Tag: Free Will

I’m Glad Christmas is Over This Year: Re-thinking the nature of the Holiday season

I did not enjoy Christmas this year, perhaps it is the net result of writing too much and having worked out answers to the problems that socially are desired to keep a ruling class of people in place of our species and knowing better. Or that I have just read too many damn books and the things that regular people say to me seem stupid and self-defeating. They don’t want their problems solved, they want their problems so they can have an excuse to fail, and thus, not have to build up the courage to do things in their lives and its all too obvious to me. Or it was the season itself, the way that CNN berated President Trump for the way he talked to children on the night before Christmas wondering if a 7-year-old still believed in Santa. Or the way religious leaders insisted that mankind had lost touch with Christ and were too focused on material goods through the Holiday season. The emphasis on belief instead of logic seemed louder this year and I didn’t like it. Or perhaps it was just that Christmas is mostly for the children and that I’m in my 50s now and a grandpa and old age seems to be taking tickets to the afterlife with too much enthusiasm and I really don’t like the bad breath of the grim reaper looming like such a negative decaying force ready to harvest more souls miserable and lost from lives lived poorly.

What made me the sickest on the whole event was that the entire season was built upon people waiting for something to happen to them instead of making things happen. Kids wait to open presents while adults try to line up their schedules so they can get together and talk about nothing. Each event of the day was tied to some rigorous schedule attached to a lot of people who only cared if you were there or not by the pictures they took and put on Facebook or some other social media platform. My experiences with my family were fine, but in general Christmas was a day that I wasn’t in control of my own schedule and I’m not used to that. I’m not a fan of estrogen fests where clots of females arrange gatherings based on their most neurotic impulses and then expect me to drop all thinking to satisfy their whims of bitching and mayhem. They have the best of intentions in these endeavors but it always seems to come out as gatherings of squares that need to be pushed through circles in a board and the fit is never applicable, yet we try to force it anyway.

The best part of the day are of course the presents. That is where you can learn a lot about what people think about one another and there are real psychological factors at play that have great meaning. I do get excited about hearing to what degree Christmas retail sales have spiked. But then our entertainment of the season is fixated on sacrifice which seems to be the way we have all accepted that Christmas is supposed to be. Even I said several times that Christmas is for the kids to have a moment of optimism in their lives to remember forever before the world tries to henpeck their souls back into some kind of egg to live the rest of their lives. We encourage children to dream and put on quite a show for them only to have all those hopes smashed upon adolescences when kids learn that all the things, they believed in was a ruse for which society has no desire to live up to. And in that great disappointment they learn their place at the table of misery with everyone else.

I went to bed at 8 PM on Christmas night feeling like every part of my essence had been twisted and plucked clean like a Wal-Mart Black Friday bin five minutes into the opening of the store for special sales. I couldn’t wait to get to bed and put the rest of the world back to my own schedule. And I couldn’t wait to get up the next day and get back to work where logic and skill guide my days in productive ways and all the naysayers could go back to the cracks, they live in not to be heard from until the next year. I normally wouldn’t let myself think this way but I’ve been doing a lot of thinking lately about below and above the line thinking and as a naturally positive person, Christmas is a very negative Holiday. I love the façade of positive aspects of it, but it never lives up to the image. People generally don’t like each other and logic loses itself in the season as people spend money on all the wrong things. People don’t like each other because they are functioning from different value systems and that is something that we are expected to put away at Christmas and be like Christ—open and forgiving. But to do that we have to forget what people are, and what they have done and that doesn’t make any sense to me whatsoever.

I think it was easier to put these thoughts away in the past because it seemed like there would always be endless tomorrows. Next year was always an option but at the age I am now where I hear the word grandpa a lot I am reminded again with that glee of a grim reaper’s bad breath that are many fewer tomorrows than yesterdays and with each year they will get worse, and that is a very negative aspect of living that is not conducive with my way of thinking. I’ve always had hope that Christmas would someday bring out the best in people but I don’t see it, and the nature of it doesn’t lend itself to anything good. It is built on belief and a passive position of having things happen to you. And the best of Christmas involves give of yourself rather than receiving which is a socialist mantra from the words of Karl Marx and all the buffoons of philosophy that have sat on the edge of religion since before there was ever a Christ. The idea that sacrifice is the way to a productive existence is just stupid.

I’m glad its over, I am happy to be back in charge of everything and to be free of other people’s schedules. I’m also happy to be able to shape optimism back into my life and to leave many of my phone messages unanswered because the person on the other end endlessly needs something, they aren’t giving themselves in their life. They are perpetual looters of value lacking it themselves and always craving it from others. Christmas was an invention by them for them and certainly not for the most productive among us. Christmas was a day where like Halloween the belief in giving is thrust upon us like a villain robbing a bank. We are expected to participate or else and I’m at a place where I don’t think its such a good idea. I think Christmas brings out the worst in people, not the best and that the purpose of it is malicious, not hopeful. And I’m glad its over.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

 

Using the Gun to Defend Intellect: Below the line thinking will do anything to avoid accountablity, even if it means destroying other people

As I said the other day I have been working on a project and have been going through old books to refresh myself on their material and one of them was The Oz Principle which first came out way back in 1994. In it the concept of The Wizard of Oz is used to great effect to describe ways of thinking in companies, and in life of above and below the line thinking regarding personal responsibility. Above the line thinkers are very responsible and are close to their own personal accountability, whereas below the line thinkers look for all the ways they can’t be held responsible for something. The contents of the book were so obvious to me that I had forgotten that it was one of my reading topics over twenty years ago, so when it came up in a discussion a few days ago it all came back to me as I read it again. The essential summation of the book which is quite powerful is that any company that wishes to survive and prosper must change the thinking of its below the line employee body, because only in personal responsibility can anything really change and become better. Such a concept can work with anything that has a lot of people in it who contribute to the health of an organization. Donald Trump as a business guy who has written many best-selling books in the business self-help genre understands these types of things which makes him a great president. During the government shutdown of 2018 Trump stayed at the White House over Christmas while the rest of congress retreated back to their states to celebrate the Holiday. Trump was functioning from what we would call above the line thinking while everyone else was functioning below. It could easily be said that in order for the concept of an American republic to work, most of the participants would have to function above the line, otherwise the government would fall apart.

But there is always of course more to the story which is why I have been working on my own concepts for dealing with this very issue for a few years now. It’s often not enough to just be an above the line thinker, someone who takes personal responsibility for the things they do in life and doesn’t seek to hide their true fears in life behind finger-pointing and the blame game. Most of us just finished Christmas dinners with family we only see once or twice a year and I’d say its safe to determine that we all encountered most of those participants who were below the line thinkers. They are as common as snowflakes in a snowstorm. In fact, it could easily be said that the entire television industry is targeted to appeal to below the line thinkers as every storyline and commercial is targeted to such positions. It wouldn’t take much to make the declaration that since the advent of television that below the line thinking has exploded as a common occurrence in our American culture so there’s a lot of work that must be done to fix that attribute.

Such below the line thinking would include blaming your parents for a bad childhood which is why modern successes are elusive to someone, or that they were born poor and thus didn’t have the opportunity to get an education, a new car, or even a house. Below the line thinking is actually a human condition brought on by a person’s fears of personal accountability so they use the masses to hide their cowardness from the world by deflecting blame for anything that happens in their lives. Ironically, I have never been such a person. By nature, and upbringing, and the kinds of examples I grew up being attracted to I have always been an above the line thinker where everything was in my wheelhouse of responsibility. Personal accountability is one of the most primary traits of leadership, and good leaders must be above the line thinkers.

This brings us to my original problem that I had reported I was working out over the last several years. It’s not enough to just be a positive thinker or to be a great example of above the line thinking. It is easy to be a naturally positive example when you are in a position of leadership, such as running a company or as President Trump is doing by running a country. But it is quite difficult to have such a position when you are working under the authority of below the line thinkers such as when you have a bad boss, or bad people who are above you in the seniority pull, or even bad people running government. Because below the line thinkers actively seek to destroy above the line thinkers just because they don’t want a culture of higher thinking to force them out of their blame game mentality because it would then require courage to fuel their actions for which they are vacant. Otherwise they wouldn’t be below the line thinkers to begin with. That’s where the Second Amendment comes into the picture, a country that wants to function above the line has to allow their people to prosper under conditions where below the line people cannot attack them for trying to be better. The right to self-defense isn’t just to protect homes, cars, wives and children from the harms of villains, but to keep villains from stealing something much more valuable, above the line thinking with threats of social castigation and even physical violence.

I get asked several times a week, sometimes several times a day, mostly from people who don’t know me well, if I worry about getting into trouble over this blog site, such as in the message above that I put on Instagram. To their thinking I am very critical of big powerful groups, such as the FBI, large media organizations, even individual people who are killers. Their question to me is what happens if you make them mad and they hunt you down an assassinate you to keep you from saying the things you do? That is a valid question after all because as we all know either literally or instinctively, below the line thinkers will do just about anything to maintain their positions, because they lack personal courage so in their terror, they will attack above the line thinkers just to maintain that insulation between reality and their fears. In public schools this is precisely why there are bullies, below the line thinkers which are much more numerous than above the line thinkers use peer pressure to maintain a safety blanket in society from the realities of accountability. So long as many more people think something then below the line thinkers can maintain the illusion that their blame game lifestyle is a valid position, and to do that they must maintain power over above the line thinking. If someone is going to be a leader and try to elevate everyone around them with positive attributes the below the line thinkers functioning from fear will want to destroy such people.

That is why I think personal firearm ownership is needed in any society that wishes to operate above the line. It’s not enough to just think something, you have to be able to defend it. When a bully comes up to you and says that they wish to essentially stay in a victim state and that if you try to force them to change into a role of accountability—such as getting off welfare, food stamps, using medical ailments to limit successful function in the world then they might inspire a mob of militants to come to your house and kill you—when they do that then if you have a gun, you can easily defend yourself, especially if you know how to use it. I see that before anyone can actually have an above the line attitude in life that they must develop a way to protect themselves from all the below the line thinkers in the world who want to destroy them just for raising the bars of expectation.

I could tell stories all day long of when I was a perpetual above the line thinker when I wasn’t in charge of everything where life was constantly made difficult because below the line thinkers had power over some aspect of my life and it was a constant fight. The fight for them is in keeping the expectations low for themselves so they attack above the line people because they are too lazy or too cowardly to step up to a new level and they will get quite violent to preserve their happy place below the line. That is something that a lot of these self-help books about personal accountability and business improvement ignore, how to deal with the masses that will try to show up with pitch forks and flaming crosses to hang you on it if you let them because they don’t want to think above the line. But gun ownership takes that argument off the table. When below the line thinkers realize that they can’t find a fear in you to prevent you from raising the bar, they have no choice but to step up and that is what I think the missing ingredient is in our modern culture, that recognition of fact. We need the Second Amendment not just to possibly overthrow a corrupt government or to protect our private property. We need guns to protect the intellectual nature of our American republic so that above the line thinkers can emerge and lead people out of the self-fulfilled darkness of victimhood thinking. Without that threat below the line thinkers have no incentive to become better so long as they can tear down those around them with threats and intimidation so to preserve the things they most fear in the entire world, accountability for their own actions. If you can defend yourself from the peer pressure of below the line thinkers, then you can be free to function without being impeded, which is the main cause for why more people do not think above the line to begin with, because its lonely there and the mob mentality of below the line thinkers can appear scary—but they really are quite cowardly and ineffective, like the wicked witch from The Wizard of Oz who was destroy just by having water thrown on them to reveal how small they always really were.

Rich Hoffman
Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

It is Good to See General Mattis Fired: Terminations of employement are signs of good managment and should be done more often

It is good to fire people from time to time, in fact, if you aren’t doing it when it’s needed, you aren’t doing a very good job of management. It’s not something that should make you happy, or should be doing just to be doing it, but if you are in a leadership position and don’t get rid of people who aren’t adopting the philosophy you are trying to instill, then you have to do it. Failure to do so weakens whatever it is you are doing. Contrary to the popular modern belief that jobs are entitlements, firing people is healthy for an organization, its like trimming trees or pulling weeds in a flower bed—it’s something that must be done in order to make things better. As we have all learned in the Theory of Constraints you can only be as good as your weakest links, so when you identify them, they must either be strengthened or removed for the health of your organization. And that is certainly the case with the position General Mattis held under President Trump as Secretary of Defense.

You don’t always know about a person until they are battle tested. With every new hire comes optimism that they will fit into your vision for whatever the endeavor is, and its generally a cause for celebration. After all, when you start something you should be excited and so should the people who were hired. When Trump hired all the people of his cabinet, being an optimist I’m sure he wanted everyone to work out. But of course they don’t always do and the Trump administration specifically in just two years has terminated more staff than any administration in the history of the United States. However, that’s not a negative, it’s very much a good thing. In the case of General “Mad Dog” Mattis Trump learned that the “generals” he had hired to help his administration were entirely too process oriented and not quick thinkers on their feet, so he has had to get rid of them. Especially in the case of Mattis, they were groomed in big government environments and under the pressure of reality are more Democrat than Republican leaving them with little to do in the future.

When Trump said at the beginning of his administration that he didn’t want to have troops fighting all over the world for nothing, he meant it. General Mattis had the job of ending the wars in Afghanistan and Syria and he hasn’t developed an exit strategy in the first two years that was acceptable, so Trump is moving on. Yet to hear the media report the story you’d think that Trump had no right to fire Mattis or to eliminate anyone from his administration. The outrage expressed is interesting because it shows truly how little most people know about leadership and what the role of the president is supposed to be. Government isn’t supposed to be a job creator, its supposed to be effective in accomplishing the task the job was created for. If the person isn’t accomplishing that task they should be fired.

Trump became an international celebrity with his television show essentially firing someone after each episode, the people who voted for him knew what they were getting. It doesn’t matter who you are, if you aren’t getting the job done, you should be terminated from your job. The trouble with modern sentiment is that they have been taught in their public schools, and other social circles that nobody should ever be fired or that expectations of employment are meant to be ignored that is the real problem. Like school teachers, police officers, fire departments and all other federal workers functioning under union control there is a basic assumption that the “people” are in charge and that management’s job is to issue paychecks to their employees who can pretty much do whatever they want when they want to do it. For instance, when President Trump fired James Comey the shock came more in the form that nobody ever fired a unionized worker in government because such a thing just wasn’t done—ever. So Trump must be guilty of something. That is the mentality that we are dealing with.

That is also why government is so ineffective at everything, because they are run by labor unions who make terminations difficult for management. It’s nearly impossible for a school board to fire a school teacher so as a result, we get lots of bad teachers teaching our children a lot of socialist nonsense and they have no fear of losing their jobs because they are protected by the union. The FBI became radicalized and was trying to tilt the election of 2016 in favor of Hillary Clinton and they functioned under a “protected” assumption which was part of the problem. And the people who promised President Trump that they’d do this or that in his administration were expected to perform. When they didn’t Trump has broken the trend of complacency and terminated those guilty of average results. That is a good thing, something that should be celebrated, not chastised.

There has to be consequences for failure and in a capitalist country losing the opportunity to perform is the most obvious reaction to weak links and General Mattis was a weak link in the Trump administration. The panic that the enemies of the president have exhibited were due to that understanding. They want the Trump administration to fail, so they are not inspired to see him remove weaknesses from it. But even worse for them is the fear that such expectations will translate to their own jobs. In General Mattis’ resignation letter he was less than graceful toward the president which then accelerated his exit to the start of the new year instead of waiting until February. Again, it is under the grace of the office that anybody serves, jobs are not entitlements. Why waste two more months of payroll on somebody who is not part of the future? Good management says you don’t, and Trump acted correctly on those principles.

In any successful enterprise there is always a visionary leader who communicates their needs to a large population workforce to be implemented uniformly. Employment is not a democracy—the mob does not rule. Most of the media, especially on television are part of a labor union as well so the foundation concepts of their employment are under a socialist premise that jobs are meant to be created but never managed. Only the union handles matters of structural management—which is the same as saying that nothing is ever managed. Because they are radicals, they feel it is in their own interests to call the Trump administration chaotic and out of control because so many people have been terminated under the current White House. But honestly, I would expect nothing less. Trump is doing exactly what I want to see. I think he was very fair to General Mattis, he gave him a few years and when he failed to produce results, Trump pushed him out the door for someone else to take a shot at success. And there is nothing wrong with that. The labor unions in government don’t like it, nor in the entertainment and news industry, but tough luck. Terminations are a good thing and its good to see that Trump is bringing that practice back to life in government where it should have always been the general practice. Because if the goal is to get good results, punishment is needed for those who don’t deliver. And that is the way of the world.

Rich Hoffman
Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

The Below the Line Thinking of Carl Liddy: ‘The Oz Principle’ and the slut’s diamond necklace

It’s always interesting to observe the way people function. I’ve been to several events this year where people of importance specific to politics gathered and this guy wasn’t there. So it is always amazing to ponder where they get their authority and how they attempt to frame a reality which they desire in their minds. But through a lot of cigar smoke I did hear that there were a few people like this harassing friends of mine in a public shaming campaign that often goes on not just with me, but with people who challenge as some sort of change agent, the static order of the day. What is even more telling about these types of people is that they claim to know more about your reality than you do such as in this example below. How could this person possibly know all the people I come in contact with that personally asked me on the very day of the comment to run for some public office in 2019 or 2020? At least 15 different people asked me that very question on the day of this comment yet this loser sends me this:

No one really wants you to run for public office. You’re a joke and an embarrassment to local GOP officials. Your belief that people want you to run is a further sign of your very sad delusions of grandeur. You need to get help.

Carl Liddy
carlliddy236@hotmail.com
71.64.193.29

Ironically on that very day I had just completed a reread of the classic business book on social conduct called The Oz Principle which is incredibly telling about human nature. The book uses the many metaphors of the even more classic story of The Wizard of Oz to explain above and below the line thinking regarding personal accountability and a general approach to life. When someone picks a fight with me, I have a policy to never let it sit, but it also doesn’t mean that you make a belt out of the person either so a response is always required of some kind and the reason I function that way is expressed in that very good book. I have been on a project so revisiting some of these very American literary classics that are direct products of American capitalism has been a wonderful experience, books like John Kotter’s Leading Change and all the works by Eliyahu Goldratt, and Getting to Yes by Roger Fisher all have in them a common theme, they attempt to remove a “loser” attituded from the reader so that they can be successful. Now for me when I read them they only affirm what I have already known, because I have lived the principles they teach every day of my life all my life. But it was The Oz Principle that made me think of this loser Carl Liddy who is obviously a below the line thinker. Who is this greasy sloth to go around lobbying people not to read my blog and to cast aspersions about my name to fulfil a narrative that only exists in his own mind so that an illusionary existence can be maintained from his personal frame of reference, which is certainly below the line under any definition of conduct?

To call me a joke to the local GOP is a desire of his not a reality of mine and The Oz Principle covers these types of subjects nicely. The way that The Oz Principle is used in that great business book is that companies in need of change so that they can be successful are usually filled with below the line thinkers, people who desire to sabotage success and the convenient cover of other people so they can participate in blame games when something doesn’t go correctly. Any organization that wants to improve their circumstances must get rid of such people, or teach them to think differently. For instance, one of the reasons I write this blog every day is because I realize most people can’t read as fast as I do, or don’t have the tools to live life and extract from it the good things that I have. So I use Kotter’s methods of change agency to shape the landscape not just to my favor but one that is conducive to reality. If our present circumstances have been corrupted by below the line thinkers for instance, which we know is quite common in our human interactions, then the way to change that is through recognizing the condition and letting people see it and correct the behavior. And it has been working, since I started this journey a long time ago change has occurred and the people who count have benefited by these words greatly. I don’t expect anybody to admit it in the light of day, but their actions in the political realm is all the thanks I require.

Below the line thinkers need the approval of other people because they require other people to confirm their version of reality. Humans being social creatures tend to shape their conversations to whomever is present, such as for instance a woman is trying to figure out what man she is going to let pick her up at a bar for a night-cap and several approach her. One man talks about football and the upcoming playoffs. The girl likes the guy physically, but he’s greasy in his demeanor so she wants to blow him off.  After all, who needs another dumb jock wanna’ be in their lives?  She went along with the football talk trying to figure him out but concluded that beyond his fantasy football picks that the guy was a loser going nowhere, so sleeping with him wasn’t even on the table. The next guy isn’t very good-looking but he seems to know a lot about local politics so he might know someone who knows someone who might do something for him and in a round about way give her a new diamond necklace, so she considers him after she has had another nine drinks.

So the two make fun of the previous guy and his knowledge of football teams. She lets the guy take her home and she sleeps with him but something doesn’t seem right. She finds out he’s married, and after two days of dating he is ready to divorce his wife and marry her. This girl goes along for the ride hoping to get a diamond necklace out of it somewhere, because she and he are excessively below the line thinkers and they seek to justify their value with material objects which is the primary reason they have such bad quality relationships in their lives. It’s also why it’s so easy to double or even triple talk about people behind their backs. About five months later its Christmas and the guy is still going through his divorce. The girl finds out that her fiancé is going to lose half of his assets in the divorce but to keep her interested the guy is going to buy her that diamond necklace. So they are at the jeweler and she sees that first guy there buying something who was interested in the football playoffs which are now underway. She asks him very nicely and politely what he has been up to as she introduces him to her new fiancée and he politely says that he is buying rings for his professional football team commemorating their journey into the NFL playoffs. That’s when she learns that he is the owner of their local professional football team that is on their way to the Super Bowl. Suddenly that diamond necklace doesn’t seem so shiny—or good.

We see the same kind of thing in politics every day, where below the line thinking has attracted people like this Carl Liddy loser who is just another dreamer trying to make something out of their miserable existence by looting off the value of people in politics who are in the arena. They sit in the stands and arm-chair quarterback all the happenings as if they were a part of history but in reality, they are just trying to throw gifts at people so that someone will talk to them, because they are losers and everyone knows it. And rather than let the words of a blog like this help them become better people they are at war with reality itself so that they can maintain an illusion of a value they play in the whole thing, but like the characters in The Wizard of Oz, the world is the illusion, it is their hero’s journey to discover that everything they always needed was within them all along. The example of the girl, all she had to do was not let below the line thinking contaminate an opportunity for her, she could have been dating the NFL owner, but instead she went for the typical loser who showed all the right things, but in reality, didn’t have any depth, and the two of them lived miserably until their next divorces. Reality isn’t always measured based on what you see, its in what is truly there and below the line people can’t make themselves more valuable tearing other people down. It just makes them bigger losers and everyone knows it. They may not publicly say so and in private they might tear down whomever is not in the room, but what people do and say in the privacy of their own minds tells the whole story, and that story is changing for the better day by day. And I’m happy with my role in helping it along.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

How America Created ISIS: The rest of the story that you didn’t know

It is quite a mystery if you don’t know the rest of the story as to why people are upset at President Trump for wanting to pull American troops out of Syria. Even Republicans are giving him a bad way of it, but the reasons they are upset have nothing to do with safety or security for anyone, but to continue to cover-up the real story of how ISIS came to be and what role the United States had played in the events that led to Bashar al-Assad gassing his own people, which shocked the world. Unfortunately nobody has been interested in the whys and hows Syria became such an unstable region, they only know what the news reports and the major companies that report the news are lockstep in conjunction with the political order of a globalist desire to erase the mistakes of the Sykes Picot agreement off the map for good which is how they have missed the rest of the story, as the late great Paul Harvey would have said it.

Bashar al-Assad wanted to be an eye doctor. His father had wrestled control of Syria and ruled it as a family domain and Bashar’s older brother was being groomed for the job of taking over. That left Bashar free to pursue his own interests to some degree with the support of massive wealth his father had accumulated. He spent a lot of time in London hanging out with the rich and famous there and falling in love with western ideas. He even married a very western woman from London and the two were set to live a life in the shadows the father but relatively happy. Until the older brother Bassel died in a car accident which changed Bashar’s life forever.

The father Hafez had been born in an impoverished family and rose to power at great risk to become president of Syria and he had fought hard to protect those gains most of his life, especially in a bloody conflict with the Muslim Brotherhood. But the children seldom ever saw their father leaving them all very hungry for attention. Bashar al-Assad himself had only stepped into his father’s presidential office once before he eventually became his successor. In the mind of such people a yearning for a father’s love can ignite a lifelong pursuit and in Bashar’s mind once he had been designated the successor of his father to rule and hold Syria in the family name, it was the least he could do.

And so it went for many years as the leaders of the world came to Damascus to kiss the feet of Bashar, the quiet family man who married a nice looking western woman from London and inherited a Biblical empire from his father because his older brother died leaving the rest of the family members to turn to him to hold the seat, and the country in the name of Hafez. That is until the Obama administration started fanning the flames of insurrection around the Mediterranean inspiring the Muslim Brotherhood to rise to power once again and overthrow dictator regimes in Egypt and Libya which worked. It was a Twitter led rebellion of Islamic radicals seeking to restore a unified caliphate all around the region in what the Obama administration thought was a peaceful enterprise.

All he wanted to do was play Robin Hood and steal away from the propped-up dictators of those countries their hard-fought gains and restore them to some form of democracy. Power to the people, and all that kind of nonsense. What they failed to understand was that the people of the Middle East without western influences were prone to revert back to a tribal mentality and war would escalate, if not just the desire for it. The practice of arming rebels who wanted to overthrow dictators such as in Libya, Egypt and soon Syria started a process which would directly lead to the creation of ISIS under the guidance of Hillary Clinton and her then boss, Barack Obama.

By the time the Muslim Brotherhood had turned its attention on Syria, Bashar al-Assad out of respect for his father wasn’t going to allow the same thing to happen to his country. After all, his father had defeated the Muslim Brotherhood many years prior to hold the country for the family name so still hungry to preserve his father’s memory Bashar took a hard-line against their acts of rebellion. But of course the Obama administration was on a quest to restore the Islamic caliphate and to spread democracy to every country in the Middle East. That also meant pushing Palestine over Israel and using Iran to apply leverage against Saudi Arabia while all the other dominos of power fell throughout the region. So the overthrow was defined by the press lockstep in agreement over what President Obama wanted to do to promote the protestors of Syria as “peaceful.” But such an action was in direct conflict with the ambitions of Bashar al-Assad to hold the country under the family name out of respect for his father. So he did whatever had to be done to push the protestors back, which is how the gassing of his own people came to pass.

Likely it was Bashar’s crazy younger brother who had administered all the military activity in gassing the Syrian rebels, men women and children but it was the reluctant eye doctor turned dictator president who was in charge and therefore responsible and he was at a lost as to what to do. He couldn’t let down his father’s memory and the world itself was pushing the rebellion against him, especially in the United States under the Obama administration so he was perplexed at how to proceed.

That is when President Putin flew to Damascus to assist Syria with military support because it offered Russia a chance to stick it to Obama passive aggressively for their tampering with Russian interests around the world. If Syria fell to the Muslim Brotherhood what would stop them from moving into Russian territories? So Russia started supporting Syria to help them fight the rebels and Obama’s administration started sending more weapons to the rebels which once empowered became ISIS as the radicalized teenagers with the support of the American military suddenly felt they could do anything. So they broke away from the Muslim Brotherhood and started their own leftist rebellion cutting off the heads of everyone they could and destroying tremendous amounts of history in the process.

Once Trump became president, he had promised to defeat ISIS which he did simply by cutting off the money and weapons that had been flowing to them under the Obama administration. And that brings us to the present situation. President Trump has no interest in spreading an Islamic caliphate by using the American military or the CIA to fuel rebellions in the region. He doesn’t want Syria to gas their own people either, but would rather get America out of the tampering business and let free market solutions decide wins and losses in the region and for that politicians connected to global ambitions are really upset about it. But to understand why, you have to know the rest of the story, which now you do.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

Take the Shutdown: It could be a lot worse

Shut it down! Shut down the government, forever as far as I care, and build the wall! Build the wall tall, and wide and draw that line in the sand and stick to it. It is time for an impasse and to stop the Democrats from dancing in Washington bars to the music of American Pie, driving our Chevys to the levy but the levy is dry. The levy is dry and the Chevys are out of business and its time to have the real conversations that should have always been going on, walls mean a recognition of American values and those values aren’t in expanding government as a primary employer of so many non-essential employees. The government is too big, too expensive, and too damn slow and it needs to be cut back, and budget showdowns like the one we are dealing with are just the ticket. Bravo President Trump!

There was a lot made about the flexibility of president Trump to cave into what Chuck Schumer called the “hard right” where voices like Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter and even me were pretty hard on the president not to cave to the pressures of the Hill, to pass another budget impasse and kick the can down the road into January. But that is typically the role of any CEO, they listen to all the conditions and make the best deal for their side of things. Trump is always willing to listen, so he changes positions a lot. But when a radio personality like Rush Limbaugh makes a statement, its hard not to pay attention because he does have his finger on the pulse of the world. Limbaugh has conservatively 14 million weekly listeners, more than that if you count hour by hour ratings through the week. That more than most magazines and television shows, and is a huge platform to speak from. But those listeners don’t come out of thin air, they are a very real population sector that isn’t represented by other forms of entertainment, and they effectively make up the Trump base. Why shouldn’t Trump listen when the noise of Washington D.C. is attempting to use chaos as a cover for pork belly money projects that exacerbate the problem of out of control budgets?

And what bleeds our budget in the U.S. economy more than a lack of border security? Sure if people want to buy drugs they’ll find a way to get them, but why make it easy for enemies of America to poison our work force? Personally speaking I am an employer and I hire hundreds of people every year, if I want to hire 5 traditionally white American citizens, 3 of them will fail their drug test. It’s a massive problem and the enemies of America have been successful in poisoning the traditional workforce with the product they smuggle across the Mexican border with North America. I would go so far to call it a detrimental circumstance. Now also as an employer, I have my needs and they will be fulfilled, but it requires every company to think outside the box to deal with that problem. So why make it easy for such malicious characters to continue shipping the poison into America?

Without question, Democrats are all about open borders and dissolving the sovereignty of nations so that there can be one global government managed by the United Nations. That has been their plan for a long time and now that things are coming unraveled due to the Trump presidency, the strings are showing. It wasn’t so obvious to most people before because they believed all this garbage about continuing budget resolutions and monstrous government projects that just employ people to play on Facebook all day getting paid for doing nothing. Government didn’t listen when people were speaking. I have been speaking about this lunacy for years, all of my adult life. Trump was elected because many people like me stopped listening to the bullshit and started demanding results. Trump is in the White House because of the Rush Limbaugh audience and the NRA members, and the Sean Hannity audience then to a smaller extent the Fox News audience, the people who still like Clint Eastwood and John Wayne movies, the products of old Hollywood. And the pain that Democrats and Rino Republicans are feeling is that they tried to institute a change agency culture from the perspective of the Beltway and people have rejected it.

There are places in California and in New England that have subscribed to this Beltway culture of big government progressivism renamed from its previous communist terminology. Seattle and Portland are cities that are openly embracing socialism for instance. But most of the rest of North America isn’t going for it and the momentum is shifting away from them and they can feel it. There was literal desperation in Nancy Pelosi’s voice when they reacted to Trump’s proposal to shut down the government over Christmas if he didn’t get his border wall money. Because if he is successful, they will lose forever their leverage of public sentiment and that will literally destroy their base, which is already in trouble from young radicals wanting to pull the entire party further to the political left. What all of Washington D.C. culture has been espousing for decades has been out of touch with the people who put them in office and Trump was sent to the White House to clean it up. All Rush Limbaugh did was remind President Trump of that.

I did my own personal bits on the matter and we all should, after all if President Trump doesn’t have our support when he needs it most the options for us are a bloody one, and nobody wants to see that. I don’t want bloodshed, I always prefer a legal means of solving a problem. But we can’t give our country away to a world desperate to loot off our progress and to insist on socialist forms under a global flag. If the world wants help becoming independent and more capitalist in nature, I’m all for helping them out. But I am not going to allow America to be destroyed because the world’s education institutions produced a false philosophy rooted in Karl Marx and Immanuel Kant instead of the great late Adam Smith. Adam Smith’s thoughts on capitalism are far more powerful and the proof is in America. To protect that value for the world to see we need a border wall which is exactly what Democrats are afraid of revealing, the obvious differences between capitalism and socialism. If drug dealers and Marxist revolutionaries cannot flood the American population with Trojan horse insurgents, then how does the Democrat party survive in the future? The answer is that they don’t.

So I applaud the stand the Trump administration is taking. I fully support it. I don’t care if thousands of government workers are at the homeless shelters out of work, because its better than armed insurrection. A lot less blood will be spilled this way, which is how the system is supposed to work. But a word of caution to the big government types, the CIA, the FBI and all the losers who watch every little thing I do as well as others like me who listen to Rush Limbaugh, are proud NRA members and are severely anti-drug, anti-illegal immigration and Trump supporters through thick and thin—be happy Trump is protecting you from a real judgement day. Take the government shut down and shut the hell up—for your own good.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

Why the World Needs Trump’s Border Wall: Defining values that make for good and bad lives

Yes, the United States must have a wall between the Mexican and American border, a real, physical barrier that people can see and which prevents unwanted crossings. And the reason why is more than just a political discussion, it’s a deep philosophical difference that is required to be recognized for the benefit of existence. Not all people in the world are equal, some feed thoughts that are quite disastrous to themselves and those around them while others are quite productive and leave in their life wake benefits that cascade into those around them. But due to the freedom of human beings to engage in free thought, the quality of their thinking produces people of differing values. When you magnify the results of many people in such a situation then it can be said that entire nations have radically different values which then become apparent at places like the Mexican/American border.

On the American side of that border is a capitalist country that uses a monetary system to determine values from everything to what kind of house people choose to live in to the more tangible elements of success and failure. On the Mexican side are the results of a failed Marxist revolution that has left in its wake a collectivist mindset impoverished and in a primitive state. The people are the same on both sides of the border, they are human with one head, two arms and two legs. But what makes them different is in what they think about. And of course, what one thinks about is what one becomes. When basic survival is the primary concern embarked on in Mexico it should come as no surprise that they live in dreadful habitats close to mud huts, and in some cases they do. Food, and sex are their primary concerns, then in raising the products of those thoughts, the children that spawn from them.

In America there is more to the culture because capitalism has provided more options to think about, thus there are more conditions for which to build a life from. Houses are different, the cars are different, the people dress different, act different, there are more food choices—all this because capitalism provides more avenues of thought other than just basic survival. When these results are multiplied across the range of human experience for that country the net gains generated from thought are obvious to even a casual observer.

Enemies of capitalism of course recognize this problem and they have every intention in the world of trying to blend the lines between the two so that one side does not feel superior to the other, because their advocacy is for a more socialist world. So the capitalist mode of thinking must be attacked in two basic ways, through the promotion of no barriers, and through the easy flow of drugs which at the high level of strategy between global interests, are intended to poison the minds of the capitalists so that they can no longer think such beautiful thoughts which make such a great American country. So the smuggling of narcotics into the American country is part of a globalist strategy to ruin the minds of the residents so that the distinction between the two countries, Mexico and America, are not so obvious. Drugs keep the people who use them in a state of primitive ambition which puts them on the same level as the typical socialist, and that is the strategic goal. The tactical application is the dealing in actual drugs to the customer base in the capitalist zones. Therefor, a country that wishes to retain its intellectual virtue must make that process difficult.

Individual liberty is surrendered when the choices that are made have an impact on the individual sanctity of those around them. This is why I am not a “libertarian.” Unfortunately, everything affects everything else, so the drug user who is in their home doing drugs for their own enjoyment is actually destroying quite a lot on the outside world, especially if they are raising children with the same reckless values. So a nation has a right to make drugs illegal if they rob a country of the ability to protect individuals from the incursions of impositions created by the drug induced. The illiterate drunk standing on the street corner is a similar villain because their presence lowers the thinking of those around them. There is nothing more disgusting than a perfectly healthy adult puking on the side of a bar after drinking too much and people having to observe such a thing thinking about it the rest of their night. Such observations lower the appeal of a capitalist society and bring people’s thoughts to lower quality ambitions by default.

The freedom to live, and think is a universal appeal but what is left for us to define is the quality of those definitions. The people of Mexico are living, and a bum in the desert is thinking and living freely while they exist in the back of a 50-year-old mobile home with the doors barely hanging from their hinges. But if such a thing were placed into the middle of a neighborhood where the average home value was $500,000 it could easily be displayed that the quality of thought for the entire community would be lowered. Having to look at such a monstrosity or talk to such a free-wheeling person at the community pool would lower the expectations of all the other residents and those thoughts would bring down the entire social structure of the ambitious capitalist culture and evoke negative judgment. So while we can say that everything and everyone should be free, the monetary value of some measurement must be applied to create the law and order that government can never provide.

To protect that value, we must have a barrier of some kind to disguise good thought from bad, and to make it much harder for the bad to influence the good. What the enemies of capitalism want is to remove value from society so that they can redefine it under collectivists assumptions. That is their objective and why they are so against Trump’s border wall proposals doing anything they can to prevent it from happening. Their desire is to blend the cultures so that the quality of thinking on one side is diminished and the other side uplifted because they can have access to the more advanced culture. But the barrier is needed to inspire one culture to look at what put them in such a dismal place and to correct the behavior. The determining factor as to what one side does and one side doesn’t do well is determined by the value of economic means—which are produced by the quality of the thinking that produced those attributes. The culture that doesn’t have such benefits might wan to point across the border and declare the people living in million-dollar homes as villains because they spent most of their lives having 20 children by five different women, and not learning who to do things that mattered economically, but that doesn’t change the nature of reality. The border wall is for the benefit of those on both sides. Those living in bad circumstances need to come to terms with it instead of focusing all their attention onto fleeing into a capitalist country that has opportunity. They need to make opportunity for themselves. And until there is a physical barrier illustrating the difference definitively, they won’t be inspired to do so.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

The Corrupt FBI: Until they fix their own problems, they have no authority to pass legal judgement on anything

I’m going to make a not so bold prediction and state that Judge Emmett Sullivan is going to throw out the guilty plea by General Flynn on Tuesday because it is now obvious that the FBI obtained that plea through deceitful means. I know everyone doesn’t pay attention to these stories because there are a lot of other things to think about that are a lot more pleasant, but this FBI case against Trump and the people of his administration is the biggest story on planet earth. It’s not so much about politics or whether you are or aren’t a Trump supporter, it really comes down to the nature of justice. If the FBI isn’t punished for their misdeeds in the Trump case then we have no real justice. There is nothing we can trust regarding law and order. If the Flynn plea sticks, we could be said to never trust anything from any court ever in relation to the United States of America, because if they can’t get this right, they could never get anything correct. The Robert Mueller special council case against the Trump presidency initiated by the Democrat operative James Comey is the biggest corruption case in the history of the world, because much of the Washington D.C. establishment has been in on the game, and if punishment is not issued then the entire legal system is in jeopardy. For those not so familiar with the case you can catch up with this video of Judge Jeanine from Fox News.

The same Mueller who has been pressing General Flynn for information on Trump effectively ruining his life, and who pressed Michael Cohen to flip against his old boss, and with Paul Manafort in jail who was the campaign manager for Trump for a short time in 2016 knew that employees on his special counsel such as Peter Strzok and Lisa Page had over 19,000 texts wiped off their phones by the Department of Justice prior to handling them over to the investigation, destroying evidence. By Mueller’s own rules against the people he’s been pressing, everyone involved in the FBI who either destroyed evidence or allowed for the destruction of evidence in this case should not only be fired, but should be in jail with Paul Manafort as well. You can’t have it both ways Bobby Boy. You can’t convict people of a crime when you are the one who committed the crimes, and in this case, much more severe crimes. No wonder James Comey is running around doing television because he knows that he’s in the middle of all this mess and if he wants to survive, he needs to try to spin the story away from him while his friend Bob Mueller continues to attempt to bring down President Trump any way possible. The FBIs only defense in this case is to hope that they keep everyone else on their heels so that nobody has time to deal with the crimes they made in trying to manipulate an election and overthrow a sitting president. That is why this is the biggest case of corruption in the world, because without honest American elections, no place in the world can have any hope of doing anything right. If it fails in America it will fail everywhere.

I continue to feel sorry for Michael Cohen, an attorney who gets paid to say anything on behalf of his clients. Now he’s facing jail time and the FBI has exposed his criminal conduct on other matters, so he is out there singing like a canary on a spring morning with the windows open. He’s hoping to get a reduced sentence so he can stay out of jail so he’s helping build credibility for the Mueller case to get that reduced sentence. Sure I think he’s lying. I also think there was probably some hanky panky going on with the girls that were paid off by Trump, but I didn’t vote for a saint by any means. Trump was a playboy and Melania knew it. That is there deal and if Trump wanted to keep some women from yacking, I really don’t care about that. Most of the world does not live by the kind of ethical standards that I expect, so that disappointment is trivial to me. The question was whether it was illegal or not. For that Michael Cohen has essentially had his life ruined and pushed into becoming a spokesman for the Mueller investigation.

Yet we are supposed to think that paying off an ex-Playboy bunny and a porn star to keep past relationships out of the newspapers is bad, but we are supposed to not be angry that the Department of Justice met with Bill Clinton, the husband of a presidential candidate to work out a deal to get the FBI off her tail over her illegal email server, or that Hillary and her staff destroyed evident before turning them over to the FBI, and that the DOJ themselves now have been caught destroying evidence as well to hide their actions against President Trump during the transition phase. We are supposed to forget about the illegal spying on his campaign. The illegal DNC funded dossier meant to be used as leverage against the incoming president and the illegally obtained FISA warrant. But we are supposed to be concerned about payoffs to women, forgetting about where or when certain things happened, or crimes of people in the Trump campaign that aren’t even related to Trump—but are inspired to apply a guilt by association verdict? Give me a freaking break!

I’m a law an order guy. Even though I may be one of the most surveilled people on planet earth I am also one of the most honest. People could rifle through my life all day long, and likely they do, and they couldn’t find much of anything illegal. I will admit that I am a person who drives very fast, so speeding on the road might be something they could find, or running through stop lights when I know its safe. But on matters of ethics, I don’t know anybody more ethical than I am on all matters, and I know a lot of people. Honesty is important to me and I live by it. So when I say that I do not recognize the authority of the FBI because they have lost my trust, I mean it. Nothing they do until they put some people in jail from their own side can change that. They are as corrupt and evil as any organization on earth. And I’m not willing to give a free pass to the field agents the way Sean Hannity does. I don’t think this corruption is just at the top, because in my experience that type of activity cascades down to everyone. Corruption is a cultural problem, not an isolated one, and if the FBI was willing to destroy evidence with the Trump campaign, and so openly with so many people involved at the highest levels, then what else have they done. Can we believe anything they’d done over the years? I would argue not and the burden is on them to restore their credibility. It isn’t on me to believe them, or you dear reader. The FBI and DOJ under the Obama administration really screwed up and its their burden to fix. And until they do, they as an organization have lost their authority. They mean nothing to me, I can tell you that.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

Corporations Should be in Charge of Mars: Governments can’t even control themselves, let alone space

As I have been enjoying the National Geographic series, Mars on their network station the latest episode from this past week hit on really the philosophic difference between a liberal and a conservative and further defined my assertion that the two cannot share in governing responsibilities of anything. And now with the very real possibility of settling people on Mars, which I’m all for, we have to look in the mirror and come to some terms within ourselves once and for all. Because this problem is literally in everything, we do hour by hour every day of the week—and that is who is in charge of society. Liberals turn to government, conservatives turn toward money—generally speaking. One reverts back to primitive notions of controlling and regulating society, the other turns toward money measurements and the bottom line. Both wan to assert value into the management of whatever we are talking about. In the case of Mars, this particular episode that I’m referring to offered that we must be cautious to not let evil corporations take over the work of exploring Mars, and that we should preserve Mars for academia to explore at their back of the train pace and that the entire purpose for going there would be to learn about it, not to exploit its natural resources. So there is already an argument as to who will control Mars, just s there is on earth as to who should drill for oil, and who should not and by what methods.

I personally get tired of hearing that all corporations are evil because they want to make a profit and that they should be tightly controlled by government. Yet there is no proof in the entire history of the world that government does much of anything right no matter what country they represent or economical means they pick. Governments are slow and generally feel they shouldn’t exist by any performance measurements. However, corporations are constantly measured by many factions, if not by their share holders directly, by their internal need to compete with some other company. They can’t get away with being a bad company making bad products because market forces regulate them in the mutually agreed value of money. Governments resent this value because they simply resist the need to be measured. The proposal on the National Geographic Channel regarding Mars was that it was our first task as viewed by science to understand Mars and preserve it, not to exploit it the way mining companies are sure to do as ran by corporations.

This is why I personally dislike government workers, because no matter where they are, they generally feel that performance is not something that should be measured in whatever they do. School teachers in public school certainly don’t want to be judged on their performance, and neither does the FBI. It was just a few days ago that we learned that Robert Mueller knew about the destruction of evidence on Lisa Page and Peter Strzok’s cell phones by DOJ officials so not to incriminate any of the Obama intelligence officials in the attempted coup of the next elected president. Some of the worst corruption by any government in the world was revealed in the wake of the Trump election. Whether or not the readers here voted for President Trump or not, or like him or not, what was exposed was absolute proof that government shouldn’t be in charge of anything, because they can’t handle the temptations to not operate from a corrupt vantage point. The checks and balances do not work in government because they have no regulatory controls themselves. All we have as a society to keep government under control is the voting booth and the threat of owning guns to take over that government at gunpoint should things get really bad. So why should government be in charge of anything? Especially Mars.

Even going back to Plato’s very good book, The Republic, people have struggled to come to terms with who should be in charge of society. In American culture under capitalism market forces have turned out to be our best bet. People who work for corporations at least have some context to pursuing goodness in life. Sure they try to cheat on occasion to get competitive advantage over their rivals but market forces do a remarkably good job of sifting out value. A bad company seldom ever survives far into the future if they can’t figure out how to make money within their organizations and that value cascades throughout their organization and into their customers. When a liberal says that all corporations care about is the “bottom line” I say, well of course they do. At least they care about something. Government doesn’t care about anything.

Without companies getting involved and chasing after the value of money so they can make some of it, Mars is just sitting up there doing nothing. The rocks and minerals that might have some economic value are stuck in a static phase and have been apparently for millions of years. They will remain until either some new natural disaster such as a planetary collision or our own sun runs out of fuel and eventually overtakes our entire solar system with gravitational forces that literally destroy everything into a super powerful gravitational trash compactor, or humans through corporate investment might use some of those tools to advance society beyond a Type 1 civilization. Eventually if humans want to survive into the future, we have to not only leave the solar system, but the universe itself. There isn’t anything to preserve in life because everything is always in motion and if the value of money is providing guidance into the value of whatever activity is being undertaken, then the efforts are wasted.

Money is not evil as government generally attempt to propose. Corporations put a lot of money into politics essentially because there isn’t anything else to trade that has any real value but money. Ethics is a value but not one that can be traded for building relationships, so if money isn’t the root of everything that is good on planet earth, than what is? It was liberals who stated that money was the root of all evil because they are in denial of what makes all elements of civilizations tick. We have studied the world and can see many ancient cities that were building magnificent buildings and aspiring to becoming great economic powers. That is of course what we consider to be first-rate societies, what kind of economic power they had. A spear chucker from some third world country doesn’t have much value no matter how much National Geographic photographs their naked bodies, because they are not advancing mankind beyond its present state. Only some method of advancement is acceptable and under capitalism the value of money is turned loose to provide that much-needed value assessment that everything requires. If something is good, people will pay for it, and that money then fuels all other activities which advance the corporations and thus the human race. Governments do not do that, they only hold advancements down because they function without a value system to guide them.

Global warming isn’t a value system, it’s a religious belief. It’s not enough to state that a planet or a migratory species should be saved by the antics of evil corporations unless money is injected into the mix to bring value to the conversation. Money is the invention that mankind has invented to sort out good activity from bad. Nature by itself is just there. To have value humans invented money to extract value from nature. So the real argument is whether or not human life should just be like other life and just live and die like everything else, or should it seek to advance itself to not only save itself from the natural disasters that are sure to come anyway, and possibly save many other lives along the way. Because left alone, nothing but death will happen to everything. For anything to have a chance as sustainable life into the future, money has to be the minimal measurement of success or failure. Because government is part of the problem due to their lack of internal measurements and tendency to act corruptly because of it. They can’t be in charge of Mars, the moon, or anything in space. They can’t even govern themselves.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

There is No Justice: The F.B.I and much of the legal world is up to no good as the Cohen case proves

So Michael Cohen is going to jail on March 6th for three years just because he was the attorney for President Trump. We have to remember what went on here, the F.B.I. kicked in the door of a sitting president’s lawyer to ransack the place in order to look for information for which they could extract to remove that elected president from office. And when they didn’t find that information they leaned on someone close to the president, in this case his personal attorney, to squeeze anything they could out in testimony so that they could build a case of getting rid of that. And when all they found were a few sketchy financial transactions they sent the attorney to jail for 3 years pretty much as a warning shot to anybody they‘d come after in the future—until President Trump was out of office. It’s a blood thirsty game and is deeply corrupt. And it is proof that there are many kinds of justice, and money can’t buy them all. The level of justice we are witnessing when the legal profession attacks one of its own in Michael Cohen and puts him in jail so that they can try to kick out the president sitting in the White House is as dirty as it gets especially in the context of history.

Remember when the “birther” movement was in full steam, when there were constitutional questions about whether or not Barack Obama could actually be president because it was unknown if he was actually born in the United States? As a kid he grew up in Indonesia and was raised by a globetrotting mother who associated openly with communists and radical thinkers and there is a lot of debate whether or not Obama actually knows who his dad is. He thinks he does but it’s highly likely that not even he is sure of it all. So how could the nation? It was a legitimate question to bring up and opponents to Obama did. But even for asking the question we were called “birthers.” The liberal contention was that it didn’t matter where Obama was born. He was a black man. He was president. To them it didn’t matter if Obama was born on the Moon, they would argue that nothing was going to remove their president from office, and they attacked anybody who thought otherwise.

Where are the same passions from the conservative side of things? What the intelligence agencies have been doing to Trump is all by itself very criminal, to the level of organized crime. A typical mafia boss has more ethics than the DNC and the F.B.I. based on what we’ve seen. The more we have learned about James Comey the more we understand how terrible the leadership of the F.B.I. truly was and this whole Mueller special investigation is a direct spawn of Comey’s radical antics, of actually stealing material from the Oval Office and leaking it to the press. Of wire tapping the transition team at Trump Tower and lying to FISA courts to attempt to undo an American election. All this stuff is so much more serious than questioning whether or not Obama was born in the United States. Yet the case against his birth in America is far stronger than any Russian collusion story.

Sure, Michael Cohen was a little slimy, in all reality, what attorney isn’t? The legal system itself is slimy, so why wouldn’t a good one be on the shady side? Personally speaking I could never defend a murder suspect or someone engaged in questionable activities as an attorney because I couldn’t put my ethical standards up for sale like that. If I didn’t believe in the client, I couldn’t do the work. Any attorney that can I think is slimy. Ethical defense is not up for sale and the way the legal system is presently states quite clearly that money can by such a thing. Obviously Donald Trump the billionaire working in a slimy town of New York where corruption ran everything had to conduct slimy activities to be in any kind of business and that’s why lawyers were hired, to handle slimy details. Cohen offered himself as just such a person so nobody is expecting a highly ethical figure in Trump’s attorney. Nobody ever did.

Yet the legal system understands that rule which is why they went after Cohen in the first place. In their need to find dirt on President Trump they went to the slimy figures in his life that are there by business necessity knowing that if they wanted to make some kind of case against the president, that they should start there. So they broke into Michael Cohen’s office sending a direct message to the President of the United States that nothing around him was safe. And the point of the Comey leaking of documents to inspire the investigation of his friend Bob Mueller was to set up the hope of impeachment if Democrats managed to take the House of Representatives at some point. Which was a reasonable calculation considering many Never-Trumper Republicans wanted to retire leaving so many seats vulnerable to Democrats. The whole game as been a scam and abuse of power and has resembled nothing regarding law and order. It’s all about power and politics. None of these legal actions have been about justice, only about retaining power and pushing out of power representatives elected within the context of the republic of America.

If we’ve learned anything from all this it is that the legal system is largely a travesty created only to control the flow of power to those who truly want to deny that America is a republic instead of a majority ruled democracy. Therefor they cannot accept that Donald Trump was elected president to upset that entire legal apple cart so they have used every dirty trick available at the highest level of politics to destroy the Trump presidency, which has not been successful and it won’t be. Every year since he jumped on the scene, I have liked Donald Trump more and more. I started out supporting him because of his business background and he had a chance to bring business logic to politics. I didn’t care that he was an over the top playboy over the years, I only cared that he bring business level decisions to the Executive Branch. But as I’ve watched him under fire and withstanding the heat, I like him more and more—and so do most Americans. People know what’s going on here, but even knowing it doesn’t prepare you for the audacious reality once it’s presented in all its ugliness. And the Cohen case is ugly. At best it is gross abuse of power by the highest powers in our political system and it deserve severe punishment for all the actors involved. I know where I am personally with all this, but I keep wondering when everyone else will catch on. I have no faith in the F.B.I. or the CIA, or even Homeland Security. I think those organizations are filled with perverts, power-hungry despots and general losers—which is why they seek government work instead of the bold frontier of private sector efforts. But this Cohen case only confirms what I have long suspected, and it can’t be allowed to stand. I’m not OK with it, I’ll say that much. In my view government works for the people who put them in power and I’m not a happy employer.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.