NOKO aid

The mysterious case of North Korea has the experts scratching their collective heads. It appears that there is a 95% chance that nothing of substance will come out of this whole thing but it's the remaining 5% that has captured our interest. It is possible that Kim will try and set up a situation like China where he keeps control using a communist government and introduces the free market for his economy. If he could be sure of making this transfer without inviting a revolution he may go for it, so it behooves the US to lay out an economic plan that would bring prosperity to the NOKO people. This could start with immediate food and medical aid followed up with trade and low interest loans or outright grants in exchange for complete nuclear disarmament. These things could be done simultaneously as inspectors could enter the country along with economic aid.

Special counsel

The Trump attack on Special Counsel Robert Mueller is reminiscent of the way in which Bill Clinton handled Ken Starr. “He’s not trying to fire Mueller but he’s clearly trying to discredit Mueller,” York said on the network Monday. “And I think that in doing that he’s taking a page out of the Bill Clinton handbook. Back in 1998 during the Lewinsky scandal, the Clinton White House went on a full-force offensive against the independent counsel. He added: “This is very much out of the playbook of discrediting the prosecutor so when he does something you can argue that it is politically motivated.” So far Mueller is following the same track that Starr used. He has moved from collusion to obstruction to a sexual affair to the presidents lawyer and now to contacts with Saudi Arabia. In this case both investigations are in the swamp and people are not happy about it. I have said all along that if you want to get some dirt on Trump go to his real estate dealings in NY City since that business in that city is full of payoffs and paybacks, but this might expose many other things that those in power would like left alone.

Mandatory sentencing

In the 80's mandatory sentencing laws came on the books but to find any correlation between those laws and the decrease in crime is difficult at best. There are countless articles on the subject but none specifically state that tougher sentences results in lower crime. This is somewhat of a mystery because of two facts that are readily available on line. The U.S. federal prison population has increased almost 790 percent since 1980 from about 25,000 inmates to 219,000 in 2012, according to a new Congressional Research Service report. Violent crime was 600 per 100,000 people in 1980 and 365 per 100,000 in 2012. One would think that just by looking at those two statistics a good correlation could be drawn demonstrating that tougher laws means lower crime but it is not there. Some would say it doesn't fit the narrative of those who oppose tougher crime laws.

Raykjavik

Watching the negotiations with NOKO play out, I am reminded of Reagan and Gorbachev when they met in Reykjavik in 1986. Reagan had proposed a missile defense that the press ridiculed as star wars but Russia was deeply concerned. The Soviets proposed eliminating half of the long range bombers and missiles as well as all missiles in Europe but they had one catch and that was for Reagan to stop the star wars project and Reagan refused and walked away. Reagan was excoriated by the press most of whom thought Reagan was a dunce and this proved it. This time, though, the photos turned out badly. When he emerged from his bargaining sessions with Mikhail Gorbachev, the president looked stung, like a small boy who had burned his fingers playing with a light socket. Reagan came home empty-handed from Iceland, and for once he was wearing the black hat — the man who said no to a historic opportunity. Confronted by the chance to become a genuine peacemaker, the president retreated in confusion. His image-makers had been overwhelmed by reality. Gorbachev knew he could not compete with star wars and the Washington Post later referred to the meeting as the 48 hours that ended the cold war.

NOKO negotiations

The press is apoplectic over the negotiations regarding North Korea. Normally these talks take place behind closed doors and only reporters who have spent their lives cultivating insider sources get little tidbits of news which the graciously dribble out to us peons but Trump is wide open and everyone gets the news first hand. Watching Morning Joe, I am reminded of an old song that goes something like this. There's a tavern in the town, cheers, but today it tumbled down, boos and each line goes from cheers to boos. When the meeting with NOKO goes bad, cheers and when it goes good, boos. These people are so upset with Trump they have lost their objectivity. It is an almost impossible task do deal with someone like Kim Un so there is no way to predict what might happen. Past experience says he can't be trusted but things are certainly different than before. Stay tuned.

Spies

In many war movies and books agents dressed in civilian clothes are sent behind enemy lines to gather information and they are called spies. If caught they are considered enemy agents out of uniform and are summarily executed. Many are given cyanide pills to bite into which kills them within seconds. This is done so that they will not reveal valuable information to their captors. Often times in spy rings information is for your eyes only meaning that the information they have is limited to only what they need to know to carry out their mission. These precautions are taken so the if the captives are tortured they will not reveal any more information than necessary or no information if they take the pill. Today experts tell us that torture doesn't work. If that is true then spies during the war killed themselves for no reason. spies

Abortions

Trump gave a speech last night before a group of pro-lifers and I was once again reminded of one of the unintentional consequences of Roe v Wade the 1973 Supreme Court decision legalizing abortions. The total number of slaves brought to this country was 10.7 million. Today there are 37 million blacks in the US. Since 1973 there have been 60 million abortions that we know of and 20 million of those were black babies. If these babies had been allowed to live they would grown into 40 million and doubled the number of blacks in the country.

Nader

Ralph Nader's name popped up in the news and I was reminded that I voted for him when he ran for president in 2000. Gore had Minnesota sewed up and I wanted Nader to rise high enough in the polls so he could join the debates. Then instead of listening to the two peas in pod Bush and Gore we would have someone to stir up the pot. Interestingly enough Nader was in a way the precursor of Trump. Nader's campaign centered around the blue collar workers whose wages had stagnated as their jobs were set overseas and automation was hurting them in other ways. These workers felt they were losing control of their lives. Nader was an outsider like Trump but unlike Trump he never created jobs. Trump hired thousands of construction workers to build his real estate empire. Even today Trump employs 25,000 low wage people in his hospitality businesses and he is known for his fair treatment of women offering them executive positions. Women Who Have Worked With Trump Say He Was "Ahead Of His Time In Providing Career Advancement For Women" And Promoted Women In A Male-Dominated Industry. "But many women who have worked closely with Trump say he was a corporate executive ahead of his time in providing career advancement for women. While some say he could be boorish, his companies nurtured and pro­moted women in an otherwise male-dominated industry."

Guns

The issues of gun violence and immigration have one thing in common. They both are so politicized that appropriate solutions are left out of the discussion. When ever there is a school shooting both sides immediately rush to their respective corners and spew out their talking points. This effectively ends the possibility of looking for ways to solve the problem. Each side feels they have a political advantage of keeping the argument going. The same is true with immigration. The democrats suggested a plan that would legalize some 800,000 dreamers. Those were illegals who came here as children and have grown into productive citizens. Trump said I will legalize those children and their parents or 2 million illegals if you agree to spend $25 billion on the wall and this was turned down. Democrats see these dreamers as a winning political issue and do not want Trump to take that away. Many republicans want illegal immigrants so they have a source of cheap labor. Once they attain legal status they can no longer be taken advantage of and among other things paid less than minimum wage.

Defense spending

Many people are unaware that Europe depends heavily on the USA to protect them from attack. The USA spends $700 billion per year on defense while all of Europe combined spend $250 billion. Even if you throw in Japan and South Korea you only add another $90 billion. Because these countries are allies and depend on the US for protection they can spend more on social programs like universal health care and in some cases higher education. The US lags behind in child care, paid maternity leave, paid vacation time and many other areas.

Gas for cars

I was listening to the news and John Hofmeister former President of Shell Oil company caught my attention. He said we can expect rising oil prices which equate to rising gasoline prices. When asked how to stop this he responded by saying that we need to go to natural gas for our transportation needs. This is the first time I have heard anyone on national news suggest that. There are 24 million natural gas vehicles in the world and 160,000 of those in the United States.

Cop pension

People are often surprised at the amount some received in the form of pensions. In the recent school shooting in Florida the officer stationed at the school retired with a monthly pension of $8,700. He was a 33 year veteran who retired at the age of 55. His salary last year was $101,000 including overtime. Since I am quite familiar with pensions this seemed out of line so I investigated and found that like many states police are eligible for early retirement at age 55 without a reduction in benefits but that was still too much money. Then I discovered that the officers contributed 3% of their salary to the pension but their employer contributed 21% of their salary. Then if the employee wants to put in an extra 3% into an investment plan the employer will add 11%. That is how you retire at over 100% of salary at age 55. If you earn $50,000 per year and max out on the pension you would contribute $3,000 to your plan and your employer would contribute $16,000. In addition there is no reduction when social security kicks in at age 62.

Term limits

I received an email asking me to endorse term limits on congress. Growing up, I always felt that elections were term limiting but that was before gerrymandering came along. The two political parties are so entrenched they were able to rig the elections in favor of incumbents by adjusting the district boundaries. This along with the advantages that the ins have in regards to money has led to a 95% reelection rate. This has given us the professional politician and the mess we have in the nations capitol. Perhaps it is time for limits, say two 6 year terms for senators and six 2 year terms for the house.

Business in China

Sometimes a little is a lot. Under the current trade agreement with China a company can avoid their high import taxes by setting up business in China but there is a caveat. The company can only own 49% of the stock. Trump wants to change that to 51%. The reason is that when the Chinese government is the majority stockholder they can have access to all of the technical knowledge as well as research and development work. China is already a major thief of intellectual property and this just makes it easier for them. So while the 2% change in ownership may seem small it involves big changes.

Sanctuary city

This is from yesterdays news. This lady Angela set up the original laws regarding sanctuary cities and it was to protect innocent illegals but later the law was changed to include criminals and she is so upset that she want to run for mayor so she can remove protection for felons. SAN FRANCISCO (KGO) -- Protesters are upset that Mayoral Candidate Angela Alioto is trying to change San Francisco's sanctuary city policy. Her ballot measure would remove sanctuary protections for violent felons. They're upset Mayoral Candidate Angela Alioto is trying to change the city's sanctuary policy. Her ballot measure would remove sanctuary protections for violent felons. While on the Board of Supervisors back in 1989 Alioto authored the original sanctuary city ordinance, subsequent supervisors changed it, and she says this initiative gets it back to her original intent. The intent of that legislation was never to protect felons, convicted felons," said Alioto.

Iran nukes

I have searched the Internet on numerous times to find an answer to a question that I have posed on three different occasions over the past several years and I have yet to find the answer. Iran has been trying to enrich uranium for more than 20 years and as yet has not succeeded in making enough for even one nuke. During that time North Korea has made a number of bombs. In about 5 years, back during the 40's, the US made the first nukes using technology from 75 years ago. Every one is aware of how much technology has advanced over these years, yet Iran is still not able to enrich the 35 pounds of U-235 needed to make a bomb. If they wanted enriched uranium North Korea who is in desperate need of cash would have gladly sold them some. I maintain now as I have over the years, that they did not want to make a bomb. That is the only logical explanation of their apparent ineptness. They have always said they were not trying to make a nuke. They have endured sanctions because they refused to allow complete inspections. It is a conundrum that is baffling. Perhaps there is something else that they don't want inspectors to see.

Electoral vote

The discussions about the upcoming 2020 census center around methods to find as many people as possible. Many people who are in the country illegally are worried that they may be deported and are hesitant to talk with the census takers. The question is, if they are here why shouldn't they be counted and the answer gets into the muddy waters of politics. Illegals are not allowed to vote in state and local elections or in national elections for congress but they do vote, although indirectly, for president and vice-president. This is because the president is elected not by counting votes but by the electoral college. As mandated by the U.S. Constitution, America gets just one chance each decade to count its population. The U.S. Census counts every resident in the United States. It is mandated by Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution and takes place every 10 years. How the Electoral College Works. ... Each State is allocated a number of Electors equal to the number of its U.S. Senators (always 2) plus the number of its U.S. Representatives (which may change each decade according to the size of each State's population as determined in the Census After each census some states loose congressmen and other states gain congressmen and this change is based on the population as determined by the census. The number of congressmen set at 435 remains the same but the distribution changes. There is one congressman allotted for every 750,000 people. Since there are an estimated 12 million illegals living in the US that equates to 16 electoral votes. Each state gets two votes based on its two senators but the rest is based on population. Those 16 votes equal the votes of 12 states. The question then arises should the votes of 12 million illegals be equal to the legal voters in 12 states.

Supremacy clause

The supremacy clause in the constitutions states that federal law takes precedent over state law. Article VI, Paragraph 2 of the U.S. Constitution is commonly referred to as the Supremacy Clause.  It establishes that the federal constitution, and federal law generally, take precedence over state laws, and even state constitutions. It prohibits states from interfering with the federal government's exercise of its constitutional powers, and from assuming any functions that are exclusively entrusted to the federal government. This law was tested in Little Rock, AK in the integration of Central High School. The Supreme Court in 1954 in the case of Brown vs The Board of Education ruled that schools must integrate. Three years later this had not happened so under the concept of justice delayed is justice denied the federal government sent in troops to escort black students into the school. We are now faced with a similar situation regarding federal immigration laws. California has allowed illegals to cross the border and has helped them to avoid capture. The federal government must now take steps to ensure that federal laws are obeyed.

NOKO terms

As the US begins negotiating with North Korea they should avoid some of the major pitfalls of the Iranian nuke deal. The Iran nuke agreement said inspectors must give 24 days notice in advance of any inspections but the fine print allows Iran up to three months grace period before inspectors can come in. In addition any inspection of military sites must be approved in advance by the Supreme National Security Council, SNSC a part of the Iranian government. These rules almost lead to self inspection by Iran since they would have time to move equipment or change sites before inspectors arrived. Saddam did that with inspectors on a number of times. On one occasion inspectors witnessed trucks driving away from the site when they arrived.

Obama peace prize

I was watching a show where they interviewed people and asked them why President Obama won the Peace Prize and they were not able to give an answer. As I listened I realized that I couldn't give an answer, so I googled it and here is what I found. Obama won because he went to Egypt and promised better relations with Muslim countries and to be a leader with ambitious global plans for scaling down a militaristic American foreign policy. The committee said it honored Obama for his "extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples."

FDR

I was reading about the Great Depression and one statement caught my eye. The writer said that FDR was the most loved and most hated President since Abraham Lincoln. I then added that Donald Trump is the most loved and most hated President since FDR. The Roosevelt's were a very wealthy family and FDR's mother assumed he would live his life as a country squire like his father but that is not what happened. He wanted to contribute to the country so he became a state senator from New York. Later he was appointed as Secretary of the Navy and then on to be president. He could have spent a life of luxury living easy but he chose instead to serve his country. Trump could have spent his retirement years living the good live but he chose instead to run for president. Two very different men in most respects but similar in their desire to be president.

Hidden bombs

For those who say that we would not torture because that is not who we are I offer the following: To illustrate my point I want you to assume that you are the President of the United States and a message has just be posted on an Islamic Internet site saying that 12 nuclear bombs have been planted in 12 major cities throughout the US and one will be exploded the first Friday of each month for the next 12 months. The purpose is to bring the US economy to its knees, which will result in a worldwide depression and thus give these groups the opening they need to take over. Whether this is logical thinking is not the point because it is what they believe. Many of these terrorist feel in their hearts that they are doing the work of God so they are highly motivated but the leadership behind these zealots has ulterior motives. The CIA comes to you and says they have captured a man whom they believe knows the locations of these bombs and they want permission to use any means to convince him to divulge this info. To make this more to the point they are not interested in something like waterboarding, which will leave him physically unharmed but they want permission to use means that may result in death. They present you will four scenarios. First he is tortured and killed and they find the bombs and disable them. Second he is tortured and killed and there are no bombs. Third he is not tortured and there are no bombs and forth he is not tortured and the first bomb goes off in downtown Chicago. Make your choice and then redo the experiment but this time you know for sure which of the above four options is for real. Has your choice changed? If you chose not to torture and the bomb went off and next week you are faced with the same conditions, do you change your mind? Examine each of these options and see if your ideas about torture change with conditions. Now look at the situation through the eyes of the public. How do they view you and your presidency if you chose not to act and the bomb explodes and how do they view your actions if you chose to act and there was no bomb. Are you a hero or a goat in their eyes depending on the outcome? Can a person make a blanket statement that torture is wrong and we will not do it? If you chose not to torture and all 12 bombs exploded could you sit in your office and say that you protected the constitution and our morality and that is the most important thing or would you say it doesn’t make sense to save the constitution and lose the country. Do you torture or not?

Truman

History repeats itself is an oft quoted phase. When Harry Truman ran for reelection in 1948, he faced a daunting task. He had followed FDR who was a sophisticated easterner who was seen as the giant of the war years. FDR was an intellectual with great speaking skills who was seen as the consummate politician. Democrats tried to dump Harry but he prevailed. Harry was crude and often spoke his mind not caring what others might think. He was proposing civil rights and this angered the south that was solid democratic. Some split away from him and formed another party called the Dixiecrats. Others thought he was too tough on communism and formed the new Progressive Party. It was a house divided and most felt it would fall. He had to run against Thomas E Dewey the handsome, young, dashing New York governor. Dewey was considered dignified while Truman was just plain old Harry. Harry was not good on the radio like FDR so he traveled by train campaigning across the country giving 10 to 15 speeches a day. He crisscrossed the country twice all the while drawing large enthusiastic crowds. The rallies were filled with flag waving, sign wearing fans, along with high school bands. Newsweek Magazine asked 50 leading journalist who would win and all 50 said Dewey. When Truman heard this he said, "Don't worry, I know every one of those 50 fellows and not one of them has enough sense to pour sand into a rat hole". Every poll showed Harry losing and he lashed out at the press so often that people called him, "give em hell Harry". Harry's favorite President was Andrew Jackson who he saw as a man of action who represented the common people.

Torture

John Brennan was confirmed by the senate with a 63 to 37 vote to head the C|IA. He was deeply involved in the establishment of black sites overseas where enhanced interrogation techniques were used. When it came time for his appointment as head of CIA he hedged his bets but was confirmed. During his February 2013 confirmation hearings to be CIA director, John Brennan told senators he had come to doubt his previously held view — formed as a top agency official — that brutal CIA interrogation techniques had yielded valuable intelligence. Here was his previous view:  “Our reviews indicate that the detention and interrogation program produced useful intelligence that helped the United States thwart attack plans, capture terrorists and save lives.” He didn't change his mind on the techniques but rather on his opinion of the results.

NOKO Kim

As the drama of North Korea unfolds before our eyes, most understand that dictators are only deposed when the military goes against, them as happened in 1989 when Nicolae Ceaușescu the communist leader of Romania was ousted. He was brutal and only weakened when the Soviet Union began to teeter. If the NOKO leader Kim feels his only way to maintain power is to keep his nuke program it is highly unlikely that he will voluntarily dismantle it. His fear is that it would appear as weakness which would open the door to revolt. Even if Kim had a change of heart and wanted his country to grow like South Korea it would be too risky to open the door to free markets although China has successfully done this. Perhaps Kim has struck a deal with China and is willing to try such a move but not likely. Probably want he wants is a deal like he has gotten in the past where he promises and US delivers.

Climate Russia

During the presidential debates between Obama and Romney the President poked fun at Romney for saying that Russia was a real threat to our future saying that he was misguided. It was Obama who said that climate change was the real threat. He said: No challenge – no challenge – poses a greater threat to future generations than climate change A reasonable argument could be made that both of these are right in their way but no one is talking about climate change. Every Thursday on Minnesota Public Radio they have discussion on climate change but they are like a voice crying in the wilderness. This issue, like so many others, just becomes significant when it garners political capital.

Not who we are

There was a phrase that President Obama used on a regular basis that was never challenged because it was warm and fuzzy and made us feel good and this phase worded slightly different has come up with the nomination of Gina Haspel for CIA director. It centers around water boarding which is called by some enhanced interrogation and by others torture. President Obama when referring to water boarding would say that is not who we are. Now they say we are above that and both are wrong. We can avoid torture as long as the danger is far enough away and not likely to directly effect us here at home but we only need go back to WW2 to find out what we might do when push comes to shove. When we felt that the Axis Powers might take over the world we were not so warm and fuzzy in our response. Cities throughout German and Japan were fire bombed with incendiaries. These were weapons designed to cause large fires which burned entire cities. The goal was to kill civilians and thus demoralize the enemy. Yes we deliberately killed women and children in order to win the war and protect the home land. On the evening of February 13, 1945, a series of Allied firebombing raids begins against the German city of Dresden, reducing the “Florence of the Elbe” to rubble and flames, and killing as many as 135,000 people. It was the single most destructive bombing of the war—including Hiroshima and Nagasaki—and all the more horrendous because little, if anything, was accomplished strategically, since the Germans were already on the verge of surrender. If you decide to go to war, go to win or stay home. We should have followed this advice in the many excursions into warlike action we have undertaken since WW 2.

Prosecution tactics

Over the years the FBI and the Justice Department developed tactics to bring down organized crime figures and later used against terrorist. They would find a low level member of the group and charge him with a crime whether or not he committed such and then offer him immunity if he would rat out the guy above him. They would then proceed up the ladder to finally get the top dog. People inside the government knew of these activities but since they were used against the bad guys things were overlooked. In more recent years this same approach has been used against white collar criminals. The most recent case involved Scooter Libby who was an assistant to VP Chaney. Libby was accused of outing a CIA agent and Patrick Fitzgerald charged him with the crime. The next day Richard Armitage confessed to the crime but was told to keep quiet. The case proceeded and Libby was convicted of lying on an unrelated issue. When Special Prosecutor Ken Starr was asked in investigate Bill Clinton's involvement in the Whitewater real estate deal he found nothing wrong but ended up convicting Clinton of lying under oath about a completely unrelated affair with Monica Lewinsky. In both of these instances a case can be made that the purpose of the investigation was to find something wrong. We now have Robert Mueller going after Trump with the goal of finding something. As the case against collusion and then obstruction weakens the emphasis shifts to a payoff to avoid a sexual scandal. The reason Clinton got in trouble was that he lied under oath and was caught by the famous blue dress. Recently a federal judge came out and publicly condemned this kind of prosecution but will that be enough to make changes in the way the government operates. Now much can be done with the current case against Trump but perhaps future cases will be handled differently.

Iran

As the time approaches for Trump to renew the Iran nuke deal, it appears that the Iranians are not living up to the agreement. Here is a direct quote from the agreement: In order for the nuclear deal with Iran to ensure the “exclusively peaceful nature of Iran’s nuclear program,” the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) must be able to inspect all necessary locations either in the territory of Iran or under its control elsewhere, including all military sites Here is Iran's response: As the Trump administration calls for stricter monitoring of the Iranian nuclear agreement, officials in Iran insist they are complying with its terms and will not allow international inspectors into military sites.

Cohen

When the Mueller team wanted information from Trumps lawyer Michael Cohen they did not ask for it and they did not issue a subpoena but they raided his home and office and took the documents they wanted. While he was surprised by this approached he might have been relieved that they did not follow the way they went after Paul Manafort. The president’s attorney was understandably grateful that the agents didn’t replicate the FBI’s tactics at the home of Paul Manafort, Trump’s onetime campaign manager. Busting in before dawn, guns drawn, with a “no knock” warrant while Manafort and his wife were in bed, the agents frisked Mrs. Manafort while she was still in her nightclothes.

Seattle

Seattle is known as a liberal city where big companies like Starbucks and Amazon are located. These companies are owned by famous liberals Howard Schultz and Jeff Bezos. The city has proposed a special tax on companies worth more than $20 million and it would cost Amazon millions of dollars. The money is to be used for low income housing so now these liberals are being asked to walk the talk. For Bezos, who is worth $120 billion, perhaps the city believes it can embarrass him to pony up. This could be the start of something brand new and open the door for cities around the country to get extra cash. It is similar to the tobacco settlement money that states received in 1998. That money was supposed to be used for health issues related to smoking but much of it was used for other purposes. Maybe the low income housing money will be used to fix roads.

Get Trump

As the controversy surrounding the request by special counsel Mueller to interview Trump heats up both sides have reasons why or why not Trump should agree. In my life I was called as a witness in federal court on two occasions and both times proved to be very uncomfortable. The biggest problem was that I could only answer yes or no and even though I felt I had done nothing wrong it was made to look as if I did. The easiest way to understand how this works is to consider the question, do you still beat your wife. It is either yes or no or take the fifth and in all three cases you are guilty. In Trumps case he has the questions in advance and can answer with more than yes or no but it is still risky because he is considered innocent going in and the best result is to come out that way but the other possible result is guilty. If Trump answers the first 49 questions this will lead to more questions and this will go on and on. If the goal is to get Trump this is a good strategy.

Impeach

In Lanny Davis' book he lays out his reasons why Comey lost the election for Hilary. It is filled with poll results before and after the Comey letter showing how it negatively affected the final outcome. In addition he points out how many FBI agents both current and retired leaked information that negatively affected the election. In the last half of the book he concludes that since Trump was elected illegitimately he must be impeached. He then list the five things he felt were impeachable offenses and how the country should proceed. One explanation for the poll results is that certain people refused to answer poll questions including exit polls. Many Trump votes do not believe that polls are honest and refused to participate and this skewed the results. Many people felt that the defeat of Gore by Bush in 2000 was a illegitimate election but they did not suggest impeachment. History is replete with examples of unfair election results but the Trump result coming as such a big surprise is difficult to swallow for many Hilary supporters.

Keystone

Once again I received some interesting feedback from one of the people on my email list. In regards to what I said about US oil being low sulfur compared to Saudi oil she pointed out that we should not be using the Canadian oil sands coming down through the Keystone pipe line as it is heavy sour crude. Instead the US is blessed with the Green River range in Colorado and Utah where there lies a 1,000 year reserved of light sweet crude. The government owns 80% of this land and could set up environmental standards for drilling. It is in a remote mountainous area that could be cleaned up after the drilling was over.