crimes that allegedly don’t exist. I happen to believe they do exist and that the federal judge who issued the warrant believes so, too.

Now for setting the record straight.

Donald J. Trump appointed Christopher Wray as FBI director in 2017 after he fired former FBI boss James Comey.

Thus, Wray is a “Trump guy” in the strictest sense of the word. However, Wray also is a law enforcement pro. He is a seasoned prosecutor with many years of experience looking for bad guys.

To suggest that Christophe Wray would turn the FBI into a political weapon would be to deny the man’s long and distinguished history as a career prosecutor. It also is to defame his reputation.

FBI Director Wray doesn’t need me to defend him. I just feel the need to remind those critics of the FBI search (I will not call it a “raid”) that the FBI boss is an official dedicated to finding the truth behind a potential criminal act.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Uh, Newt? They can do nothing to me!

Newt Gingrich is grasping at anything to minimize the stunning news overnight that the FBI has searched the Florida home of Donald J. Trump for evidence that he might have committed a crime — or three — while serving as president of the United States.

The Republican fire-breather/former speaker of the House said this: “I think what’s even more troubling and what every American, whether you’re a Democrat, Republican, doesn’t matter, liberal, conservative, doesn’t matter. If 30 FBI agents can take over the house of a former President of the United States and probable candidate for president, what can they do to you?”

I can answer Newtie’s question. Are you ready?

The FBI can’t do a damn thing to any American if they haven’t broken federal laws.

Gingrich: If FBI Agents Can Raid The Former President, What Can They Do To You? | Video | RealClearPolitics

What fu**ing difference does it make if the subject of a federal investigation is a former POTUS or someone who might be a candidate for the office?

Attorney General Merrick Garland has spoken with crystal clarity on the subject of his investigation into the events of 1/6, its aftermath and its causes. “No one is above the law,” Garland said. He clarified that statement by declaring, “I mean, ‘no one’ is above the law.”

The issue isn’t about “control” of our lives, or about bullying of a president who well might have broken several laws. It is about whether our democratic system of government is worth protecting against those who would seek to destroy it.

Newt Gingrich is entitled to his opinion. I am entitled to mine. They differ. I happen to believe I am correct and Newtie is wrong.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

DOJ makes history!

Donald J. Trump is correct. The search of his home in Florida is the “first time in history” that the FBI has conducted such an operation against a former U.S. president.

There. Now that we have that out of the way, I want to make sure we all understand something else.

Trump is the first president to resist the peaceful transfer of power to a new administration; he is the first president to have incited an attack on the Capitol; he is the first president to have demanded that states “find” votes to reverse the outcome of an election; he is the first president to have been accused of taking top-secret documents out of the White House illegally.

So, is the FBI search legal? Yes. It is. The Justice Department obtained approval from a federal judge to proceed with the search. The FBI needed to demonstrate “probable cause” to believe a crime has been committed, and it did in the eyes of the judge who issued the search warrant.

Trump’s assertion that he now is the first president in U.S. history to have been subjected to this kind of legal action is correct.

However, he deserves it!

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

FBI zeroes in on Trump

What in the name of juris prudence are we to make of the news that exploded this evening?

The FBI has walked into the home of the immediate past U.S. president to search for who knows what. The announcement comes on the eve of the 48th anniversary of the date Richard Nixon resigned the presidency as the Watergate scandal unraveled everything in sight.

Let’s understand what the so-called “raid” at Mar-a-Lago entails.

A federal judge had to sign off on a Justice Department request to allow the agents to look for evidence of specific allegations of criminal wrongdoing.

Thus, this is not just some rogue agency running amok. It is the result of a federal judge determining that the FBI had enough to justify a thorough search of a former president’s home.

There appears to be building evidence that Donald Trump broke more than one federal law when he squirreled federal documents away as he was preparing to vacate the White House after the 2020 election.

We don’t know what the FBI was seeking. It will become known in due course.

However, from my perch, it looks for all the world that the feds have the goods on the individual who gave the finger to the oath he took to protect the government.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Trump gets support from CPAC … imagine that!

This is likely the biggest non-surprise of the current political season, but it’s still worth a comment or two.

It comes in the form of the endorsement of Donald J. Trump’s continuing presence on the political scene by the Conservative Action Political Conference, which met this past weekend in Dallas.

I cannot help but shake my noggin.

The CPAC faithful want Trump to run for president in 2024. They have decided, I reckon, to ignore the two impeachments during his term in office, the stunning pile of evidence that mounts from the House select committee’s probe into the 1/6 insurrection and perhaps the possible indictments for criminal activity that might come from the Justice Department.

Oh, and never mind that Trump has yet to lay any sort of agenda for the future. He continues to wallow in The Big Lie that he keeps alive by suggesting the 2020 election was stolen from him.

That’s leadership? That’s moving toward the future?

At CPAC, conservative Texans show Donald Trump loyalty | The Texas Tribune

The “conservative movement” has been hijacked, along with the Republican Party, by the cult of personality led by Donald J. Trump.

The Texas Tribune summed up nicely the theme of Trump’s keynote speech: Trump stuck to a familiar script and repeated the falsehood that the 2020 election was stolen from him, even as those claims have repeatedly been debunked by even his own former aides. He painted cities run by Democratic leadership as hellscapes awash in crime and lamented what he described as an open southern border with Mexico.

The Texas crowd ate it up. “I’m over the moon, I’ve been trying to see him for years,” said Therese Boehnlein, who drove from Waco to Dallas to see Trump.

Well … OK. The ex-POTUS dropped a hint or two that he’ll run again in 2024. That will be his third attempt at the White House. Just remember something: He got fewer votes than Hillary Clinton in 2016 and a lot fewer votes than Joe Biden in 2020.

Truly astounding.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

If only he hadn’t lied

This makes me so mad I could just spit. Dick Cheney came to his daughter’s defense with a stellar argument that called Donald John Trump a “coward” who “lies to his supporters.”

The former vice president of the United States said a “real man” wouldn’t lie the way Trump does.

Of course he is right! I would be leading the cheers for the former VP who served for two terms during George W. Bush’s presidency, except for this little thing. Dick Cheney also is a liar.

I don’t say this with any sort of cavalier attitude. I want the former veep’s ad to sway voters to his daughter’s corner as she battles for re-election to the U.S. House seat that her father occupied before taking on the job of White House chief of staff for President Ford.

Dick Cheney, though, spooned up a major dose of snake oil when George W. Bush became president. He persuaded the president that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction, chemicals that it would use against us. He also told us that Saddam Hussein — the late Iraqi dictator — played a role in the 9/11 attacks on Washington and New York City. Neither allegation was true.

We went to war with Iraq in March 2003 and lost nearly 5,000 American lives in the process. And for what purpose? To retaliate for lies conveyed by the then-vice president and others within the Bush administration.

This is the kind of thing that sticks to people’s backsides. It’s indelible. No matter how much Dick Cheney might pretend to be a man of high honor and integrity — who tells the truth all the time — we cannot deny that he lied about WMD and the culprits behind 9/11.

I just wish Liz Cheney could have found another ally to launch this attack on Donald Trump.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com