DC riot, Donald Trump

Manslaughter charge for Trump? What the … ?

1 Comment

Five people died in the Jan. 6 assault on the U.S. Capitol, an event that Donald J. Trump could have stopped with a single verbal order to his maniacal followers that day.

He didn’t say a word. He let the attack on our government continue. The event turned bloody. Now comes this tidbit from a former U.S. attorney, Barbara McQuade, who says Trump could face manslaughter charges for his role in provoking the assault and for his abject failure to stop it.

Wow, man!

Is that for real? McQuade believes the 1/6 House select committee has compiled enough evidence to refer to Justice Department legal eagles a criminal referral seeking a manslaughter indictment.

McQuade wrote this in making the case: Under federal law, involuntary manslaughter occurs when a person commits an act on federal property without due care that it might produce death. To establish a criminal case of manslaughter against Trump, prosecutors would need to prove each of the elements of that offense beyond a reasonable doubt: an act, committed without due care, that caused death.

First, did Trump commit an act that could constitute the actus reus for manslaughter? His statements at the Ellipse in which he urged the crowd to march to the Capitol could be an act that constitutes this element. Recent evidence that this was not a “metaphorical” statement, but rather a coordinated plan, would make the statement even more egregious because it would mean that Trump had time to reflect on the potential deadly consequences of his actions.

Oh, boy. I don’t know that the committee needs to go that far. It seems to me it has enough evidence to seek plenty of criminal indictments that stop short of accusing Trump of manslaughter.

Still, the idea does make one ponder what might be coming down the road.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

State news

Recall the old ways, legislators

As the Texas Legislature prepares to commence its 88th legislative assembly next month, I would like to offer this brief admonition.

It is that Texas state government works best when legislators from both major parties find common ground, work under rules that give the minority party a slice of power and find compromise whenever possible.

I have a nagging feeling that today’s legislative leadership is going to heed the saber-rattling that comes from the Freedom Caucus, the TEA party, the MAGA crowd and assorted right-wing fruitcakes as they prepare to legislate their way through this 140-day session.

It need not be that way.

We once had a Republican governor, George W. Bush, who worked tightly with the likes of Democratic Lt. Gov. Bob Bullock and Democratic House Speaker Pete Laney. Democrats controlled the Legislature in 1995 when Bush took over as governor after defeating Democratic Gov. Ann Richards. Bush was new then to elective politics, but he turned out to be the quickest study imaginable as he grasped instantly the need to work with the other guys under the Texas state capitol dome.

He would later, of course, be elected president, handing the governorship over to fellow Republican Rick Perry, who didn’t quite grasp the Bush formula for legislative success.

It’s different these days. Republicans control the governor’s office and both legislative chambers. There still is a sizable Democratic minority in both the state House and Senate, some of whose members remember how it used to be in Austin.

House Speaker Dade Phelan appears slated to another term as the Man of the House. If he follows form, he will appoint House Democrats to committee chairs. I don’t have as much faith in Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, who presides over the Senate. But … bipartisan cooperation in one out of two legislative chambers is better than none.

The session will be busy. Legislators need to fix our electrical grid. They keep yapping about reducing property taxes. Our highways need repair.

I just want them all to keep their eyes on the prize and not worry about offending the fire breathers who make up both of their bases.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

International news

Yes, Putin is a war criminal

Emanuel Macron is sounding every bit like the world leader many observers contend he has become. I heard a demonstration of his forthrightness and strength the other day in a “60 Minutes” interview.

The French president said in response to a direct question about whether Russian tyrant Vladimir Putin is a “war criminal.” Without flinching, blinking or pausing, Macron said “yes, he is a war criminal.” Putin’s crime, according to Macron? Putin is ordering the bombing of civilian targets in Ukraine.

There. Done deal. Putin, who launched the illegal invasion of Ukraine in February, has demonstrated beyond a doubt that he needs to go on trial for war crimes, said Macron.

Indeed, the French president is emerging as Europe’s most formidable leader. He took over that role when German Chancellor Angela Merkel vacated her office this year.

It’s no small feat that the European Union has held together stronger than ever in opposition to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Or that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization stands as one against any threats that Russia might pose to any of its members.

I credit two people for that solidarity. One is President Joe Biden, who has summoned NATO to be firm against the Russians. Another is Emanuel Macron, who speaks with strength and resolve in condemning the Russian tyrant.

We need a strong Europe to stand against the Russian aggressors. Europe needs a strong United States to lend its own resolve to this fight.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

national news

Now will GOP reassess itself?

Mitt Romney’s loss to President Obama in the 2012 presidential election prompted the Republican Party to determine it needed a thorough examination of its future.

The party pledged to search its soul and look for ways to appeal to more Blacks, Hispanics, suburban women and other demographic groups known to be friendlier to Democrats.

I don’t know what the party came up with, but four years later it nominated a certifiable racist, sexual assailant, pathological liar as its presidential candidate. Donald Trump then won the 2016 election. The party since has taken many steps backward from where it was when Romney led the GOP.

I want the Republican Party to reassess its position these days as much as Republicans do … if only for different reasons.

I remain committed (more or less) to Democratic Party principles. I also want a return to honest debate pitting philosophies against each other. Today’s Republican Party is too enamored with The Big Lie, with MAGA demagoguery and with fealty to Donald Trump.

Furthermore, I want to state for the record once again that Trump entered politics in 2016 without spending a moment of his disgusting life working to improve people’s lives. Even after serving a term as president, public service remains an unknown concept to Trump.

I would welcome a return to honest and vigorous debate. I relish a good fight between politicians with serious policy disagreements. We aren’t getting that quality of discourse now. Instead, as we just witnessed, we saw a stable of Republicans defeated because they had earned the anointment of the twice-impeached former POTUS, who backed them because they swilled the Big Lie Kool-Aid.

We can do better than that.

Mitt Romney’s narrow loss a decade ago should have taught Republicans a valuable lesson. It didn’t. Maybe now the GOP will heed the message that voters are telling them.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

national news

POTUS makes agonizing call

President Joe Biden deserves the benefit of some compassion and whole lot less of the back-stabbing and second-guessing he is getting from right-wingers over Brittney Griner’s release from a Russian gulag.

Griner came home to Texas after being released in a negotiated prisoner swap that sent arms dealer Viktor Bout back to Russia. The MAGA crowd has been leading the boo birds in criticizing the deal that has resulted in another American, Paul Whelan, remaining in Russian captivity.

Let’s be clear about what went down.

The White House had been negotiating with the Kremlin over securing Griner’s release. As it turned out, the Russians had settled on a deal that meant it would be Griner for Bout. That was their final offer.

So … Biden accepted the deal.

Had he refused, we would have gotten no one out of Russia.

It is fair to ask: Would the right wingers out there have accepted a no-deal over what we got?

Let us also recognize the president’s pledge to keep working to secure Paul Whelan’s release. Whelan has been held on a phony spying charge for four years. It’s instructive that Whelan’s family — and even Whelan himself — have been gracious in acknowledging Griner’s release from the Russian hoosegow.

Yes, we all want Paul Whelan to come home. No one should be happy that he remains locked up. It angers me, too, that he wasn’t part of the deal that brought Griner — a celebrated pro basketball athlete — home to her family.

However, I am not going to “blame” President Biden for the deal he struck.

He has acknowledged the difficult choice he faced. Hey, it’s why he’s making the big bucks as president of the United States.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

national news

Impeach Biden … for this?

Marjorie Taylor Greene stands all alone among the dumb-dumbs who occupy too many seats in the U.S. House of Representatives.

The Georgia Republican — known to be a QAnon queen, an election denier, a MAGA fanatic and all-round detestable individual — says President Biden should be impeached for (get a load of this!) agreeing to bring Brittney Griner home from a Russian prison.

Hmm. OK. Let’s parse this for a minute, eh?

Greene wants former Marine Paul Whelan to come home, too. Here’s a news flash: So do I, so does Joe Biden, so do all Americans with half a heart.

President Biden has told us all — except that Greene apparently wasn’t listening — that he will “not stop” working to bring Whelan home. The Russians, we also have learned, insisted on a one-for-one swap, Griner in exchange for the arms dealer Viktor Bout.

Does anyone believe seriously that Joe Biden doesn’t want Whelan to come home?

Meanwhile, what’s with the impeachment talk from the moronic congresswoman who just won re-election to her second term in the House? What is the “high crime” she would seek to hang on the president?

OK, I know she isn’t alone among the MAGA cultists who comprise much of the House GOP caucus. She’s got plenty of loudmouthed company, such as Matt Gaetz of Florida, Lauren Boebert of Colorado, Paul Gosar of Arizona, and Jim Jordan of Ohio to name just four of ’em. They all must sit around in the House cafeteria conspiring to create all the mischief they can muster up.

Frankly, Marjorie Taylor Greene and her ilk should give us all plenty of concern. She stands to wield outsized power in the next Congress, which will be run by Republicans who hold onto a slim majority. She will have the ear of the next speaker of the House.

To think that this individual actually votes on laws that affect all of us. Wow! This person’s stupidity is a thing to behold.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

military news

Vlad keeps blustering

Vladimir Putin has laid down the law to “any nation” that decides to use nuclear weapons against Russians, which is that they would be “wiped off the face of the Earth.”

Check. Got it, Mr. Russian Goon.

The world knows that Russia is armed to the teeth with nuclear weapons. Putin keeps threatening to use them to put down the resistance he has encountered in his illegal invasion of Ukraine.

Is anyone on Earth at all surprised that the Ukrainians would mount such a stern resistance against the Russian invaders? Not me, man!

So, for Putin to threaten to use nuclear weapons to obliterate any nation that does the same is just empty rhetoric.

The Russian tyrant knows as well as anyone why the United States and the Soviet Union stood nose-to-nose while operating under a nuclear policy of “mutually assured destruction.”

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

national news

Sinema bolts Dems … OK, so what?

So … Sen. Kirsten Sinema of Arizona no longer belongs to the Democratic Party, choosing to register as an independent.

You may count me as one American — who cheered mightily for Democrats to capture an actual majority in the Senate — to be not as chapped as many others out here in the cheap seats.

Sinema has rankled many Democratic partisans by declaring she no longer ascribes to party doctrine. She wants to vote independently, serving the needs, wishes and demands of her Arizona constituents.

I ask you: Why is that so terrible?

The question will be whether she caucuses with Democrats the way two other independents do: Angus King of Maine and Bernie Sanders of Vermont. If she does, then I believe she can be counted on as much as Democrats always counted on her vote on key issues. She has shown a rebellious streak, even when she was a card-carrying Democrat.

As Politico reported: “I don’t anticipate that anything will change about the Senate structure,” Sinema said, adding that some of the exact mechanics of how her switch affects the chamber is “a question for Chuck Schumer … I intend to show up to work, do the same work that I always do. I just intend to show up to work as an independent.”

Sinema switches to independent, shaking up the Senate – POLITICO

I can recall a time in the 1990s when another partisan lawmaker refused to toe the party line. Republican Congressman Larry Combest of Lubbock stuck his finger in Speaker Newt Gingrich’s eye on farm policy, namely the Freedom to Farm bill. Combest told Gingrich publicly that he worked for the farmers and ranchers of West Texas and did not work for Newtie. He pissed Gingrich off to no end.

Combest remained a steadfast Republican for his entire time in Congress, unlike Sinema’s decision to toss her party label aside … but the message then was the same as what Sinema is delivering now.

Democrats still control the Senate, no matter what Sinema decides ultimately on with which party she will caucus.

My advice to the partisans? Chill out!

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

environmental news, local news

Say ‘no’ to this gasoline ban

I am not generally inclined to protest local government’s desire to make our lives more tolerable, but Dallas City Council is pondering an issue that goes too far in ensuring such comfort.

The city is considering a ban on all gasoline-powered lawn equipment. Yep, you can’t fire up the lawnmower or the leaf blower after 2030 if the council proceeds with this effort.

The Dallas Morning News editorial board has spoken already on this nutty notion and the paper makes a lot of sense in saying the council might be reaching way beyond its grasp.

The Morning News said in an editorial published the other day: Promoters of the ban will point to climate change and air quality as harmful, but the council presentation last month included no evidence that is true.

One element of this idea does make sense. The city, according to the DMN, ought to ban contract landscapers from using this equipment if it sees fit. No problem with that. However, if Mr. or Ms. Homeowner wants to use a gas-powered lawnmower and leaf blower to gussy up their yard, they should be allowed to do so.

Granted, I don’t live in Dallas. I live a bit north of Big D in Princeton. I kind of fear that that the city fathers and mothers here might get an idea to follow Dallas’s lead.

Don’t go there, Princeton City Hall.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

local news

Watching from ground up

My journalism career enabled me to cover many fascinating subjects and meet some extraordinary people over the course of nearly four decades … but these days I am being given the chance to watch an issue develop from conception to an electoral conclusion.

I am now a freelance reporter working for a newspaper in the city where my wife and I settled four years ago. My bosses at the Princeton (Texas) Herald have asked me to cover the development of an economic plan that likely will result in a bond issue election next May in this Collin County community.

The Princeton Independent School District formed a 49-member citizens committee that is examining how the district will deal with burgeoning student population growth. To be honest, I had never covered such an issue from the beginning, sitting at ringside as the committee hammers out the demographic, economic, taxing issues that await it.

To be utterly clear, I need to be careful that I do not “scoop” my bosses at the Herald by posting something on this blog that pre-dates the coverage I will provide for the newspaper. Still, this much has been published: the district is growing rapidly; a demographer has told the committee where the pace of growth is setting the pace; the committee has planned several other meetings prior to presenting its recommendation to the school board in late January.

This presents me with a serious challenge and a wonderful thrill to learn a great deal about this fascinating community. One thing I have learned already is that Princeton is among the fastest-growing cities in the fastest-growing county in Texas.

It excites me to be able to tell this city’s story to my neighbors and to others in this city who have a stake in the future of their public school system.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

 

Commentary on politics, current events and life experience