Tag: Rich Hoffman

The Day After: Getting along in politics was never the goal–only winning any way possible

I think for me the battle began during the 2008 election season where John McCain ripped into the WLW radio personality Bill Cunningham for disparaging his presidential rival’s name, Barack Hussain Obama. It was in fact the guy’s name, yet McCain seemed to be playing a game none of us were aware of, including Cunningham who covered politics nearly to the extent that Rush Limbaugh had for many years. It was a kind of WTF moment for me in wondering why Republicans were so weak when it came to defending themselves against potential domestic enemies, defined by those who cannot agree at least that the American flag is a symbol of freedom and prosperity to the world. Anybody who says otherwise in my view is a domestic enemy that needs defending against as we all promise to uphold by the United States Constitution. Then there was the campaign of John Kasich which again involved Bill Cunningham from WLW. They campaigned together at Voice of America Park in West Chester, Kasich sounding like a Tea Party patriot. Only two years later, both men would turn wildly to the left and become something much more progressive. Then around that same time Mitt Romney lost to Barack Obama just as McCain did because he shared with the former some “nice guy” view of politics that the other side wasn’t playing equally. So that gave us four more years of the socialist Barack Obama and I personally had enough. When Donald Trump threw his hat in the ring, I was one of the first that signed up and the two speeches Trump gave on Thursday of February 6, 2020 was precisely the reason.

I have had enough of niceties in politics, I want people who represent me and my interests. I don’t think its healthy for everyone to play nice in the sandbox, I want to see friction and debate, because that is how we determine the strength of a thought, through competition and testing in a democratic fashion. The goal was never to get along. It was to win, as a nation, things that were good for the nation. And the Democrats showed clearly in these last three years or so since a true representative had been elected what they were always about. They have from the beginning been domestic enemies, going back to Woodrow Wilson and FDR. Kennedy if you look at the evidence of his murder was killed for many of the same reasons that politicians have been trying to get rid of Trump, to control the public narrative and keep the bar within reach of the most lazy Washington bureaucrat. For anybody who would care to challenge that assertion, the Trump administration a few years ago declassified the Kennedy assassination role that our own government played in it and to nobody’s surprise, it reads like the texts between Lisa Page and her loverboy Peter Strzok. It was quite appropriate for Trump to take a victory lap by reading those texts again for everyone to remember, just for the record.

Yes, we have been dealing with bad, evil people and the responsibility to do something about it falls on all of us. I am just thankful that the Trump family has been willing to do the job, because what has happened to President Trump since his election has been nothing short of an actual assassination. If we were living in less public times, like it was when television was new in 1962, an actual killing would have been the preferred method of eradicating a political rival. In fact Kennedy was a Democrat believe it or not, but he was the kind I might even support. The way he stood up to communism in Cuba and Russia was important, even if it did get communist supporters working in our own government to the blueprint table to plan his assassination as a byproduct. Then of course there was that ridiculous notion of going to space when the government of America wanted young people wallowing in the mud at Woodstock naked and afraid—and drugged into voting for a more socialist kind of Democrat—ones like Bernie Sanders who would continue to function in the House and Senate for decades before finally pulling their masks off in 2016. They did kill Kennedy by setting up the circumstances that would produce his brutal murder in front of a crowd and terrify onlookers into cleaving for government into the known future. A hostile act that would otherwise be viewed as a declaration of war, only who would we fight? The enemy was unseen in the publishing houses of New York, in the chambers of congress itself, and in the many academic institutions across our country committed to brainwashing young people into the spread of communism as it was viewed globally during the 30s, 40s, 50s then climaxing in the 60s.

The obvious anger Trump expressed on the day after his acquittal was more than justified. I had been thinking much the same thing and it was very nice to hear him articulate those emotions properly. I keep hearing from people that the nation is divided, and that politics has become so divisive as if there were some rule against aggression. That good ideas should be shelved if they hurt the feelings of other people, and that just isn’t the way things work or should ever work. Conflict leads to honesty and understanding. It is good to be respectful, but when we hear that someone wants to play nice, watch out, they are up to no good. There is always a trick to the method, an attempt to lower our defenses so that some enemy of ideas can sneak in and destroy their target unmolested, just as Obama did with John McCain in 2008. McCain’s running mate Sarah Palin, a woman that the left should have embraced was attacked in every way conceivable, viciously just because she was attached to a Republican ticket. That should have told everyone what kind of game was going on in a day when people weren’t so divisive because the expectation back then was that the political right would just take it while the political left had their way with everything.

So, the speeches yesterday by Trump were a long time and coming. I’ve waited a long time to hear them and was actually relieved that our system of government, as a republic, had lasted a serious attack by domestic enemies who obviously dislike what America was and intends to be. It is better to fight them legally than in the streets and door to door, but make no mistake about it, that continues to be on the table. Getting rid of Trump will not allow them to roll across America and take it over with some socialist view of the world. The niceties are over, the gullible John McCain types with John Kasich and Mitt Romney, those days are over and have been for around a decade now. Trump is the future and fighting back whether its them, or some of us who might have to step up but playing nice is not in the card deck. Winning is. The goal in politics is not to get along, its to represent the people who voted for you. And if that means punching people in the face metaphorically, or otherwise, then so be it.

Rich Hoffman

Why Democrats Hate Trump and Republicans in General: The choice between being a winner or a loser

It took a few days for it all to settle in, the debacle for the Democrats in Iowa, the terrible reaction to the State of the Union address President Trump gave this week, and the acquittal in the senate of the failed impeachment attempt of that same president, but the essence of the failures of the Democrat Party are deep and reflect an America most people despise, that of the loser. Its one thing to have compassion for people who are born losers, its quite another to allow ourselves to be controlled by them. We don’t want losers telling us what to do, and we certainly don’t want our lives limited by them. And what we saw this week by Democrats under great pressure, because the Republican Party under President Trump’s leadership is working very well, are members of the other party that just can’t compete, and they are fully aware of it. All their attempts to “equalize” the situation failed leaving them essentially to be a heaving mess of below the line thinking that nobody finds attractive. It reminded me why I simply don’t like Democrats, its not due to their race, their sex, or even their essential philosophy they say is steeped in compassion for other people, the planet, or even the less talented, its because their view of the world is rooted in negative victimization and nothing else, and that was never what becoming an American or staying an American was ever supposed to be about.

Plenty has been said by lots of smart people regarding the events of this past week, but nothing says incompetency like the Iowa caucuses. When people asked me about it, and these other events my reply was to compare it to a football game. Any quarterback from even a high school team can hit a running receiver in stride 30 yards down the field if they know where they will be at precisely the correct time that the ball is released from their hand, so long as they have 5 seconds or more to make the decision to throw. However, when a quarterback must play against a good defense and the line of the opposition is pressing down on that quarterback in 2.5 seconds or less, then even good quarterbacks will look like bumbling fools on the field of play. The Democrats are used to having all the time in the world to throw the ball, Republicans in the past have not pressed them out of some gentlemanly agreement to be equally deficient in performance. That is until President Trump came along from the private sector and started applying expectations to government—which is the source of their hatred of him. Suddenly there were expectations on Democrats that they just were not ready to deal with, and instead of trying to get better over the last three years, they have bet everything on getting rid of the expectation, symbolized in President Trump.

The media has gone along with the game allowing the Democrats to feel empowered as a political class to some level of competency so long as there was never any real measure. But Trump brought measures with him to Washington D.C., the same kind of measures that all private industry is judged by and the essence of it is that Democrats just weren’t ready. And when it was showtime in Iowa, it was an embarrassing mess. And when the State of the Union speech was given by President Trump, the Democrats could only sit there and listen as they spent all their time and energy being the opposition to Trump’s measures that they couldn’t share any joy in the long list of accomplishments that the President spoke about for over an hour straight. All they could do is sit there like the victims they have chosen to be, or to protest all together by not showing up, wearing white outfits to reflect the women’s suffrage movement from the turn of the last century, or do as Nancy Pelosi did at the end of the speech, rip it up because they had found themselves behind on all of it.

Then of course the next day, Republicans in the senate, except for the chameleon Mitt Romney, voted to acquit the President of the attempted coup by Democrats by quelling impeachment dashing any hopes of removing Trump from office before the election in November. That is what having a winning attitude will do for a person or a party, people tend to unite behind it and bask in its joy. But when your entire platform is about being a victim, that’s not at all an attractive prospect. People may see themselves as losers, but few people are happy staying that way and that’s all the Democrats are offering, which is why as a party, they are failing so epically. I hate to say it again, but I predicted all this many years ago and sure enough, its happing right on schedule. It’s not that Trump himself did it all, he was but the vehicle. It really comes down to personal beliefs, if they are above or below the line. You can’t build a great anything if the participants have a loser attitude. Trump was elected by an excited base because they recognize in Trump someone who wants to win. They do too, and so the Trump base was born. Its not hard to figure out, its something that evolved out of a natural trajectory of thought.

What you will find dear reader when talking to the “other side” whether its in an elevator at an apartment complex in Hyde Park which is full of anti-Trump socialites who know more about wine than they do politics, or the angry mother at Kroger shopping for weekend snacks for her family while running all three of her kids from one sporting event to another and doesn’t have time to know what’s going on in the outside world aside from what she sees on Yahoo’s front page of news, is that people who dislike Trump or Republicans in general are angry at their own lack of understanding about the world and their laziness to do the work in learning more so they could be more informed. They want to remain below the line people, people obsessed with what they can’t do, or what they can’t be. They want to relish in their victimhood because they just don’t have the ambition to take a positive position in their own lives on anything, and the Republicans of Trump make them feel the pressure to be more, and they hate it.

When people say they hate Trump what they are really saying is that they are too lazy to keep up and that they want to go back to the days where they didn’t feel so much pressure. Where they could give a little statement to the press about something and the media would run with it, but nobody really expected anybody to do anything about it. Democrats had likely the worst week they have had in years not because anything changed for them, but now there are measures to compare to, and that pressure is something they are not used to dealing with. It should be expected that people wanting to remain victims in life would be unhappy with the sudden growth of the country under the Trump presidency which expects good results about everything. Ripping up the SOTU speech the way Nancy Pelosi did was no different than all the attempts to impeach Trump, or to convict him just because he had expectations, they were too lazy to live with. Instead they kept their eyes on victimization when the Trump administration was bringing empowerment and before they could blink, the Democrats had lost their base almost completely. And now its too late for them to do anything about it.

Rich Hoffman

The Buckeye Firearms Association Endorses George Lang: Getting HB 178 passed

The best hope for a continuation of House Bill 178 getting passed in the Senate is to have George Lang there to help convince Mike DeWine to sign the bill, which modifies weapons law, permitting concealed carry without a license, and many other positive reforms. While many are still in debate about to what extent the Second Amendment can or should be regulated, the crazy leftist who shot up a night spot in Dayton has many conservatives weak-kneed and in need of some hand holding in the aftermath. Of the people running for the 4th District Senate Seat in the upcoming primary between George Lang, Candice Keller and Ding Dong Lee Wong, only George Lang has the clout and ability to help Mike DeWine get off the fence and back to the table to sign such a bill as HB 178. As we get closer to the primary in March, its important that voters understand the strategy and best options for the issues they are most passionate about, and in Ohio the gun rights concerns are a big topic, so a bit of context is worth our time and consideration.

Candice Keller has been asked by the GOP to step down for her comments made in August in reaction to mass shootings in general. I think many people who are logical understood that much of what she said is true, about fatherless homes, and drug users being the cause of many mass shootings, but what hurt her is that she brought up Nazi language and tousled into the gay rights debate in a way that was completely unnecessary, and it hurt the GOP brand, and her stance on Second Amendment rights, which she has been a strong supporter. But she also walked right into the poo poo by giving opponents of bills like HB 178 a face to throw darts at, and therefor a great excuse for Mike DeWine to move away from signing it. So long as Candice was a face of Second Amendment rights in Columbus then she is hurting all the politicians who support the bill but had the political skill to stay out of trouble when pressed by the media for reaction to such catastrophes like the shooting in Dayton last year. This is another reason that the media has given Candice so much prominent coverage—most of it negative, because it has forced this issue underground again and made her look like a front runner in the 4th Seat Senate race. But there is a better option, a much better one in George Lang who is every bit as much of a Second Amendment supporter, I think more so, however, he has the political skill to unite people around the bill in the Senate to the Governor that Candice just doesn’t have. And even if she did, it will take her years to rebuild her political clout within the GOP to be effective in those types of discussions.

The media would like to make the race for that senate seat look much tighter ahead of the primary with its secret hopes that enough people might vote for Candice so that she can be elected to that seat only to waste it on more political scandal, which would then effectively kill HB 178 for many years. However, running for a big office seat like those in the senate takes politicians who can raise money, advertise, and then not step in it when pushed by the media for comments, who can stay on target literally with their message under great stress. And to that point only George Lang has any remote possibility of being an effective senator in the 4th District. In the financial reports for the candidates that were due on Friday of last week, George Lang had cash reserves of well over $200,000 where Candice only had $12,000. So that leaves her only strategy to hope to stay relevant is to be a rock chucker and hope that she can get some headlines and free coverage to get her message out. But the problem is, the GOP wants her to resign, so any coverage she gets is always going to be negative.

Meanwhile the Buckeye Firearms Association has endorsed George Lang for Ohio’s 4th Senate district and by mid-February the NRA is going to give its support as well. George’s record and ability has the recognized strength to advance gun rights as a senator and that momentum should not be wasted by anybody who wants to see bills like HB 178 become law without becoming so watered down by passage that it would be virtually worthless. I would encourage Candice whom I think genuinely cares about gun rights to get behind George as the best option to represent the 4th District in this great debate. But more than that, George has the ability to put that needed arm around Governor DeWine’s neck to get the signature needed to make HB 178 a reality. Those are the kinds of political skills that go well beyond a simple vote in the chamber and how things really happen in any political body.

Candice due to her lack of political skill, not necessarily her fault—time will fix a lot of that—but she’s had to take some of these extreme positions on her Facebook page to try to cover her lack of connections to secure funding for a campaign. It’s a page out of the Trump playbook, but he was rich and didn’t need to raise money for advertising in the traditional way. New media can take a creative politician far, but not that far, and her lack of ability to gather a crowd that will give her thousands of dollars in donations is something that can’t be overcome with political theater alone. There needs to be other layers to the reach of a senator in any district and that range and donation ability is the kind of leverage that gets you a lunch date with the governor to even pitch the ideas outside of chamber protocol. Everything is about political clout and that is how after this 2020 election cycle HB 178 has the best chance to get back out into the voting cycle.

The NRA knows George is the best chance and so does the Buckeye Firearms Association, and others who are sure to follow. If the true goal is to get pro firearm legislation solidified in Ohio then George is the best option. If the goal is simply to get elected into the senate by any means possible and Candice has to be forced to show all these extreme cards to get the free publicity, then she can’t truly say that she wants HB 178 to pass, because she has no ability to help advance it as a senator or as a member of the House. The GOP is distancing themselves from her and I would say to Candice that her political future isn’t over, it needs repaired. Helping to get HP 178 to a senator who can help on the other side and secure sentiment with the governor would go a long way to repairing that relationship. And that would take more guts for all the right reasons than destroying everything from the inside out just to get a political win for the short run.

Rich Hoffman

Ding Dong Lee Wong: Prostitutes, collusion, and Chinese loyalty–you can go “wrong with Wong”

I’ve seen it a few times myself while dining at the very good Sushi Monk in West Chester, the liberal trustee Lee Wong posing as a Republican will knock at the back door if he finds the door is locked and come in to the restaurant making sure everyone knows that he’s friends with the owners and has special privileges. I’ve often wondered about the revelation that Lee has spent time in Hamilton’s East Avenue “talking” to prostitutes and why he would even do such a thing. But when pressed, Lee will always cite his military service then try to use it to get the upper hand on whomever he is speaking with as if that puts the entire issue to rest. But you can always tell a lot about a person in how they behave in public and his need to bum free meals off restaurant owners working hard to make a living, and coming to the back door to let everyone know that he’s special—or wants people to think he is—says everything you need to know about Ding Dong Lee Wong.

Lee is a natural moocher off the world around him. He looms in the background on everything that happens never taking the lead on anything. He votes as a trustee and has enjoyed riding on the coat tails of the great management that occurred in West Chester with trustees Mark Welch and George Lang formally, and currently Ann Becker. But he has done little himself to do anything to contribute instead looms in the background and mooches off every situation more as a complainer about fairness and advocating constantly for the rights of the Chinese that he baffles people who supposedly know him best. He’s friendly, because he has to be. He has nothing else to offer, certainly not leadership. And he is known as an advocate for policies that are very much related to Democrats rather than for Republicans. He is running as a Republican, but that is only because he knows there is no other path to an elected seat in Butler County than to put on the mask. But legislatively, he votes to the left, and sometimes to the far left. And if you happen to be in Sushi Monk on a night where he walks down from his house which is right behind the restaurant in Beckett Ridge, his manner of social content is obvious even to a political novice.

I am a big fan of Sushi Monk, its ran by nice people who are very good at what they do. What are they supposed to do when a trustee tries to befriend them in the hopes of getting a free meal? They aren’t dumb, they have been locking that back door so Lee has been walking around to the front where everyone else has to come in. But you can feel the arrogance from Lee wherever he is, a sense of entitlement that comes from people who are natural looters off the world around them. And without question that is Lee’s interest in the Ohio Senate seat for the 4th District. Lee will walk around the neighborhoods and shake hands, but what he wants is an easy seat in Columbus that makes him look like a big man, and give him more opportunities for more free meals as a big shot living off the efforts of others.

To validate what I’m saying just watch the countless videos published on the West Chester trustee meetings, he has stood in opposition to just about everything logical that either George or Mark has proposed and has stood in direct opposition with them behaving exactly as a Democrat would. The idea of someone like him even voting in the senate is a terrifying concept. If people think Mitt Romney is bad at the federal level, Lee isn’t even trying to hide it. Not that I think he will come anywhere close to being elected, but there are always some voters who don’t know the candidates who see Lee’s name on a ballot and might think “what the heck, what is there to lose?” Well, let me tell you, Ding Dong Wong is a long way from the right choice. You can go wrong, with Wong.

Knowing a Lee enough I think the only reason he wants the Senate job is for the opportunity at free meals and access to social spots he might not have otherwise. Before it was even Christmas he started putting out the signs for the March primary in his little eco car that no real conservative would be caught dead in, and hoped to get his name out to enough people to surprise the election results. Knowing him and how much he despises George Lang, I’m sure he has fantasies of upsetting him in the primary with a split vote. He dislikes Lang because he’s a pro-business capitalist and Lee is a Chinese anti-Trump sympathizer. He came to a recent Trump rally held in West Chester because he had to, but he has made lots of anti-Trump comments in his years as a trustee that are recorded on those videos to reveal how he really feels. And that is what’s really scary about someone like Ding Dong Wong, they are not what they say they are, but are something other

.

Every time I see Lee in different places I wonder about why he was on East Avenue asking known prostitutes if they were working. I have lived in the area for most of my life and I’m not even sure where East Avenue is. Why would Lee even be there asking such questions? The prostitute who reported him was Robin McDaniel who told Ding Dong Wong “no” because she thought it might be a sting. Lee has denied the allegation, but McDaniel didn’t have any reason to lie about it. Out of all the people in the world, she mentioned Ding Dong, and nobody else. When I think of it the situation sounds just like how Wong came in the back door at Sushi Monk, always a little sneaky, always a little empowered, hiding some dark personality of communist sentiment behind a mask of military service. A spiteful bootlicker as a trustee who takes some grand pleasure at pretending to be a Republican so he can hold office and ruin the plans of real Republicans like George Lang and Mark Welch. It is people like Ding Dong Wong who have always given politics a bad name, and like most Democrats do, they point at everyone else as the villains when it is they patrolling East Avenue looking for “working girls” and sneaking in the back doors of restaurants so that everyone can see that they are privileged because they have power.

I may not think these things about Ding Dong Wong if he didn’t get caught trying to funnel West Chester money into a sidewalk deal of Eagleridge Drive and Eaglet. In that deal Lee colluded with a neighbor of his, a Mr. Cho, to have a crosswalk built at taxpayer expense and he had a second vote for the motion in the long-time liberal Cathy Stoker. It was a simple matter of $4,690.00 dollars to put in the crosswalk, but that’s not the issue. The issue is that Lee has a history of using his office to make his friends happy, and he uses that happiness to gain benefits for himself. He is more in love with the power of an office than in the sacrifice of doing the work. And when questioned he always hides behind a military record that a lot of people have, yet he thinks of it as an immunity card. I think of Ding Dong Lee Wong as one of the most corrupt politicians running for any office in Ohio. And if voters aren’t careful, they’ll wake up one night to a ding dong at their back door, and what they’ll find there is Lee Wong singing a song of benefits for office access, and they’ll find themselves in a very uncomfortable position.

Click the hotlinks above for more information:

Rich Hoffman

The Problem with Candice Keller: It takes more than throwing rocks to be a good senator

In a bizarre way, everything about Candice Keller comes across as presented by Ganga Tarot in the below video—victimized, always on the outside looking in, and that conspiracy is the only answer to the future. It’s not that what Keller says about things is the problem. Everyone understands how freedom of speech these days is used to control thought and belief, so I’d be the last to say she shouldn’t have said this, or she shouldn’t have said that, and perhaps about many things she is right. But there is a difference between being a one trick pony and someone like Trump who can say similar things and escape the scrutiny of judgment untouched by scandal, and that difference follows Candice around like a ball and chain. She hopes that in the end she can use her woman status to separate herself from her rivals for the Senate in Ohio’s 4th seat, but at a time just ahead of the primary vote in March, her party has rebuked her at every level. And her response has been to resort to something more akin to the #metoo movement where her only way forward is to present herself as an undercard with a victimized status of womanhood.

The Republican Party has gathered behind the trusted leadership of George Lang for that very important seat. Looking at the Trump election for reference, the fighting among the party was vicious right up to the convention so its not uncommon for people who should be working together within the party to still be fighting this close to an important election as this primary in March. But Candice should see how the stars are lining up and be thinking of the day after instead of just trying to get a few votes by appealing to voter’s own sense of victimization. There is nothing more pathetic than such a one trick pony throwing rocks with nothing else to contribute who fails to understand that the nature of the game is to get the Party behind you, not asking you to resign. Trump’s campaign which Candice is trying to appeal to, understood that he had to unite the party by the convention, and in relation to her campaign that deadline has already passed. As a senator Candice would be completely ineffective when all she’s known for is a rock thrower screaming victimization. That makes her good points in standing for Second Amendment rights, and on abortion worthless because she has shown that she has no other means to bring people behind her legislation than to retreat behind victimization status.

I’ll be the last to say that punching back and hitting hard is beneath the needs of Party politics. However, there need to be other weapons in the holster, such as charm, team building experience, and the ability to rally people behind your cause. You have to understand the name of the game, and in politics, the reason there is a two party system, like it or not, is to force representatives to work with people of many different beliefs and get them to back an idea you propose. It doesn’t mean you have to compromise on everything, but you do have to have the skill to bend people to your will through many other methods besides just insulting them. There is a time and a place for fighting, but you have to know better when and where those times are, and just a few weeks ahead of the primary with Republicans refusing to get behind her in an established way, she is doing more damage to herself and the future she could be a part of by digging a deeper hole. My friendly advice to her would be to not resign, but to step aside quietly in this senate race and get behind George. Then live to fight another day because I see a lot of use for her contributions. But not right now after some of the devastating public relations she has had. If she continues to attack the GOP as unfair, how can she ever rally them behind her in the future, or on some new bill she proposes in the House? She must think of the long game, not the immediate need she has to save some face amidst controversy.

I make no mistake about it, that I’m for George Lang, and I am for many, many reasons. Mostly that I know him very well and for a long time, and I know he has all the skills I just mentioned. He has the needed political range and he can do well in the world by keeping things mostly above the line, and positive, which is a key for the position of senate. But more than that, even under intense pressure he has never found himself in a situation that Candace has. He’s been a frontrunner for most of his political career so its not a matter of playing it safe and not saying the wrong things at the wrong times, its just political skill. You must be savvy enough to raise money, be true to your base, and find ways to get people to work with you and not lose your soul along the way. George has done all that and more and he has had Party support. My worry is that Candice has things to offer the Republican Party and I don’t want to see her ruined after this primary election. I’d like to see her live another day and to develop her abilities beyond the one trick pony status.

It’s not enough to be a Trump supporter in Ohio and to appeal to the base. There are few politicians in Ohio, especially someone like George Lang who is considered to be a mainstream politician who is more for Trump. I remember when the entire Republican Party was supporting John Kasich and thought of Trump as a joke. George was with Trump from the very early moments. When Trump came to the Savannah Center in West Chester in the spring of 2016, well ahead of the Republican Convention in Cleveland, it was not yet popular to support Trump but George Lang was sitting right next to me in the VIP section and next to him was Margaret Conditt of the then 52nd district House seat. Sheriff Jones was there too, but not many others. Many of the VIP seats were empty and we let some lucky people come up out of the line to get a prime seat in that tight venue. I didn’t see Candice there, maybe she was in line somewhere, but the point is George has been with Trump from the beginning, and to have such a supporter in the Senate would be a great thing for Trump in Ohio and his supporters which Lang is an unquestionable advocate of the White House’s policies.

Personally, I’d like to see Candice get back into the good graces of the Republican Party as a contributor that people aren’t running from. The party could use her help, and she could use some advice in developing more tricks than just attaching herself to the Trump agenda. She needs to do more than throw rocks. She needs to do all that and a whole lot more. She needs to build bridges and get endorsements because that is attached directly to fundraising, and nobody wants a senator in the Ohio statehouse that is just a radical nobody will line up to hear speak. We had an event in West Chester and people did line up to see George Lang, a lot of people, and again, Candice wasn’t there, and she should have been. Even the liberal Lee Wong was there, although I think he thought it was the back door to Sushi Monk and was hoping for a free meal. Candice can’t hope to win an important seat in Ohio without having the Party with her, especially this close to the election. It’s the day after the primary that I’m worried about for Candice. Her place in the Republican Party needs to be much healthier not just for the benefit of all Republicans in Ohio, but for the people who need her to make good votes, put forth good bills that the governor can sign because Party unity is behind the effort, and people are willing to donate to the expensive act of campaign management. I want a future for Candice Keller, not a bottomless pit. But ultimately, its up to her to listen.

Rich Hoffman

Why EdChoice is so Beneficial: Removing Parkinson’s Law from the public education debate in Ohio

I’ve been watching and listening to the whole debate about EdChoice in Ohio with great interest. Of course, the Ohio Senate had to vote to delay the implementation of Ed Choice which was scheduled to take effect the day of this writing, until April 1st 2020. The public schools in particular have responded terribly to it, including the school in my own district which I’ve written a lot about, Lakota. It has been nothing short of embarrassing to listen to Lakota’s superintendent complain about the funding model that is coming whether they like it or not and move the entire district into a victimized status so quickly on the issue. The report back from some financial news from Lakota has not been good and they are floating the idea for another levy which would be a terrible, anti-growth tax increase just to supplement their mismanaged spending habits, so the news was bad enough. This EdChoice debate has only made things worse. Dealing with professional educators to me is the worst experience that there is in professional politics because they are so entitled and unrealistic about what they think their financial requirements should be, so we’ll deal with some of that here, and in the coming months. Listening to politicians attempt to put their minds around what to do about EdChoice, which is simply a grading system that inspires the financial contributions of the state to follow the student of that failing school to the school of their choice. This of course leaves variability in public school budgets for money they have been used to getting now going to an unpredictable number of students who may decide to go somewhere else with that precious state money.

I listened to Bill Cunningham and Representative Bill Seitz talk about this EdChoice problem on WLW and every word made me cringe. Here were two people who call themselves rock ribbed Republicans missing the whole point of the public education debate. Now, my history with these two is that they are on the wrong side of many issues. They mean well like a lot of people do, but their perspective has been tainted by years of acceptance of a system initiated by people like John Dewey during an experimentation of many things during the progressive era at the turn of the last century and like many have accepted that that’s just the way things are and the way they will always be. Money goes to the school from the state to teach children living in that district not just skills for a future job, but to turn them into democratic citizens with an emphasis on social change. In hindsight this has been a complete disaster, look at the products of the schools, which many of us are. People aren’t very smart, and they don’t set their sights very high in life. Dewey’s mistake was in attempting to steer society away from republic representation and more toward democratic majority rule, which we all know now is a disaster at the epistemological level.

For the two Bills talking on WLW about EdChoice, they are both people in their 60s and 70s now, to them public school is about sports programs, learning to follow orders so that kids learn to live in a civil society, and in establishing much needed social connections with peers. Way back, many decades ago when my wife and I pulled our kids out of public schools for a year to teach them at home because the results were just so disappointing we had family members literally melt under the news because they were afraid my kids would turn into complete social outcasts, because they believed after so many years of this Dewey philosophy that the goal of public schools was to establish these mental applications. Of course, those sentiments were completely fear based, just as about everything in public education is. We have learned to just accept the failure that is evident because that’s always the way we have done things. People like the “Bills” on WLW enjoy the idea that their public school is the holder of real-estate value, and that Friday Night Lights football in the fall months of every year make for great conversation. But it was flawed from the beginning and never was poised to do what Dewey wanted because his fundamental problem was in thinking that the state as a central authority should be in charge. It was a progressive experiment, but not a very “Republican” thing to do.

Schools like Lakota and many others who are complaining about the insecurity in their funding model should be looking at the situation like any business would instead of some free-loader sitting in a bird nest of a rich district and opening their mouths for tax money to flow in. They should be working to be the best school with the best options in a free market society. No matter what the report card states in giving families the choice of a school they’d like to go to, Lakota should feel confident that kids would want to go to their school for all the reasons that anybody would, to get a good education, be near a good sports program, or just to be around other students who aren’t problems coming from broken families. Students should have a choice and if Lakota wants those students, they should have to work to attract them.

The most tragic thing I have noticed, looking at the situation professionally, is that all public schools have become addicted to the natural state of Parkinson’s Law that has contaminated their budgeting structures. Everyone who has been involved professionally in process improvements understands that Parkinson’s Law is an adage that states “work expands so as to fill the time available for its completion,” meaning that a work schedule blankly stated will allow a worker to fill that time allotment from beginning to end by the nature of human interaction. If you give someone an hour to do a 5-minute job, they’ll take the whole hour. Process improvement demands to understand how long it actually takes to do a job, and to work out the tendencies of Parkinson’s Law to misstate labor needs. Well, that same tendency is at the center of the public education debate all across the country, and is why the EdChoice trend is so badly needed. Budgets have been filled to their maximum to accommodate whatever the state provides and to what extent local school district tax payers will put up with in increased levies driven by labor unions looking to use Parkinson’s Law to attach need to student performance by using the chaos of money going to the schools, not the student, to keep the process centrally controlled and with a false understanding of what education per student should cost, leaving the real state funding model perpetually broken, which is just how the labor unions and lazy superintendents like it.

Clearly what we have had hasn’t worked. Education needs reformed and the centralized aspects of it need to be removed. Free market solutions are the only way to improve schools and the students that come from them. People should have the option to vote with their feet putting schools into the same competitive situation that every restaurant, shopping complex and entertainment destination must do, compete for the dollars available. Education is not so sacred to not be attached to competitive market conditions, end of story. A quick look at our students declares that trying something new wouldn’t hurt, because we couldn’t do worse. And ultimately that is the direction of education anyway, just as the trends of the world are declaring. People want more choices in life, not less, and it’s a matter of time anyway where money for education shouldn’t even come from the state. But while it does, it should go to the students so they can vote with their feet. Not to hold them to a school that doesn’t feel it has to earn their business. If Lakota is such a great school, or any government school for that matter, don’t tell us how good you are. Make yourself one of those schools that people want to go to. Make it so that you are so crowded that you must turn people away, which only increases the value of the product. Sure, it makes the current way that schools do business chaotic, it forces them to understand how much Parkinson’s Law is in their processes. It forces the teacher unions to think differently for sure. But that is their problem, not ours. And the state will never know how much it should spend on students so long as Parkinson’s Law is contaminating their assumptions. That is the key to this whole discussion and we’re going to have it now or in a few years, but the way things have been are not the way things are going to be. The old Dewey model was poised from the outset to fail. But these days, life happens too fast and there is just too much to learn to attempt to squeeze everything into the traditional classroom setting that we have been attempting to do. The times and this new economy are forcing us to change, so let’s get at it and solve this problem once and for all by looking at the entire concept differently.

Rich Hoffman

A Miracle in West Chester: People brought together to cheer on a president who wasn’t even there

As there was an event dedicated to President Trump held by a combination of people important to the re-election actions needed in 2020, I was reminded of some of the more subtle realities of leadership management that don’t get talked about much. To comment that there was a Trump rally in West Chester, Ohio that drew a very large crowd, and he wasn’t even there says a lot about just how good this president is in ways that modern academia is clueless about. They can’t teach this kind of leadership effect at West Point, or any institution of learning, because the contents of its power are so elusive that it is beyond the measurement of modern methods. But I have come to understand it in my own way, the nature of influence leadership and just how important it is into shaping the world that we know. Even with all the attacks against President Trump, and the attempts to prevent the inevitable that comes from his raw enthusiasm for everyday life, I have watched his remote influence shape directly the lives of a cast of characters I have known within the Republican Party in such positive ways that it has been almost magical, straight out of a Disney movie.

Locally within Butler County where Republicanism is almost a regional consideration, the values have not always been aligned. I was reminded at that same event by several people that the Butler County Republican Party supported John Kasich during the last election, and we all watched that character fall from grace completely, and totally making himself a national embarrassment along the way as he made a hard left on the political spectrum almost toward the death and resurrection of Karl Marx himself. Even for me, I had been in conflict with many of the people celebrating the Presidency of Donald Trump. We all had differences rooted in positions along that political spectrum, yet at the event, we were all friends united by a common love, and understanding that Trump brings to everything he does, and that is the element that makes him so good. He unites as all leaders do people’s attention toward the obscure and they love him for it.

Even now, I see that the person I had been supporting for Senate, Jim Renacci has conflict with the current governor of Ohio Mike DeWine. I could tell similar stories about many people attending the West Chester Trump Rally on January 30, 2020. There were people there who had been at each other’s throats in years before, myself included, but with a little Chick-Fil-A offered up as a food option and a lot of positive sentiment directed toward the stage where current politicians reminisced about the Trump presidency, there was great love born from the experience where those differences melted away like a spoonful of butter on hot pancakes in Gatlinburg, Tennessee. It was quite something to witness.

I have been warning many who have been in the fight for a long time not to become too in love with the thrill of the fight, and the nature of conflict, because at some point there will be a unifying circumstance that will bring everyone together as friends again. So its important to be open to that friendship when it gives rise to the opportunity. Its also important not to put away the weapons of war too deep into the closet either. Just because everyone has found unity in an idea, conflict is still the bond that creates future friends and pushes for the development of new frontiers of thought. Sipping tea and conversing over lattés doesn’t get you there. Team building comes directly out of people unified by necessity and war still is the most unifying function that can focus people’s attention on the things that connect them, not what divides. Part of the reason the Democrats are so floundering to find solutions for themselves these days is that they have used an attempted need to create hatred for President Trump to move their base forward, perhaps in the way that the Tea Party movement thought of Obama. The problem is, President Trump is a very likeable person and he has managed to unify nearly the entire spectrum of the Republican Party into a happy family, maybe as much as would ever be possible, and he has done it in a remarkably short period of time.

I was part of many conversations in those early days of Trump among those same Republicans, many whom supported Kasich for President, or Ted Cruz types. Some of us still had old war wounds from political endeavors where we all weren’t in agreement, particularly on public union issues. But under the pro-growth policies of the Trump approach to things, many of those concerns have been crushed under the sheer optimism of a Dow Jones marker near 30,000. I think it’s a lot to ask of any expectation, but if we can’t get politicians to agree on cutting out the fat in their budgets, Trump has chosen to think big and grow our way out of it. Even for me, I can see a path that will deal with the national debt in the next term as all these pro-growth strategies will begin operating in the black. That doesn’t solve the problem of debt spending by a government out of control, but the Trump solution of solving part of it with sheer growth has put the knives back in their sheaths and allow friendships to spring forth once again on unified fronts. That doesn’t mean that constructive conflict won’t continue, but perhaps instead of slit throats it will only be arm wrestling.

The media seemed to have difficulty understanding the story of this Trump Rally in West Chester, because as they kept saying, Butler County is Trump Country. What’s so big about a rally there with or without him. Where is the news? Of course, the prejudice from newsroom directors is obvious, they could find a story in a cat stuck in a tree, so their choice is not to give any positive news to the public about anything Trump does. But their boycott on logic went deeper to that, to an almost subconscious understanding of this leadership issue, and that the Democrats just don’t have an equal. But outside of the conflicts of politics, the story is in the long reaching effects of good leadership and how unifying it can be in obtaining goals everyone can agree on. That to my eyes is a miracle of modern splendor nearly unheard of in the history of the world. It was a good story to see, so many wild and woolly Republicans of all different backgrounds and needs unified in such a wonderful way, that was a news story that should have made front page news in any other time. But because the other side doesn’t have a comparable advocate, the results are being ignored in hopes that the greater world might not yet be touched by such a miracle. And to know the characters involved in this shin dig in West Chester, calling it a miracle is an understatement. Yet former enemies were now friends, and the seething combat that often takes place on Facebook and during fierce campaigns was now cheers for a president far away in Washington D.C., not even there to shake hands and pump his fist to the crowd, and that was something to behold for the prosperity of all time to witness.

Rich Hoffman

The Outsider Don Lemon: This is what winning looks like

It has probably been noticed that much of what I have been writing has took a turn in tone from an outsider view of the world, to more to the insider. That is because Trump, whom I have supported from the very beginning, and the Tea Party movement which I was also a part of from the very first moments, are now in charge. When you win and capture the other players chess pieces you must accept that victory and not continue to act as a victim in throwing rocks at the castle walls. Once you enter and take over the occupants of that castle, and you sit on the throne, you must acknowledge that your role has changed, and you are now responsible for what happens next. So, my direction has been to prepare those victors for a proper philosophy to help them grasp that victory and not to lose it back to the heathens who have been cast out. And that is precisely what happened on CNN when Don Lemon had on a panel of people who openly mocked the intelligence of Trump supporters, they were speaking very ungraciously about their newly found view of the world outside of the castle walls—out of power and still yet unwilling to acknowledge their loss of privilege and respect in the world.

I have been writing material for those of us getting used to our winning positions so that when the other side tries to recapture their positions, these newfound winners will know how to maintain their positions and increase their winnings, and to not allow the pendulum to swing back in the other direction as it has for a few centuries now in American politics. When you gain power, you keep it, and you use it to improve the lives of people looking to you for support and leadership. And in that way of thinking I have been making the arguments that conservative views of the world are a superior philosophic vantage point concluded through experience and wisdom, quite the opposite kind of sentiment that Don Lemon was applying to Trump voters. I would argue the opposite, that Trump voters have the higher moral high ground and superior intelligence state of mind, and that is why victories are coming easily to them these days.

The political left had captured intelligentsia over a century ago and they maintained a stingy grip on it for all of our lives, to the point where they have attempted to lay claim to intelligence itself. The Progressive era as it made a political crawl for power in 1912, and ended up putting the extreme racist Woodrow Wilson into the White House with Franklin D. Roosevelt in place just over a decade later for four terms of White House occupation, claimed our education perspective with a very Marx like view of the world that people like Don Lemon still think exists. But they have not yet accepted that they lost that position not just in the 2016 election, but essentially during the entire decade that came before. The political left pushed George W. Bush further and further to the left, then gave us Obama after an embarrassing decade of Bill Clinton. People were tired of watching their republic continue to turn so far to the left on the political spectrum, so I clarified what that measurement has been in an article dedicated to the effort.

In 2008 and 2009 I was doing work with many contacts in Hollywood and was enjoying being a growing insider in entertainment media. My bullwhip act was catching on and I was getting a lot of invites to a career trajectory that was shaping up to lead to millions and millions of dollars. The networking connections that I was establishing with my talents was shaping up to be very lucrative. And it was on a film set in Glendale, California that I made a decision to lend my talents to this new conservative trend toward the Tea Party which many at that time thought was crazy—because of all the money that was on the table. I was engaged in a philosophic talk about politics with many popular stars at a lunch break while we were in line at the catering truck and I decided that I was going to have to use my abilities to help change the direction of the country. So, I became involved in the Tea Party movement helping where I could on issues local and national. I became heavily involved in talk radio and put my name next to many controversial issues because from the very beginning, I understood the political spectrum that I have now been conveying recently. What good is millions of dollars if liberalism was allowed to steal it all eventually anyway and we lose our society? In that way, I put off my insider status for a choice on the outside so that the right political philosophy could retake powers of position in our nation, so that we could all have a better society along that political spectrum.

Believe me, I felt the pain of going from an insider to an outsider. It was not a happy place, so I get the need to ridicule their betters that Don Lemon and his friends at CNN feel is necessary. And they should know that they are only digging their own hole deeper. Because unlike what I experienced in the early days of the Tea Party leading up to the Trump election of 2016, and everything that has happened since, I understood where the political spectrum was and why people started America to begin with. That the entire progressive era was a well-meaning swing way to the left of it, but that the heart of every American rested well to the right of that center and would under the needs of freedom, to continue moving to the right every chance it had. So, for Don Lemon and his supporters, and all those on the left politically, they do not have philosophy on their side. They will not be able to retake powers of position easily, unless we hand it back to them with unlocked doors and sheer neglect. That knowledge is terrifying to them, and they should be scared for how they behaved when they did have power. It is our task to give them many nightmares in the aftermath of their fall from power just as a warning to their further encroachments.

However, winning should always be the goal and we have won. Now the challenge is to stay hungry for more wins and to maintain a winning culture. To not relax and become ourselves corrupt, but to be vigilant and hungry for that winning culture at every opportunity. It is a new day and we don’t need to worry so much about being victims to the Don Lemons of the world. We have beaten them. Its ok to piss over the castle walls upon their spiteful faces, but we must never again give them political leverage over us. And that is the lesson of the day. When you get power, keep it and understand that our position is historic, and that the philosophy of mankind is on our side, and so long as we preserve the natural tendency of all human beings to function under freedom, that their movement to the political right will always guard that castle, and keep us all in the winning column for many centuries to come. We’ve all made sacrifices to get here, all battles are about such decisions. Now however that we have power, we need to keep it for the hopes of all who dream well into the history books that have not yet been written. And additionally, now that we have power, its time that we use it to do good, and bring justice to those hungry for it.

Rich Hoffman

The Political Spectrum: Understanding how to measure widom in a culture where free will is a motivator

I say this in all fairness, but in regards to the political spectrum, all values are not equal. Liberalism is not an equal philosophy to be debated for instance with understandings of conservativism as viewed by Americans. They are not all equal ideas depending on perspective, but ones that are in a state of evolution depending on the interpretation of the holder of those values. While regional beliefs do largely shape the politics of an individual, it is in practice that the theories of belief are tested, and in every circumstance since Sir Thomas More contemplated a Utopia, or Plato considered the implications of a Republic, liberalism fails. As an individual becomes more aware of the wisdom of life, they therefor become more what Americans call, conservative. And yes, there are right and wrong answers in life, only degrees of variability depending on one’s emotional evolution along that political spectrum. Someone may have a right to believe differently about something, but it is not the conditions of existence to bend the will of correctness to the fallibilities of philosophic understanding.

This is a topic of some great concern these days, since we can see through polling that the nation is evenly split between American Democrats and Republicans with the conservative party just barely holding out against liberalism. And there are currently great fears that socialism as it is taught in public schools might make a strong running for political domination as it has in other places around the world. I would offer that the situation is not so scary, and that if you travel around the world you will find that not everyone has the same view of what a conservative is or a liberal. So I tend to think about those things on one political spectrum that we can all agree upon, and our politics isn’t just related to regional values, but of understandings of graduation along that spectrum. For instance, a conservative in England if compared to a political spectrum to one living in the United States likely would be far to the left. I might think of a tea sipping conservative in England as a bleeding heart liberal in the states, and the cause of that is more in personal education than in a true value system. I would argue that as people gain freedoms in life away from their political and social structures, that the wiser they become in life and therefor, the more conservative they are. When given choices, they tend to move further to the right. Political beliefs on the left are rooted their by barriers to knowledge, not in choice. If given a choice to believe something different, people naturally pull to the right and become more conservative.

Conservatism is therefore more a measure of intelligence and understanding rather than sentiment. I often talk about Democrats as having mental deficiencies because many of their beliefs are rooted in paradoxes, such as declaring that a woman’s right to choose is actually a license to kill a baby. What dumb people think of as an option is in reality murder. Let’s call it what it is. The same irrational comment is put forth over gun control, we have the Second Amendment to protect our gains in society from those who screw up and let us down. In that eventuality, we may need to take back our government, but the government is the one with the military that we payed for. But since they control the law and the utilization of that military how could we remove them from power if we don’t have guns, if we’ve given them all to that government to manage? It’s a really dumb idea that is rooted on lazy trust in bureaucrats rather than in a conservative philosophy. When we talk about liberals, or people who have liberal sentiment, we are talking about people who have not come to logic yet in their life on that particular topic. They may be mentally handicapped for one reason or another to reaching those conclusions on their own, so various states of liberalism may keep them too far to the left on the political spectrum. As they learn more about the way life works, the tend to move more to the right. President Trump could tell a story about his life in this fashion. So could Ronald Reagan.

I have a lot of experience with liberal people going way back into my youth. I have been invited to their social parties and watched them upclose and with the barriers down, and can report that in all cases they were liberal due to some mental deficiency not yet gained through the experiences of life. You don’t often find people going in the other direction unless they hit some period of their lives where tragedy overtakes their logic and they become overly sentimental with failure and seek liberalism to hide their own low bar that they have adjusted in their lives to justify their intellectual status. Wherever you go around the world people are people, they want pretty much the same things. However, they may have very restrictive governments, or family structures that hold back their emotional development more to the side of liberalism, but as they gain more freedoms in life and continue to learn more, they always become more conservative. The political spectrum is not conducive to Einstein’s thoughts on relativity. Your thoughts about something do not change depending on where you are, but your understanding of the political spectrum may be limited to the knowledge you have access to. The spectrum is the spectrum, but a person’s place on it is bound by intelligence and understanding. This is true in Europe as it is in Kentucky within the United States. Regional beliefs may have started conservative or liberal depending on who your neighbors are, but those foundations may have a head start on the political spectrum based on the personal freedoms of that culture relative to the factors that allow thought to move to the right. But thought always wants to move to the right on the political spectrum. No logical person could argue otherwise.

Some will try however, to argue that liberalism is taught in our education institutions and that some of the best in the world are the caretakers of philosophy, but that would all be wrong. People can be taught to be comfortable on a particular place on a political spectrum and to stay there because their friends or neighbors have given themselves the same limits. Or even family members hold people to places of belief that they might not otherwise have. I have family members who think of themselves as very conservative who to me are extremely liberal, and the cause is not logic, its in a lack of understanding about the ways of the world, a lack of wisdom and exposure that built that wisdom more than actual belief. The more people learn about life, and the wiser they are, the further to the right of that political spectrum they become, whether they are a monk living on a mountaintop in the Himalayas, a drug dealer in Mexico, a priest in Kansas, a lottery ticket buyer in Las Vegas, or some wealthy billionaire in the middle of nowhere closed off from the world and enjoying the merits of their productivity. Regional beliefs can hold a person to a position along the political spectrum, but they don’t dictate the merits of wisdom and a person’s journey from liberal to conservative throughout their lifetimes.

In regard to the state of America and its split down the middle politically, that is because roughly half the nation has a lot more to learn. Its not that they have an equal seat at the table. What it does mean is that they need to hit the books and to learn more things about the world so that they can advance further to the right. There is no mixing of the ideas, there is only the degree from which a person functions along the proper trajectory of political thought, with the word “political” being functional with intellectual measurement, not belief. With that in mind, as we move deeper into the election season and people say what they will about what beliefs are politically, the context needs to be clear that politics is more a measure of wisdom than of sentiment. And depending on what values you vote on says a lot about the level of wisdom you have as a functioning person. So the smarter people become, the more they vote to the right. The less wise, the further to the left they will be. It may not always be their fault, but it is the true condition of their intellect.

Rich Hoffman

The Schiff Show: Those who are most guilty are the ones pushing for impeachment

After watching the impeachment proceedings in the senate, it is quite clear not just because it is an attack on a president that I voted for, and therefore an attack on me, but that Adam Schiff has more at stake than just a hatred politically for President Trump. It’s obviously personal for them. They obviously don’t think that they can beat him in the upcoming election, so that is the cause of these theatrics of impeachment. There is something much more sinister going on that they are seeking to hide from the public with these antics. Peter Schweizer’s book ‘Profiles in Corruption’ came out a few days ago and I picked it up for a quick read and I am convinced by the arguments made in that book that Peter is on to something big. So big in fact that nobody will cover it because so many people are guilty of the crimes. If only a small percentage of the claims made in ‘Profiles in Corruption’ are true, then we have a huge problem in both houses of congress, which I think is certainly the case. And the proof is in the hatred of Trump and the direct attack on him to defer away from the real crimes that have been committed.

I watched carefully, and without emotion the prosecution in the case, particularly Nadler and Schiff. Nadler has a long history of hating Trump personally, and he is quite clearly abusing his power in office to erect some aspect of revenge against the President for personal reasons. To enough of a degree that Nadler should be removed from office for such bad judgement alone. But the Adam Schiff story is worse, because it looks like he is covering his own layers of corruption for the benefits of his party not just to survive through the 2020 election, but to keep the dogs off his own connections to many lines of corruption, that extend well beyond Ukraine. If anybody looked and acted guilty by all the signs of nonverbal communication, its Adam Schiff.

I would suggest that the Republican approach to this case is all wrong, playing along with the legal grounds as if this were a real trial, and evoking that the “senate” is some kind of stately power that is beyond the quells of politics is not going to work. We are dealing with real criminals protecting a political class that is deeply involved with severe criminal mischief, white collar crimes that go well beyond similar white-collar prosecutions of mass corruption. These criminals are using their powerful statues as law makers to erase away their crimes, and they are willing to bring down a presidency to cover their actions—which should shock everyone, no matter what your political affiliation. The more I watched, the more insulting it was, especially once opening day arguments extended past midnight. All this effort for what—to try to pin their own crimes on a president just asking a question about corruption from the other side. The real issue was why the president felt he needed to ask—that is the cover-up.

Yet Democrats came out swinging throwing out indefensible accusations from the start saying that McConnell was running a corrupt proceeding. The obvious attempt was to make Republicans look weak in response to such aggressive statements that just might tilt the balance in a fall election—if all went well. But the true magic trick here was to keep anybody from even asking the question, “Mr. Schiff, how many of these deals were you involved in with Hunter Biden and his father.” By making it so that even asking a question could evoke so much trouble, who would dare to go further? That is the subtle message here and something only people willing to do the proper study of the situation, like Peter Schweizer, would even think to ask. The evidence is clear that something is wrong and the attack on Trump is far deeper than even election meddling for the 2020 elections, its to cover up crimes committed by many of the people in that senate chamber, and I would bet that everyone there knows it. That’s why they don’t ask those deeper questions, because they too would be implicated.

The purpose of the show is to even help Republicans in the senate appear to make the whole thing appear more lofty than it really is, the proceedings with John “Obamacare” Roberts proceeding as a stately judge hammering his gavel for recess is meant to make them all look like they are in command. That the whole thing isn’t a farce covering up massive international crimes for which Trump’s administration is uncovering just by its existence. What I watched in the hearings from all sides were people either guilty of those mass crimes, or people who knew about them but were worried that if that knowledge hit the public, a complete erosion of their trust in our government institutions would cascade into outright rebellion. Many of those people might disagree in that chamber, but they have lunch together, they golf together, they have formed bonds that it would be painful to expose. They may be political enemies, but all too often they are personal friends, and as most humans are reluctant to do, they don’t want to hurt them. So, they have all agreed to some extent to this ridiculous, and expensive display designed not to seek justice through impeachment of an elected president, but to hide crimes of personal enrichment. And to use their control of the law to cover for their villainy. And they actually have the audacity to stand before us all during all hours of the day, soaking up the news cycle in such an audacious, and selfish way for their personal vanity and desires for destruction of other people so long as the aims of investigation to not point to them.

Like the slob who farts and then cries out, “who passed gas” when they know clearly it was them, but by the smell of it, it could have been anybody in the room. They hope to declare their innocence just by being the first ones to say anything. Yet the fart came from them and nobody else. Others might suspect as much, but because they are friends, they wouldn’t want to embarrass them in public, so they keep their mouth shout and play along. That is what the senate has been doing for Democrats, and it is pathetic. The real crime has not been discussed, and it should be. The real villains are the ones making the accusations, and without a doubt to my notice, Adam Schiff is one of the guiltiest and most corrupt people on the face of the earth. And he is so corrupt that he knows nobody would believe it, so he further covers his trial by being the one doing the accusing so that he is not the one accused. That is the purpose of this impeachment and the voracity of its utilization. And even for the attempt of it, we should all be very angry. Even more than that, we need to look at a serious employment change of these very representatives because we cannot turn a blind eye to this. Justice is begging for attention and our eyes need to reside on the accusers, not the accused.

Rich Hoffman