Treason? Nope!

18 U.S. Code § 2381 – Treason

Current through Pub. L. 114-38. (See Public Laws for the current Congress.)

§ 2381.
Treason

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 807; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(2)(J), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2148.)

18 U.S. Code § 953 – Private correspondence with foreign governments

Current through Pub. L. 114-38. (See Public Laws for the current Congress.)

§ 953.
Private correspondence with foreign governments

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply, himself or his agent, to any foreign government or the agents thereof for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 744; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(K), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)
In November 1968 I voted for the first time. Actually, I didn’t vote on November 5, I had already voted by absentee ballot, along with most other US military personnel. At age 22 – I turned 23 just before the election – 1968 was the first election I could vote in. As a legal Tennessee resident, that it is where I voted although I was physically at Warner Robins, Georgia at the time. I was on my second enlistment in the US Air Force, having reenlisted in Vietnam the previous year. I’d been back in the United States for a little over a year and already had orders back to the Pacific, orders that I knew would put me back in combat again. In order to vote, I had to send a request for an absentee ballot through our squadron voting officer to my Tennessee county’s election commission. The ballot went to my squadron, and I was notified it was there. I went to the squadron and saw the officer, who opened a safe and took out the ballot and gave it to me to mark. After I had marked my choices, I handed it back. He sealed it and put it in the mail.

Recently, political author John A. Ferrell wrote an op-ed piece for the New York Times (obviously, to publicize his upcoming book on President Richard Nixon) in which he claimed he had “proof” that Richard Nixon tried to sabotage the 1968 election. He points as “proof” to notes written by Nixon associate and later Nixon Chief of Staff H.R. Haldeman in which he briefly mentions noted Chinese newspaper woman and widow of Lt. General Claire Chennault that he found in an archive. Ferrell and Nixon critics immediately seized on the notes as definite proof that Nixon used Mrs. Chennault as a go-between to sabotage President Lyndon Johnson’s efforts to establish peace talks between South Vietnam and North Vietnam.  There is no doubt that Mrs. Chennault had a close relationship with the South Vietnamese government. Although she is alleged to have become an American citizen in 1950, she was Chinese by birth and an active supporter of the Nationalist Chinese government of Chaing Ki Shek. A virulent anti-communist, as had been her husband, she was active with the Republican party. However, that doesn’t mean that the very brief notes Ferrell found prove that she was acting on Richard Nixon’s behalf. If anything, they indicate that he knew she was in contact with Saigon and had been there numerous times. Since Haldeman and Nixon are both dead, there’s no way to know what the notes meant. That they are “proof” of Nixon’s “treason” is (erroneous) conjecture.

 Democrats and Nixon-haters like to claim that South Vietnam’s refusal to participate in peace talks cost Hubert Humphreys the election. In fact, nothing could be further from the truth. It is a myth that American voters wait until the last minute to decide who they are going to vote for. In fact, the vast majority of Americans know who they’re going to vote for as soon as the candidates are announced. The idea that people wait to the last minute to decide is a sham. Johnson announced that a halt of all offensive actions against North Vietnam on October 31, less than a week before the election. If it had any effect on the election at all, it was negative. I was an Air Force flight crewmember and had flown missions over North Vietnam as well as Laos. The general consensus among the officers and non-commissioned officers I flew with was that it was a mistake. As Johnson’s talk of impending peace talks, we paid little attention.

Was Anna Chennault’s relationship with the South Vietnamese treason? The answer is unequivocally NO! The definition of treason, shown above, is very narrow. It consists solely of waging war against the United States or providing aid and comfort within the United States and elsewhere. Anna Chennault was not supporting the North Vietnamese and South Vietnamese communist Viet Cong in any way. In fact, she was vehemently opposed to them. Did her actions violate the Logan Act?  At first glance, it appears she might have but a closer reading of the 1799 act shows that there must be with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States. Mrs. Chennault’s relationship with the South Vietnamese president and South Vietnam’s ambassador to the United States was purely to convey political information. There were no disputes or controversies with the United States involved. Incidentally, since the Logan Act was adopted by Congress in 1799, there has been only one person indicted and the subject, a Kentucky farmer who had written an article in the Frankfort, KY paper advocating a separate nation in the western part of what was then the United States to ally with France. He was never prosecuted.
There are parallels between Anna Chennault’s contacts with South Vietnam and the allegations of President Donald Trump’s relations with Russia, although the first is factual and the second is unfounded. There are allegations of violation of the Logan Act by President Trump’s security advisor, Lt. General Mike Flynn in that he had conversations with the Russian ambassador without White House clearance. A number of Democrats, including left-wing journalist and White House Press Secretary for LBJ Bill Moyers, are calling for a senate investigation of allegations against President Trump and using Anna Chennault’s activities as a basis for such an action. However, in both instances, Democrats are grasping at straws to explain why Hubert Humphrey in 1968 and Hillary Clinton in 2016 lost the election.
Commentators often like to call the 1968 election “close.” In fact, it wasn’t. Nixon won by a 110 vote margin. Alabama Governor George Wallace, running for the American Independent Party, captured 46 votes and was the preferred candidate among young men, (based on exit polling.) In short, Nixon was the preferred candidate as the 1972 election proved when he received 520 votes, as opposed to his opponent’s 17. Similarly, Donald Trump won the 2016 election by a wide margin, winning 77 more votes than Clinton and winning 30 states as opposed to her 20 and the District of Columbia. Nixon and Trump didn’t win because of “dirty politics,” they won because they were popular and had large followings nationwide. I voted for both of them.
Canadian/British/American Conrad Black’s take on it.

A Vote for Satan

I was born and raised in West Tennessee, the western division of the great state of Tennessee, the region lying between the Mississippi and Tennessee Rivers. West Tennessee is part of the purchase of land from the Chickasaw orchestrated on behalf of the United States by Tennessean Andrew Jackson and Kentuckian Isaac Shelby in 1818. The northern part of the purchase became part of Kentucky and is now referred to as “The Purchase” while the rest became part of Tennessee and became West Tennessee. After the purchase, the land was opened up for settlement and settlers – including my ancestors – began coming in from the Carolinas and elsewhere in Kentucky and Tennessee. The rich bottomlands along the Forked Deer, Hatchie, Obion and Mississippi Rivers were settled largely by slave owners who established large cotton farms while the higher ground to the east was settled by mostly livestock farmers who owned few, if any slaves. Consequently, the region had divided loyalties when Tennessee seceded from the Union – my home county, Carroll, was one of several West Tennessee counties that voted to remain. Large numbers of West Tennesseans fought in both armies and the region, which the Union initially captured but abandoned, saw warfare between irregular Southern guerrillas and Unionist “bushwhackers.”

After the war, West Tennessee remained in turmoil as some of the guerrilla and bushwhacker bands continued fighting both with each other and together as outlaws. Most of the history of that period has been obscured and by the time I was born right after World War II, no one knew what had happened during those terrible times. However, one thing remained – the Democratic Party dominated Tennessee, and West Tennessee Democrats, many of them at least, were so devoted to the party that they’d vote for Satan if he ran on the Democratic ticket. I know; my grandmother was one such Democrat.

My mother never talked about her family much and it wasn’t until I was in my fifties that I found out why. She once told me that her grandfather was “a bad man” and went on to say that he was “a grand dragon” in the KKK. I still don’t know much about him and never knew him because he died as a result of injuries suffered when he was hit by a car when I was ten months old. (I do have a memory – my earliest of all memories – of looking down on him in his coffin and my mother’s teenage cousins crying.) I still don’t know much about him other than that he wasn’t born until after the Civil War and that his father apparently was not a soldier but I do know that he was a staunch Democrat. I also know that while he probably was not a “grand dragon,” he was definitely a member of a group of night-riders who went out at night as an enforcer. I haven’t found anything to indicate they ever lynched anyone but the Madison County night riders were real. My aunt tells me that they went after people who ran afoul of the mores of the time.

My grandmother was like so many of her time – and since. She was a staunch Democrat who, although she never voiced hatred for Republicans, at least not in my presence, never voted for a Republican. Neither did my grandfather, whose grandfather evidently was a Confederate cavalryman who rode the legendary Nathan Bedford Forrest – until he apparently deserted and went home. They had three daughters, one of whom, my mother, came to her senses and became a Republican after she met my father, one who was as staunch a Democrat as my grandmother and one who recently left the Democrats, or so I’m told although I’m not certain she has.

Democrats like my grandmother are like those in the Piney Woods of East Texas who are called “Yellow Dog Democrats” because they’d vote for a yellow dog if it was on the Democratic ticket. I’ll take it a step further – such Democrats would vote for Satan if he was on the ticket. In fact, I heard a black Hillary supporter say on TV recently that she’d vote for Hillary even if Jesus Christ Himself endorsed Donald Trump. There’s no doubt that such voters would vote for Satan. This time, they are.

 

 

A Criminal Enterprise and Revolt in the Executive Branch

It’s Friday, November 4, the last day of early voting here in Texas. Election day is three days away. I’m addressing this to those who have yet to vote, particularly those who intend to vote for Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party. If you vote for Hillary, ,you will be voting for a criminal. If you vote for any Democrat,  you’re voting for a candidate who represents the  party of corruption.

Just today the State Department released a new batch of Emails that Hillary Clinton had deleted  from her server but which remained in the DOS server. This particular Email is classified yet Hillary forwarded to her daughter Chelsea, who was using the alias Diane Reynolds even though she was using Hillary’s private server – dreynolds@clintonemail.com. That she sent the Email, the contents of which are so sensitive that they have been classified as “Confidential” by the State Department, is a violation of Federal law because “Diane Reynolds” was not authorized to read official mail. This particular Email is classified until 12/18/2024. The Email was sent by Michael B. Froman, who was deputy assistant to the president and deputy national security adviser for international economic affairs, at the National Security Council and the National Economic Council. It was forwarded to Hillary by Jake Sullivan, who was Hillary’s deputy chief of staff and director of policy planning. Although the contents have been redacted, it was obviously official correspondence that Hillary had no authority to share with her daughter, who was involved with the Clinton Foundation and working for an investment group in New York City. Hillary’s response to the Email had been previously released.

That Hillary shared this Email with Chelsea, a private citizen, is an indication of how she exhibited careless disregard for national security. Only the FBI – and the NSA – know what she shared and with whom and many agents seem to be very upset that she was not indicted. It turns out that the investigation of Hillary’s misconduct while she was Secretary of State isn’t the only aspect of her life under scrutiny. It turns out that the Feds are also looking into the Clinton family foundation and Hillary’s conflict of interest as she engaged in a play-for-pay scheme selling influence in return for big dollar contributions to the Clinton Foundation. It appears that the Feds now have the goods on Hillary and are working furiously to put her in jail – while the Department of Justice fights them at every turn. Such is the Clinton saga.

Hillary’s trail of dishonesty goes all the way back to 1978 when she mysteriously turned a $1,000 investment into $100,000 practically overnight. She claimed she got good advice from Jim Blair, an Arkansas lawyer and politician with close ties to her and her husband. It’s believed that the windfall was actually a payback for Bill to look the other way while Blair and some of his associates set up a drug-smuggling scheme with Barry Seal, a drug runner from Louisiana who was relocating his base of operations to Mena, a small western Arkansas town in the southern Ozarks. Bill was Arkansas attorney general at the time. It’s believed that the plan was for Seal to bring the drugs in then they’d be distributed in chicken carcasses packed by Tyson foods then sent to fast food restaurants in the Midwest. (Kentucky governor John Y. Brown’s political career came to an end when he was found to have been talking to members of a Lexington, KY based drug ring.) One of those allegedly involved was Dan Lasater, a  Clinton buddy who was convicted of drug distribution and served six months in jail; Bill Clinton pardoned him. When Barry Seal was arrested in Florida, he hired Clinton friend and Hillary’s former associate in the Watergate prosecution Richard Ben-Veniste to represent him. (Seal was later assassinated in front of a half-way house in Baton Rouge, some say by Federal agents.)

Clinton friend and associate Jim McDougal had a lot to say about the Clintons, particularly about Hillary, in his memoir, which was published posthumously after he died in a Federal prison in Texas. He tells how an Arkansas political hack told him he should pay off the Clintons so he started slipping them $2,000 a month under the table. Later on, when Bill told him that the Rose Law Firm where Hillary had been hired was complaining because she wasn’t generating any revenue, McDougal put her on a $2,000 a month retainer even though he had no need of her services. God only knows how many other Arkansas businessmen (and crooks) were paying the Clintons off.

The Clintons continued their illegal activities after Bill left the White House, but their new activities come under the category of influence-pedaling. The Clintons charge exorbitant speaking fees in return for political favors and there’s evidence that Hillary  took advantage of her role as Secretary of State by offering her influence to large donors to the Clinton Foundation. It is those activities that have attracted the attention of agents of the FBI. All indications are that the FBI has the goods on the Clintons, and are seeking an indictment but are being blocked by political appointees in the Department of Justice. It is highly likely that the FBI obtained evidence against Clinton in the voluminous trove of documents found in the possession of National Security Service contractor Harold Martin in August. Current media accounts are that the Clinton Email investigation was reopened because of information found on Anthony Weiner’s computer but this has never been confirmed. All FBI director Comey said in his letter to Congress is that new evidence was found in “an unrelated case.”

At this point no one knows for sure what the FBI has on Clinton, or even what progress has been made on any of the cases since the Email case was just reopened and the Clinton Foundation Case has just become public knowledge – although there have been indications that it was on-going. There are rumors of disagreements between the FBI and the DOJ over the two cases – Director Comey is alleged to have notified Congress that the Email case had been reopened against the wishes of the DOJ. There have been claims that revealing investigations of political candidates close to an election violates some kind of “official policy” although no evidence of such a policy actually exists. This is not the first time the White House has claimed some kind of nonexistent policy – during the Clinton impeachment, the White House claimed there was some kind of executive privilege prohibiting Secret Service agents from testifying. The Supreme Court said otherwise.

There is one thing for certain, and the White House is more than aware of it. If Hillary Clinton wins the election, the Democrats will retain control of the Executive Branch even if she is impeached and removed from office. To the White House, electing Hillary is imperative because a Trump presidency will see a continuation of the investigations and prosecution of the criminal Clintons. Hillary also knows it; it’s been reported that after the national security/veterans forum in New York that she went off on her staff shouting “if this fucker is elected, we’ll hang!” Trump told Clinton to her face during one of the debates that if he were president, she’d be in jail. Jail is where she belongs, not the Oval Office. Just remember that when you go to vote next Tuesday. If you can’t bring yourself to vote for Trump, don’t vote at all.

 

The Clintons in Arkansas and beyond (Note – this is from a left-wing site!)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Remember Harold Martin?

Last Friday, FBI Director James Comey sent a letter to Republican members of Congress advising that the case against presidential candidate Hillary Clinton had been reopened because information had been found in “an unrelated case” that might pertain to the case. Now, this is earthshaking news that veteran reporter and Clinton biographer Carl Bernstein says can only be due to blockbuster information. (Bernstein has also said there’s “no way” it can be bigger than Watergate but then he has no knowledge of the information and doesn’t know what it contains.) Naturally, the Clinton campaign and Clinton are screaming foul and demanding “answers” even though the answer has been given – that Hillary Clinton is under criminal investigation. The New York Times came out and claimed that the information was found on a computer jointly used by former Congressman Anthony Weiner and his wife Huma Abedin, the Indian Muslim and former White House intern Clinton took under her wing back when her husband was doing the same thing with Monica Lewinsky. The Times and other news outlets, including FOX news have “confirmed” this information through “unidentified sources in the FBI”. While it is possible that the unrelated case is the Weiner case – he is being investigated for sending inappropriate texts to an underage female – there is another, more likely source.

On August 29, a National Security contractor named Harold Martin was arrested for possessing classified information. Martin, a US Navy veteran, possessed highly classified information dating back for two decades. Now, let’s think about the National Security Agency and what it does. Dating back to 1917, the NSA was chartered in its current form in 1952 by President Harry Truman. The documentation chartering the agency was (and still is) classified and the organization’s very existence was kept secret The NSA – often referred to as “No Such Agency” depends heavily on signals intelligence services in each of the military services. Until 1979, the Air Force, of which I was a part from 1963-1975, had the Air Force Security Service. The Army and Navy each had their own signals intelligence services/commands. The role of the AFSS was interception of foreign communications, particularly radio communications, using sophisticated listening equipment at remote sites around the world and onboard modified transport airplanes and bombers – the C-47, C-54, C-130 and C-135 and B-17 and B-29. Highly intelligent young airmen were selected to train as “Crypto” technicians through a battery of tests administered during basic training. (I was tested because I had taken Spanish in high school.) Those who were selected to train as linguists were placed in special programs that included two years at selected universities. Linguists and technicians were cleared at a level even higher than Top Secret, it was commonly referred to as a “Crypto” clearance but no one who didn’t have one really knew what it was called. I once met a young cook at Pope Air Force Base, North Carolina who had cross-trained into the aircraft loadmaster field from crypto. Although he had a high security clearance, his job change required a new background check. He had recently been married and the background check revealed that his new wife had family connections in a communist country. He lost his clearance and was sent to the chow hall as a cook!

There is another side to the signals intelligence mission that is not generally known. It was whispered about within the military. It is the mission of protecting US secrets by monitoring communications of American officials and military personnel. The first time I ever heard it referred to officially was when I went on temporary duty to Kadena AB, Okinawa (I later went PCS to Naha, an airbase some 12 miles away.) We were told during our orientation that all telephone lines were monitored and we should be very careful about what we said on the telephone. The admonition was repeated when I reported for my permanent assignment at Naha several months later. There were signs on the wall by telephones reminding that calls were monitored. Several years after I left the military, I worked with an Army veteran who had served in the Army’s counterpart to the AFSS. He told me that his job was monitoring telephone lines, and how that he and his buddy had once monitored conversations between a high-ranking general and his mistress. I was reminded again of how the NSA and it’s military agencies monitor communications when my son entered his plebe year at the US Naval Academy. Shortly after he got there, he told me to be very careful what I said in Emails because their Emails were monitored.

Now, NSA monitoring of communications is conducted not only of military personnel, but also of Federal officials, including Congressmen, Senators and members of the Executive Branch with access to classified information. There is no doubt that Hillary Clinton’s communications were monitored throughout her term as Secretary of State and probably while she was a US Senator since she was a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee and would have had access to classified information. Her communications may have also been monitored – and probably were – while she was Bill Clinton’s First Lady. It is highly likely, no, it is CERTAIN that Harold Martin’s trove includes Emails from and to Hillary Clinton.

Now, the question arises -if Hillary was discussing classified information on unofficial channels while she was SOS, why wasn’t she prosecuted? The answer is simple – while military personnel are subject to prosecution under the UCMJ, members of the Executive Branch are prosecuted in the Federal courts and any prosecution would have had to be initiated by the DOJ, which, like the SOS, is headed by a presidential appointee. Any information would have been “kept secret,” or covered up at the highest level.

What we’re seeing now is a struggle at the highest level, a struggle between Congress and the Executive Branch. We’ll see what happens.

Polls and Drugs

Let me start this out by saying that I have already voted, I voted this afternoon at my local library, the polling place for my precinct. There was a line but it wasn’t terribly long. When I went there first, the line was fairly long and made up primarily of blacks, Hispanics and Middle Eastern/Indians. I didn’t have my cane and knew I’d have a hard time standing in that line without it so I went home then went back after lunch. There was a line but it was far shorter than the one this morning and the demographics had become more white. I stood in line for about 15-20 minutes then went to the machine and cast my ballot. It didn’t take long – all I had to do was check Republican then go through the pages and hit “cast ballot.”

As I write this, the Evening News is on our local CBS station. Scott Pelley was talking about how far behind Trump is, and maintaining a straight face even though he knows he’s lying. Let me tell you something about polls. First, there are polls and then there are polls. Some that pass as polls are actually “surveys” with no controls. Some are by telephone, the traditional method of polling, some are online and some are a combination. Some are one-time polls and some are Daily Tracking Polls, which are actually more accurate. And it’s the Daily Tracking Polls that are showing that Trump is actually ahead of Clinton in some instances and tied in others. One poll, the Dornsife poll conducted by the University of Southern California, showed Clinton with a slight lead this morning after several weeks with Trump ahead. The TIPP poll, which is considered the most accurate poll of all, shows Trump 2 points ahead as does the Rasmussen poll. All three polls are Daily Tracking Polls. Donald Trump is saying he doesn’t believe “the polls” and he has good reason to do so because the polls showing Hillary Clinton with big leads are lies.

How are polls manipulated? It’s actually very simple. Most polls are taken by companies either contracted by or favoring Democrats and they are looking for results favoring their candidate. Those favoring Clinton include all three of the broadcast TV networks and CNN along with the New York Times, Washington Post and numerous other newspapers who have all endorsed Clinton and are pulling out the stops to get her elected. (FOX may be favoring her as well.) Their pollsters bias the polls by concentrating on urban telephone exchanges where they know they will get more Democrats and more people to answer their phones. There was a time when everybody answered their phones but that day is long gone, thanks to Caller ID. Those who are most likely to answer are those in the demographics favoring Clinton, named those in lower income groups. This not only allows more respondents from the main demographic favoring Clinton, it also means more Democrats, which leads to what is known as “over sampling.” Pollsters stack the respondents they report with Democrats at a proportion far higher than their actual numbers in the national population. This causes polls to be biased toward Democrats and leads to results showing Clinton several points ahead of Trump while unbiased polling shows a dead heat or even Trump leading.

Now, let’s talk about drugs, drugs and the Clintons. Bill Clinton was governor of Arkansas in 1979-81 then again in 1983-1992. During the Clinton administration, a notorious drug runner conducted one of the largest drug-running operations in history from the airport at the Ouachita Mountain town of Mena, Arkansas. Barry Seal’s operation brought billions of dollars worth of drugs into Arkansas yet he was never prosecuted for his Mena activities. (He was arrested in Fort Lauderdale, Florida and became a government witness. I am not certain if I ever met Barry Seal or not, but we are “connected.” I worked as a flight instructor and charter pilot for a fixed-base operation in Little Rock and met a lot of people who came in to see my boss and at airports around the state. However, I never made a trip to Mena during that time. In fact, it wasn’t until I came to Houston that I went in there with my friend John Danek to take our airplane for paint and interior. By that time, Barry Seal was long since dead but people were still talking about him. Even then, I didn’t know about our connection and it wasn’t until  a few years later when I was living in Findlay, Ohio and happened to buy a book about the Clinton’s activities in Arkansas that I realized how closely connected we were.

While I was still working in Kentucky, I happened to run into a fellow pilot I had formerly worked with at Union City in the pilot’s lounge at Owensboro. By that time, our former employer had shut down and we talked about what had happened. Larry told me that one of our airplanes had been bought by “that drug dealer in Arkansas.” At the time, I didn’t know which drug dealer he was talking about and I’m not sure I remembered the conversation until I read the book. I’m not sure which book it was because I sent it to my daughter but I think it was this one. I was shocked when I read that one of Seal’s airplanes was a Piper Navajo with the N-number either 7509L or 7248L. I’m not sure which it was but those numbers were two airplanes I flew out of Union City. They had both modified with what was called the Nayak Conversion with the addition of fuel tanks in the engine nacelles that hadn’t been installed at the Piper factory. The additional fuel gave the airplanes vastly increased range, enough to fly to and from Central America from Mena.

Now, what does all of this have to do with the Clintons? As I mentioned above, Seal’s Mena operation was in operation during Clinton’s term as governor of the state. Incidentally, Mena is just north of where Clinton was born in Hope and 65 miles west of his boyhood home in Hot Springs, a town well-known for its connections to organized crime. Coincidentally, or perhaps not coincidentally, when Seal was busted, the lawyer he hired was Richard Ben-Vineste, a high-placed attorney and friend of the Clintons who had worked with Hillary on the Watergate investigation and who – WAS BILL CLINTON’S PERSONAL ATTORNEY! Now, is it mere coincidence that Seal was represented by him?

 

 

Puritanical Hypocrisy

It’s been awhile since I’ve written anything on my blog, for a number of reasons. For one, I finished writing and published a novel, have been working on another, have read a few books, including the late Jim McDougal’s ARKANSAS MISCHIEF and started a memoir by a fellow loadmaster. Today I thought I’d take a short break and post some of my thoughts on the election, in which I will be voting tomorrow – for Donald Trump. Tomorrow is the first day of early voting here in Texas and I intend to take full advantage of it.

If there’s one thing that this election has made clear, it’s that there is a large wave of Puritan hypocrisy in this country, as the NBC audio tape have made clear. I’m not sure if people are so upset because Trump used the words “fuck” and “pussy” or because he told Billy Bush that he had once made a pass at Nancy O’Donnell, Bush’s coworker at Access Hollywood. Was it that he said “I tried to fuck her” instead of “I tried to get her in bed” or “I made a pass at her.” Then the media got all upset because he said that women throw themselves as “stars” – Trump was a TV star – and that he said “grab them by the pussy.” Of course, the media reported that Trump was talking about assaulting women when what he actually said was in reference to women who threw themselves at “stars”.

Now, the so-called “F-word,” fuck, is just that, a word, a word that goes back until at least the thirteenth century. That it’s in reference to sexual intercourse is obvious. It’s only a “dirty” word to people who (claim) don’t want to talk openly about sex, even though in today’s society it’s used in general conversation, particularly by so-called “millennials.” Broadcast TV shies away from it but the same can’t be said for cable, and particularly for Hollywood. That Trump used it should be no surprise – by the way, Hillary Clinton uses it too. The late General George Patton was famous for it. I first heard – or saw – the word over 60 years ago when someone wrote it on an outside wall at Lavinia Schoohere I was in fourth grade. I had never seen or heard it before and asked my buddies what it meant and they all burst out laughing. I hardly ever heard it growing up in rural West Tennessee but when I went in the military, it seemed to be every third word used in the conversations of men from Chicago and the Northeast.

Today’s Puritanism is not religious, but rather political, and it’s widespread in the media and among political pundits. Just as the English Puritans imposed certain conditions on their fellow adherents, today’s pundits impose strict conditions on, well, on just about everyone! It’s hypocritical (just as Puritanism was) because those who condemn others are guilty of the very same practices. They cluck-cluck when some woman “comes forward” (no doubt after having been paid) to claim that Trump kissed her without permission. Never mind that kissing on the lips is common among New Yorkers and in Hollywood. What is most hypocritical is that Democrats who accuse Trump of being a monster ignore the far more contemptuous conduct of presidents, particularly Bill Clinton, who was impeached for lying about his relationship with a young White House intern, Lyndon Johnson, who brought a famous hooker to the White House, and John Kennedy whose flagrant sexual activities were well known but ignored by the media. Kennedy seduced and deflowered a 19-year old intern (who was enrolled in a well-known Christian university) then ordered her to give his special assistant a blow job! Yet the media and Democrats have gone ballistic over an 11-year old tape in which Trump relates how a woman turned him down!

 

 

Why I Distrust the Clintons

I could make this very simple – BECAUSE THEY’RE LIARS! However, although that’s the intent of this post, I want to go into some detail.

Over the past few months, I’ve read three books about the Clintons. The first, David Schippers’ SELLOUT, The Inside Story of the Clinton Impeachment, was originally published right after Clinton’s impeachment. Schippers was the lead prosecutor in the impeachment investigation. The second book is former Secret Service Uniformed Division officer Gary J. Byrne’s CRISIS OF CHARACTER. Last night I finished Bill Clinton’s high school friend and later paramour Dolly Kyle’s book HILLARY, the Other Woman and I have Peter Schweizer’s CLINTON CASH beside my chair to read next. All of these books contain information revealing how both of the Clintons have consistently lied during their political career. That Bill Clinton is a liar is well illustrated by his having been impeached by the US House of Representatives for perjury (lying to a grand jury) along with other issues. That the Clintons are liars is well documented.

Gary Byrne was one of the Secret Service officer’s called to testify to the grand jury and after the Supreme Court ruled that there was no legal basis to prevent a government official from testifying and revealing “privileged information.” His main revelation is that Bill Clinton was alone in the Oval Office with Monica Lewinsky, a young White House intern, on several occasions and that it was common knowledge in the West Wing that he was sexually involved with her, and allegedly with the late Eleanor Mondale as well. He was also involved with an unnamed White House receptionist. Bryne reveals how that a Navy steward assigned to the Oval Office came to him with (expensive) towels containing not only semen, but lipstick (that Byrne believed was not Lewinsky’s, but the lipstick worn by the receptionist). The Filipino steward was afraid to send the towels to the laundry so Byrne smuggled them out of the White House and disposed of them.

When it comes Hillary and her lies and corruption, it is Dolly Kyle’s book that is most revealing. Ms. Kyle, whose last name is Browning, met Bill Clinton on a Hot Springs golf course when she was 11 and he was almost 13. Although Clinton was two years older, they ended up in high school together because Dolly skipped two grades and graduated at age 16. Although they didn’t have sex while they were in high school, Dolly and “Billy,” as she an others around Hot Springs knew him, often got together to talk. Dolly reveals that Billy was not raised in Hope, but that although he was born there, his mother moved to Hot Springs and left him with her parents until he was 5, at which time she got him – over her mother’s protest – and took him to Hot Springs, where Billy lived until he left for college in 1964. Dolly points out that Billy’s claim in the movie The Man From Hope that his grandfather protested the closing of the Little Rock High School in 1958 is false because he passed away a year before the school integration took place.

Dolly reveals that Billy Clinton was basically a coward, and it was his cowardice that led him to protest the Vietnam War and evade the draft. (Contrary to assertions, Donald Trump never evaded the draft – he had the standard student deferments while in college then was classified 1Y because of medical defects found in his draft physical. When the draft lottery was initiated, Trump drew a high number.) Even worse are the many allegations of sexual assault and even rape, including a young English woman named Eileen Wellstone who met Clinton at a bar near Oxford University where he was a student and was raped by him. Clinton says the sex was consensual. Dolly was writing back and forth with him while they were in college but she wasn’t aware of his sexual escapades. Dolly got pregnant while in college and was married at 18. She had three children before the marriage ended in divorce in 1974 when Dolly was 25. By this time, Bill Clinton had graduated from Yale Law School and moved to Fayetteville, Arkansas and was teaching at the University of Arkansas.

Kyle and Clinton corresponded with each other throughout his college years and would see him when he was in Little Rock, where she was living. He told her that he’d moved in with a female student named Hillary Rodham but indicated it was for purely financial reasons – he was at Yale on scholarship and had little money but Rodham’s father was paying for her education, including her residence. Billy told Dolly after he moved in with Hillary that he “thought his sex life was over but at least he had a roof over his head.” Dolly doesn’t say when her relationship with Clinton became sexual but she was definitely seeing him within a month after her divorce (and possibly before. Dolly says that she was raped at 16 and afterwards became rather loose.) She saw Clinton in February 1974 at a fundraiser in Little Rock – Clinton was running for Congress – and spent time with him in a hotel room. Later that year, Bill got a job for Hillary at the University of Arkansas and brought her over from Washington, where she had lost her job with the Watergate Commission. She had failed the bar and had no job prospects. They moved in together in a small house in Fayetteville. They lived together for over a year and were finally married by a justice of the peace in their house in October 1975. Clinton was elected as the Arkansas attorney general in 1976 – he had no opposition.

Clinton is known to have been sexually involved with several other women during his time at U of A, including Dolly Kyle, who dated him until she met someone and was married, then moved back to Texas to attend the Southern Methodist law school. At least one of his conquests was one of his students. He claims they were consensual but there’s reason to believe the women were pressured when they were named as witnesses in the Paula Corbin Jones case. Schippers learned that Clinton’s lawyers pressured witnesses to lie in their dispositions or sign documents calling for their subpoenas to be “quashed.” It was those actions that led to the witness tampering charges against Clinton.

Hillary Clinton, who often referred to the presidency as “we”, was heavily involved in the attempts to cover up Bill’s indiscretions. Dolly Kyle says that when the Gennifer Flowers story broke, Hillary came up with a plan to have her appear on 60 Minutes with them. She would acknowledge that she had been Bill’s girlfriend and lover in an attempt to turn the attention to her and away from Flowers. The Clintons had already gone after Kyle over a novel she was writing. Although Bill knew about the novel – and encouraged it – he (or Hillary) realized that it could be damaging to his political hopes. Kyle’s own brother and sister advised her that if she continued with the novel and didn’t deny her relationship with Clinton to reporters that “we” (meaning the Clinton campaign in which they were both involved) “will destroy you.” Hillary attacked all of the women who accused her husband of sexual assault, and made salacious charges against Monica Lewinsky once news of her affair with the president became public knowledge.

Kyle doesn’t state but insinuates that Hillary is either a lesbian or bisexual. Bill Clinton once told her that having a baby would help project the image that “we’re a normal married couple. We need to do something serious to take attention off The Warden’s (Clinton referred to Hillary as “The Warden) lifestyle. There is a curious irony in the Clinton’s story. Hillary’s well-known assistant, Huma Abedin, was a White House intern at the same time as Monica Lewinsky. They have been together ever since.

The Clintons are also blatant racists, even though Bill was once called “the first black president” and Hillary claims to be all about equality. While Bill was governor of Arkansas, he promoted policies that were overtly racial. He referred to blacks as “G-damned niggers”, sometimes by name and sometimes as a group. Hillary shows evidence of distaste for blacks. They are hypocrites.

That both of the Clintons are serial liars are well established, Bill by his impeachment by the US House for perjury and Hillary by her many statements – such as landing in Bosnia under sniper fire – that have been disproved by photographs and film. There is nothing honest about them.