From Henry George’s Protection or Free Trade, published in 1940. Ten years earlier “President” Trump’s mother had immigrated from Scotland. His father was born in America to German immigrants.
It has long been known that to obtain the best crops the farmer should not seed with the seeds grown in his own fields, but with seed brought from afar. The strain of domestic animals seems always improved by imported stock, even poultry-breeders finding it best to sell the male birds they raise and supply their places with cocks brought from a distance. Whether or not the same law holds true with regard to the physical part of man, it is certain that the admixture of peoples produces stimulating mental effects. Prejudices are warn down, wits are sharpened, language enriched, habits and customs brought to the test of comparison and new ideas enkindled. The most progressive peoples, if not always of mixed blood, have always been the peoples who came most in contact with and learned most from others.
…from the stable's genius:
Q: What about Obama’s comment? Obama’s comment at the graduation ceremony (inaudible).
THE PRESIDENT: I didn’t hear it.
Q: He (inaudible) twice at the leadership.
THE PRESIDENT: Look, he was an incompetent President. That’s all I can say. Grossly incompetent.
All you need to know about Trump:
Just five months ago, Mr. Trump fired Navy Secretary Richard V. Spencer for opposing the president’s intervention in support of a Navy SEAL accused of murdering a wounded captive with a hunting knife during a deployment to Iraq in 2017.
From the Center for American Progress:
The tax code provides that Congress’ tax committees — including the House Committee on Ways and Means, the Senate Committee on Finance, and the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) — are entitled to obtain any tax returns from the IRS that they request. Section 6103(f)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) reads:
Upon written request from the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of Representatives, the chairman of the Committee on Finance of the Senate, or the chairman of the Joint Committee on Taxation, the Secretary [of the Treasury] shall furnish such committee with any return or return information specified in such request…As law scholar Harry Litman explains, the term “shall” means exactly what it says: “The language [‘shall’] is the well-established norm, across a range of legal settings, used to denote an absence of discretion on an official’s part. It leaves no room for quibbles.”
…he’s not mean like that Warren bitch:
Q: Do you think sexism was a factor in Elizabeth Warren pulling out? And do you believe you will see a female President in your lifetime?
THE PRESIDENT: No, I think lack of talent was her problem. She had a tremendous lack of talent. She was a good debater. She destroyed Mike Bloomberg very quickly, like it was nothing. That was easy for her. But people don’t like her. She’s a very mean person, and people don’t like her. People don’t want that. They like a person like me, that’s not mean.
…and here’s how, as urged by my neighbor Tony Piel, former director and general legal counsel of the World Health Organization:We Democrats may have made a mistake in going for impeachment of Trump in the House of Congress focused on the single issue of violation of US Election Law (which turned into a debate, day after day, over “corruption,” Biden, Burisma and Hunter, which “Trumpists” could distract us with). It was a foregone conclusion, from day one, that Trump would be acquitted by the Republican majority in the Senate.
What we should have done, and could still do, is call for full hearings in the House and go for a motion to censure Trump for his explicit, incontrovertible violation of the U.S. Constitution and U.S. laws of consequence. (Note that House censure motions do not go to the Senate.) These violations include :
(1) Trump violated the constitutional ban on receiving emoluments (things of value ) from foreign governments, agencies, persons or enemies of the U.S. such as Putin’s Russia. (Motivation for taking the emoluments is irrelevant. Trump broke the law.)
(2) Trump violated the U.S .Impoundment Control Act which prohibits the diversion or withholding of funds specifically appropriated by Congress, without the consent of Congress. (Motivation for evading Congress is irrelevant. Trump broke the law.)
(3) Trump repeatedly violated the U.S. Constitutional provision outlawing treasonous conduct “giving aid and comfort to enemies of the U.S.” Note that Trump’s withholding of military assistance to Ukraine was effectively a way of giving military assistance to Putin’s Russia. (Motivation for treasonous behavior is irrelevant. Trump sided with our enemy, Putin’s Russia again and again. Trump broke the law.)
The thing about the above three violations is that they are “high crimes” (not just “misdemeanors,” or misbehavior) by Trump himself. They are incontrovertible. There is no room for debate about the facts or the governing law. Either he did it or he didn’t. The law is perfectly clear. Furthermore, a motion of censure cannot be blocked by Republican “Trumpists” in the Senate.
Other issues can be added, such as sexual abuse, bribery, tax evasion, business and banking fraud, landlordism, money-laundering and related obstruction of justice. We should target Trump’s highest crimes. Don’t get side-tracked by diversion tactics.
For example: Under U.S. Tax Law (U.S. Tax Code Section 6103) Congress has absolute power to demand the Treasury & IRS to reveal to Congress “anyone’s” tax return. “Anyone” means anyone. There is no exception, not even for a U.S. president. Trump is refusing to reveal his tax returns. Is there any factual question here ? Is there any question of what the law is ? None at all. (Again, motivation is no excuse for violating U.S. law.)
Why go for more hearings and censure now, at such late date ?
Answer: To educate the entire American public, who have a right to know the full truth, before the November 2020 elections. Then let the majority of American voters decide the question of removal from office. If we don’t do it, we are saying that a president is above the law, even when he risks U.S. national security. Should we just abandon the Constitution and the law ?