Kathy Griffin is a hypocrite and a coward, and she has more than used her her fifteen minutes of fame.

Sometimes I make fun of comedienne Kathy Griffin's appearance. Honestly, I really do make an effort to avoid picking on ugly people.  I have yet to win any beauty pageants myself, and I'm sure it wouldn't take a professional entertainer to point out my flaws.  Before I allow physical characteristics to become part of my commentaries, I make darn sure that the target of my judgement is deserving.  Kathy Griffin has built a very successful career as a comedienne by making fun of people.  Our society seems to believe that famous people shouldn't complain about vicious personal attacks because, well, famous people usually have lots of money.  Who wouldn't put up with a few insults on the way to a seven-figure annual income?  Kathy Griffin used to reserve her nasty comments for entertainers, but recently, after being hired by CNN to do an annual New Year's Eve broadcast with Anderson Cooper, Griffin has expanded her target range to include any and all Republicans and Conservatives.  As the old adage reminds us, "what's good for the goose is good for the gander".  Kathy Griffin is a physically repulsive woman.  When the cameras are rolling, she manages to look OK, (credit due to her makeup team as opposed to genetics) but as was evidenced by her apology video clip sans makeup from last Wednesday, Kathy Griffin is not an attractive woman.  Because she presents such an odd combination of physical attributes, at times I've found myself studying her appearance.  Her head is much too big.  In fact, the last time I watched more than five seconds of her stand-up, it appeared as if her head accounted for forty percent of her body.  Sadly for Kathy, television usually focuses on head shots, and Kathy is the spitting image of the Mr. Potato Head toy I enjoyed so much as a child.

Although in my opening paragraph, I was admittedly rough on Kathy Griffin, my comments are nothing compared to the insults she has directed to President Trump and his family.  Some of the comments involving the President and his Daughter Ivanka are so offensive that they occasionally draw criticism from Democrats as well, believe or not.  Her insults, protected by First Amendment and her claim to being an established comedienne, include way too many targets to count.  Griffin may have pushed the proverbial envelope a bit to far earlier this week, though, when she released a photo taken during a professional photo shoot with photographer Tyler Shields, in which she is holding aloft a fake representation of the bloody, decapitated head of President Donald Trump.  I encourage anyone who has not seen the picture to find it in Google, because as offensive as the photo may be, its important that all reasonable Americans understand just how bizarre and full of hate progressives and the left have become.  No doubt Griffin was shocked by the reaction to her artistic efforts.  After discovering the tens of thousands of angry tweets relating to the photo, she put together a short video clip apologizing and admitting that she had "crossed the line".

I was relieved that Griffin had responded quickly and unequivocally regarding the inappropriateness of the photo, especially when it was discovered that the President's eleven-year old son Barron saw the image on television before the First Family had been warned.  Not surprisingly, some on the left saw nothing wrong with Griffin's photo shoot.  Do you remember Ken Jennings, the egg-head from Utah who memorized a set of encyclopedias and was able to win a ton of money on Jeopardy?  He's a celebrity now, and since he's a typical leftist, he is more intelligent than the rest of us, and has carte blanche to say whatever comes into his mind.  In response to Barron Trump seeing a representation of his father's bloodied, decapitated head on television, Jennings tweeted, "Barron Trump saw a very long necktie on a heap of expired deli meat in a dumpster.  He thought it was his dad and his little heart is breaking."  I guess Ken Jennings has graduated from professional Jeopardy player to world-class comedian.  In the real world, Ken Jennings sees himself as a successful author.  Its time Jennings tasted a bit of humility.  Please, please don't buy his books, especially not the books with children as the target audience.  After all, Barron Trump, at eleven years, is still a child.  Don't buy his books, and encourage others to follow suit.  I'm hoping people will be so incensed that booksellers decide to no longer carry his product.

As for Griffin, it didn't take long for her to return to form.  Because Donald Trump, Jr. has tweeted in defense of his younger brother, Kathy Griffin has decided that she is being "bullied" by the Trump family.  I kid you not.  Celebrity Ambulance Chaser and lefty par excellence Lisa Bloom is representing poor, abused, innocent Kathy Griffin.  I truly hope that the American people, at least those who believe in personal accountability, won't take this pretend-attorney and her sad, put-upon client very seriously.  We truly are the silent majority, folks.  We aren't represented by the Washington Post, CNN, the NY Times or MSNBC, because we refuse to fall into any "victim" category.  I didn't enter this country illegally, I'm not trapped in the wrong body, I don't feel sexually harassed whenever someone smiles at me, I'm not in jail because society failed me and I was "forced" to sell drugs, and I don't believe that the country owes me anything other than the opportunity to make a good life for myself.  I truly believe that most Americans feel the same way.  Lets make ourselves heard by avoiding the promotions and products of the Kathy Griffins and Ken Jennings of the world, and stand up for the America in which we believe.

  

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.

A few observations on polling.

Once political season rolls around, their is no way to avoid the non-stop polling.  We are currently less than a month away from the most important election in our political cycle, one month from knowing if we will have a President Hillary Clinton or a President Donald Trump.  We also have other elections taking place simultaneously, which will decide the makeup of the next Congress.  One group of organizations that have grown fat in recent years because of politicking are the polling companies.  Not long ago, most Americans would be lucky to recognize three separate pollsters, but lately, the media has decided that the American people just can't get enough of polls.  I can count at least twenty companies right off the top of my head.  Granted, pollsters collect and analyze data about far more than just political opinion; but in today's hotly contested electoral environment, the money is in the current campaigns that are coming to a close in early November.

Campaigns utilize polling information to determine candidate weaknesses and strengths.  They are also useful to help campaigns decide where and when to spend advertising resources.  Why would a candidate continue to buy airtime in a state in which he/she trails by twenty percentage points, when other states are much more competitive.  For instance, Donald Trump isn't spending money in California and Hillary Clinton has no ads running in Kansas.  But polls are also used to manipulate perceptions.  You see, polling organizations are inexorably tied to the big media corporations.  Many broadcasting companies, including Fox News, CBS, ABC, NBC and CNN all have their own polling capabilities.  Sometimes they work in tandem with newspapers, for example Fox News/Wall Street Journal Poll, and the CBS/NY Times Poll.  It should come as no surpirse that polls have become a major weapon in national politics.  Lets take a look at how it works:

Its possible to manipulate people with the framing of the polling questions, but in this instance, lets keep it simple.  The question is, if the Presidential Election were held today, and you had to choose between Republican Donald Trump and Democrat Hillary Clinton, for whom would you vote?  As the poll is constructed, the sample must be created.  Polls are scientific, so people can't just be called randomly.  you must first create a sample.  How many Republicans are you going to include, and how many Democrats? How many Independents?  What percentage of males and females?  If you chose to structure your poll by picking a specific percetnage of African-Americans, or Asian-Americans, you can certainly impact the end result.  How you structure your polling sample is called the methodology.

When it comes to polls, it always benefits to read the small words at the end of the survey results. This is where they usually hide their methodology.  For example, you may discover that the sample included 39% Democrat,  30% Republican, 5% Independent, and the rest "no affiliation".  Common sense tells you that the Democratic candidate has a big advantage because more Democrats participated.  Believe it or not, I took this particular sampling example from a major poll published this week and broadcast on every news channel.  Surprise, surprise, Hillary Clinton has a big lead.  The pollsters will justify their methods by arguing that their sampling is in line with the "latest" information regarding what percentage of the electorate is Republican or Democrat.  If the country is 39% Democrat and 30% Republican, then it only makes sense that hou would use the same percentages in your sampling.  The problem is, the percentage fluctuates dramatically, not only nationally, but locally.  And if you are polling for the state of Ohio, wouldn't make sense to try and determine the percentages of Republicans and Democrats in Ohio, instead of defaulting to the perceived national figures?

To sum it up, don't think too much about poll numbers.  Back in 2012, we were told that Romney was going to win a close election.  Romney lost, and it wasn't really close.  Not only are polls subject to manipulation, they can be innaccurate for a host of other reasons.  Sometimes people get annoyed when their dinner is interruptd by a phone call, and they lie.  Other times, people don't understand the process.  Our recent political history, going back to the famous "Dewey vs. Truman" election in 1948, is replete with examples of polls that produced results different from the actual election.  This particular Presidential election is a hard one to handicap.  Although everything appears to be falling Clinton's way (including the polls), there continues to be that feeling in the back of my mind, that we are in for a big surprise.  Trump voters are angry and motivated- they will flock to the voting booths.  The Clinton voter continues to be less-than inspired.  Also, I think its safe to assume that we haven't heard the last about Wikileaks emails, imvestigations, and the extra-curricular activity of former President Bill Clinton.  So don't take the daily deluge of polling information too seriously.  Unless, of course, the figures point to a Trump victory.  😉

Why do our most important elections always turn out so nasty?

Not surprisingly, this year's presidential election between Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Donald Trump has had its share of personal attacks and name-calling.  I knew it would happen, and so did you.  In fact, I can't remember the last major election in our country this didn't eventually end up in the gutter, and my memory of political involvement at one level or another stretches bsck to 1984 and President Ronald Reagan up against Democratic challenger, former Vice President Walter Mondale of Minnesota.  Why deos this happen?  Every election, both candidates begin their campaigns by publicly pledging to focus on the issues, and to run a clean, respectful and positive race.  Sometimes certain candidates are able to keep their pledge, as lomg as there is a Political Action Committee (PAC) on their side to sling the mud instead.  In fact, politicans are using PACS more and more to trash their opppnents, so they can have what is called, "plausible deniability".  Regardless, at the end of the day we seem cursed to suffer through hateful, cruel, invasive personal attacks as part of every important election.  If the citizens, the press, and the candidates all disavow this type of campaigning, then why deos it just seem to get worse all the time?

It doesn't take a microscope to uncover certain incriminating facts regarding this year's Presidential election.  Roughly three weeks ago, befroe the first Presidential Debate, polls showed Trump ahead in the battleground states of North Carolina, Florida and Ohio.  National polls showed the race a statistical tie, with the trend moving in Trump's favor.  Then we had our first debate.  Trimp began by focusing on job creation and the need to renegotiate certain trade agreements.  Sometime during the debate the moderator (not Hillary Clinton) introduced the issue of Trump's taxes.  Trump explained, as he has repeatedly to the same journalists, that he is in the middle of being audited, therefore he can't reelase his income taxes until the process is complete.  Trump's response probably made no difference.  The moderator had successfully imjected an issue in the debate which had nothing to do with jobs, the economy, terrorism, the Supreme Court, or the National Debt.  Later on, Trump was asked about comments he made twenty years prior regarding a contestant in one of his Miss Universe Pageants.  Since a video clip appeared to show Mr. Trump referring to this particular contestant and her weight,  the inferrence that Trump is a Bigot was introduced into the debate.  Again, nothing to do with foreign affairs, ISIS, or the minimum wage, put the perfect set-up for new personal attacks on Trump.

For at least a week, the media feasted on the story of Trump and the overweight Beauty Pageant contestant.  Once the second debate rolled around, another video clip starring Donald Trump somehow ended up on the desk of the Washington Post (actually, the tape was provided to the Post by NBC).  In this video clip, Trump and TV host Billy Bush can be heard having a conversation about women that was lewd and vulgar.  Neither men knew that they were being filmed/recorded at the time, so this video is a huge invasion of privacy, but who cares, right?  Trump quickly apologized, and tried to explain his language as an unfortunate and regrettable example of "locker room talk".  Of course, moderator Anderson Cooper had to bring it up in the second debate, and again, the controversy had nothing to do with those issues that the media identifed as being important to the electorate.  The media continues to push the narrative that the candidates want to avoid the important issues and would just as soon engage in personal attacks on each other. The reality is, the media is driving this bus, folks, and no one else is allowed behind the wheel.

Every expose or new controversy, whether it be an interview with one of the women who has accused former President Bill Clinton of sexual impropriety, or some absurd story claiming that Donald Trump never pays income tax, has been released and promoted by the media.  If the media wants to keep the candidates focused on the issues, then they should refuse to accept advertising money for political ads that don't focus on the issues.  They should only broadcast debates and policy speeches that exclusively focus on jobs, terrorism, education, and the twenty trillion dollar debt.  Its just another example of the hypocrisy from the entity that jnfluences our electoral process in a very disturbing way.  On more than one occasion, Donald Trump has been criticized for spending time defending himself from a personal accusation.  The press publicly scold Trump for not addressing the issues that "the American people care about".  So the media releases the personal attack, advertises related follow-up stories, disseminates the story on every news source, and then slams the candidate for not sticking to the issues!

I know, its emough to bring on a nasty headache.  But we must be aware of all the equities involved in our political process.  The media will always differ to a sexy, colorful, or embarrassing personal story about public figures, as opposed to some segment about foreign trade or the price of tea in China.  They are convinced that the American public would prefer to hear about both candidate's dirty laundry, even if we are in the midst of a Presidential election.  The press is basically omnipotent in our society, because the oversight for the media is the media.  Folks have been wasting their breath for years, screaming about the obvious leftist bias in the American media (how about those even-handed questions from the debate moderators), and the problem just seems to get worse.  People talk about getting religion out of schools and out of government; how about getting activist journalists and editors out of the media?  Journalists in 2016 are comvinced that they are the only ones smart enought to make important decisions, thats why editotials and political endorsements have become such an important part of today's fading print media.

Advice to the media/press: just report the details, and trust the American people to have the common sense, intelligence, and consideration to figure things out on their own.  We don't care who the editorial staff of the Houston Chronicle supports for President in 2016.  As for the debates, why not have an equal number of representatives from both parties agree on the questions the day of the debate.  I'm not alone when I say that I feel as if my party's nominee for the past two elections has been selected by the opposing team.  

Media bias- just how bad is it?

All of my adult life, at least the years during which I have been politically aware, I have noticed a definite bias in the media.  I am amazed when I hear folks denying this reality, or worse, criticizing Fox News for providing a Conservative perspective to current events.  Not a day goes by that I don't acknowledge my appreciation for both Fox News and the Drudge Report.  The playing field is not equal by any stretch of the imagination, but at least someone of my political persuasion is willing to put up a fight.  Frequently, though, I am reminded of just how powerful the liberal media has become.  The first Presidential Debate between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump provided just such a reminder.  Not surprisingly, the moderator feigned complete neutrality, and then proceeded to ambush Trump with questions about a former Ms. Universe Pageant contestant.  I expected the moderator to discuss Trump's income taxes and also his comments regarding the Obama birth certificate comtroversy.  It would only make sense, considering the Clinton email server issue and the controversy regarding influence peddling and the Clinton Foundation would surely be mentioed.  I was mistaken.  I can only assume that the first debate was meant to focus on sensitive Trump developments, and that the second debate would introduce Hillary's trouble issues; time will tell.

Today the Washington Post released a video clip of Donald Trump making some less-than proper comments regarding women during a conversation with journalist Billy Bush.  Trump was obviously not aware that he was being filmed at the time.  His commentary was very similar to the type of banter I hear frequently when groups of men get together and the subject of women is introduced.  Regardless, it isn't pretty, and Trump's apology was appropriate and appeared sincere.  Of course, we will never hear the end of this latest snafu, because the media believes that they have found the torpedo that will sink the Trump campaign once and for all.  Maybe they have, but it certainly won't deflect me from making some simple observations.  First and foremost, I would to know how long the Post has been in possession of this video, and what motivated the decision to air it now, roughly three weeks before the election.  I have a sneaky suspicion that the Post was in possession, or at least aware of, the video during the Republican Primaries.  Is it off-base to conjecture that the Washington Post held on to this embarrassing bit of tape during the Primaries because the Democratic establishment wanted Trump to win the nomination, giving them the opportunity to use all the goodies that they had collected and put away for future use?  I bet the press was aware of the former Ms. Universe early-on as well.  After Donald Trump won the nomination, the mainstream media was beside itself with the belief that, just as in 2008 and 2012, they had manipulated negative stories on the various candidates in order to "pick" the GOP nominee.  Its not as far-fetched as you might think.  I can't be the only Republican voter who is left confused and frustrated by the recent string of flawed GOP nominees.

What has me truly angry, though, is not possible manipulation by the Press, or even the obvious bias with which Conservative candidates are obliged to accept.  What really gives me a case of the Texas Red-Ass is the hypocrisy of the Media and the Washington Post in particular.  For those of you who are old enough to remember Bill Clinton's Administration, it must be just as easy for you as it is for me to recall some of the more unpleasant details of President Clinton's seduction of White House intern Monica Lewinsky.  Lots to remember here, folks, imcludimg the lie, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky"......., and the perjury committed in the Paula Jones deposition.  And then there was the cigar, and the stained dress, and the fact that Lewinsky was not only a subordinate of Clinton, she was also a very young woman, in her early twenties.  Where is the hypocrisy, you ask?  When the Lewinsky saga was unfolding, the mainstream Media led the charge to declare the enter controversy "a personal matter" and "nobody's business" (my quotations).  The Post was out-front in scolding Americans for turning a private issue into a political weapon.  Isn't that exactly what the Washington Post is doing now?  Don't kid yourself- the Democrats and the Clinton Campaign aren't shocked and disturbed by the video clip.  They are thrilled, and no doubt they believe Trump won't be able to recover from this scandal.  I can only hope that the American people will see this for what it is, a private moment of conversation that should never have been exploited in this way, regardless of the content of the discussion.  The Washington Post has gone so far as to release a transcript of the video clip.  I don't need to read the transcript.  It makes no difference to me what Trump said to a friend in a private conversation that had nothing to do with government business.  Hillary Clinton's problems, on the other hand, have everything to do with her behavior as a US Government employee.  I'm also much more comfortable with a lewd Donald Trump in the White House, than a return trip for Bill Clinton in any incarnation.  I believe the man is a sexual predator and I have yet to see any evidence to the contrary.

Keeping it short and simple- a post-debate reminder why I'm voting for Donald Trump.

I spent a good part of tonight's Presidntial Debate trying to understand why someone with Donald Trump's public exposure and profile seems to have the communication skills of a High School sophomore.  He has real difficulty staying on topic and finishing points.  My friend Jennifer refers to it as talking in "verbal circles", and I think that she has found a great description.  That being said, I am able to clearly identitfy what Trump supports and what issues will be a priority should he win this election.  This debate only served to solidify my support for Trump and my absolute opposition to Hillary Clinton.

Trump identifies the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), signed into law by former President Bill Clinton, as the worst trade legislation that our nation has ever enacted, and he's right.  NAFTA serves to strengthen the economies of Latin America on the back of U.S. workers.  Trump boldly announced that any nation who unfairly taxes our products, is going to be met with the same taxes on this side of the border.  Are you listening, Mexico, China, Vietnam, South Korea and Taiwan?  The EU will be obliged to revisit some of our Trade Agreements as well.  Just because the international community like to encourage the perception that Americans are all filthy rich, and that citizens of the United States unfairly consume most of the world's resources, is no reason for us to regularly enter into unbalanced, damaging Trade Agreements.

Trump promises to curtail useless, unnecessary, and crippling regulations on industry and on businesses.  Democrat Administrations love regulation.  They seem to always make the assumption that any regulation will help save animals, clean the water and clear the air.  Unnecessary regulations financially impact a business owner's ability to expand his workspace and hire more employees.  But the real reason I believe Trump will be successful is his plan to provide a tax break to the job creators in this country- the large, medium, and small business owners.  In order to grow businesses, you have to let the people keep more of their money.  They are capitalists; they will invest any additional tax savings back into our moribund economy.  That's a guarantee you can take to the bank.  Meanwhile, all we get from Hillary is more of the same Democratic argument that the government should be in charge of creating jobs.  A simple review of basic economics illustrates that governments have always been terrible at job creation.

Trump will discourage the continued existence of sanctuary cities, which is part of his effort to re-introduce respect for the rule of law.  Persons who are considering breaking U.S. law by trying to enter our nation illegally, should not have certain destination cities already circled on the map.  We need a President who will put the backbone back into our Immigration Laws.  Americans are only as secure as our international border.  We can't reward people for breaking the law, while hundreds of thousands of people fill out the paperwork and wait patiently (and legally) for their opportunity.

Trump intends to destroy ISIS, a worthy goal that should have been accomplished some time ago.  Trump will rebiild our military, and put Veterans at the front of the line for school financial aid, home financing, and medical care.  Trump will clean out the State Department and remove all of the Clinton apologists and America-haters that have sadly taken root at Foggy Bottom.

During the debate, Clinton came across as just another politician, providing the audience with all these great ideas that I guess never came to mind during her six years as a Congresswoman who never authored any legislation.  She had the gall to bring up the "Birther Lie", reflecting on Trump's past support for finding real answers to the Obama birth certificate controversy.  Lie is a special word in Clinton's world.  She lied about the cause of the Benghazi tragedy, because of her refusal to say "Islamic Terrorists", she lied anout having never received classified emails on her "illegal server", and she lied when she said that "a wall" would exist between her State Department and her husband's Foundation.  We now know that fifty-five percent of the lucky folks who received an interview with Secretary of State Clinton, left her office and ran to make a donation to the Clinton Foundation.  I wonder why?  And that wall proved invisible on a number of other occasions, including when Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin, both high-placed members of her State Department Staff, did work for the Clinton Foundation while collecting a USG check from the State Department.  Are you comfortable with her support for the nuclear give-away Treaty with Iran?  Where was the benefit in that?  What about the ransom paid for the release of U.S. hostages?  If Iran should be trusted with a Nuclear Treaty, can't they be depended upon to release innocent U.S. citizens from Iranian jails without a ransom of billions of dollars?  And if you need anymore examples of Hillary's foreign policy mistakes, take a look at the New Start ballistic missile reduction Treaty she signed with none-other than Lucifer himself, Vladimir Putin, back in 2010.

I keep hoping that Donald Trump will develop a more effective speaking style, but I don't think its going to happen.  So I'm left to dig through the issues, in order to determine who is the best candidate for President in 2016.  Fortunately, it didn't take very long.

A few important and fair issues to consider before voting for Hillary Clinton.

(I realize that today's blog entry is addressed to person's who may choose to vote for Hillary Clinton on November 8.  I also acknowledge that the great majority of people who read this blog have no intention of voting for Clinton.  These facts may lead you to consider, "what's the point?"  The national conversation currently taking place in the United States isn't meant to be limited to just the necessary amount of bad press to convince folks to vote one way or another.  Even after you believe you have made up your mind, its important to let the educational process comtinue.  Learn all you can about both candidates.  It can only add to your conviction.)

We have less than sixty-three days remaining before United States citizens go to the polls to decide who follows Barack Obama into the Oval Office.  There is no doubt that the American people would like a campaign based on the economy, foreign policy, and the national debt, just to name a few important issues.  But at the end of the day, the discussion always seems to devolve into negative reporting and personal attacks.  Last week, Republican Donald Trump announced an effort to reach out to Black and Hispanic Americans, two voting groups that seem determined to vote Democrat until the end of time.  Trump spoke of the rising unemployment in minority communities and the lack of quality schools.  He didn't shy away from the subject of gun violence, and the unacceptably high number of young Black and Hispanic men who sit in jail, when they should be sitting in a College Classroom.  Trump spoke of the failure of the system that exists in place, and the lack of opportunity in our poorer urban communities.  Instead of encouraging the introduction of such important issues into the race for the Presidency, the Clinton Campaign almost overnight put together a video alleging that Donald Trump has ties to the KKK- a perfect example of what is wrong with our political system.

Although I'm sure the Trump Campaign won't hesitate to attack Clinton in the same fashion, I always endeavor to introduce issues that I feel are relavent and vetted.  Vetted by who?  By me; I've spent enough time living in DC and working inside the beast to have a useful perspective, if you will excuse the self-promotion.  I won't accuse Hillary Clinton of being a Chinese spy or a closet Marxist (she disposed of the closet long ago!).  But I will ask a very important question, that as of today, has yet to be addressed.  If Hillary Clinton is elected President, how will she be able to view classified material?  A simple review of Clinton's admitted actions involving classified documents when she was Secretary of State, preclude her from having any hope in hell of passing a background check.  If we consider only the actions that Clinton has admitted, and set aside the plethora of unanswered accusations, it would be a stretch to think that Clinton could get a "Confidential" level clearance, let alone a Top Secret/SCI clearance, which is a necessary tool for the President of the United States.  Its past time that the issue is addressed by the media.  How can we elect a President who cannot pass the necessary evaluation to earn a Top Secret/SCI clearance?

Let's take a look at that monstrosity identified as "The Clinton Foundation".  This entity serves to provide former President Bill Clinton the opportunity to raise money for a number of good causes across the globe.  The idea is that Bill Clinton has a great deal of influence among the powerful and wealthy around the world, and can bridge the gap between the needy and the resources necessary to improve lives.  It all sounds great, except for a handful of problems.  Have you ever heard of, or seen, The Clinton Foundation at work?  Have you ever seen a news special or documentary on some successful project to feed hungry people or educate the poor, that was made possible by the Clinton Foundation?  In the end, the Foundation is just like all the other charities that the rich and famous like to set up (lately its been folks in sports and the entertainment industry); lots of noise and money changing hands, but very little being accomplished.  The reality is, these Foundations serve to provide jobs to all of those who at one time or another, proved useful.  The Clinton Foundation is a "who's who" of Clinton supporters and useful contacts.  It costs a fortune to run a Foundation, especially when you take a look at what it's employees are paid.  At the end of the day, its a miracle that any money is left over at all to apply to the original goal.  But the Foundation continues to grow, and in the case of Bill Clinton, provide a never-ending supply of worshipers and fans.  Isn't Bill a great guy!

When Hillary Clinton joined the Obama Administration as Secretary of State, persons within Obama's inner circle expressed concern about the closeness of the Foundation to the State Department.  The Obama folks were assured that a "wall" existed, so that no overlap could take place.  So much for the wall.  So far, it has come to light that two of Hillary Clinton's State Deptartment Staff,  Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills, continued to do work for the Foundation.  The real trouble for Hillary didn't start until a review of her meeting logs detailed that 55% of persons she met with in her role as Secretary of State, turned around and donated money to the Clinton Foundation.  Have you heard of Nigerian billionaire Gilbert Chagoury?  He is a friend of Bill Clinton's, gave at least one million dollars to The Foundation, and pledged to donate one billion dollars to the Clinton Global Initiative.  Not surprisingly, he was treated as a VIP by Hillary's State Department.  He has since been convicted of money laundering in Switzerland.

Sixty-three days do not provide enough time to dig into the hidden tunnels of contacts and favors that existed between Hillary Clinton's State Department and The Clinton Foundation.  So much money, so many discreet deals and purposely paid degrees-of-separation.  For persons who are planning to vote for Hillary Clinton, are you sure that all of this smoke doesn't lead to a fire somewhere down the line?  You may not like Trump, but he has lived his life as a businessman, doing his best to succeed within the framework of rules and regulations that exist for Real Estate Developers.  Clinton has been a politician her entire adult life, which inevitably leads to the type of complications discussed in the previous paragraphs.  Isn't it time we tried a different direction?