As the Obama Administration winds down, lets review the State of the Union.

As his term in office winds down, President Barack Obama is enjoying a positive approval rating, and taking advantage of every opportunity to remind the American people that his Presidency was a tremendous success.  Obama likes to mention a 4.9 percent unemployment rate and 70 plus consecutive months of positive growth.  He also pardoned 78 convicted felons and commuted the sentences of 153 others.  Pardons and commutations are the prerogative of every outgoing President; Obama focused on drug offenders with his act of legislative forgiveness.  Ever since President Bill Clinton chose to pardon political ally Mark Rich and to commute the sentences of sixteen Puerto Rican terrorists, I try not to pay much attention to this odd tradition.  Obama seems to be enjoying the last few weeks of his Administration, and his last minute decision to outlaw any new offshore drilling will certainly please the ecological fanatics who constitute a loyal part of the Democratic Party.  I am in favor of allowing the departing President to leave office with dignity and promote a needed sense of continuity from one Administration to the next, but I am beginning to get annoyed by the daily revisionist review of Obama's Presidency as disseminated by the mainstream media.

It is beyond disingenuous to publicly claim that the unemployment rate is 4.9 percent.  Our economy is stagnant, and threatening to fall into recession.  The 4.9 figure includes only those persons who currently apply for unemployment.  Persons who have been unemployment for many months or even years no longer are included in this percentage.  I don't live in New York, Los Angeles or Washington DC, so I can't say if the job markets in those cities are healthy.  I can tell you that in the parts of the country of which I am familiar, jobs are scarce, and companies are not growing or posting profits.  Obama is correct when his states that the economy has grown over the past 70 odd months, but the amount growth has almost always been under 2.0 percent.  Economists will tell you that our economy isn't actually growing anymore, and certainly is in no position to provide jobs to the existing number of unemployed, let alone the never-ending number of new college graduates who enter the work force during the year.  To attempt to convince the American people that the job market is healthy and that the economy is just chugging along is perpetrating a fraud.  If you question my perspective as opposed to Obama's, do the research yourself.

Obama is able to stay popular with the majority of Americans, a fact which is difficult for me to comprehend.  But he isn't only popular stateside.  He continues to receive rave reviews throughout Europe and Latin America.  One of the most fascinating dichotomies of our time is Obama's ability to remain a figure of reverence in Paris, Buenos Aires, Berlin, Rome, Santiago, and London, while the United States remains resented more than ever.  Actually, the explanation isn't that complicated.  Obama has built a cult of personality for himself, and part of the effort included trashing his own country and its heritage.  It all began with the Apology Tour at the beginning of his Presidency, and has continued unabated ever since.  As Obama's international popularity increases, the United States as a World Power and instrument of positive change in the world seems less respected now more than ever.  From the first day it was all about Obama. 

If I had the opportunity to ask the outgoing President one question, I would inquire about the twenty trillion dollar national debt.  Its a subject that never comes up in any of his rare Press Conferences or public speaking appearances.  If I could sneak in another question, I would want to know why he never addressed the national threat of gang activity in our inner cities.  I believe Black Lives Matter, and what occurs everyday in Chicago, Detroit, Philadelphia and Washington DC is nothing short of a threat to our national security.  The fact that on average ten to fifteen young black men are shot every day in Chicago, and it has never been considered important enough to convene a national conference of community leaders and law enforcement, is a disgrace.  The people living in our inner cities aren't able to play golf every week with one famous personality after another, nor are they getting dressed by the nation's most expensive fashion designers.  Heck, maybe they don't care about golf or fashion, but they do care about living.  They have just as much right as every other citizen to a threat-free living environment, and President-Elect Donald Trump will earn my respect if he addresses this issue early on in his Administration. 

The refugee issue underscores political division within the European Union.

Last Monday, December 19, less than one week before Christmas, an act of terror perpetrated at a Christmas market in Berlin, Germany, reminded us that the struggle against Islamic terrorism has not abated.  In a scene rememisent of the terror attack in Nice, France last year, a large truck was driven into a cafe/market area which was packed with people enjoying the holiday festivities.  Parents, spouses and children of the victims are left to answer the question, "why"?  Everytime you turn on the news, one talking head after another is attempting to explain the motivations behind violence committed against civiliams; what a colossal waste of time.  Regardless if its ISIS or Al Qaida, Boko Haram or Al Shabaab, Islamic terrorism has is intended to intimidate, frighten and murder Christians, Jews, and on the Indian subcontinent, Hindus.  Terrorism for the sake of Islamic Extremism is not a recent development, but the frequency with which these groups are able to strike in Europe and the United States is disturbimg to say the least.  No doubt Donald Trump appealed to many voters when he promised during the recent presidential campaign to aggressively combat ISIS.  Over the next year, voters in France and Holland will have the opportunity to decide if the current batch of Prime Ministers and Presidents have been doing enough in response to these attacks.  The refugee issue, which is directly related to concerns regarding terrorism, is presently the hot-button issue in Europe.

The continued presence of ISIS (and other Islamic extremist groups) in Syria has created a monumental refugee crisis.  The Obama Administration has been useless with regards to ending the conflict or addressing the refugee crisis.  The Syrian conflict has destroyed almost every urban community outside of Damascus, and the inhabitants have been forced to leave their homes.  The European Union has responded to this development by opening its borders to hundreds of thousands of refugees.  Not to be outdone, the Obama Administration agreed to resettle large numbers of refugees in the United States.  The decision to create humdreds of thousands of new Europeans and Americans has been met with a great deal of opposition in both the United States and various nations in Europe.  It has become obvious that ISIS and other terror groups have been planting operatives within the refugee population.  The resettlement processes in Europe and the United States have no effective method of identifying the throngs of refugees who continue to show up on the borders of Italy, Hungary, Turkey, and Greece.  German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who has led to campaign to open Europe's borders, is hoping against hope that the person who committed this most recent attack, won't in the end be identified as a recent refugee; I would advise her not to hold her breath.

The organizations and political leaders who argue for quick resettlement of the Syrian refugees are justifiably trying to avoid a human catastrophe.  But the answer to this problem should never imclude comprimising the security of persons in North America and Europe.  Settimg up quota systems to pressure European governments to quickly resettle thousands of people will only create another kind of human catastrophe.  Another issue which seems to get swept under the carpet is the cost of resettlement.  Barack Obama has left the American people with a twenty trillion dollar national debt.  The EU is facing a major economic crisis in Italy, and France, the second largest economy in the EU, is dealing with a crippling unemployment problem.  Many middle and lower income folks in Europe and America are asking the question, "just when did this become my problem?"

The permanent solution to the refugee crisis is to end the conflict in Syria.  This goal could have been accomplished years ago if Obama would have had the courage to militarily combat ISIS in Syria and Iraq.  Russia has stepped in, but will commit itself only as far as its proxy Bashar al-Assad is concerned.  Regardless, one cannot escape the fact that Syrians should live in Syria; it's their home.  A decided military effort achieved by a military coalition can only be achieved by a leader with great determination, courage, and influence.  The conflicts in both Syria and Iraq can only have a military solution, but the good news is that a military solution is possible.  Destroying ISIS and resolving the Syrian Civil War will end the refugee problem.  Does Donald Trump have what it takes to forge a solution?  He certainly believes he does; but for the rest of us, action will speak louder than Twitter.

Green Party candidate requests official recounts in three states in an effort to raise questions about the legitimacy of the 2016 Presidential Election.

Just when you thought that the burdensome, depressing 2016 Presidential Election was finally over, Green Party candidate Jill Stein has reminded us just how much the Liberal political establishment disrespects our electoral process.  Stein raised and spent millions of dollars on a campaign which was destined to never reach the five percent mark.  I can only assume that the money Ms. Stein spent on her exercise in vanity would have provided tens of thousands of poor Americans with food and clothing as winter approaches, but even Stein has her priorities, I suppose.  Stein has decided to pursue recounts in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania, states won by Donald Trump by very thin margins. According to Hillary for America attorney Mark Elias, "we believe we have an obligation to the more than sixty-four million Americans who cast their ballots for Hillary Clinton to participate in ongoing proceedings so that an accurate vote count will be reported."  Why is Mr. Elias commenting on Green Party nominee Jill Stein's request for recounts?  Because, not surprisingly, the Hillary campaign has jumped on the recount band wagon as well.  But lets be honest, the Clinton campaign has been in cahoots with Jill Stein since the idea of a recount was broached.  The idea was to encourage Stein and the looney Green Party to request the recounts, so that if the results remain the same (which they should, notwithstanding Democratic shenanigans), then Hillary wouldn't appear to be a sore loser.  This entire development is full of bits of comedy.  The Democrats have so much confidence in our electoral system and the honesty of the American voter, that they fight tooth and nail against any voting identification requirements.  So if the Democrats have so much confidence in the system, then why do we need a recount in three states?  Can the system that is so foolproof that voter fraud is impossible, screw up in all three states that basically decided the election?

The insincerity of the recount circus is truly disturbing.  The Democrats will have us believe that they are attempting to ensure that every vote is counted, especially in the states which were decided by small margins.  Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania were decided by small percentages, but in the end, they voted for Donald Trump.  What about New Hampshire and Minnesota?  Clinton won New Hampshire by less than four thousand votes (forty-seven point six to forty-seven point two), and Minnesota by less than forty-three thousand votes (forty-six percent to forty-five percent).  Colorado, Maine, and Nevada were also within a few percentage points.  But these states were won by Hillary Clinton, so the concern for the sanctity of the individual vote goes right out the window when a Democrat has been declared the winner.

When the leaders of this effort discuss the process and their motivation, they always mention the "popular vote".  They assume that the average American is so easily distracted, that they can create a national wave of anger around the idea that Hillary Clinton was the "legitimate" winner in the 2016 Presidential Election.  We went through this once before, in 2000, and many people were reminded regarding how our electoral system functions.  We have an electoral system to prevent large urban agglomerations from single-handedly picking our president every four years.  Enough people live in Chicago, Los Angeles, and New York, to arguably decide each and every national election.  Many years ago, persons much wiser than myself decided that each state should have an impact on national elections, and candidates should not focus their entire campaigns on just three or four urban areas.  I like the electoral system, but I can understand why someone wouldn't; fortunately, because we live in the United States of America, you can change the process through legislative action.  If you believe that the popular vote should decide the winner of our presidential elections, then get involved, build a movement, seek out like-minded persons and politicians, and draft an amendment to the Constitution.

As for persons who continue to disseminate the idea that Hillary Clinton won the popular vote, therefore she should be president, I can only suggest a simple review of recent history.  Both Clinton and Trump earned their nominations after successful but contentious primary campaigns.  After earning their respective nominations, both candidates huddled with advisors and created plans to accrue the two-hundred seventy electoral votes necessary to be declared the winner.  Neither candidate discussed what steps would be needed in order to win the popular vote.  During the campaign season, the talking heads on Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, and everywhere else, continually analyzed the map of electoral votes, not of population.  If the popular vote were the deciding factor in the presidential election, Donald Trump would have made more than one trip to Texas.  In fact, he would have made quite a few trips to California, New York, and Illinois.  Trump did not need to make repeated trips to Texas, because Texas is a solidly red state.  But if he had campaigned heavily in Texas, I am convinced he would have added another one million votes to his total.  Trump did not campaign in California or Chicago, but regular visits could very well have added an additional million votes to his popular total.  But Trump didn't need to visit Bakersfield, or Cicero, or Syracuse, New York.  His team realized beforehand that he needed electoral votes, not the popular vote, so a plan was crafted by which Trump would sweep the bell-weather states of Ohio, Florida, North Carolina and either Michigan or Pennsylvania.  Trump campaigned hard in those states, and for that reason, he is the President-Elect.

I watched a fifteen year-old girl burn the American flag on the news last night.

I recall Barack Obama beating John McCain in the 2008 presidential election, and I remember quite well in 2012 when Obama did the same to Mitt Romney.  I didn't vote for Obama in 2008 because I didn't believe he had the life experience to be president.  By 2012, I had determined that I did not share Obama's perspective on the history of our nation, nor did I agree with his economic and foreign policies.  I was particularly disturbed by his use of Executive Action, and by the doubling of the national debt to the astronomical amount of twenty trillion dollars.  I was not happy in 2008, and I was equally disappointed in 2012.  Almost half of America voted against Obama in 2012, so I assume that they were just as frustrated.  Interestingly enough, the folks who lost in 2008 and 2012 are the ones who support the Second Amendment and the right to bear arms.  If you didn't know better, you might have some fears that after losing two consecutive elections to a president who openly supports draconian gun control laws, armed Republicans might be rioting in the streets.  But you know better.

Instead, the election of 2016 will be remembered for the riots, looting, property burning and physical assaults that took place in many U.S. cities on the nights immediately following the election.  While its true that Hillary Clinton will likely win the popular vote by a tiny percentage, no one can reasonably argue that Donald Trump did not win the election.  Our electoral system awards the candidate who wins the most electoral votes.  After they get around to calling Michigan, Donald Trump will have won 306 electoral votes to Clinton's 232.  IF our elections were decided by popular vote, Trump would have spent a great deal more time in Texas and California.  But our system is not keyed into the popular vote.  Both candidates knew this fact, and both put together strategies which would ideally accrue 270 electoral votes.  Trump's strategy was successful, Clinton's was not.  It really is that simple.

The day after the election, President Obama and Secretary Clinton both acknowledged Trump's victory, and asked the American people to put the disagreements behind us, and work together for a better future.  For some reason, tens of thousands of Clinton supporters chose to ignore this request, and instead decided to express their frustration by rioting and destroying personal property.  My first reaction was to be pragmatic.  Let these people release their anger, and then, after a few nights, we can get back to life as usual.  It was about this time that I saw the news story on public High School teachers in California who were leading their students to the demonstrations.  The students were then provided U.S. flags, lighter fluid, and matches.  One fifteen year-old from an obscenely expensive private school in the San Francisco area, announced to the camera, "I'm queer and I'm not going to take being oppressed anymore by this fascist government".  She then proceeded to light up Old Glory is a sea of flames.  You can't imagine my anger at that moment.  My father earned three Purple Hearts fighting for her freedom, and the soldiers that have died in various conflicts made the ultimate sacrifice, so this spoiled, selfish, piggish child could burn a flag.  She wasn't alone- groups of teachers from numerous public schools directed their students to the nearest television crews, so they could heap scorn on President-Elect Trump and the fascist, racists who voted him into office.

I don't have any resentment to the young kids who were out in the street protesting.  I save all my disgust and anger for the political activist educators who have no qualms about using children to express their particular political perspective.  Fifteen year old students should not self-identify as "queer activist soldiers", nor should they leave a perfectly good classroom to join a protest that they really don't understand.  The only people who are screaming about deportations are those on the left.  Its reprehensible to scare people for political gain, especially when the issue involves families.  No doubt immigration is an important issue as far as I'm concerned.  I've spent more than enough time in foreign countries to know that secure borders are necessary in order to have national security.  We can't continue to allow foreigners to cross our border at their discretion, without proper documentation.  In addition, our social welfare net can't support the entire population of Central America.  Its called Entitlements, folks, and its the main reason we have twenty trillion dollars of debt.  Everytime I pick up a newspaper, I find another article referring to sanctuary cities and their determination to provide undocumented aliens with access to social aid/programs.  It's a nice idea, but  it's just not feasible.  Just like every family has to live within a budget that is dictated by income and expenditures, so the Federal government is supposed to spend money equal to its revenue.  Politicians no longer worry about the national budget; they just sell more debt to China, and provide more benefits to just about anyone who has the time to apply.

This country is filled with angry people.  On the left, everyone hates Donald Trump, and on the right, people are determined to undo some of the accomplishments of the Obama Administration.  It would be so much simpler if the folks on the left just accepted that Donald Trump is the president-elect, and  in four years you will have the chance to boot him out, if you like.  I for one don't want to see any more people disrespecting the flag.  The left seems to have a real problem with a radical element within its own tent, that espouses violent revolution and threatens to assassinate elected leaders.  The left needs to address this problem, just as conservatives must on occasion distance themselves from milita groups.  I hope that this mess can be cleaned up quickly, because I don't think a Trump Administration will accept this type of civil disobedience forever.  Leaders of the Democratic Party need to come out and publicly disavow the rioting, the destruction of property, and the burning of the flag.  We have sixty-one million people standing on opposite ends of this last election, but we have only one nation to embrace, heal and improve, and we have to be united to make things better for everyone.

Its time to put this election and all its associated bad behind us.

Last night, the candidate who I voted for and strongly supported, Republican Donald Trump, was elected the forty-fifth President of the United States.  Don't be surprised if there isn't much celebrating coming from my house.  While I'm relieved that my candidate won, I'm not particularly thrilled with the manner in which he conducted himself during the campaign.  In fact, Donald Trump was my last choice amongst the list of Republicans running in the presidential primary.  As odd as rhis may sound, both the Republican and Democratic nominees were hugely unpopular, even in their own parties.  It will take someone with a bit more time than I'm willing to commit to determine exactly why these two persons were selected by the voters.  I just hope and pray that we don't ever have to go through another election like this one.

I find Donald Trump to be arrogant and dismissive, and I'm truly shocked by his lack of communication skills.  Wnile I don't believe he is a bigot, he has a tendency to show a pronounced lack of respect to women and at times minorities.  I voted for Trump because I agreed with his stated positions on the issues that I find important.  He appears determined to improve immigration enforcement in one way or another, and he shares my opinion that no citizen is safe when border security is ignored.  Trump is a Republican, and is likely to nominate Justices to the Supreme Court who will properly inferpret and enforce the law.  Trump's opponent, Democrat Hillary Clinton, would nominate liberal activists, at a time when the Court is likely to require four, maybe five new members.  One important reason why I and I'm sure the majority of other folks voted for Trump, was our shared opposition to Hillary Clinton.  I have no intention or revisiting the list of reasons shy I did not support Clinton, but I can assure you my decision was not made lightly.  I'm a firm believer in the rule of law as it is enforced equally on all citizens, regardless of ethnicity, sex, or financial status.  Also, I have a difficult time looking in the other direction when a U.S. government employee uses their access for personal enrichment.  The term is "Influence Peddling", and it is practiced by both Republican and Democratic civil servants with frightening frequency.

The last eight years have been a nightmare of fewer jobs, lower wages, abuse of Executive Authority, loss of international stature, and a frightening breakdown in the relationships between Americans of different ethnicities.  For many Americans, Hillary Clinton represents a continuation of the Obama Administration.  This is an unfair characterization, even though Clinton was Obama's Secretary of State from 2010 to 2014.  I don't know if any Democrat would have stood much of a chance in this election, as voters were motivated to express their anger and frustration to the Obama Adminstration in the only way on hand, which was at the ballot box.

It is time to turn the page, folks.  This election should be considered the last page in the review of the Barack Obama Administration.  President-elect Trump must rise to the occasion, and never forget that he represents all Americans.  I can't be the only person who has had their fill of the Clinton email scandal.  I believe that once he takes office, President-elect Trump should take steps to either pardon Hillary Clinton or instruct the Justice Department to immediately end all investigations related to the email matter.  What is to be gained by continuing any collateral investigations?  Take my word for it, Hillary Clinton has been punished.  She will never have another opportunity to become the first female president, which was obviously a life-long ambition.  Talking about reaching across party lines is one thing, and actually doing it is another.  Letting Clinton retreat into retirement with discretion and grace, without the concern of continued criminal probes, serves the best interest of the nation.

Isn't the integrity of our political system worth a voter identification requirement?

During my life, and not just during my career with the CIA, I have lived in a variety of different countries.  I was basically raised in Europe, and as soon as I graduated from college, I accepted a job in Africa.  Exposure to so many different cultures has been a tremendous blessing.  The languages that I picked up have proven useful time and time again.  As a Federal Agent working on the border, I became very familiar with Mexico and its history of political instability.  Once I joined the Agency, I had the opportunity to visit a number of third-world countries, including Iraq, Zimbabwe, Jordan, Nigeria, and Kenya.  I truly enjoyed experiencing life as it is lived in other countries, and I'm pleased to say that the great majority of people I encountered were happy, kind and generous.  I experienced true humility every time someone who had next to nothing invited me to share what little they had.

I often found myself feeling very frustrated that so many people, hundreds of millions, from different religious backgrounds and speaking different languages, all were caught in the same prison of political corruption.  A quick glance through a few history books indicates that almost every poor nation in the world at one time or another, has had an opportunity to experience an election based on the principles of representative democracy.  But electoral fraud in the third-world is almost as common as poverty.  I recall countless times when (with a bit of pride) I would think to myself, "thank goodness we don't have to worry about election fraud back home".  It's true that the political history of the United States includes LBJ getting elected to the Senate with a ballot box full of dead people, and John F. Kennedy benefitted from some questionable votes in his razor-thin victory over Richard Nixon in the 1960 presidential election.  But these examples are very much the exception.

The 2012 election between Republican Mitt Romney and the incumbent Democrat Barack Obama, made me realize that the United States is no longer immune to voter fraud.  I recall more than a handful of instances in which Democratic precinct representatives were accused of various examples of fraud.  A few people were actually prosecuted, even though the Justice Department makes no bones about its unwillingness to investigate voter irregularities.  The 2016 presidential election ushered in a number of streamlined methods of voting, designed to encourage participation.  Unfortunately, a disturbing number of voter fraud allegations have cast a shadow on these efforts.  Accusations of ballot-box stuffing, voter substitution, and the participation of dead folks only seem to involve Democrats.  Is it a surprise that investigative filmaker James O'Keefe was able to provide a video in which Democrat election workers discussed how to commit voter fraud, and even went so far and to provide examples of how new volunteers are taught methods of voter substitution and ballot box stuffing?

Because of the documented episodes of voter fraud in 2012, a number of states passed laws requiring all voters to present valid identification.  Immediately, the Democrats, cried foul, claiming that racist Republicans were attempting to intimidate minority voters.  I was stunned by this development.  Am I wrong to think that we should do whatever we can to protect the integrity of our electoral process?  You and I need identification to do just about anythimg today, from driving a car and cashing a check, to picking up a prescription for toe fungus.  What is so intimidating about showing identification before voting?  From my perspective, it's very simple.  Anyone opposed to the idea of requiring I.D. before voting, is intent on committing fraud.  I'm sad to say that so far, the courts have sided with the Democrats.  Texas was the most recent state that was obliged to scrap its voter I.D. law because of a ruling by a Federal Court.

The effort to keep the voting process free of personal verification is part and parcel to the Democrat's intent to move the United States closer to becoming a one-party state.  If Hillary Clinton is elected President on November 8, she promises to sign amnesty legislation that will almost immediately provide twenty million foreign nationals with U.S. citizenship.  The great majority of the twenty million are ethnic Hispanics from Mexico and Central America, so you can bet that once their citizenship is in place, they will be voting Democrat.  Since the last few presidential elections have been decided by seven million votes or less, you can understand the importance of blocking amnesty in its present form.  I don't fathom why it's necessary to adjust the twenty million illegal aliens directly to citizenship.  Wouldn't it make more sense to process these individuals for Permanent Resident status first, so they could pay taxes, register their kids for school, and not panic each time they encounter a Police Officer?  They would then have the option of completing the Nationalization process, just like other Permanent Residents.  The idea of fast-tracking these imdividuals, whose entire presence in our country is predicated on breaking our laws, should be repugnent.  At the least its terribly unfair to all the persons who have applied legally, and are sitting in Mexico City, Tegucigalpa, San Salvador, Lagos and New Delhi, patiently waiting for their name to be called.

The Democrats and Hillary Clinton go off the deep end when this change in the proposal is mentioned, and its easy to understand why.  For the Democratic Party, this entire issue is about adding a game-changing number of new voters to the list of registered Democrats.  Don't fall for the crocodile tears and speeches about families being separated.  Sure, there have been some isolated instances when family members "sin documentos" have been returned to Mexico, but it's only the politics of distraction, my friends.  This is about votes and political power; nothing more, nothing less.

Why I can't support Hillary Clinton.

So what is my problem with former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, anyway?  Although I did have a very short, pleasant conversation with her once. I won't pretend to be a confident.  A review of Bill and Hillary Clinton over the past four decades, convinces me that they are obsessed with power and money.  With Bill you can add "sex" to the list, but with Hillary you can add "ideology".  The Clintons are elitists, but who isn't in DC politics these days?  Members of Congress begin raising money and running for re-election the day after they are sworn in.  Almost immediately the focus turns to lobbyists, entitlements, and most importantly, committee appointments.  For some reason, people who are able to find a place in the DC political scene, always eventually become millionaires, and never seem to leave.  Who can blame the Clintons for wanting to stay part of the elite, especially after Bill spent eight years as President at a young age, relatively speaking?

For Hillary, its not all about money and influence.  Hillary is a political ideologue.  She believes that she knows what is best for the world, and she is determined to leave her mark.  Its not wise to disagree with her perspective, because she is dedicated to the principle that "the ends justifies the means", esepcially when you've earned your place amongst the elites.  We've seen it time and time again.  Hillary will obfuscate, confuse, and break the law to reach her goals.  In a recent manifestation of this habit, Hillary decided that security regulations did not apply to her (one of the elite), therefore she was going to install a private server and use it to occasionally (giving her the benefit of the doubt here) send and receive classified information.  Once the server was discovered, the goal became to survive the controversy without jeopardizing her run for the presidency.  Again, evidence destroyed, laws broken- actions justified because the end goal, becoming president, was what mattered.

Keeping all this in mind, my problem with Hillary Clinton has more to do with timing than anything else.  She is running for president at a very delicate time in our nation's history.  Our economy has ground to a halt and we are no longer create jobs, our immigration system is an invitation to all the needy of the world, and terrorism continues to knock on the front door (but now the knock is coming from the inside).  I don't believe that I have the luxury to whine and complain about Hillary's willingness to destroy people who stand in her way, or her willingness to lie about the cause of the Benghazi riot that cost us the lives of four brave Americans.  I'm very worried about the survival of our political, social, and economic system.  Hillary's bad habits will have to wait for my attention.

Simply put, we can't exist as a soveriegn nation as long as our borders are unprotected.  The effort to encourage foreign nationals to enter the United States illegally is nothing short of treason, but I'm no longer interested in talking about Barack Obama.  If Hillary Clinton wins the election, she will inact an Amnesty program (with or without Congress) that will provide between fifteen and twenty million persons who have been living in this country illegally, with the right to vote.  Amnesty is nothing short of rewarding people for breaking our laws, and punishing those who attempt to become US citizens legally.  But Hillary's goal is not to provide relief to twenty million people who, through their own actions, are caught in a very difficult place; her goal is to create millions of more Democratic voters.  The end game will morph the United States into a one-party nation.  Where will the GOP go to find millions of voters to balance the new political equation?  I guess the Republicans could accuse the Democrats of racism, and falsely claim that Democrats are going to take away a woman's right to choose and make old people eat out of trash cans, but that example of fear politics has already been perfected by the Democrats themselves.

Aside from immigration, I am concerned with the future of the Supreme Court.  The next president will be able to impact the Court in ways that the country has never experienced.  If Hillary Clinton is allowed to nominate four, maybe five leftist activist Justices in the mould of Sonia Sotomayor, what impact do you think this will have on the Constitution?  It brings us back to Ideology.  No doubt Hillary wants to be President so she can "encourage" government to interpret the Constitution as she does.  What does that mean for persons concerned about the Second Amendment?  How long will it be before Bibles are outlawed in public, and Churches instructed to alter their appearance, so as to not offend persons of other faiths who might be driving by?

Certainly I'm bothered by Hillary Clinton's attitude and history of deceit and corruption.  But this election is more about who she will become as opposed to who she is today.  She wants to be the President who ushers in a new era of Amnesty and open botders, and she wants to be Commander and Chief who finally succeeds in taking all the guns away.  These are the reasons why I will do everything I can (legally of course- I'm a Republican), up until the morning of November ninth, to see that she is not elected President of the United States.

Media attempt to distract voters from Clinton email scandal falls flat.

Just as we predicted, the arrival of Halloween this year was accompanied by a determined effort on behalf of the mainstream media to change the political comversation.  Late last week, the FBI announced that its imvestigation into Hillary Clinton's use of an illegal email server was actually ongoing.  The investigation, which most of us believed was no longer active, received a new jolt of adrenaline with the discovery of hundreds and thousands of emails on the laptop Clinton Campaign Vice Chairman Huma Abedin shared at home with her husband.  Given the media's obsessive and blatant determination to see Hillary Clinton win the Presidency, we surmised that a full-blown effort would be made to launch a personal attack against Clinton's opponent, Republican Donald Trump.  Actually, the press dropped two separate attacks on Trump today.  On CNN, in the Washington Post, on ABC, and in the New York Times, voters were reminded that the FBI was interested in Trump's connections to Russia and Russian President Vladimir Putin.  Before you could take a breath, some of the same media organizations were rehashing the issue of Donald Trump and his unwillingness to release his income tax returns.  Surely one of these stories would catch hold and quickly push the Hillary email scandal from the minds of voters.  Guess what, folks?  It didn't happen.

It didn't take long for the Trump Campaign to remind the various media outlets that the FBI had already cleared Donald Trump and his campaign of any connection whatsoever to the Russian government and efforts by Russia to create havoc with the presidential election.  With regards to the income tax issue, Trump has explained time and again, including in the first debate, that he is presently being audited by the IRS, and as soon as the process is complete, he will be happy to disclose his tax records.  To be honest, I expected something better from the press.  Is this all they could come up with over the weekend?  No doubt they have a few more shots to take, and they may be saving their best shot for last.

Today's effort, I'm pleased to say, fell flat.  The electorate seems to have made up its mind as to the integrity and honesty of both candidates.  I don't think that the Clinton Campaign, or the media for that matter, will have much success with headlines accusing Trump of innapropriate behavior with women- that line of attack has used up its usefulness as well.  On the other hand, Trump seems to be sitting in the catbird seat, because his campaign doesn't have to attack Hillary Clinton's character or truthfulness.  History and the FBI are doing the job already.  Both Bill and Hillary Clinton have established particular reputations in Washington, not only with rank-and-file government bureaucrats, but with White House Staff and the Secret Service.  During their years as civil servants, they enriched themselves through the abuse of access to people with ample resources and influence.  They created an army of sycophants whose best interests are directly tied in to continued Clinton access to the tools of government.  The Clinton Foundation is stuffed full of former Clinton aides, support staff, legal advisors, and political workers, who receive a fat paycheck because of the donations Hillary was able to solicit durimg her time as Secretary of State.  Probably for the first time, average Americans are beginning to see what the Clintons are all about, and many former supporters are deciding that retirement is in order.  The next seven days will determine if the long ride on the back of the American people is finally over.

Be prepared for a final week Clinton Campaign personal attack on Trump.

We haven't seen the end of the last-minute distractions, folks.  Last week Hillary Clinton received one heck of an unwelcome surprise from FBI Director James Comey.  It's standard Clinton modus operandi, though, to not let bad news linger.  The easiest way to distract the public's attention from an unflattering story is introduce an even more shocking bit of news, and surprise, surprise, it will be about Donald Trump.  Its coming, folks, so prepare yourselves.  You may recall that just as Trump was beginning to gain traction in the campaign, the media "discovered" a flock of women with absurd but attention-getting accusations against the Republican nominee.  With just over a week to go before the election, Clinton is desparate to make Trump once again the focus of negative press.  I give the mainstream media high marks for just how quickly they circled the wagons around their candidate.  All weekend long, it was one story after another, trashing James Comey and pointing out that his actions were not approved by Attorney General Lynch.  You remember Lynch, I'm sure.  She's the non-partisan (!) Justice Department boss who had that timely meeting with Bill Clinton on the runway in Phoenix.  Loretta Lynch, who belatedly apologized for the meeting with Clinton only after it had become public.  You can take her opinion on any issue regarding Hillary Clinton and you can throw it as far as the nearest Clinton Foundation office.

I don't know what shape the Clinton attack will take, but I suspect it will target Trump's reputation as a successful businessman.  We haven't heard the last of the income tax return issue, and the "Trump University" card is always good for a few headlines.  On the other hand, I can imagine that Julian Assange and Wikileaks are not happy to be relagated to "old news" by the FBI announcement.  I'm convinced that Assange has a few cards left to play, and I can think of nothing I would appreciate more than a Wikileaks email dump with lots of embarrassing Clinton tidbits.

As election day approaches, I am growing more and more concerned with continual stories of early voting irregularities.  Yesterday, I read that Democrats outvoted Republicans in early voting in Colorado by 27,000.  Who provided this information, and shouldn't it be kept confidential?  In addition, Reuters/IPSOS polling claims that Hillary Clinton will beat Donald Trump in national early voting by 15%.  That figure is downright astounding and calls for closer scrutiny of the various registration and early voting operations.  Frankly, I don't trust the Democratic registration and "voter assistance" programs.  James O'Keefe has given us an inside look at what is clearly a process filled with fraudulent intentions.  With the unwillingness of the Justice Department to investigate claims of voter fraud, can you blame the left for pushing the envelope?

Since the end of the national comventions, I have done what I can to try and keep honest voters informed.  This election petrifies me for a host of reasons, but two stand out:  I am convinced that the United States is on the brink of becoming a one-party state.  In addition, the Constitution as we know it cannot survive the activist intentions of four, possibly five additional left-wing Supreme Court Justices.  Keep in mind, Hillary Clinton will pass an Amnesty in her first year in office, and if a Republican Congress objects, she will pull an Obama and make use of Executive Action.  An additional fifteen to twenty million Democratic voters is at stake, folks.  For persons worried about the legal right to own a weapon, or for Christians concerned with recent attacks on everything faith-based, you can guarantee that a left-wing activist Supreme Court will be determined to take away your gun and your Bible.  These are the equities in jeopardy, my friends.  This is why I have been so vocal about sharing these blog posts, and trying to get at least five people a week to either register (to late) or promise to support Trump on November 8.  Nothing less than the future of our Republic is at stake.

Whose fault is this mess?

Just when we thought we had heard the last of Hillary Clinton's email controversy, on Friday FBI Director James Comey announced that the investigation is still active.  It appears that Clinton confident and Vice Chairman of the Clinton Campaign Huma Abedin had saved a number of emails on her home laptop that the FBI determined were pertinent to the investigation.  Huma Abedin's husband, former New York State Representative Anthony Weiner, is currently the subject of a sex crimes investigation.  Weiner is suspected of engaging in innapropriate "Social Media" conversation with an underage girl; the authorities were examining the Laptop he shared with his wife when the emails were discovered.  Apparently over one thousand emails that might pertain to the email investigation were discovered.  On Friday, Comey sent a letter to both Democratic and Republican Congressional leaders, informing them of this new development.  

Historically the FBI has chosen not to release politically damaging information during an election, but Comey chose to make this announcement because of the controversy surrounding his previous decision not to indict Clinton.  Not surprisingly, the Democrats, who previously sang the praises of Director Comey, are incensed.  The Clinton Campaign has accused Comey of purposely interfering with the election, and demanded that Comey release all information relating to the discovery of the new emails.  True to its nature, the media has jumped in feet first, defending Clinton and questioning Comey's motivation.  The Washington Post and CNN have taken the lead on this front, helping Clinton to circle the wagons by giving airtime to one Clinton apologist after another.  The one fact that they conveniently chose to avoid, is that this entire mess can be laid at the feet of one person: Hillary Clinton.

When Clinton chose to accept the position of Secretary of State in the Obama Administration, she was determined to have total control over all her correspondence and communication.  In furtherance of this goal, she chose to install a personal server im her New York residence.  While Secretary of State, Clinton knowingly passed classified information on this unclassified server, in direct violation of State Department policy.  Clinton was eventually subpoenaed regarding the issue of classified intelligence and her personal server, and she responded by having a technician "bleach" the server, which effectively erased as many as thirty-three thousand emails.  How many of those emails were classified?  We will probably never know.  In addition, Clinton destroyed all thirteen of the Android cellphones and Blackberries that she used during her time as Secretary of State.  Not only is that wanton destruction of taxpayer's property and evidence, it is the type of action taken by someone with something to hide.

If Hillary Clinton is looking for someone to blame for this new development, she need only look as far as the nearest mirror.  Its not just hyperbole when I say that just about anyone else would have been arrested for security violations of this caliber.  Knowlingly destroying evidence pertinent to a Federal Investigation is a Felony.  How else would you describe bleaching of the server and the destruction of the communication equipment?  Expect Clinton to respond with both barrels.  With only nine days left before the election, and Donald Trump threatening to sprint past Clinton in all the battleground states, you can be sure that the Clinton Campaign has cooked up a personal attack on Trump.  As is their modus operandi, the media will take whatever they are given and use it to bury the email investigation.  You may recall that the last time Trump started getting traction, we were inundated with women accusing Trump of innapropriate behavior.  Every one of those accusations have been discredited, but the damage almost cost Trump the election.  We can only hope that in the end, people will remember the issues and vote accordingly.  This election is about change versus the status quo.  If you are happy with the direction we are headed, then you shouldn't vote for Donald Trump.

The last two weeks and a definite swing in momentum to Trump.

Recently I was stuck in a waiting room for a painful two hours, with only local television to keep me company.  At the moment I am without my television, so I have been spared the majority of the political advertising that must be flooding the airwaves.  If its any consolation to those of you who regularly watch TV, today I was literally tortured with non-stop commercials for Democratic Congressional Candidate Pete Gallegos, a slimey lobbyist-type if ever there was one.  During those two hours, I accomplished the impossible: I learned to dislike both Pete Gallegos and HIllary Clinton even more than I did when I woke up this morning.  For those of you who are old enough to remember, are you aware that the Democrats have resurrected that offensive campaign ad which accuses Republicans of planning to rob Senior Citizens of their Social Security? I received a potent-enough dose of Democratic political advertising to realize that at a local level, they have returned to the politics of fear.  Republicans are going to force old folks to eat dog food and women will lose the right to choose.  The simple truth is, in the last four decades, the GOP has controlled both Houses of Congress numerous times, and occasionally controled to White House to boot.  There has never been an effort to deny Social Security to the elderly, or a Republican-led, organized movement to repeal the Fourteenth Amendment.  The truly sad fact is that people respond to these messages.

Even though my television is still in storage, I do listen to the radio and follow the news with my IPad.  I hear the non-stop chorus annointing Hillary Clinton as President two weeks before the election.  The media feels justified in pushing the idea that Clinton has triumphed because of the regular poll results that they devour on a daily basis.  Last week, another member of Trump's campaign staff resigned, which provided added impetus to the argument that for all practical purposes, the election is over.  In addition, many conservatives have lost hope because of the barrage of news stories regarding electoral fraud.  People realize that the Obama Justice Department has no intention of investigating the federal crime of electoral fraud, and they are left wondering, just how does Trump plan to win against Clinton's money, Hollywood, the national media, and widespread fraud?

Donald Trump will win this election.  You heard it here first, folks.  Has it been that long since Trump demonstrated his appeal by racking up at least fourteen million primary votes?  Trump voters are motivated and the Democrats are not.  Polls don't amount to a hill of beans if folks can't be bothered to vote.  Many Democrats who answer the all-important question with "Hillary Clinton", were Bernie Sanders supporters, and many of Bernie's folks are having real trouble bringing themselves to vote for someone who stole the nomination from their candidate.  There is no doubt that the buses provided by the Clinton Campaign to get Democratic voters to the polling stations are going to be less-than half-full.  Not to mention, we still have two weeks left of Wikileaks email disclosures.  Again, let me stress: Julian Assange is a showman- he will save the best for last.

So please don't get discouraged.  When the non-stop ads start to get you down, find something to watch on cable (not CNN or MSNBC).  Just because Hillary Clinton has decided to spend some money in Texas, don't be fooled into considering that Texas might vote Democrat.  It ain't happenin', folks.  I'm also convinced that on election day, my good friends in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints will make sure Donald Trump gets all of Utah's electoral vote.  Evan McMullin tries to convince us that his sole pupose for being in this race is to be the next President.  Excuse the cliche, but I wasn't born yesterday, Mr. McMullin, and neither were the people of Utah.  The singular reason McMullin is in this race is to keep Donald Trump from collecting Utah's electoral votes.  McMullin has been co-opted by DC establishment Republicans, who are petrified that Trump will win and shake lose all the career bureaucrats and entitlement-junkies from the GOP.  If you know any Utah voters, please make sure they understand the real motivations behind McMullin's candidacy.

The next two weeks are going to be full of media distractions.  Expect to see a daily parade of women accusing Trump of innapropriate behavior.  Last Saturday, Trump introduced a contract with the voters of America, which details his positions on major issues and his strategy to achieve his goals.  Instead of covering Trump's announcement, CNN spent the weekend giving airtime to another person making easily-refuted accusations.  The media has no interest in a debate over the issues.  Their only interest is seeing Hillary Clinton in the White House.  Be prepared for the daily personal attacks on Trump and his advisors.  The Democrats understand that its not necessarily the accusations and personal attacks that do so much damage to Trump, its his responses.  From this point on, Trump needs to have a two-front focus.  He must continue talking about jobs, our crippled economy, veterans, terrorism and immigration.  The American people support Trump on those issues.  Trump's second focus needs to be on the latest Hillary Clinton controversy.  Right or wrong, Wikileaks still has some big suprises to inject into this election.  Don't hesitate to stand up for what you believe is right.  Hillary Clinton may already be plotting the continued Socialization of our government, but the (legal) votes still have to be counted.

Voter fraud: the latest electoral disease introduced by the Democratic Party.

Everyday new evidence is uncovered which details the level of corruption in the Democratic Party.  For many years, both the Republican and the Democratic Parties were plagued with a small but embarrassing amount of bribery and fraud.  1960 was the year that the Democrats put the pedal to the metal and zoomed right past the GOP in the electoral corruption sweepstakes.  Many historians today accept that John F. Kennedy only beat Richard Nixon because of voter fraud in Texas and Illinois.  In an election that was decided by less than 119,000 votes, serious questions remain to this day regarding the eighty-nine percent turnout in Chicago's suburbs (Kennedy won Illinois' huge electoral prize by just 8900 votes, and won Texas with a razor-thin race due to documented cases of ballot-box stuffing).  Since then, Democrats have consistently topped the GOP with regards to fraud allegations.

The contested 2000 presidential election between Republican George W. Bush and Democrat Al Gore was a question of electoral law as opposed to fraud, but the 2008 election between Republican John McCain and Democrat Barack Obama included numerous allegations of intimidation and ballot-box stuffing, especially in Ohio.  2012 saw a repeat of the problems in Ohio, with even more claims of irregularities.  In 2012, unlike 2008, Republican officials in Ohio were able to collect evidence of multiple cases of ballot-box stuffing, precinct worker intimidation, and precincts reporting one-hundred percent counts for one candidate.  The Justice Department, which has the obligation to investigate electoral fraud, announced that the allegations did not meet the threshold that would trigger a federal investigation; this decision was made before any of the evidence had been examined.    Eventually someone was convicted, but the great majority of the cases were never prosecuted.

In the run-up to the 2008 election, the national Democratic Party really got their act together.  They realized that many traditionally Democratic voters were not registered, while others were not being encouraged to vote.  Others needed assistance to reach the polling station.  Kudos to the Democrats who put together a well-organized plan to register new voters in heavily urbanized areas, and to guarantee that those voters showed up at the polls on election day.  Special emphasis was put on registering African-American citizens, who have traditionally voting for Democratic candidates over Republicans by a wide margin.  Democratic activists have expanded this effort to include Hispanic-Americans, who also traditionally support Democrats.  This nation-wide drive has had a significant impact on electoral politics.  Experts point to Virginia and Florida, both former Republican states but now leaning Democrat, as a good example of the impact of this effort.  Both states voted Democratic in 2008 and 2012.

In 2016, the Republicans finally discovered a game-changing strategy of their own, and it had everything to do with the candidates themselves.  Well-known businessman and billionaire Donald Trump announced his candidacy as a Republican, and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton declared as a Democrat.  It would have been difficult to find two more polarizing candidates, at least as far as Republican voters were concerned.  Republicans went wild over Trump's brash style and willingness to speak his mind, even if it meant insulting his opponents.  On the other hand, the average conservative voter seems to have a special animus towards former First Lady Hillary Clinton.  Vote totals in one GOP primary after another would set a new record.  It became apparent that the number of Republican votes was bound to increase substantially, and Hillary Clinton did not inspire the same kind of excitement amongst Democrat voters.  The Democrats had no other option but to fall back on their other reliable method for increasing votes: fraud.

With just over two weeks to go before the election, reports are popping up in Virginia, North Carolina and Florida of vote tampering and other forms of electoral cheating.  Evidence of fraud has turned up in Texas, Iowa, Pennsylvania and Ohio.  To add gas to the fire, Independent Filmmaker James O'Keefe produced an undercover documentary highlighting the Clinton Campaign's efforts to train its volunteers in how to commit voter fraud.  The Clinton Campaign subsequently fired two of its campaign coordinators, but the cat was already out of the bag, folks.  This election will probably be decided by the electoral votes from one or two of the batleground states.  On that list are North Carolina, Ohio, and Florida.  Acceptance of this organized effort to steal an election is not only un-American, its criminal.  Now we understand why Democrats are so opposed to instituting a photo identification requirement at polling stations, and allegations that the Democratic Party supports amnesty as a method to increase the number of Hispanic-American voters doesn't seem so unreasonable after all.  Not only does Donald Trump have to deal with a politically-biased national media, he now must confront potentially rampant electoral fraud and a Justice Department that is determined to protect his Democratic opponent.

Who is Evan McMullin and what exactly is he trying to accomplish?

The more I learn about "Independent" presidential candidate Evan McMullin, the more suspicious I become regarding his motivations.  McMullin spent eleven years in the CIA, about the same amount of time yours truly worked for the organization.  McMullin worked in the Counter-Terrorism Center and he deserves our gratitude for being part of the effort to combat the spread of international terror.  My issue with McMullin begins after his career in the Agency ended.  He returned to school and earned a Master's Degree in Business Administration, then somehow became a national security advisor for the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.  No one can say that McMullin is not well-schooled, and there would be no point in questioning his obvious grasp of Foreign Affairs.  I am suspicious of Mr. McMullin because he is part and parcel of the Republican establishment that is fighting Donald Trump from the inside, as part of a determined and well-funded effort to keep Trump from taking control of the Party.  You've seen some of the other members of this group- the Republicans in name only (RINOs) who are so obsessed with holding on to their meal ticket that they have chosen to endorse the Democratic nominee over the Republican.  Its one thing to say that you don't like Trump and refuse to support him, but to actually endorse Hillary Clinton signifies personal fear, not for the future of the United States, but for the continuation of the status quo.

Make no mistake, folks.  When Donald Trump wins this election, the Republican Party will be put on notice.  Real reform is necessary.  Entitlement abuse must end for both Democrats and Republicans.  Trump will herald the death of business-as-usual in Washington DC, and people like Evan McMullin are running scared.  I have made every effort to try and understand what motivates this man to run for president.  His circumstances are not complicated, as he has absolutely no chance of winning this election.  Some of his sycophants have released a "schedule" of sorts, that identifies a number of events which could, legally, result in a "President McMullin".  Relax, my friends, its nothing new.  His supporters argue that if McMullin draws enough electoral votes away from the two candidates, that the election will be decided in the House of Representatives.  This plan has a few more features, but there really is no need to waste any more of our time.  The only state in which McMullin is competitve is Utah.  Evan McMullin could reasonably win the popular vote. The good folks of the Beehive State are not thrilled with Trump as a candidate, and Utah will never vote Democrat, ar least not in my lifetime.  The main problem with Mcmullin's plan, is that he will NOT be taking electoral votes away from both candidates, he will be taking them away from Donald Trump.  McMullin knows this, and so does Hillary Clinton.  Donald Trump will probably lose the election without Utah's electoral votes.  Its that serious.  As for McMullin's plan to send the election to the House of Representatives- it will never happen.  Simply put, a McMullin victory in Utah puts Hillary Clinton in the White House.

Which brings us back to motovations.  McMullin is young enough to hold serious aspirations for higher office.  A grateful Republican establishment would have no trouble annointing McMullin as one of its "faces of the future".  I don't know for a fact that McMullin is running on behalf of the RINO nation, but nothing else makes sense to me.  I am opposed to the RINO establishment because I happen to be one of those odd people who still supports term limits, and I don't believe that the founding fathers intended for people to turn representative service in Congress into a life-long occupation.  Many of these people don't give a hoot about policy and the differences between Republican and Democrat.  They are dually driven by their obsession to remain in a position of power and to continue making gobs of money.  Are you aware that every member of Congress is a millionaire?  The scary fact is that most of them did not arrive as such.  Its a good job to have, no doubt.

I pray that the good people of Utah think long and hard about a Clinton Presidency and what that means for the Supreme Court and our protected right to freedom of religion.  Four left-wing activist judges will be more than enough to start limiting when and where we can practice our faith.  Citizens of Utah, please understand that a vote for McMullin will help Hillary Clinton win the White House.  You don't like Donald Trump personally?  You aren't alone.  But he is on your side of the issues, and Hillary Clinton is not.  Concerning yourself with where Evan McMullin stands on the issues is sadly a waste of time because he can't win.  Remind yourself about the issues that matter: job creation, foreign trade, a disasterous national debt, the Supreme Court, terrorism, and the erosion of personal liberty.  Trump stands with you on those issues, as do Ben Carson, Rudy Giuliani, Newt Gingrich, Mike Pence, and many more honorable past public servants who would undoubtedly become part of the Trump Administration.  Please don't allow yourself to be manipulated into supporting Hillary Clinton.

Donald Trump reminds America what to expect from a Clinton Presidency.

Donald Trump did exactly what was needed Wednesday night, to remind the American people why this election is so vital for the future of our nation.  He was clear, concise and focused in detailing the history of corruption and influence peddling that has become business-as-usual for Hillary Clinton.  Trump also stuck to his message of job creation, tax reform, and fulfilling obligations to our Veterans.    When Hillary starts winding up her fantastical message of free everything and government control, you could almost hear thousands and thousands of households across the nation falling asleep.  She is such an inveterate politician, that she can't help herself from delivering the same-style presentation that we've been hearing from her and other liberal politicians for years.  Everything will be free, including solar panels for every home, and the evil rich folks are going to pay for it (yawn).  Donald Trump understands that the American people aren't stupid.  They realize that the business community must be allowed to keep more of its money in order to expand and hire more workers.  He also sticks to the vital message of re-negotiating trade agreements.  Trump made me particularly proud when he bluntly reminded Hillary Clinton of the irony of her campaign- she has all the ideas to fix the problems that she helped create!

I was pleased that Trump had the opportunity to drop the responsibility for the false personal attacks on his character at the feet of the person ultimately responsible: Hillary Clinton.  Thank goodness the final debate was moderated by the balanced, fair-minded professional journalist Chris Wallace.  Not once during the previous two debates did the moderator include use of the word "corruption" when addressing a question to Hillary Clinton, even though its obvious that this is a big concern for the American people.  I'm convinced that Donald Trump can win this election, and help us avoid the nightmare of four Clinton Supreme Court selections.  The Clinton Campaign is on its heels, dealing with news stories about electoral fraud and secret arrangements with Obama's Justice Department.  Be prepared- the personal attacks will continue.  But Clinton has to be shaking in her pantsuits that Obama was unable to shut down Wikileaks.  Something is coming, folks, and I'm expecting it to be a game changer.

We are doing our part; its time for Donald Trump to validate our support with a dominant performance in Wednesday's debate.

The events of the last few days have breathed life back into the Trump Campaign.  Once the media was obliged to take a break from the non-stop personal attacks on Donald Trump, the American people were reminded why Hillary Clinton is not qualified to be President.  A cursory examination of the seventeen thousand-plus emails that have been released by Wikileaks boss Julian Assange detail a system of corruption within the Clinton machine that seeks to control everything.  The Clinton Campaign has no respect for our political process or our system of government.  One email after another contains disrespectful comments regarding not just Republicans, but any Democrats that have had the nerve to oppose the Hillary machine.  Also, a review of the emails demonstrate a willingness on the part of Clinton to bargain and barter her way around rules and regulations, regardless of security protocols.  But we haven't seen the good stuff yet.  Assange is a showman, and he is determined to have a dramatic climax to the release of these emails.  There is no doubt that something huge is on the way, otherwise why would the Obama Administration jump through hoops to get Assange's internet connection terminated?  True, the Administration denied having anything to do with the Ecuadorian government's decision to shut down Assange's internet access, but that denial isn't worth the paper its printed on.  Don't act indignant, President Obama- the American people are well aware that you are not to be trusted.  It tears me up to say it, but sadly, we've reached that point, folks.

Today, Conservative Producer James O'Keefe released the second in a series of documentaries that detail the endemic corruption that acts as glue to the Clinton machine.  Yesterday we learned that Clinton Campaign officials were guilty of inserting drunks, drug addicts, and mentally ill homeless people into Trump Campaign appearances, with the intention of creating havoc and inciting violence. Today's documentary short was even more disturbing, but probably not surprising.  As I announced in yesterday's blog post, the Clinton Campaign is training its operatives to commit electoral fraud.  Specifically, they are being instructed on ways to register dead people, manipulate the lack of an identification requirement, and use the accusation of racism to avoid any and all accountability.  Its business as usual, according to one of the Campaign bosses that they caught on video tape.  I guess the Acorn scandal from the previous presidential election didn't go very far in encouraging integrity with the Democrats.

Earlier today a friend reminded me just how unreliable most of today's polling methodologies have become.  Be that as it may, the polls have been tightening, especially in Ohio and Florida (don't worry abour North Carolina.....there is no way that the Tarheel State will vote for Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump).  After the temporary smoke left by the slander and lies faded away, the American people remembered the true equities involved with this election.  Hillary Clinton can't be allowed to chose the next four Supreme Court Justices- our nation would be altered in ways that I'm too disturbed to point out.  I'm convinced that come election day, a silent majority is going to rise up in this country, and exclaim to the world, "ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!"  We need to return to the America of my youth, when it was shameful to disrespect the flag and the National Anthem.  Donald Trump must also do his part in Wednesday's debate.  He must strike the perfect balance of explaining his policies and vision for the future, and at the same time, reminding the American people why they can't trust Hillary Clinton.  Trump has plenty evidence to share, but he must not fall into that trap of smugness and conceit that seems to pop up a bit too often.  He should not waste even one second of airtime- fill it with one example after another, and leave the viewers petrified at the thought of a President Hillary Clinton.

Regardless of the debate, I will continue to encourage people to vote for Donald Trump.  I will be blogging up until the day of the election, because it really is that important.  We have just experienced two terms of an Administration that maxed out your grandchildren's credit cards, and Hillary Clinton was part and parcel of that Administration.  I hope Trump remembers to mention the twenty trillion dollars of national debt, but with so much to chose from, he might just pass it up.

More evidence that efforts are underway to impact the presidential election above and beyond simple campaigning.

I had planned on taking a day off from the blog, but developments with the Wikileaks email dump obliged me to stay on the job.  Late last night a friend informed me that Julian Assange's internet access had been disrupted.  Let me give you a bit of background on Assange and Wikileaks.  Julian Assange is an Australian citizen, computer programmer by occupation, who created the organization known as Wikileaks.  Since its inception over ten years ago, Wikileaks has been dedicated to hacking into private government and business computer systems, and releasing to the public confidential information.  The organization claims no political bias, and only releases information that it decides is in the public interest.  You may recall that former U.S. Army soldier Bradley Manning was Court-Martialed for sharing Top Secret military intelligence with Assange and Wikileaks.  While Wikileaks was making a name for itself in the Bradley Manning affair, Assange found himself in "unrelated" difficulty with the Swedish police.  Two women accuse Assange of sexual assault, relating to the time period that Assange was living in Sweden.  Assange, who was in England when the accusations became public, has been hiding out at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London in order to avoid extradition to Sweden to face trial.  While he has been holed up in the Embassy of Ecuador, Assange has continued to control Wikileaks.  In fact, Assange claimed that Wikileaks had hacked into Hillary Clinton's server when she was Secretary of State, and that Wikileaks intended to release these emails in October, just prior to the U.S. presidential election.

When October rolled around, and Wikileaks started releasing Clinton emails, the U.S. media was busy giving airtime and legitimacy to a string of slanderous, false stories about Donald Trump.  A number of us noted with anger the "coincidental" timing of the stories about Trump, but we also realized that the media could not distract the American public forever.  The Wikileaks emails would eventually be disseminated, and barring any unforeseen developments, the release would take place before the November election.  Imagine my surprise when I discovered Sunday night, that Assange's email access had been disconnected, just prior to the release of another batch of emails.  Wikileaks, which claims to have other methods of sharing the emails, announced that Assange's access was terminated by the government of Ecuador.  I have also read that the CIA was involved, but I doubt the varacity of that particular accusation.  I am convinced that the Obama Administration put the heat on the Ecuadorians, strongly advising them to shut down Assange's access in order to avoid an incident with the U.S. government.  We all know just how popular Barack Obama is internationally, so I doubt the effort required much arm-twisting.

You see, folks, the emails are beginning to bear fruit.  Sunday and Monday were the first two days in weeks during which I did not hear personal attacks against Donald Trump.  Instead, the news channels were unable to avoid airing details of a Wikileaks email from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's office to the FBI.  In this particular email, Under Secretary of State Patrick Kennedy offered to make a deal with the Bureau.  According to the email, if the FBI would CHANGE the classification on some of Hillary Clinton's emails, then, quid quo pro, the State Department would lift restrictions it had placed on the presence of FBI Agents in certain sensitive countries.  First and foremost, what was offered is illegal.  Only the originator of intelligence can change its classification, and it has to be done on the actual document, not a subsequent email that may contain only a snippet of the sensitive material.  Secondly, the State Department has rules based on National Security and Diplomacy that dictates which U.S. government employees should be allowed in what country.  I can guarantee you that none of these rules includes a "quid quo pro" agreement with another government agency.

This attempt to change to classification on emails was a blatant attempt to assist Clinton in covering her tracks "after the fact".  I'm thoroughly disgusted to see State Department protocol manipulated for Clinton's personal benefit, but after what has happened with the FBI's Clinton email server investigation, I am not in the least bit surprised.  For the moment, though, I'm more concerned about the attack on Wikileaks and the interruption of Julian Assange's ability to disseminate emails.  I am keeping my fingers crossed that all this talk about a secondary and tertiary ability to disseminate isn't just bravado.  The Clinton Campaign and the Obama Administration have jumped through hoops to keep the American people from seeing these emails.  Is it possible that Wikileaks was able to download some of the missing thirty-three thousand emails before Clinton's cronies were able to have them erased?

Just in the last forty-eight hours the Trump Campaign seems to have re-energized and re-prioritized itself.  I'm confident that moderator Chris Wallace will not turn the debate into a personal attack on Trump.  I believe Wallace will keep the debate focused on the issues, which absolutely should include any new revelations derived from the Wikileaks emails.  Do not let the Democrats distract you with accusations that the Clinton server issue is a personal attack.  Hillary Clinton was a government employee when she ordered the server to be installed, and a government employee when she knowingly trafficked classified intelligence on her unclassified system.  As a government employee, she is supposed to be accountable to us.  Everytime Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was involved in a controversy, she publicly announced that as Secretary of State, she was ultimately responsible.  Then, just as soon as the press cleared out, she would put in motion efforts to blame everyone and everything, so long as she wasn't accountable.  I'm a student of U.S. political history.  I love reading about the various past presidential elections, and learning about some of the controversies that occurred.  I am beginning to believe, that when one takes into account the influence peddling between her State Department and the Clinton Foundation, the lies of the Benghazi tragedy, and the outright "priveleged" gall of the email server issue, that Hillary Clinton is the most corrupt nominee to ever get this close to the White House.

Is Trump correct when he claims the presidential election is "rigged"?

I admit that Donald Trump deos not communicate as effectively as he should, given his credentials as a billionaire businessman and the Republican nominee for president.  How he has managed to be so successful is a bit of a mystery.  Regardless, he has been tremendously successful.  He has a special understanding of international business and the pitfalls of signing treaties like the North America Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).  One of the phrases that Trump continues to use that particularly annoys me, is "the election is rigged".  It comes across as something one grade school student would say to another, after a heated game of baseball.  I would prefer that Trump say something like, "the Democrats have put the pieces together that they believe will allow them to steal this election.". But I didn't chose Donald Trump, a landslide of other Republican primary voters are responsible for that decision.  Be that as it may, his speaking style obviously appeals to some people, and he is the man we need to beat Hillary Clinton.  But what about his claim that the election is rigged?  What could he be referring to?

According to the polls, weeks ago, Donald Trump had a double-digit lead in Ohio, a five-point lead in North Carolina, and a four-point lead in Florida.  He was threatening to overwhelm Hillary Clinton all over the map.  Her health had become an issue, and the Wikileaks email dump was waiting on the horizon.  Trump went into the first debate with an air of confidence that seemed appropriate.  The debate began as all the debates should, with a legitimate question about jobs.  But before the night was over, the moderator had introduced three subjects that had nothing to do with the issues.  Of course those questions were all directed at Trump.  "Why won't you release your tax returns?  Who is this former Miss Universe that accuses you of harassment?  Do you still believe that Barack Obama is not a U.S. citizen?". The attack was shocking in its bias and lack of subtlety.   Because I have been following the election, I know that Trump has explained repeatedly that he can't release his tax returns until the IRS has concluded an in-process audit.  The moderator and Hillary Clinton understand the position Trump is in, but they also know that if they repeat the question enough, some people will start to assume that Trump has something to hide.  Then one of the mainstream newspapers releases a false story that Trump pays no income tax.  His refutation makes no difference- the cat is already out of the bag.  As soon as the debate was comcluded, the press started picking on the story of a former Miss Universe that claimed that Trump had called her "fat".  The day after the debate, the media wasn't analyzing where the candidates stood on the issues; instead, the media was up to its neck giving this colorful and also criminal woman more airplay than jobs, or trade, or terrorism, or the economy, etc.  What came next?  The "locker room talk" video tape, well-spaced in between Miss Universe and the seven Democratic activists and outright liars that the press and the Clinton Campaign dug up.  The original purpose was probably to distract voters from details contained in the Wikileaks email dump, but the overall result was much more than the Democrats could have hoped for.  Donald Trump now trails in the polls in all the battleground states, and appears to be having trouble even in safe red states like Arizona and Utah.  True, the media is manipulating the polls to make the race appear to be over already, but there can be no denying that tremendous damage was done to the Trump Campaign.

The media has played a shameful, and in my opinion, criminal role in this campaign.  But when Trump talks about the election bring "rigged", he is also imcluding evidence of massive voter fraud already taking place in North Carolina, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Florida, and even Iowa.  Strangely enough, every time an incident of voter fraud is discovered, its a Democratic activist who has been busted.  There is real evidence that volunteers for the Clinton Campaign (and for the numerous left-wing groups who suppprt her), are actually providing instruction on how to register dead people and how to vote multiple times.  This is what Donald Trump is up against.

I wish I had an answer, or at least something optimistic to say.  I'm still struggling with friends who despise both candidates so much, that they are voting for the Libertarian or Independent Candidate.  They might as well go into the voting booth and pull the lever for Hillary Clinton.  I'm also frustrated that my own efforts to spread the word have met with less than successful results.  In the last two weeks, my blog posts have been linked or shared only TWO TIMES.  Folks, we all have to so something other than complain to our like-minded friends and family.  Find that person who has decided not to vote and explain to them the equities involved in this election.  I don't think our Constitution can survive Hillary Clinton's Supreme Court selections.

Trump is on the money; with the power of the media behind her, and a Justice Department that will not prosecute her or investigate voter fraud, Hillary is sitting in the catbird seat.  What we need is a true American miracle.  The unseen, uncounted and ignored majority must rise up and sweep the Democratic crud right into the gutter!  Does Donald Trump aggravate the heck outa you?  Join the club!  Then go back and review the issues.  You will agree with every one of his proposals.  And remember who he has as his team: Newt Gingrich, Ben Carson, Rudy Guiliani, and even Judge Judy Sheindlin!  Don't let a day go by without doing something positive.  Share my posts, donate money, put up a yard sign, spread a message on Facebook- together we can make it happen!

Trump denies allegations of innapropriate behavior and identifies the mainstream media as being in collution with the Clinton Campaign.

I'm relieved to see the Trump Team responding aggressively to last week's slew of allegations.  In all, seven women came forward to accuse Donald Trump of innappropriate behavior in unrelated incidents covering a thirty-year time span.  A simple background review identifies at least four of the women as being actively involved with Democratic politics and another as being a donor to the Clinton Campaign.  Unfortunately, it's not possible to erase all the exposure which was allocated to these stories.  It would be like trying to return a fart to its originating location, and asking folks to forget the smell.  The most important question we should be asking ourselves, is what was accomplished by this circus?  Sadly, some voters who may have been undecided will assume that where there is smoke, there is fire, and conclude that Donald Trump is not qualified to be President.  What else was was achieved with this well-organized, false, slanderous attack?

As NBC, CNN, ABC, CBS, the Wahington Post and the NY Times were running the allegations on a loop, the Wikileaks organization was releasing more emails from John Podesta, the Chairman of the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign.  Podesta had previously served as Chief of Staff to President Bill Clinton and as a "Counselor" to President Obama.  The Clinton Campaign and its allies in the media knew in advance, as we all did, that Wikileaks would be releasing emails this week.  More emails will be made available over the next few weeks, but what has already been examined should have been the main story on all the evening news broadcasts.  We are discovering why the Obama Administration was so anxious to assist Hillary Clinton in avoiding prosecution.  Emails between Podesta and Clinton aide Cheryl Mills remind us that President Obama was also sending emails over unclassified systems.  If Hillary goes down, then Obama mght be called to task as well.  The emails provide a glimpse into the activities of the Obama White House vis-a-vis the unfolding Clinton email controversy, and reveal collusion between the Clinton campaign and the Obama Justice Department that demand a Special Prosecutor.

The American people were basically kept in the dark about the latest chapter in the email saga.  Again, thank goodness for Fox News, the only mainstream news resource that instead of strict editorializing, actually presents both sides to controversial issues.  But one against seven are tough odds, even for Megyn Kelly, Bill O'Reilly, Chris Wallace and crew.  Last Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday were all about the "locker room talk" video, and since then its been a steady stream of allegations, with not a hint of journalistic imtegrity present.  Are these the issues that the press keeps telling us that we should be demanding of the candidates?  Hillary Clinton's email scandal is an issue that should be discussed, as are her actions as Secretary of State.  The allegation of a Democratic activist who claims that, thirty years prior Donald Trump lifted the armrest on her first-class plane seat to grab her breast, isn't.  Within seconds I knew this accusation was questionable, because I have flown enough to know that first-class seats have never had moveable armrests.  These allegations are so absurd (one claims innapropriate behavior by Trump at a concert that never even took place) that they wouldn't have survived any decent journalist's smell test.

We have not seen the last of the Wikileaks document dump.  Rumor has it that we will be hearing about Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's efforts to find foreign donors for the Clinton Foundation.  We can also expect more details regarding Bill Clinton's "coincidental" meeting with Justice Department boss Loretta Lynch on the airport tarmac in Phoenix ("we spent forty minutes discussing our grandkids"...my quoatations).  There is no doubt in my mind that a Quid Quo Pro agreement was discussed between Lynch and Bill, that would ensure no prosecution and the continuation of Lynch's job in a Hillary Clinton Administration.  I just can't accept that Bill Clinton is so stupid that he would have taken the chance to meet with Lynch in this manner (they were almost able to keep the meeting secret) unless something truly important was at stake.  Keeping Hillary Clinton from being prosecuted is very, very important to these folks.  What Hillary Clinton did was against the law.  You cannot knowingly create a method of communication that puts the confidentiality of classified imtelligence at risk.  She wanted to have her cake and eat it too.  The fact that she ordered the destruction of all thirteen of her Blackberries and Cellphones is criminal.  Those devices belong to the American people, and at the time of their destruction, the investigation, in one form or another, had begun.  Destroying devices and bleaching hard drives has one purpose: to cover up evidence.  In this case, I'm sure some of the missing thirty-three thousand emails are involved.

The media has no qualms about agressively disseminating false accusations against Donald Trump; of this we are aware.  Be prepared for a daily dose of this garbage.  We will do our part by ignoring the media and encouraging our family and friends to vote Republican.  The Trump Campaign must also do it's part.  Someone has to get Donald in line.  You can't respond to false accusations of sexual misconduct by inferring that the reason the allegations are false is because Trump would never have approached such ugly women.  Monitoring his Twitter feed would also help.  It's going to be a very rough ride, folks, but we must do whatever we can to bring change to DC.  I will take an ill-mannered businessman with the right ideas on any day, over a corrupt, life-long politician with Marxist sympathies.

The poliics of distraction and personal destruction, Hillary Clinton style.

(If you enjoy my commentary and agree with my perspective, please consider sharing the post.  In less than three weeks we will be participating in the most important presidential election of my lifetime.  We must do something to retake comtrol of our government, to reign in spending, police our borders and treat our wounded/crippled veterans.  If you are tired of Transgender issues, terrorist nations telling us to go to hell, criminals being given the benefit of the doubt over police officers, and marijuana slowly becoming more accessible than regular tobacco, then speak up!  Do your part, and please share this post. Thanks, Eric)



You can mark down Wednesday, October 12, as the day that the 2016 Presidential election came to an end, at least for practical purposes.  It certainly seems to be over, if you spend a few minutes channel surfing through the various news channels.  It does seem unlikely that Republican nominee Donald Trimp will be able to recover from today's sordid list of accusations.  By some incredible coincidence, four (the number may go up before morning) women have come forth today to accuse Mr. Trump of innapropriate behavior.  Since I only read the article once, I may not remember all the details clearly, but one accuser is a 74 year old woman.  According to her, thirty years prior Mr. Trump attempted to "grab her breast".  Another accuser claimed that in 2005 she was standing outside Trump Tower, and Mr. Trump walked up and kissed her.  No doubt these accusations have been made before, and remain nothing more than unsubstantiated allegations.  All four of these women randomly decided to speak up three days after Donald Trump reminded the American people of former President Bill Clinton's past.  Mr. Trump invited a group of women to the second debate who had previously accused Bill Clinton of everything from sexual assault to rape.  Again, the timing must be a coincidence.  Otherwise we would be obliged to consider that the American press and media are in cahoots with the Democratic Party and the Hillary Clinton for President Campaign.  How could anyone even joke around about something so serious as a national media with a political agenda?

On occasion, politics can get messy, and at times, it can be complicated.  At least in this instance, the situation isn't complicated.  last year or earlier this year, when the press became aware of just how serious Donald Trump was about running for President, they did the usual search for anything embarrassing or compromising in his past.  Its the type of firing line that all Republican candidates have to risk. Democratic candidates were usually given a free ride, at least until Fox News arrived on the scene.  The networks and news companies put everything they had collected "on ice" during the Republican Primary.  Why didn't they just release all the negative stuff then, so he would lose in the primaries?  The mainstream media actually wanted Trump to win the Republican nomination, because from their perspective, of all the Republicans fighting for the nomination, Trump would be the easiest for Hillary to beat in a General Election.  Let's face it, Mr. Trump does not always communicate effectively, and he has no idea how to behave himself for an extended period of time on the national stage; not to mention the video of his "locker room banter", the complaints made by the former Ms. Universe, and the handful of women who, over the past three decades, have publicly accused Mr. Trump of "innapropriate behavior".  Absolutely the Democratic establishment wanted Trump to win the Republican nomonation.  And when I say Democratic establishment, I mean to include its military wing, the mainstream media.  This effort on behalf of the press and media is nothing new.  They can take full credit for the weak Republican nominees in 2008 and 2012 as well.

I can't be alone in wishing that we could have an election with two opponents who put forward their ideas, intentions, and perspectives, and give us the opportunity to decide which vision is the best.  The media continues to remind us in both print and on the airwaves, that the American people want an election that focuses exclusively on the issues.  Then the same media will introduce you to the video tape that they dug up that shows Trump at his worst, albeit in a private conversation that had nothing to do with job creation or the environment.  The press plays this game with such aggressiveness that they must take us to be the most ignorant bunch of patsies.  While the press is busy piling on Trump, Congress is discovering evidence of a Justice Department that colluded with the Clinton Campaign during its so-called investigation of Clinton's private email server.  As I write this post, Wikileaks is releasing reams of emails from Clinton aides and associates that paint a clear picture of someone who exists above the law, and enjoys being one of the "chosen ones".

Donald Trump departed the Republican Convention in Cleveland with a clean slate.  Hillary Clinton was not so fortunate.  Congress comtinued to be interested in Clinton's illegal server, and what became of 33,000 missing emails.  Hillary Clinton used thirteen different Blackberries and cell phones during her time as Secretary of State. The FBI and Congress were both interested in these thirteen devices as part of their investigation.  Hillary Clinton had all thirteen devices DESTROYED.  We are talking about government property here.  Can you imagine what would happen to a Secretary at the Department of Agriculture who knowingly destroyed his/her government cell phone?  I won't bother getting into the agreement the FBI made with Clinton aides Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin, which resulted in the destruction of their laptops. Hillary should have been obliged to explain these controversies because they occurred when she was getting a government paycheck.  That means she was accountable to us, folks.  Those cell phones and Blackberries were the property of the people of the United States, and the only reason to destroy each and every one would be to comceal evidence of wrongdoing.  We've been through two debates and the only time Hillary Clinton is prssed on these issues is when they are brought up by Domald Trump.

The mainstream media feels totally justifed in its actions.  They have come to the comclusion that half of America is too stupid, too racist. and too religious to be trusted with electing a president.  I'm beginning to wonder if maybe they are on to something.  Why else would people allow themselves to be imfluenced by what is clearly political manipulation?  People are so quick to believe everything they see on the news.  "Well I heard it on CNN, so it must be true.". CNN, the NY Times and the Washington Post no longer have the right to call themselves fair and balanced.  The bosses decide who they think is best, give a ringing endorsement, then go about systematically burying the opponent with the politics of personal destruction.  I for one do not want the media choosing my president, and I will continue to call it like I see it, for as long as I can.  Don't think twice about those RINO Republicans who speak out against Trump.  They never truly supported his candidacy because he trounced a couple of their coworkers in the primaries.  When all is said and done, let your common sense and conscience be your guides.  They will not steer you wrong.