Symphony

Encore of Revival: America, March 18, 2019

The twelve Senators who voted to continue the mess at the border included the soon-to-be notorious "three amigos"—Paul, Romney, and Rubio. The other Senator from Utah, Mike Lee, also voted with Mitt. Of the other eight, two are up for re-election in 2020—Lamar Alexander of Tennessee and Susan Collins of Maine. It will be interesting to see if they get re-elected.

Opposition to Trump only makes him stronger—and the office of the president along with him. Once again, it seems Democrats and "never-Trump" Republicans, like the three amigos, are part of some conspiracy too obvious to recognize. Even the Mueller fiasco helps Trump amass his army of voters.

Congressional Democrats want to make the Mueller situation partially public by making Mueller's report public—while keeping silent the dark beginnings of the "Russianewsgategate" scandal that started it all. Mueller's so-called "investigation" is more akin to something between a chicken randomly running circles with its head cut off and a headless horseman—maybe more of a headless horseman riding a headless chicken. The so-called "investigation's" new nickname could be "the headless chickenman."

Senator Lindsey "Grahamnesty" sure is coming out of his shell! He was formerly known as the senator who got along. But, ever since the Kavanaugh witch trial in the Senate, something in Senator Graham seems to have snapped—and it isn't unsnapping. He was most outspoken in blocking the biased release of Mueller's "headless chickenman" report.

Now, the State of Washington thinks that a State can over-ride the Constitutional requirements for Federal elections. Here we go...

continue reading

Standard
Symphony

Encore of Revival: America, February 11, 2019

If the border wall dispute goes to a point of emergency, there would be implications. How deeply the administration and Congress will want to pursue those implications is a question to itself, with a likely answer of, "Not far." But, the implications will remain.

Declaring a national emergency at the border is basically a declaration of being invaded by a civilian army. Like any army, this army also has a purpose and a moral cause they think to be right and fair. What invading army doesn't? But, it would be an invading army of some kind or another because that's what Constitutional powers the president would need to use to declare the emergency: repel against invasion.

The Constitutional language here compels Congress to act. If Trump were to declare an emergency to deal with the border situation—then a Federal judge stopped him—that judge would be just as implicated as Congress.

The implication?—Conspiracy with the enemy.

If an invasion can be stopped, but won't be stopped by Congress or a judge, then they are conspirators with that invasion. This is because they are Constitutionally required to stop any force from invading, not only a deputized army sanctioned by a recognized state.

Trump might not be able to do much. Presidents can't impeach anyone and members of Congress don't answer for anything they do as elected officials to anyone except the electorate. He might be able to fire the Federal judge, but that won't achieve anything because another treacherous scoundrel is sure to pop up elsewhere.

But, the implication will be there. What to do about it will be left up to the voters.

continue reading

Standard
Symphony

Encore of Revival: America, February 4, 2019

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJQpZaP7OcY

Apple can crackdown on Google and Facebook, but America can't crack down on it's own private property and protection for citizens?

This week, the president's State of the Union Address will convene on schedule. The guest list is said to be interesting, though at press time, the president had not yet announced his guests. The regular speech is one way of fulfilling a Constitutional requirement that the president:

...shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient.

The normal way of fulfilling this Constitutional requirement (the speech) was under threat by the government shutdown. That shutdown ended with a temporary budget, while Congressional Republicans proved that they saw "shutdown" as the strategy, while Congressional Democrats and President Trump—each in their own way—proved the shutdown as an unintended consequence of their "wall" or "anti-wall" strategy. Now, the State of the Union is confirmed on the calendar. The interesting parts won't be about the wall as much as they will be about China.

China—the one thing that could unite all sides of American debates. Beware the peace of a nation in need of an enemy to unify them, for that peace may be shortlived.

Hot on the Capitol Hill agenda is Obama's DACA program (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals). The argument basically goes that young trees can be transplanted, but once they have grown, re-transplanting them again can kill them. Children are innocent and—though beneficiaries of the free economy, free speech, and freedom of America's wonderful and ought-to-be-sought socioeconomic system—children would not be at-fault for receiving the great benefit of America's growing greatness. So, why punish the children? That's the argument in DACA's defense.

One example that isn't used enough to defend DACA is the Back-to-Africa movement, of the 1800s, which sought to return Black Americans to Africa. The idea was absurd, demonstrating no knowledge of international life and culture. Though an injustice, forcing a reversal after history has moved on only makes the injustice worse. DACA was such an injustice and the way forward cannot be explained in, shall we say, "black and white".

From the Conservative perspective, the best solution to DACA claimants (the children in question) is to punish the perpetrators, not the children. In other words, punish the parents. The following course would do just that: Any illegally entered parents must report themselves and prepare for deportation or, with a clean criminal record, be given 30 days to prepare for a speedy and unconditional return to their home country. Then, children wishing to claim DACA status must meet minimum age and circumstantial requirements that prove returning to a life in their family's country would cause a lower-quality life, such as not knowing the language or already having developed American credentials, must not have citizenship with that nation, and be banned from any dual citizenship with that nation for ten years.

This would cut off the parents from their children. If they wanted their children to be American because of America's greatness, this would give them that at a price worth paying. For anyone who thinks the price is not worth paying, the DACA benefits would not be necessary. Let the people choose themselves and let America be a place of immigrants willing to pay the price of freedom that never comes free.

continue reading

Standard
Symphony

Encore of Revival: America, January 28, 2019

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCdSTuVq2Z8

American deadlock trudges on. Trump promised a wall and he won't back down. Democrats won't back down either. Both show solidarity with their respective platforms. The only group that seems to favor backing down is Congressional Republicans, who want Trump to get this over with any way possible. For the compromising Republicans on Capitol Hill, Trump's refusal to sign a "wallless budget" isn't a "wall" strategy as much as it is a "shut down" strategy. Trump and Congressional Democrats see it differently.

Keep watch; it just might be Jared Kushner who saves the day.

The term "free speech" has taken a new meaning. While speech has kept less and less freedom from the tech bosses, the monetary cost of speaking out has essentially become free. With speech becoming more and more "financially free", the media industry can't find a way to stay solvent.

Newspapers and local news broadcasters seek collective ways to work against the tech giants, but they only rearrange their immediate problems with no long-term solutions in sight. The dwindling news industry is attacking "free" platforms of semi-free speech: social media. That's the clue of where news & information will head in the future.

continue reading

Standard
Symphony

Encore of Revival: America, January 7, 2019

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FDlzKnZxHEs

Article IV Section 4 of the US Constitution states that the US government must "protect" each State from "invasion". It goes on to include protection from "domestic violence", but that requires action from the Legislature, unless the Legislature can't convene, then the Executive branch must take action.

It does not say, "The US government may protect the people if it wants to. And, if the Legislature refuses to, then the President must allow anyone and everyone to just destroy whatever they want to." It also does not say, "...unless they really, really want to come into the country, and that's why they're invading." But, that's how House Democrats would like to have it interpreted.

What's happening at the southern border is an "invasion"—people from the outside coming in by force. The Constitution does not specify that the invasion must be a sanctioned, deputized, funded military force operating at the behest of a recognized State. Any and every kind of invasion must be stopped, by Legislature or otherwise.

The Legislature is only required for situations of domestic violence. But, even then, if the Legislature can "convene"—and it can—but disobeys this Constitutional requirement, that could be cause for an action of impeachment because they would be in violation of their oaths of office, to support the Constitution. Then, the power to stop domestic violence would fall to the Executive branch, namely the president.

Trump is well within his powers to declare an emergency and take executive action, but he might be Constitutionally required to begin impeachment proceedings against Congress if the border situation is regarded as domestic, not an "invasion" from non-US citizens. So, claiming that Congress is needed to build the wall would actually be an argument to indite Congress.

As for citizenship by birth, that applies only to children of parents "subject to the jurisdiction thereof". Amendment XIV does not say, "Anyone can run from the police, sneak into the country, have a baby, then demand citizenship for that baby." But, that's how Congressional Democrats would like to have it interpreted.

The US is about to rediscover its Constitution, the document that united our nation at its founding. That could redefine the entire playing field of elections in the future.

continue reading

Standard
Symphony

Encore of Revival: America, December 24, 2018

The government shutdown is good for Trump and good for the wall. He said what he meant and he meant he wasn't bluffing. Good, old fashion follow-through is one of DC's lost virtues. If the current budget isn't passed by the start of the new 116th Congress on January 3, then it will die. It already has approval of the White House and has passed the House. The quickest way to end the government shutdown is for the Senate to pass the bill.

Ultimately this is a game of "chicken". Either way, we should expect whining everyday.  The key to Congress surviving a government shutdown is the theater of talking everyday as if "today's the day" that the government will reopen. It's somewhat akin to the act that Democrats and drive-by news anchors put on about how "today's the day" when they will find the "silver bullet" to stop Trump.

There is no such silver bullet, not even today.

The main actors rising above the dust are the Kushners. Jared and Ivanka are drafting deals and growing coalitions, no matter their father's opponents. Their progress should be bigger news.

So, over Christmas, the worms of Capitol Hill take pot shots at each other and the president is referred to as a child for sticking to his promises, just as Clinton did when he vetoed the budget. One of the best kept secrets about government shutdowns is that the government doesn't actually shut down. To some, that's a disappointment. Even Mueller's investigation continues, but the Supreme Court might stuff coal in his stocking. The holiday season has many more surprises yet to come.

continue reading

Standard
Faux Report

BREAKING: Donald Trump Secretly Hired Illegal Immigrants To Start Building Border Wall

WASHINGTON, D.C. – 

Top secret documents leaked to the press by a White House staffer showed that President Trump ordered the hiring of over 2,000 illegal immigrants to begin working on his border wall between Texas and Mexico. The documents, released to the press only hours ago, also stated that he was prepared to offer each worker upwards of $40 an hour.

“This is a goddamn outrage,” said construction worker Chris Thomas. “I have been bidding for the border wall job for nearly a year, and it’s the goddamn illegals that get the job? Isn’t the whole point of the wall to keep these sand people out of the fucking country?”

Trump released a statement on Twitter, stating that “all suspicion of illegals being used for labor at the border are false.” He went on to say that “Fake News” had struck again.

“I would never hire undocumented workers,” tweeted Trump. “The Fake News Media has struck again, and you’re all buying it. We don’t have any staffers in the WH that would leak that news, even if it were true.”

Standard
Symphony

Encore of Revival: America, April 30, 2018

Immigration is at the top of everything—news, speeches, law enforcement...

Building contractors hoping to get the contract for the Trump wall should be very pleased with this caravan of immigrants just arriving at the border, as should the Republican Party. With the failing Russianewsgategate investigation from Mueller, this immigrant caravan has almost guaranteed a contrary-to-the-norm Republican pickup in the 2018 election. Trump even knows that he can threaten to shut down the government to build the wall just before an election.

The interesting part of this caravan—as well as other illegal immigrant crackdown new stories—is that the caravan may actually believe that their journey will have the reverse affect that it's having. And, the news media also seems to think that reporting on illegal immigration crackdowns will make the public think that immigration is less of a problem. Perhaps the media and the marchers live in the same world. It makes sense since experience in one subculture can cause the reality of another subculture to become counterintuitive.

continue reading

Standard