Tuesday, January 30, 2018

The Insolence of Orifice

Flagrant violations do not require proceedings to state what is in plain sight; and the gentleman from New York has been in violation of the emoluments clause, the take care clause, the oath, and, therefore, in contempt of the Constitution from the beginning.  To use a renowned scholar's phrase,  "the complete power to pardon," according to Article II, Section 2, Clause 1, applies "except in cases of impeachment."  Does that mean no pardons at all can be granted in the present circumstances, if the plain sight rule prevails?

     THE HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN REPUBLIC is defined by means and ends.  That is why we are so conscious of our shortcomings.  That is why our hypocrisy twists and shouts.  And that is why we are not satisfied.

     The Declaration laid out our ideals and the case against the king.  For all its faults, the first charter, the Articles of Confederation, was a fulcrum to help nudge us in the right direction.  That did not change with the Constitution, which does the same.  For the oath reminds us of the sacred relationship between means and ends, the reconciliation of the idea and the reality, and resistance to convenience over commitment.  There was no confusion--then.

     All the "competent powers" of the Presidency must be exercised with "a due responsibility"; and Alexander Hamilton's two examples regarding reprieves and pardons were extraordinary and mundane.  (The Federalist Papers, No. 70)  The first was treason--the only crime defined in the Constitution--because it is a threat to the life of the Republic, and where the power of forgiving would be used, if possible, to "restore the tranquillity of the commonwealth."  (The Federalist Papers, No. 74)  The second, acting as a check on the judiciary, was not as dramatic but should not be discounted.  (The Federalist Papers, No. 74)

     Now confusion has arisen.  Its promoter has tried to make the unthinkable commonplace.  Questions are asked, or suggested, that answer themselves:  Can a President pardon himself?  Can a constitutional power be used for an unconstitutional end?  And yet there is the pretense of mystery.

     Neither Hamilton nor Blackstone was confused, for a monarchy is one thing and a republic another.  No, that came later with sleight of hand and fancy footwork.

     If the king can do no wrong, he has no need to pardon himself.  (Commentaries on the Laws of England by William Blackstone, Volume I, 238)  But if the President of the United States can pardon himself, his person is more "sacred and inviolable" than that of the king because the Supreme Court has said that "a pardon...carries an imputation of guilt; acceptance a confession of it."  (The Federalist Papers, No. 69 & Burdick v. United States, 236 US 94)  Thus, such a deed would mean the President can do no wrong with impunity, which would be a betrayal of history, the Constitution, and Common Sense.

     "Under the fundamental rule that no one may be a judge in his own case, the President cannot pardon himself."  (Memorandum Opinion for the Deputy Attorney General, August 5, 1974: hereinafter the Pardon Memorandum)

     But with a twirl of the cape comes the side-step and glide.

     "A different approach to the pardoning problem could be taken under Section 3 of the Twenty-fifth Amendment.  If the President declared that he was temporarily unable to perform the duties of his office, the Vice President would become Acting President and as such he could pardon the President.  Thereafter the President could either resign or resume the duties of his office."  (Pardon Memorandum; emphasis added)

     By playing musical chairs--and footloose with the Fundamental Charter--the new butterfly effect makes the Chief Magistrate of the Union and his Deputy the American Monarch and his Crown Prince.  Instead of "Lock him up!" chant "Felons rule!"

     The objections to monarchy in the Declaration showed that no matter the forms of address, means and ends were out of balance.  And for those who major in missing the point, please do not fixate so much on the title that you forget about the deed.

     Status in the American Republic was to be based on merit and making the most of opportunity.  Thomas Jefferson dismissed "an artificial aristocracy founded on wealth and birth" in favor of "a natural aristocracy" of "virtue and talents."  His concern was not academic:  "The artificial aristocracy is a mischievous ingredient in government, and provision should be made to prevent its ascendancy."  (Emphasis added.)

     "No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States:  And no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state."  (Article I, Section 9, Clause 8)

     The farewell to heredity and wealth was reinforced by the report President Washington had Secretary of War Knox send to Congress in support of Universal National Service.  Like Elijah on Mount Carmel pouring water on the sacrifice, so did Knox--on those who lacked the fire of patriotism.  (I Kings 18:1-39, KJV)

     "But it ought to be remembered that measures of national importance never should be frustrated by the accommodation of individuals...."

     And he did it the second time.

     "If wealth be admitted as a principle of exemption, the plan cannot be executed.  It is the wisdom of political establishments to make the wealth of individuals subservient to the general good, and not to suffer it to corrupt or attain undue indulgence."

     And he did it the third time.

     "All being bound, none can complain of injustice, on being obliged to perform his equal proportion.  Therefore, it ought to be a permanent rule, that those who in youth decline or refuse to subject themselves to the course of military education, established by the laws, should be considered as unworthy of public trust or public honors, and be excluded therefrom accordingly."  (Emphasis added.)

     The Constitution's prohibition on granting any titles of nobility--a step toward equality--was not about a label but the display of distinctive traits, hereditary succession and an enormous disparity of wealth.  (Article I, Section 9, Clause 8 & Section 10, Clause 1)  The ban on nobility is related to the emoluments clause, which the gentleman from New York has ignored.  And that is why he fathered the twins and controlled how they were raised.  For the gentleman from New York was thoughtful on the subject of "the complete power to pardon"--thoughts full of his aides, his family, and himself.

     The Arpaio pardon was an abuse of the power.

     "Humanity and good policy conspire to dictate, that the benign prerogative of pardoning should be as little as possible fettered or embarrassed....  As the sense of responsibility is always strongest, in proportion as it is undivided, it may be inferred that a single man would be most ready to attend to the force of those motives which might plead for a mitigation of the rigor of the law, and least apt to yield to considerations which were calculated to shelter a fit object of its vengeance."  (Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers, No. 74; emphasis added) 

     The intention of the man in the Tower was to create a nobility, an artificial aristocracy--for his barons.  Thus, the gentleman from Arizona is a candidate for the Senate beholden to his benefactor.  And so, a constitutional power has been used for an unconstitutional end, a test designed to make the preposterous seem plausible.  A question worthy of a comedian--Can a President pardon himself?--was not a set-up for a punchline.

     "The President...shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment."  (Article II, Section 2, Clause 1; emphasis added)

     Flagrant violations do not require proceedings to state what is in plain sight; and the gentleman from New York has been in violation of the emoluments clause, the take care clause, the oath, and, therefore, in contempt of the Constitution from the beginning.  Thus, if the plain sight rule prevails, no pardons at all can be granted in the present circumstances.  Otherwise a bite shall be taken from the most poisonous fruit since the time of Adam and Eve.

     "Give me a place to stand," said Archimedes, "and I will move the Earth."

     What is true of the lever is true of ideas, as Hamilton reminds us.

       It has been frequently remarked that it seems to have been reserved to the people of this
       country, by their conduct and example, to decide the important question, whether societies
       of men are really capable or not of establishing good government from reflection and
       choice, or whether they are forever destined to depend for their political constitutions on
       accident and force.  If there be any truth in the remark, the crisis at which we are arrived
       may with propriety be regarded as the era in which that decision is to be made; and a
       wrong election of the part we shall act may, in this view, deserve to be considered as the
       general misfortune of mankind.  (The Federalist Papers, No. 1)

     The consequences are enormous.

     "It belongs to us to vindicate the honor of the human race, and to teach that assuming brother, moderation."  (The Federalist Papers, No. 11)

     Like an iceberg, appearances can be deceiving.  But a glimpse of the unseen can be revealing.  Despite how things seemed on Earth, God was bragging about a human being named Job.  (Job 1-2, KJV)  That is the God in whose Name many take the oath, the Holy One with great faith in us.  And it is time for mankind to stand up and not let God down.

     The incongruity between a monarchy and a republic cannot be ignored.  For the one, there is no separation between the person and the position.  For the other, there is a distinction between the individual and the institution.  Here, the Chief Executive is not "a perpetual magistrate," which highlights differences between them in regard to the traditional view of national security affairs.  (Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers, No. 70) 

       However proper or safe it may be in governments where the executive magistrate is an
       hereditary monarch, to commit to him the entire power of making treaties, it would be
       utterly unsafe and improper to intrust that power to an elective magistrate of four years'
       duration.  It has been remarked, upon another occasion, and the remark is unquestionably
       just, that an hereditary monarch, though often the oppressor of his people, has personally
       too much stake in the government to be in any material danger of being corrupted by
       foreign powers.  But a man raised from the station of a private citizen to the rank of Chief
       Magistrate, possessed of a moderate or slender fortune, and looking forward to a period not
       very remote when he may probably be obliged to return to the station from which he was
       taken, might sometimes be under temptations to sacrifice his duty to his interest, which it
       would require superlative virtue to withstand.  An avaricious man might be tempted to betray 
       the interests of the state to the acquisition of wealth.  The history of human conduct does
       not warrant that exalted opinion of human virtue which would make it wise in a nation to
       commit  interests of so delicate and momentous a kind, as those which concern its intercourse
       with the rest of the world, to the sole disposal of a magistrate created and circumstanced as
       would be a President of the United States."  (The Federalist Papers, No. 75emphasis added)

 
    We have gone from the man who opposed monarchy at the risk of his life to a man who would create one at the risk of ours.  Those who think that is hyperbole need only look at history.  President Washington warned of foreign influence in his Farewell Address.  But the gentleman from New York has been cashing in and could care less.  And so, with the First Daughter ready to deliver, the great fear of the Anti-Federalists--"the fetus of monarchy"--grows.  And despite his daily displays of outrageous conduct, reporters should remind the public of the obvious violations of the Constitution day after day after day.  But WE THE PEOPLE must MAKE HIM IRRELEVANT AGAIN.

(c)2018 Marvin D. Jones.  All rights reserved.


http://www.marvinjones.blogspot.com/2017/09/the-schlesinger-moment.html    ["Flagrant violations"]

https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/1ki/18/1/s_309001     [Elijah on Mount Carmel]

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/07/22/2-hour-tweetstorm-trump-claims-presidents-complete-power-pardon/501887001/    ["the complete power to pardon"]

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/1/15/1732998/-Convicted-criminal-Joe-Arpaio-found-out-on-live-TV-that-he-admitted-guilt-by-taking-Trump-s-pardon    [Lord Arpaio]


https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/job/1/1/s_437001     ["a human being named Job"]  

 https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5265745/ivanka-trump-first-female-president-fire-fury-michael-wolff/    [Lady Invokana]

Monday, January 29, 2018

What's Truth Got To Do With It?

You must understand the lies I am saying
Makes my pulse react
That it's only the thrill of prey facing kill
Prosecutors act
It's rational
Only indictable
You must try to ignore that it means more than that
Oh, oh, oh

What's truth got to do, got to do with it?
What's truth but a sweet old fashion notion?
What's truth got to do, got to do with it?
Who needs the truth when a word can be broken?

It may seem, Mueller, that I'm acting confused
When you're close to me
If I tend to look dazed, I've lied uh someplace
I've got cause to be
There's a name for it
There's a phrase that fits
But whatever the treason you got perjury
Oh, oh, oh

What's truth got to do, got to do with it?
What's truth but a sweet old fashion notion?
What's truth got to do, got to do with it?
Who needs the truth when a word can be broken?
Ooo

I've been lying in a new direction
But I have to say
I've been thinking about the Fifth Amendment
It scares me to feel this way
Oh, oh, oh

What's truth got to do, got to do with it?
What's truth but a sweet old fashion notion?
What's truth got to do, got to do with it?
Who needs the truth when a word can be broken?

What's truth got to do, got to do with it?
What's truth but a sweet old fashion notion?
What 's truth got to do, got to do with it?
Who needs the truth when a word can be broken?

(What's truth got to do) ooo got to do with it?
What's truth got to do, got to do with it?
Who needs the truth when a word can be broken?
(What's truth got to do, got to do with it?)
(What's truth?)

(c)2018 Marvin D. Jones.  All rights reserved.


https://youtu.be/oGpFcHTxjZs  [With apologies to Tina Turner]








Friday, December 29, 2017

Day 344

He had appeared to violate the rule.  He was warned.  He was given an explanation.  Nevertheless, he persisted.

     The hour of maximum danger is upon us, and the gentleman from New York and his accessories and apologists and appeasers are apoplectic.  These bad magicians are good at distraction, but they are not pulling any rabbits out of the hat.  Nevertheless, people insist that Presto the Magnificent is the best.

     Self-styled "conservatives" are hugging technicalities and hanging ten on a tangent.  When it comes to the Special Prosecutor's investigation, over and over again they say there is no "collusion."  They are technically right and totally wrong.  There is conspiracy, which is the legal term.

     Unlike Presto, let us make the Russian Connection disappear.  Imagine Comey spent the night sitting on the curb with Willie the Wino passing the paper sack back and forth, which contained a fine wine aged since yesterday, and was in a drunken stupor when he composed his memoranda.  Will anyone then say, "Ta-da!"?

     During the transition, Richard Painter, former ethics lawyer for Bush the Younger, and Laurence Tribe, a professor of constitutional law at Harvard University, warned the gentleman from New York about the emoluments clause.  Walter Shaub, the Director of the Office of Government Ethics, offered to assist him with divestiture.  That was given no consideration and was not accepted.  Thus, from the moment he said, "So help me God" he has been in violation of the Constitution, and the benefit of the doubt cannot erase "high crimes and misdemeanors."  (Article II, Section 4)  Wherefore an impeachment resolution can be drafted from the frame of reference of the self-styled "strict constructionists" that would find the gentleman from New York in violation of the emoluments clause, the take care clause, the oath, and therefore in contempt of the Constitution.  (Article I, Section 9, Clause 8; Article II, Section 3 & Article II, Section 1, Clause 8)

     The warning signs came early--"I am your voice"--and often--"I alone can fix it."  And there was cause for concern:  "I am the only one that matters."

     The first word in the Constitution is "WE."  The only time "I" appears is in the oath to uphold the supreme law of the land; the "I" acts on behalf of the "WE."  And so, the bond has been broken.

     Despite distractions, the Russian Connection has not disappeared.  And to three infamous names--Lucifer, Judas, and Benedict Arnold--a fourth shall soon be added, that of the gentleman from New York.

(c)2017 Marvin D. Jones.  All rights reserved.


https://www.newyorker.com/news/ryan-lizza/walter-shaubs-desperate-attempts-to-make-trump-adhere-to-government-ethics

 https://www.lawfareblog.com/ethics-rules-are-national-security-rules
    

Wednesday, December 13, 2017

Forty-seven Shades Freed

Fantasy is fine--in its time and place.  But horror is another story.

     The destination is in the distance.  From here to there--and between then and now--is only a matter of time.

     On October 13, 1307--Friday the thirteenth--a sovereign tried to destroy those to whom he was indebted, the Special Forces of his time--the Knights Templar.  King Philip the Fair of France was anything but.  And because beauty is in the eye of the beholder, the same applies.

     Mischief began with a missive composed by Mr. Cotton.  His compost attracted forty-six other gadflies, and they made a field of schemes.

     "If you build it, he will come."

     On October 13, 2017--Friday the thirteenth--the gentleman from New York tried to benefit those to whom he is indebted.  The man who claimed bone spurs in a heel, yet could not remember which one made it impossible for him to answer his country's call, stood in the Diplomatic Reception Room of the White House on the Unknown Foot--entombed in a Ferragamo, known but to God--before a portrait of George Washington, the Commander in Chief of the Continental Forces who made the United States of America and the Presidency possible, and had no problem taking steps that may put the lives of other people's children at risk.  After all, he uses other people's money with reckless abandon.

I. Point-Counterpoint

     When the gentleman from New York made his statement on the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, it was as if Jason Voorhees had come to life.  But he was only a character in a movie.

     "The Iran regime has committed multiple violations of the agreement.  For example, on two separate occasions, they have exceeded the limit of 130 metric tons of heavy water.  Until recently, the Iranian regime has also failed to meet our expectations in its operation of advanced centrifuges."

     Yukiya Amano, Director of the International Atomic Energy Agency, says Iran is in compliance.

     "The JCPOA is a substantial gain for verification, because the combination of the Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement, Additional Protocol and additional transparency measures represents the most robust verification system in existence anywhere in the world.  The JCPOA has led to a significant reduction in Iran's nuclear activities....

     "As far as nuclear activities are concerned, Iran accepted many restrictions.  For example, its stockpile of low enriched uranium hexafluoride must not exceed 300 kilos and the number of centrifuges used for producing low enriched uranium must not go above 5,060.  The Agency verifies and monitors that Iran is abiding by these restrictions....

     "Before the JCPOA, Iran carried out activities which were in contravention of UN resolutions valid at that time, so more detailed reporting was required.  That is not the case today."  (IAEA, November 14, 2017)

     ..."(W)hile the United States adheres to our commitment under the deal, the Iranian regime continues to fuel conflict, terror, and turmoil throughout the Middle East and beyond."

     "You could say it's a terrible deal because it doesn't cover Hezbollah, and Syria, and Yemen, and missiles, and human rights.  That's not what the agreement is," said Ernest Moniz, a nuclear physicist and former Secretary of Energy intimately involved in the negotiations.  

     "The ballistic missile tests are inconsistent with UN Security Council resolutions, but this is separate from the nuclear deal," said Kelsey Davenport, Director for Nonproliferation Policy at the Arms Control Association. 

     The UN Security Council resolution which supports the agreement is a recommendation, not a requirement, regarding other matters:

     "Iran is called upon not to undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles designed to be capable of delivering nuclear weapons, including launches using such ballistic missile technology, until the date eight years after the JCPOA Adoption Day."

     Nevertheless, the agreement has caused Iran to get rid of 98% of its highly-enriched uranium and 13,000 centrifuges, and destroy the core of the reactor at Arak that was capable of producing weapons-grade plutonium.  (Vox, August 7, 2017)

     "Iran is not living up to the spirit of the deal."

     "...(T)he IAEA has verified, I believe seven times now since the implement day that Iran has implemented the deal faithfully, fully, and complete.  Unfortunately," said Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, "we cannot make the same statement about the United States...."   

     "Specifically what?" asked Fareed Zakaria.  

     "For instance, when the White House made an announcement a couple of days ago that President Trump used his presence in Hamburg during the G20 meeting in order to dissuade leaders other--from other countries.  To engage in business with Iran.  That is a violation of not the spirit but of the letter of JCPOA, of the nuclear deal.  And I believe the United States needs to bring itself into compliance with its part of the obligation under the deal, Iran has been complying, it has been verified by the IAEA."  (CNN, July 16, 2017) 

     Zarif was referring to a statement by then Deputy Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders regarding the conduct of the gentleman from New York at the G20 summit.

      "In his discussions with more than a dozen foreign leaders, he underscored the need for nations to join together to strip terrorists of their funding, territory and ideological support--and to stop doing business with nations that sponsor terrorism, especially Iran."  (White House Press Briefing, July 10, 2017)

     "If he truly did wander around the G20 and said, 'Don't do business with Iran,' I think that's a pretty reasonable argument for the Iranians to make," according Richard Nephew, the former Principal Coordinator for Sanctions Policy at the State Department.  "It's easily a violation of the spirit of the deal.  Based on a plain-text reading of the (nuclear deal), I would characterize that to be a breach of our obligation."  (Vox, August 8, 2017)

     "...(I)n recognition of the increasing menace posed by Iran, and after extensive consultations with our allies, I am announcing a new strategy to address the full range of destructive actions."  (Emphasis added)


     "Renegotiating part of the agreement or the entire agreement is not an option," according to Federica Mogherini, the High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy.  "If you reopen one part of it, the entire agreement is reopened and you will probably enter into another12 years of renegotiations."  (The New York Times, November 8, 2017)


     "...(I)n the event we are not able to reach a solution working with the Congress and our allies, then the agreement will be terminated.  It is under continuous review, and our participation can be cancelled by me...at any time."

     "The President of the United has many powers, but not this one," said Mogherini.  (The Guardian, October 13, 2017)

     Ya got trouble, my friend, right here,
     I say, trouble right here in River City.

     The Mischief Man began with An Open Letter to the Leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran.    Thus, the gentleman from Arkansas played a part in producing the pretext which makes some wish he had stayed

     in the land of cotton,
     Old times there are not forgotten;
     Look away! Look away! Look away!--r'ality.

     "...Congress passed the Iran Nuclear Review Act to ensure that Congress's voice would be heard on the deal.  Among other conditions, this law requires the President, or his designee, to certify that the suspension of sanctions under the deal is 'appropriate and proportionate' to measure--and other measures taken by Iran to terminate its illicit nuclear program.  Based on the factual record I have put forward, I am announcing today that we cannot and will not make this certification."  (Emphasis added)

     The IAEA, which is acknowledged in the Act, says that Iran is in compliance, and the other parties concur.

II. Correction

     The spoiled child who was spared the rod needs a public spanking.  Words have meaning, and they matter.  Policymaking by temper tantrum of one with a case of the terrible twos is inexcusable.  Sound policy depends upon clarity, and the truth, which helps us to see clearly, is best glimpsed from various angles and put together like the pieces of a puzzle.

     "Congress's voice" was never in danger of being ignored, as Professor Woodrow Wilson noted long ago in an observation too often overlooked or undervalued.

     "Quite as important as legislation is vigilant oversight of administration; and even more important than legislation is the instruction and guidance in political affairs which the people might receive from a body which kept all national concerns suffused in a broad daylight of discussion."

     Thus, even before the Case Act of 1972, the Legislature could be engaged.

     "It is the proper duty of a representative body to look diligently into every affair of government and to talk much about what it sees.  It is meant to be the eyes and the voice, and to embody the wisdom and will of its constituents."  (Congressional Government: A Study in American Politics by Woodrow Wilson, 297 & 303, Fifteenth Edition)

     Two questions can be posed to the officers of the national security establishment--the Armed Forces, the Intelligence Community, and the Diplomatic Corps:  Do you agree or disagree with the assertion of the gentleman from New York?  Or would you be satisfied with certification of Iran's compliance?  If the latter, a veto proof joint resolution would serve as a dictionary for the uninformed and provide a definition left out of the Iran Nuclear Review Act of 2015, perhaps because such a thing had heretofore been thought unnecessary, to wit, certify--to confirm, assure, to attest as being true or accurate, an acknowledgement of reality.

     Unlike the Mischief Man--and INRA--which The New York Times called "A Reckless Act" and said "there is no constitutional imperative requiring Congress to insert itself into the negotiations," simply stating that the purpose of the agreement is being met is not an encroachment on executive power.  (The New York Times, April 14, 2015)  Instead, it is a reminder to "take care that the laws be faithfully executed."  (Article II, Section 3, Clause 5)
 
III. Chanel No. 5 

     The fantasy of "Forty-seven Shades of Nay" has given way to Rod Serling's Night Gallery.  The artist is Salvador Dali.  The subject is surreality, which leaves one wishing that described a squire whose shoulders were tapped by the sword of a monarch.  But some assume the position for another reason.

     Comrade Putin's kneepads are keeping the gentleman from New York comfortable as he squanders America's soft power.

     "We have made it clear that the European Union and its member states will protect European interests," said Federica Mogherini, the High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy.  (The New York Times, November 8, 2017)

     Unnecessary divisions create openings at home as well as abroad.  And speaking of the gift that keeps on giving, Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III left no doubt as to where he stands--or sits on his hands--and with whom.

     On October 18, 2017, Senator Ben Sasse (R-NE) addressed the gentleman from Alabama.

     "I would like to continue talking about the Russians but in the context of the long-term objectives that Vladimir Putin has to undermine American institutions and the public trust....  We face a sophisticated long-term effort by a foreign adversary to undermine our foreign policy and our ability to lead in the world by trying to undermine confidence in American institutions."

     After pointing out the dangers ahead in 2018 and 2020, he continued.

     "We live at a time where info ops and propaganda and misinformation are a far more cost-effective way for people to try to weaken the United States of America than by thinking they can outspend us at a military level....  So as the nation's chief law enforcement officer and as a supervisor of multiple components of our Intelligence Community...do you think we're doing enough to prepare for future interference by Russia and other foreign adversaries in the information space?"

     "Probably not," Sessions replied.  "We're not.  And the matter is so complex that for most of us, we are not able to fully grasp the technical dangers that are out there."

     As Sessions continued, another question came to mind:  "Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge?"  (Job 38:2, KJV)

     "So what steps has the Department taken," Sasse asked, "or should the Department take to learn the lessons of 2016...in fighting foreign interference?"

     Sessions reply was non-responsive, so Sasse picked up where he left off.

     "Do you think the Department of Justice has a proactive role in looking at hardening our democratic process against foreign interference?" 

     Sessions acknowledged what the Senator said and eventually got around to answering his question.

     "I am not sure we have a specific review underway at this point in time."  (Foreign Policy, October 20, 2017)

     On November 14, 2017, Representative Bradley Schneider (D-IL) addressed the gentleman from Alabama.

     "With the 2018 elections less than one year away and given your acknowledgement this is a serious, complex matter that's deserving a real review, specifically what steps have you taken to protect our elections next year?"        

     "You've raised a good point.  I have not followed through to see where we are on that.  And I will personally take action to do so," Sessions said.  "A lot of things been happening.  We are working on a lot of great agenda items.  But this one is important and I acknowledge that.  And I should be able to give you better information today than I am."  (Talking Points Memo, November 14, 2017)

     When elections in Europe and America are disrupted, who benefits?  Well, at least NFL players are not kneeling to service a foreign power.  But, instead, we are watching the sequel where the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action becomes the Chief Traitor's Junk Claptrap Pot of Absurd--"Forty-seven Shades Freed."

(c)2017 Marvin D. Jones.  All rights reserved.


1) http://www.history.com/topics/friday-the-13th    [Friday the thirteenth]

2) http://www.marvinjones.blogspot.com/2015/06/forty-seven-shades-of-nay.html    [The Mischief Man] 

 3) https://www.npr.org/2017/10/13/557622096/transcript-trump-s-remarks-on-iran-nuclear-deal     [GFNY’s Remarks]

4) https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/statements/director-generals-remarks-on-iran-the-jcpoa-and-the-iaea    [IAEA]

5) https://www.vox.com/2017/8/7/16089848/trump-iran-deal-nuclear-spirit-rip-up

6) http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1707/16/fzgps.01.html     [CNN, July 16, 2017]

7) https://youtu.be/eoXICZ4QfvQ      [Above interview]

8) https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/07/10/press-briefing-principal-deputy-press-secretary-sarah-sanders-and    [GFNY violating the Iran Nuclear Agreement at G-20]

9) https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/oct/13/trump-iran-nuclear-deal

10) https://youtu.be/LI_Oe-jtgdI    [The Music Man, "Ya Got Trouble"] 

11) http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-trump-iran-deal-mess-20171016-story.html    [squanders America’s soft power]

12) http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/10/20/jeff-sessions-just-confessed-his-negligence-on-russia/
 
https://youtu.be/G9z6WlwN8C0    [youtube, 3:09-3:22, "in fighting foreign interference?"]

13) http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/sessions-testimony-reveals-no-doj-plan-to-protect-elections-1076576835986