POLITICAL PRIVILEGE

Hillary Clinton has been hiding in plain sight as a corrupt law breaking politician that has confounded the public's sense of legal fairness for years. Cynicism over the myth that " no one is above the law" begins with the utterance of the name Hillary Clinton. 


The public is rightfully appalled at her many illegal dealings that never end in justice being served, but rather justice has been averted, skirted and flaunted.  

The perception of Washington's political class along with its minions of bureaucrats, is not a healthy and respectful view of government, in fact trust in government is at an all time low.

The average American feels that our government officials operate more as an organized criminal cabal undermining our nation's foundation and the rule of law, that appears only to be aimed at the average citizen. Hillary Clinton is the embodiment of evidence that a such double standard exists, and it infuriates Americans to watch our nation's identity mocked by selfish politicos.

Thousands of morally honest Americans have been snared in the government regulatory nets and charged with violations, causing them to lose their life savings in fines and penalties while politicians engaged in the same activities, skate free. The late Leona Helmsley once suggested "only the little people pay taxes" and we could add, or get fined for not following regulations, and sadly it seems she was correct.

Thousands of Americans, perhaps less ethical, have been caught by our government ranging from evading taxes to insider trading end up serving jail time, while insiders like the Clinton's are allowed to use a charity foundation to pocket millions and pay for their jet setting. Where is the IRS audit of the Clinton Foundation? Where is the criminal probe? Where is Lady Justice's blindfold?

How does a Secretary of State utilize a private server without anyone in governments knowledge? How is it possible that no one realized that Hillary's e-mails were without an official government address? How is it legal for a government official to solicit donations of money from foreign companies and officials for a so-called charity (Clinton Foundation) while conducting the country's high level foreign policy? Why at the moment of discovery of this illegal and dangerous personal withholding of public records, if one assumes no one knew prior, didn't government officials swoop in and subpoena Hillary and her server? 

The truth appears to the American people to be that our government officials allowed Hillary to have a private server. The Obama administration allowed Clinton to use an unsecured private e-mail account for official business as Secretary of State. 

The Obama administration seemed to be unconcerned that one morally unscrupulous woman was allowed to compromise the nation's security by using an unsecured e-mail account where classified information was handled with criminal disregard for the safety and security of our country.

The Obama administration allowed Clinton after she left office, (now aware of her illegal control of public records) to have 20 months of unfettered access to this unsecured sever. The Obama administration had no reaction when she and her lawyers waded through the thousands of e-mails and made the ghastly arrogant statement that she turned over all the public material, that she and she alone deemed to belong to the public.

The Obama administration did not blink when thousands of e-mails were deleted under the Clinton claim that those unrevealed e-mails were private correspondence between her daughter Chelsea about her wedding or yoga appointments. 

Meanwhile the State Department had dragged its feet, ignoring Freedom of Information requests by multiple parities during Clinton's reign as Secretary of State, and not one government official raised a flag of protest or inquiry to protect the American public's property. 

Hillary yes is the sinister player but considering all the duplicity that had to accompany this theft and deception that was done brazenly in front of many bureaucrats, leads most Americans to conclude that our government is no longer operated by honorable unpartisan officials sworn to our Constitution.   

The Obama administration allowed Hillary and her lawyers to destroy, tamper, delete, delay, stall and design an alibi to avoid accountability. Does this sound like swift justice? Does this sound like something a prosecutor would allow any other citizen to get away with doing? Does this sound like equal justice under the law or special exemption?

Why did the House committee on Benghazi allow her to avoid the penalty of perjury? Why wasn't she made to swear under oath, as all others were required? To quote Hillary's testimony "What difference does it make?" the answer is always in the legal details and technicalities.
Her testimony before the committee was chock full of lies and half truths, such as her denial of any knowledge of our government arming Syrian fighters with the help of Turkey, but she was not put under oath, and so perjury cannot be claimed, and so once again Hillary Clinton lives above the law. 

Americans are angry, disgusted and deeply distrustful at what appears to be our Justice Department's prosecutorial "distinction" rather than discretion, in which only the average Jane and Joe American is nailed to the wall, while the powerful hold a lifetime privilege pass. 

President Obama claims to have no knowledge of Hillary's e-mail scandal as he has claimed ignorance of the multiple scandals in his administration (IRS, Benghazi, Rosengate, Fast and Furious) and he has used the Justice Department as though it was his private Stasi force, to go after political opponents only. 

Instead of the Democrats and Republicans standing up for our Constitution they cynically have use the scandals for political election talking points while Americans watch with anguished revulsion at the degrading leprosy of political cronyism destroying our American Republic.

Equally some Americans are wondering aloud, whether China, Russia and or a host of other bad actor hackers have our State Department e-mails and classified documents captured via Hillary's criminally negligent and treasonous actions with public records. 

If she were president, our nation would be run and controlled by foreign interests via blackmail to an empty soul, wearing a pantsuit while occupying the oval office. Still wondering why Trump gains in the polls?

If Hillary Clinton is allowed to both avoid prosecution and continue to run for President of the United States of America, then no prosecutor anywhere in America can utter the words "no one is above the law" and be believed by any righteous citizen. Too many of us currently believe that the "law is only applied to the little people" and this perception is growing while trust in government is declining.  

Elite privilege should not exist in America under any name, regardless of wealth, power or connection to power, for basic human equity under the law is our firewall against tryanny.

WITH SIX YOU GET BURRITOS

Doris Day's last film in 1968 was "With Six You Get Eggroll". It was a romantic comedy about the difficulty of blending families when widowers (or divorced) couples re-marry. When the children and relatives line up against a step-mother and step-father there is no pleasing either side and compromise short of calling off the romance is impossible.

At the end of the movie, all ultimately learn to not just accept the union but to soften their hearts and support the marriage. The disharmony that has been brewing over immigration is far less likely to have a fair and harmonious outcome. In fact the wedding is off! Americans are as hot as tamales and the Washington reform talk leaves a bitter sour cream  taste in their mouths.  

There are six basic voices in the immigration debacle facing  our nation and its future. These are the Democrats, the Republicans, the Corporations, the farmers and small businesses, the minority liberal voters and the majority voters. Their positions on the immigration issues is as follows; 

1)The progressive Democrats are seeking wholesale amnesty for illegal aliens expecting to sign up loyal voters for the future.

2)Meanwhile some members of the Republican Party worry that if they are not included in the citizenship give-away, they will lose all future elections. They have proposed a slow walk to amnesty for illegal aliens.

3)Corporations and high tech firms are not interested in amnesty but rather changing the H1B immigration laws. The claim is that American universities are not graduating high tech students with math and science degrees in sufficient numbers to fill the vacancies in their industries. Therefore they must import workers from countries such as India and China in order to fill their worker shortage.

4)Small businesses and farmers on the other hand are looking for cheap unskilled labor and are lobbying for guest worker programs. They want the law prohibiting them from hiring illegal aliens softened or removed.

5)Liberal voters don't like borders and are pushing for a dismantling of most all of our immigrations laws.

6)The majority of voters want our immigration laws enforced, the borders secured and illegal aliens deported. Americans want lawful immigrants that assimilate and swear allegiance to our country.   

In order to resolve any problem, one must first correctly identify the source and cause of the problem. In the case of our immigration and border problem, there are two indisputable causes; lack of security and lack of deportation.

The reason lack of security and deportation are separate, is that, even if we were to build a wall around America rivaling the wall of China, not all illegal aliens enter the country via crossing the border. Many illegal aliens have been granted visas, and then they fail to leave once their legal right to remain in the country has elapsed. 

Some states (California) give illegal aliens sanctuary while other states (Arizona) have been sued for trying to assist the federal government immigration duty to enforce the law.

The bottom line; border patrol and capture, deportation enforcement and criminal prosecution of those hiring or abetting illegal aliens has been undermined by federal and state authorities.

The next question to be rightly asked therefore is, how does changing the law or granting amnesty fix our broken immigration system? Americans know that they answer is simple; it doesn't. Laws not enforced are meaningless. And we have granted amnesty before and it only worsens the problem. 

There are three main false assertions being used as arguments for the need to grant amnesty and change immigration laws. 

The first argument being expressed is that there are too many to deport.  The contention being if you estimate that there are upwards of 11 million illegal aliens then it is logistically impossible to deport them all. Also, in deporting that many illegal aliens because of the misuse of the "Anchor Baby" determination of citizen by being born in America, then you would be breaking up families.

The second argument being used is that business and industry cannot fill both high end and low end tech jobs by hiring American citizens. 

The third argument is that America's immigration laws are archaic and discriminatory.

Well let's take the last argument first about discrimination that is argued by multicultural liberal groups that want to make America an open border turn style for every human in the world regardless of their pedigree and loyalty. 

One needs to ask these open border advocates if they leave the door wide open in their own apartment or house. Do they allow anyone off the street to waltz in and raid their refrigerator, sleep on their sheets and then claim squatters rights to half the property?  Or wipe out their families health by a contagious illness? We know the answer, and we know the radical idiocy of their open border ideas. Fail!

The second argument touted by business pushing the need to import our high skilled work force is equally illegitimate. The argument by corporations that our education system doesn't produce enough high tech workers does need to be solved. So why would they not actively recruit the freshman on college campuses to get their degrees in those disciplines rather than abandoning American youth for foreign nationals? Why do they support progressive policies and unions that have destroyed America's education? Fail!  

The second argument made by small businesses that Americans will not apply and work at unskilled labor jobs is equally illegitimate. Supply and demand exists not just in consumerism but also in the labor market. The better the compensation and benefits the more attractive the jobs. If your business operating plan relies on cheap labor, low wages and no benefits and you are finding it hard to hire workers then you should either fold as a business or raise those wages to attract workers. Expecting the government to grant you slave laborers is an affront to free markets. Fail!

Finally the logistical impossibility of deportation argument that pretends a manhunt brigade is needed to do the job along with the compassionate argument against breaking up families needs debunking.

If one makes this specious  argument then the logical question becomes; why do we have any laws at all. In fact, since we can't stop criminal activity on our streets so why not argue for the abolishment of all criminal laws, release all prisoners and disband our police force? 

When does our criminal justice department decide not to prosecute criminal conduct because the perpetrator is a single mother or single father with children to raise and support? Sending a single parent to prison for life certainly breaks up the family and leaves children in some cases, wards of the state. We don't as a society suggest that as long as you are a breadwinning single parent you have amnesty from prosecution, do we? Fail again!

Along with E-Verify we should be requiring hospitals, social services police officers, landlords, employers and any other individuals to report illegal aliens or face stiff fines and possible criminal charges in the quest for deportation tracking. We could create a self-deportation campaign (2-3 years) where a public service message tells people to report themselves to authorities and have their deportment transportation costs paid. The benefit being that before that 3 year period expires they would not be placed on a permanent list banning them from future entry. Once the grace period is over then people would be warned that they would be deported with prejudice, meaning they would lose the opportunity to ever come back to America's front door.

The truth is that America has the right to sovereignty just as individuals have the right to deny trespass on their properties. We have the right and the obligation to keep citizens safe from seditious cultures, pandemic illnesses, criminal importation and proportioned absorption per our economic situation.

No other country in the world is the haven for the world, and no other country in the world can offer the exceptional opportunities that American citizenship grants to those lawfully seeking to become a loyal assimilated new American immigrant. 

The talk of amnesty by the left, the Democrat Party and the sell-outs in the Republican party are not just wrong, they are cynically immoral for choosing illegal aliens over law abiding legal immigrants.

The big and small business lobbyists are wrong because they are seeking to solve America's high and low skilled labor market shortage by quick government fix rather than to invest in our American workforce. 

The only group that holds the moral high ground is in fact the majority of Americans. The majority that wants our borders made secure. The majority that wants the government to do its job and deport illegal trespassers. The majority that is against amnesty. The majority that wants the rule of law to not be politicized by Washington bureaucrats. The majority that wants legal immigrants to be honored and respected and not feeling foolish that it would have been cheaper and easier to ignore our immigration laws. 

Americans heard Obama say that the 2014 election was about his policies. Americans voted and spoke to those policies. The results were not fuzzy and or hard to discern. From his foreign policy, domestic regulations and amnesty open border dreams, Americans said NO, NO, NO and enough, enough and enough. 

The American people know the difference between an eggroll, a burrito and Gruber-ville crap sandwich when it come to comprehensive immigration reform.     

It is time for the newly elected Congress of 2014  to represent the majority voice when they take office in 2015. It is time for our representatives to represent citizens not special interests. It is time they adhere to their constitutional oaths and stop acting as though the immigration issue is complicated, it isn't. The only reason it has become convoluted is because of political expediency, by both political parties.

TAKING THE LOW ROAD

The definition of prejudice is playing out in Ferguson Missouri, prejudice is an irrational pre-judgment  based on insufficient knowledge and biased assumptions. Prejudice and racism is not a mindset owned in exclusivity by any group whether in the minority or majority. 

The tinder box of angry unrest has been lit in Missouri by race baiters and victimhood apologists against their own police force based on sketchy information. What is known is that a man was fatally shot by a police officer in Ferguson Missouri. Was it an act of police brutality and unnecessary, or was it a justified shooting? The facts are not yet known and the evidence that leads to one or the other conclusion needs to be assessed by level headed unbiased truth seekers not riot instigators.

Should it matter that the victim was black? Should it matter that the police officer is white? If police in any town or city in the country uses unwarranted lethal force on citizens then we all expect them to be charged and prosecuted for the criminal act. Being a police or a federal law enforcement officer does not make you above the law, or grant you immunity if you break the law. Nor should being a police officer turn your rights upside-down and make you guilty until you prove your innocence. 

Americans know that as in any organization or group there are always some bad apples in the barrel and our police forces across the country have always contained corrupt cops. The problem becomes either the perception or the reality of the "Thin blue line" or the fraternity within the police force. The perception is that cops protect cops by either looking the other way or actively helping to cover-up corruption. 

However beyond corrupt policing there are also two other anomalies that show up in any police force. One is ineptitude and the other is burn out. Rookie police officers that are either poorly trained or lack experience  can react overly aggressive and be labeled "trigger happy".  While on the other extreme officers that have years of street policing experience can become jaded, arrogant and hostile given the high stress that comes with the job. These are not corrupt officers yet these are equally not the face of the finest peace officers patrolling the streets of our communities.

"There are lies, damn lies and then there are statistics" as Mark Twain suggests about how facts can be misconstrued to reach ignorant conclusions. Many race baiters suggest that statistics show that police shoot Black and Hispanic men more than white men and that statistic proves that there is a police prejudice against minorities across the country. That statistic is true but the conclusion is flawed.

Another statistic shows that minorities commit the larger percentage of crimes in this country. Therefore if police are confronting crime and crimes occur more often among minorities then as a consequence of their job, to arrest lawbreakers, they will have a higher percentage of encounters with minorities. It also means that a higher percentage of those encounters could end up being fatal, either by use of necessary force or unjustified and corrupt use of force.

In recent years a new term has been coined for people that ignore police commands and refuse to show surrender, we call it "suicide by cop".  It is interesting to note that these incidences have increased in our culture yet no one seems to be able to determine why. Are police too trigger happy today? Are people more belligerent toward authority?  Are more lawbreakers on mind and mood altering drugs?

The truth is that most Americans don't want our police force to shoot citizens and ask questions later. Equally most good police officers don't want to shoot and kill anyone on the street. They understand that they are not judge, jury and executioner and would prefer to keep their weapon holstered when making arrests.

Making this fatal police incident politically charged and racists is not just a mistake before the facts are revealed but a wayward mindset for a community that knows that there is another statistic to consider. That is that most of the victims of crimes reside in the urban minority areas. Some of these protesters will needs the help of law enforcement in the future. Will they be made gun shy, or confrontationally challenged and either stay in their patrol cars or not respond at all? 

Indeed in many cities the bigger complaint against police forces in America's urban areas riddled with crime and gangs, is that police avoid those neighborhoods and victims feel abandoned by law enforcement. Police can't be both the enemy and the protector.

The cynical destruction of minority urban areas is caused by three competing messages, hostility toward police, lack of witnesses because they are intimidated with fear by gangs and the arrival of political charlatans that use tragedies in their communities to gain votes and distract people from real solutions.

 

How many innocent minorities (children) are killed in drive by shootings in this country? Today's inner city gangs are no different than when mafia owned the city streets. One of their greatest weapons is intimidation. Yet unlike the witness protection program that was instrumental in prosecuting organized crime figures, we have few ways to protect victims and witnesses against gang violence in most of our urban areas.

Instead of listening to race baiters and leftists victimhood chanters, people should wake up and work with law enforcement to arrive at practical solutions to keep their neighborhoods safer, their children more respectful and prove that material poverty does not excuse moral poverty.