Donald Trump "soweth, that he also reap"

Galatians 6:7-9 King James Version "for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap."

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/28/opinion/trump-booed-world-series.html

Echo opinion by Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson, published in ArcaMax:

WASHINGTON, DC -- It is Donald Trump's own fault that he got so lustily booed at the World Series game when the Nationals played, on Sunday night. When you publicly refer to people as "human scum," they are likely to return the favor.

Moreover, when the retalitatory Trump campaign ran an inappropriate video political ad at the stadium, during the last National's World Series game- and this time they won the prize- the crowd booed him again. 

Trump looked surprised when his appearance at Nationals Park (where the dastardly Houston Astros won yet another game) was greeted with catcalls and chants of "Lock him up!" After all, earlier in the day he had announced the killing of Islamic State monster Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi in a daring U.S. Special Operations raid. Surely, he must have felt, he deserved kudos for that.

And indeed he does. Here they are: Sincere congratulations for ridding the world of a sadistic butcher who richly deserved his fate.

Thank you to America's highly professional Special Forces and to the Kurdish allies who made finding the location of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi possible.

The problem is, though, that one battlefield success (conducted by US Special Forces!)  did not erase 33 months of presidential behavior that many, if not most, Americans consider outrageous and worthy of impeachment. The smile and wave that Trump offered those baseball fans did not rescind the vicious, snarling rhetoric he spews on a daily basis, including his recent description of Republicans who oppose him as "human scum." The flicker of vulnerability that played across Trump's face when he heard all the booing probably softened few hearts, if any.

This is not a reality show like "The Apprentice" in which all is forgotten between episodes and alliances are formed or abandoned in the blink of an eye. Trump may not recall the abuse he heaped on perceived adversaries last week, last month or last year. Those on the receiving end, however, definitely remember.

I agree with those who say that the office of the president deserves respect, even if the person occupying that office does not. But, I add a caveat, which is that the president himself must understand his relationship with the American people, which is one of service: He works for us. Every president I have met has spoken of how humbling the job is. Trump appears to see humility not as a gift but as a weakness. If Donald Trump will not humble himself, then the people must do it for him.

We have been here before. Back during the Nixon administration, it was possible to drive right past the White House on Pennsylvania Avenue. As Watergate reached its crescendo, protesters would stand on the sidewalk holding signs that said, "Honk if you want him impeached." Motorists sent up such a cacophony that some were given $5 traffic tickets for "excessive noise."

That's the thing about democracy. People have a right to tell their leaders what they think of them. If your constituents believe you have betrayed their trust, they will let you know.

Special Forces experty attacked and caused Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi to blow up his suicide vest.

If Trump was genuinely unprepared for the hostile reception, it might be because he is accustomed to the adulation of the crowds at his political rallies. The red baseball caps that the crowd wore Sunday night did not say "Make America Great Again." They bore the curly "W" of the hometown baseball team and were worn mostly by residents of Washington and its suburbs, which constitute a Democratic stronghold. It has been a long time since Trump exposed himself this way in hostile political territory, and it may be a long time before he does so again. My guess is that he will put it down to eternal hostility on the part of "the swamp" or "the deep state."

And that is a shame. "Whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap," says the King James version of the holy book Trump claims to read. We've seen no evidence of self-awareness from Trump, but we must keep hope alive.

There are those who will argue that treating Trump in this manner is a political gift to him -- that it will fire up his loyal base by giving evidence to support his narrative of being unfairly victimized, in this instance by elite coastal baseball fans. My view is that Trump is going to inflame his base one way or another, no matter what his political opponents say or do. He obviously has no respect for the traditional boundaries of civic debate. 

Those who seek to defeat Donald Trump will not do so while ever-so-carefully walking on eggshells.

Yes, it is a sad day when the president of the United States cannot attend a World Series game without getting booed. It is also a sad day when the president mocks the Constitution, bulldozes all political norms and commits a host of impeachable offenses. This may not be how we would like things to be, but it's how they are.

In my opinion, Donald Trump is a very sick man; using the 25th Amendment is the proper way to end his presidency

California opinion echo published in Mercury News - Don’t impeach Trump
— use the 25th Amendment!

For the three years Donald Trump has been in office, in my mind there has been no time when we have been free of chaos.

Whatever anyone thinks of Donald Trump, either good or bad, if they spend any time thinking, they must at best believe he is erratic and unpredictable.

At this point, I have no interest in recounting actions he has taken that make him unfit to be president. I must say that I am suffering from serious “Trump fatigue.” Surely others share my feelings. 

The thought of five more years of Trump is incomprehensible.

Rather than taking the “impeachment” approach, I believe the more appropriate action should be invoking the 25th Amendment. In my opinion, Donald Trump is a very sick man and using the 25th Amendment is the proper way to end his presidency.

From Fredrick Ford  Walnut Creek California

Influenza- the vaccine and the prevention effectiveness

This article was published in "Briefing", The Week, November 1, 2019

Getting a flu shot is a seasonal rite. But why do you need one every year — and why doesn't it always work? Here's what people need to know:

How does the vaccine work?
The flu vaccine contains inactive or weakened versions of three or four different strains of the influenza virus. Most people receive the vaccine via injection, but there is also a nasal spray available. The weakened viruses can't cause serious illness, but they trigger and train the immune system to fight off the invading microorganisms. White blood cells generate an army of antibodies, which attack and destroy the vaccine viruses by attaching themselves to parts of the virus known as antigens. The vaccine antigens have the same shape as real flu antigens, so the immune system now has antibodies that match up with the real flu virus. That experience teaches the immune system to recognize future flu infections and quickly make antibodies to attack the invading viruses. It takes about two weeks after receiving the vaccine to develop immunity, which is why doctors recommend getting it early in the flu season, which begins in October and can last as late as May.

Do most people get vaccinated?
No. Although the U.S. has one of the highest vaccination rates in the world, only 45 percent of adults and 63 percent of children get flu shots each year. Scientists estimate that if the vaccination rates were boosted to between 80 and 90 percent, it could effectively stop seasonal flu from spreading because of herd immunity. Influenza is one of the world's most contagious diseases, spreading easily through the air and by touch. It affects between 5 and 15 percent of the world's population every year. The disease kills 12,000 Americans during mild flu seasons and up to 56,000 in severe ones, with 90 percent of the victims over 65 years old. Many people don't get vaccinated, however, either because they fear getting the shot or believe it isn't effective.

How effective is it?

The vaccine's effectiveness varies dramatically depending on how well it matches the viruses circulating in a given season. In good years, the vaccine protects 50 to 70 percent of the people receiving it. But some strains are more difficult to create vaccines for, such as the H3N2 type, which raged during the severe 2017 flu season. That year's vaccine was found to be only 40 percent effective overall. Nevertheless, doctors recommend getting the shot anyway because even some immunity helps slow the spread of the disease. Vaccination also can make symptoms of any flu infection less severe, even if it doesn't completely prevent illness. "We do have something that works," says Peter Palese, a virologist at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York. "It's not perfect, but it's better than not having any vaccination."

What makes flu so tricky?
The flu virus is constantly mutating, rendering the body's antibodies against previous flu infections obsolete. Influenza is less stable than other viruses, such as chicken pox, because its main genetic material is RNA. The virus makes many small errors when it copies its genetic code during reproduction. Every generation of the flu virus has a slightly different genetic structure, which is harder for the immune system's existing antibodies to recognize. This process is known as "antigenic drift." Scientists have to guess which influenza strains will be more prevalent well before flu season starts, to give pharmaceutical companies time to manufacture enough of the vaccine.

How are vaccines made?
The process hasn't changed much since the first flu vaccines were given to American soldiers in 1945. Over 90 percent of flu vaccines are incubated in fertilized chicken eggs, because the virus grows extremely well in them. This technique is relatively cheap, but production is cumbersome and time-consuming, taking about six months. The World Health Organization issues predictions for the Northern Hemisphere flu season in February based on observational data and laboratory studies, with pharmaceutical companies beginning production almost immediately. The process requires about 900,000 chicken eggs per day. Given the six-month time lag, it's all but impossible to swiftly order up vast new batches of vaccine in case an unexpected strain emerges, which is what happened in the 2009-10 flu season with the H1N1 virus, better known as swine flu. The virus infected an estimated 61 million people in the U.S., killing 12,000.

Are improvements possible?
In theory, yes. Donald Trump issued an executive order in September, directing the Department of Health and Human Services to create a flu vaccine task force to modernize seasonal vaccine production. Nevertheless, the order does not provide any additional funding for vaccine development. Experts say it could take decades to develop the sophisticated new infrastructure needed to make vaccines in animal cells instead of eggs. "Egg production is a huge bottleneck," says Martin Friede, coordinator of the Initiative for Vaccine Research at the World Health Organization. "You can't just call your local egg farm and say tomorrow I need 10 million more eggs."

A universal flu vaccine
The holy grail of flu research is a universal vaccine that would provide lasting protection against all forms of the virus, but it remains elusive. There have been clinical trials in the past, with the National Institutes of Health beginning a new round of tests on humans this year. The hope is to train the immune system by targeting the stem of a protein on the virus, which varies little from strain to strain. However, our bodies don't generate many antibodies to target this part of the virus, instead focusing on the frequently changing head. Because of a process called "imprinting" — in which the immune system learns how to fight viruses based on the first encounter — it's difficult to teach the body new habits. "I don't think we're that close at all," says Michael Osterholm, director of the University of Minnesota's Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy. "I think the kind of work that's gone on has been critical and important, but it's only the first 5 feet of what would need to be a 100-foot rope."

When Donald Trump took his oath of office he swore to "preserve, protect and defend"

Echo opinion to the Editor of the Illinois Northwest Herald:

While speaking recently to reporters before a televised cabinet meeting, Donald Trump displayed anger, resentment and disbelief over having to cancel his plans to hold the G-7 meeting of world leaders at Doral, his private, for-profit club. 

In fact, Trump was irate and scornfully dismissive that anyone would even suggest he would have profited from this event. In his typically nonsensical manner, he sneered, “You people with this phony emoluments clause!”

That pesky emoluments clause of the Constitution is Article I, Section 9, Clause 8: “[N]o person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.” It couples with an Article II restriction barring the president from receiving “any other Emolument” other than a fixed salary from federal or state governments.

Nancy Pelosi orders impeachment probe: ‘No one is above the law’

In short, presidents are explicitly barred from accepting things of value from either foreign governments or our own, because doing so would obviously be extremely very corrupt.

It would seem someone in the White House, perhaps one of his numerous attorneys, could have schooled him on the “phony” emoluments clause. That he wasn’t aware seems to contradict his recent tweet: “What you have now, so great looking and smart, a true Stable Genius!”

Or, he really does believe our laws don’t apply to him.

In short, presidents are explicitly barred from accepting things of value from either foreign governments or our own, because doing so would obviously be extremely very corrupt.

It would seem someone in the White House, perhaps one of his numerous attorneys, could have schooled him on the “phony” emoluments clause. That he wasn’t aware seems to contradict his recent tweet: “What you have now, so great looking and smart, a true Stable Genius!”

Or, he really does believe our laws don’t apply to him.

If Trump believes the Constitution or parts of it are “phony” and therefore shouldn’t apply to him, was the oath he swore to “preserve, protect and defend” the Constitution also phony?

Helen Torscher Crystal Lake, Illinois 

Donald Trump didn't want to end corruption during the Ukraine call. He doesn't care about corruption , just as long as he benefits from contributing to it.!

Echo editorial opinion from the The Denver Post in Colorado.

Editorial: Trump’s unethical push for a Ukrainian investigation into his political rival must be condemned

Donald Trump, acting as potus, should not be pressuring a foreign leader to investigate one of his 2020, political rivals. Such unethical behavior undermines American foreign policy efforts and jeopardizes the integrity of our elections.

That is a point, upon which, we would hope members of both political parties in the United States could agree.

Every member of the U.S. Senate — including Colorado’s Republican Senator Cory Gardner who called reports of Trump’s actions “concerning”— voted to support the release of a full whistleblower complaint. They, like us, think the accusation that Trump abused the power of his office for political gain is something that should be taken seriously and investigated thoroughly.

Other Republicans, including members of Colorado’s congressional delegation, have sprung to Trump’s defense, arguing the president was only trying to root out corruption (!- to Maine Writer, this "corruption" concept is an oxymoron when it applies to Donald Trump. Where are his hidden tax returns?) in Ukraine and get to the bottom of unsubstantiated rumors that the country was involved in the 2016, hacking of the Democratic Party’s servers. 

After having read the summary transcript of a July phone call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, we don’t think that’s an accurate description of the exchange.

“The democrats and the media, frankly, have attacked this president to such an extent that it has caused a certain callousness in the public and a certain cynicism in public towards revelations,” Rep. Ken Buck, R-Colorado, told the Denver Post editorial board on Thursday. “I don’t think this rises to an impeachable offense. I don’t think this is necessarily even wrong. Could it have been handled better? Sure, but it is not something that I think is suggesting that this president is trying to interfere in an ongoing criminal investigation or is trying to affect the outcome of the 2020 presidential election.” (Maine Writer- This is the classic apologist point of view!)

Senator Cory Gardner

Buck signed on to an op-ed with other members of the House Foreign Affairs Committee defending Trump. Colorado Reps. Doug Lamborn and Scott Tipton also said they haven’t seen any evidence that the president did anything wrong.

To be clear, we’re not saying definitively that Trump has committed an impeachable offense; there’s an official process that will consider whether the whistleblower complaint is substantiated and if it rises to the level of “high crimes and misdemeanors.” 

But, what we are saying is that we expect (a lot!) more of our president than the conversation he had with Zelensky. It was wrong. Viewed collectively with Trump’s order to freeze hundreds of millions of dollars in aid for Ukraine’s war against Russia days before the phone call, it raises a specter of impropriety that goes beyond mere trifling matters. 

There is also the fact that Trump’s private attorney Rudy Giuliani was having conversations with Zelensky’s staff outside of the Trump administration.

As the U.S. tries to promote a free and open democracy in Ukraine and support the country’s stand against the Russian annexation of Crimea, Trump made clear to Zelensky that his top priorities were, in fact, personal.

According to a not-verbatim transcript produced by intelligence officials who routinely listen to the phone calls presidents have with foreign officials, Trump asked Zelensky for a “favor:” investigate Crowdstrike, an American company that the New York Times reported helped make the forensic determination that it was Russian officials who hacked the Democratic National Committees servers in 2016 and released a trove of emails that were damaging to Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

Then Trump said something along these lines: “The other thing, There’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it… It sounds horrible to me.”

This was not Trump asking Zelensky to root out corruption in his country. This was Trump asking Zelensky to investigate the frontrunning Democrat in the presidential primary.

Biden had taken a leading role in Ukraine in 2015. However, at the same time, his son Hunter Biden was sitting on the board of one of the largest companies in Ukraine. The United Kingdom had frozen millions of dollars in assets from the company, but the head prosecutor in Ukraine refused to hand over documentation that could have assisted in the investigation. No charges were brought and the assets were unfrozen.

Biden has bragged about how he used foreign aid to pressure the government to fire that prosecutor and bring in another who would be less friendly to corruption. That certainly sounds like Biden was on the right side, but we also think it’s clear given that Biden should have forced his son to leave the board or recused himself from the foreign policy efforts in Ukraine. However, there’s no equivalent to that impropriety and Trump’s blatant self-serving requests.

Whether or not Trump is impeached and whether or not he wins in 2020, Congress must say loud and clear — including Colorado’s congressional members — that his efforts to entangle foreign countries in our election will not be tolerated. The Americans and the world deserve better from the president of the United States.

Americans must learn what the whistleblowers are telling investigators

Echo opinion by Catherine Rampbell published in The Washington Post and in the Salt Lake Tribune- "There is a 'there-there"

Catherine Rampell: There’s another whistleblower complaint. It’s about Trump’s tax returns.

Daniel Ellsberg risked his career and his safety to expose the Pentagon Papers, a top-secret study of U.S. involvement in Vietnam. He became one of the most famous whistleblowers in American history. The Washington Post’s Libby Casey explains what it means to be a whistleblower, what legal protections are and are not available, and what someone risks by speaking up. (The Washington Post)  

Hey, have you heard about this whistleblower complaint?

An unnamed civil servant is alleging serious interference in government business. If the allegations are true, they could be a game-changer. They might set in motion the release of lots of other secret documents showing that Donald Trump has abused his authority for his personal benefit.

Wait, you thought I meant the whistleblower from the intelligence community?

Nope. I'm talking about a completely different whistleblower, whose claims have gotten significantly less attention but could prove no less consequential. This whistleblower alleges a whole different category of impropriety: that someone has been secretly meddling with the Internal Revenue Service's audit of the president.

In defiance of a half-century norm, Trump has kept his tax returns secret.

We don't know exactly what he might be hiding. His bizarre behavior, though, suggests it's really bad.

Maybe these documents would reveal something embarrassing but not criminal (e.g., the relatively puny size of his fortune). Maybe they'd reveal that some of his financial dealings are legally dubious or even fraudulent, which would be consistent with past Trump-family tax behavior.

Most significantly, they might reveal that Trump has been profiting off the presidency. Among the relevant conflict-of-interest questions that Trump's taxes could answer: whom he gets money from, whom he owes money to (and on what terms) or how his 2017, tax overhaul enriched him personally.

Not that you’d know it from the administration’s stonewalling, but Congress actually has unambiguous authority to get Trump’s returns. In fact, it has had the authority to get any federal tax return, no questions asked, for nearly a century. Under a 1924 law, Treasury “shall furnish” any tax document requested by the House Ways and Means or Senate Finance Committee chairs.

That's exactly what the House Ways and Means chairman, Richard E. Neal, D-Mass., did in the spring. The statute doesn't require him to state any legislative purpose for his request, but he provided one anyway: He said that the committee needed to make sure the IRS, which it oversees, is properly conducting its annual audit of the president and vice president, as the IRS manual has required post-Watergate.

There is historical precedent for worrying about how rigorously the IRS might be auditing its own boss. In the early 1970s, the agency commended then-President Richard M. Nixon on his supposedly pristine tax filings, even though he owed about a half-million dollars in unpaid taxes and interest.

Since then, presidents have voluntarily released their tax returns. So Congress didn't really need to worry much about whether the IRS was going easy on the president.

"The concern about the IRS' audit is almost minimal or nonexistent if tax returns are public, because there are effectively a million auditors," says George K. Yin, University of Virginia School of Law professor emeritus and former chief of staff of Congress' Joint Committee on Taxation. "The public can see if there's any funny business going on."

Current circumstances are different, of course.

Still, from an optics standpoint, this IRS-audit-oversight rationale seemed a strange one for Neal to cite. Especially because it was the primary rationale offered, and there was no reason at the time to believe the IRS was actually being bullied. So, for the first time in history, the administration refused a Ways and Means tax request, on the grounds that Neal’s stated legislative purpose was “pretextual.” (Maine Writer ~ when in doubt, always interject a confusing, new and untested word!)

But now, in retrospect, Neal’s stated purpose looks either extremely ingenious — or extremely lucky.

That's because this summer an anonymous whistleblower approached the House committee to say its concerns had been justified. The whistleblower offered credible allegations of "evidence of possible misconduct," specifically "inappropriate efforts to influence" the audit of the president, according to a letter Neal sent to the treasury secretary.

We don't know the complaint details, including who allegedly meddled with the audit or how, and whether the IRS complied. The complaint hasn't been released, and Neal said last week that he's still consulting with congressional lawyers about whether to make it public.

But the exact details of the allegations matter less than the fact that they corroborate Democratic lawmakers' argument that oversight of the IRS' annual presidential audit is indeed a legitimate reason they — and hopefully, eventually, the public — should see Trump's taxes. It's hard to imagine how the federal judge in this case could now rule against the committee.

As is so often true with allegations of Trumpian wrongdoing, we’ve learned once again that there’s a there there — and there, and there, and all sorts of other places you mightn’t have thought to look.

By Catherine Rampell

Donald Trump is casting a bleak shadow over all Republicans

Donald Trump's irresponsible behavior must be checked!

Echo opinion letter published in the Idaho Statesman 

Donald Trmp disregard for America's values and allies

For quite some time, many of us have been disappointed and dismayed by Donald Trump's actions and blatant disregard for our American values, not the least of which is his total lack of any kind of integrity. But until just recently, the Republican congressional members have contrived some reason to support his “unpresidential” behaviors while he runs roughshod over our institutions, our position as a leader of nations, our credibility, etc. Apparently, the brash decision to order the immediate withdrawal of our troops from Syria was a “bridge too far.” 

This particular decision has done great damage to our future military operations in terms of troop morale, confidence of our allies and the list goes on. The House has passed a bipartisan condemnation of this action, and the Senate is saying they want to pass another similar declaration.

If we are truly concerned about someday, somehow rebuilding our international reputation and the confidence of our troops in their leadership, we have a way to show the world we have the fortitude and conviction to admit we made a huge mistake and rectify it. Imagine what the world would think about our democracy if we removed this president from office.

From Jay Combs, Eagle Idaho

Republicans breaking their own Congressional rules

Two echo opinion letters published in the Minnesota Star Tribune newspaper.

Maine Writer- It was Republican Speaker John Boehner who signed the hearing rules to which the stupid Republicans staged an illegal demonstration while creating a sloppy white men show to object to the legal Congressional impeachment hearings. 

In fact, Judge Andrew Napolitano, on Fox and Friends, blamed Boehner, 2015, Republicans for House rules allowing closed-door impeachment proceedings. John Boehner enacted the rules  It was a Republican majority,” Napolitano explained.

Two Minnesota points of view:

Dear Editor:

Republican concern about due process with the confidential impeachment House meetings is misplaced. There will come a time when public airing will be needed. Now is not that time. But due process concerns should extend to the White House, too.

The White House has refused to disclose e-mails and other relevant documents and things that likely relate to Ukraine. In the laws of evidence, there is a doctrine providing that a party in exclusive possession of evidence who fails to produce it is subject to adverse inferences from the failure. We can make those adverse inferences, but wouldn’t it be better to have the documents and things that vindicate transparency and due process? What is the White House trying to hide? Where were those Republicans with respect to that obstruction of due process?

From Thomas W. Wexler, Edina Minnesota

Dear Editor encore:

Here we go again. The intrepid Republican representatives crashing a constitutional congressional inquiry into the possible impeachable offenses of the president is an eerie and painful reminder of another chaotic incident when well-dressed (white men*) Republicans created a disorderly demonstration during the vote recount in Brown County, Fla., in the presidential election of George Bush vs. Al Gore.

For the party that claims to be the law-and-order gang, it is remarkable how easy it is for its members to abandon civility and social order for the sake of expediency and cover-up. These two historical events are anything but coincidental. They are pathological tendencies of a damaged political party and its need to exercise dominance in America. It is dangerously difficult for them to make a full and necessary transition to a new kind of voter majority — women and minorities.

As a nation, we must reject this sort of anarchy. 

From Richard G. Hunegs, in St. Louis Park Minnesota

*MaineWriter- I simply can't imagine the volume of outrage Americans would have heard if the group that had illegally stormed a legal Congressional hearing had been, instead, the Black Caucus!  

Ambassador William Taylor testified under oath

Republicans are apparantly allergic to people who tell the truth. 

Secretary Pompeo "Attention!"  Shame on (West Point graduate!) Pompeo for being silent about the credibility of the respected Ambassador Taylor.  

Ambassador William Taylor testified to Congress under oath

In fact, telling the truth while under oath obviously drives them certifiably crazy. When a respected foreign service diplomat like Ambassador William Taylor is brave enough to give lawful testimony to Congress while under oath, this bravery should be praised. Instead, because the information provided happens to be "truth", the Republicans act like there is something infectious about the honesty. Shame on Republicans!  They should demand for Donald Trump and Rudy Giuliani to testify under oath.

In fact, Donald Trump is is a liar in chief!

This echo opinion by the author Scott Torrow was published in the Arizona Tuscon Star:

The following column is the opinion and analysis of the writer.
National Opinion: Political hacks? Not even close. US Foreign Service officers deserve better than White House attacks, writes Scott Turow.

The chaotic White House lashed out at respected diplomat William Taylor (who spoke while under oath!) after his credible testimony in the House impeachment investigation this week. Its reaction was unequivocal, insulting — and dead wrong.
Taylor, acting ambassador to Ukraine, explained in careful detail that he saw Donald Trump's tie of military aid to a public commitment by the Ukrainian president to investigate Joe Biden, contradicting Trump’s claims that there was no quid pro quo in the conversations.

Trump officials quickly trash-talked Taylor, saying his testimony was part of “a coordinated smear campaign from … unelected bureaucrats waging war on the Constitution.” This was in line with the reaction last week of acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney, who dismissed earlier testimony from the likes of veteran diplomats Marie Yovanovitch and George Kent as coming from “mostly career bureaucrats who are saying, ‘You know what, I don’t like President Trump’s politics, so I’m going to participate in this witch hunt that they are undertaking on the Hill.’”

I don’t know any more about diplomats Taylor, Yovanovitch and Kent than I’ve read. But I have observed firsthand the rigorously nonpartisan culture in our Foreign Service, which is not well-understood by most Americans. For more than a decade, I have occasionally traveled overseas as part of the State Department’s U.S. Speakers Program. Why me? For many years now, under administrations of both political parties, the United States has fostered the rule of law abroad. The State Department apparently thought an American novelist and lawyer, who writes about the law and whose books have been frequently made into movies, might offer a more engaging approach to that topic for a foreign audience than, say, a law professor. Since 2008, I have been dispatched to, among other places, Argentina, Austria, China, the Czech Republic, the Republic of Georgia, Israel and Russia.

One of the biggest revelations to me on these trips has been meeting dozens of officers of the U.S. Foreign Service. To a person, they struck me as remarkable, both for the depth of their intelligence and their devotion to our country. 

We routinely honor the members of our armed services. But our Foreign Service officers are entitled to almost the same level of veneration. Thirteen thousand serve at 256 posts around the world, implementing U.S. foreign policy and helping Americans abroad. Their careers frequently keep them far from home and family, often in unglamorous or even dangerous locations. Chris Stevens, our ambassador to Libya, had been a Foreign Service officer for more than a decade when he was killed in the infamous Benghazi attack in 2012.

Entry into the Foreign Service is highly competitive, involving written and then oral exams. Only 1 in 10 candidates is ultimately hired. And the competition does not end then. There are annual ratings and an up-or-out promotion system. At the top level is the Senior Foreign Service, requiring a presidential appointment, the rank occupied by Taylor and Yovanovitch. Senior officers sometimes become U.S. ambassadors, especially in locations like Ukraine, where expertise in local affairs is essential in representing us.

FSOs implement the policies determined in Washington, whether or not they agree with them. They know that over the course of their careers they will serve under Democrats and Republicans, and that it would inevitably be detrimental to their advancement to be outwardly identified with either party. On the job, they express no political opinions.

I happened to be in Israel on one of these trips, in December 2016, when the Trump administration announced it would move the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Congress had mandated this change in 1995, but previous administrations had deferred what was widely regarded as an inflammatory action. To the FSOs in Tel Aviv, the announcement meant they would have to move, uproot their families and work every day at a site that would be a top potential terrorist target. But I heard nothing critical from anyone. They accepted the right of a new administration to make new policy.

That is the professional culture of Taylor, Yovanovitch and Kent. Taylor is a graduate of West Point and a Vietnam combat veteran who has a graduate degree from Harvard. He served in foreign service assignments to the Middle East before becoming ambassador to Ukraine under President George W. Bush. He returned from retirement last summer to become acting ambassador there at the request of the White House. Yovanovitch, a Princeton graduate, joined the Foreign Service in 1980. Bush nominated her to be our ambassador first to Kyrgyzstan, then Armenia, before President Barack Obama chose her to serve in Ukraine. Kent, a deputy assistant secretary of state, joined the Foreign Service in 1992, with degrees from Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies and Harvard.

The three have been described by colleagues as discreet, meticulous and down the middle. Kent, for example, not only testified about the Trump administration’s machinations in Ukraine. He also reportedly said he’d told Biden’s staff in 2015 that Biden’s son’s role with Burisma, a Ukraine energy company, created the appearance of a conflict of interest.

The Trump administration’s effort to dismiss these three as political hacks and “bureaucrats,” implying that they are mere paper-pushers who stepped from obscurity only to smear the president, ignores the truth that they are all front-line diplomats who have served American interests abroad for decades under both political parties. Like their thousands of colleagues in the Foreign Service, they are entitled to our thanks and respect, not vilification by the White House.
Scott Turow is the Chicago-based author of “Presumed Innocent” and “The Last Trial,” which will be published next May. He wrote this for the Chicago Tribune

Genocide is now attributed to the Donald Trump legacy- Mike Pompeo: "Attention!"

Trump’s withdrawal (aka "retreat") virtually guarantees the reemergence of a cohesive ISIS (The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, also known as the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, officially known as the Islamic State -it does not really exist-and also known by its Arabic-language acronym Daesh, is a Salafi jihadist ... Wikipedia.)

Donald Trump surrendered in North Syria and left the Kurds at risk for genocide.

My "big question" to Secretary Mike Pompeo is this: How can you pretend to the American Secretary of State when you act like what your intention is to be elected a Senator from Kansas? Even more to the point, why aren't you doing something to help save the loyal Kurds who are now living in the jasw of genocide like the Armenians of over a century ago.

Armenian genocide (1914-1923)- was carried out during and after World War I and implemented in two phases—the wholesale killing of the able-bodied male population through massacre and subjection of army conscripts to forced labour, followed by the deportation of women, children, the elderly, and the infirm on death marches leading to the Syrian Desert.

Kurdish genocide killing with chemical weapons

Kurd genocide - With so many different ethnic groups living in one region and straddling several borders, the north central Kurdish area of the Middle East has been a continuous battle ground amongst and between the nation-states of Turkey, Iran, Iraq and Syria.

By Andrew Malcolm published in the Kansas.com Wichita Eagle 

Throughout the history of this area, the Kurds have revolted against the Turks, Arabs and the Persians in trying to establish an autonomous or independent state but have always been defeated. In defeat, they’ve pressed for some degree of autonomy which was granted, but inevitably revoked. Cyclically, the Kurds re-organized, rearmed and revolted and were again forcibly put down.

Trump’s withdrawal virtually guarantees the reemergence of a cohesive ISIS.

Echo opinion published in The Witichta Eagle

As if Donald Trump didn’t face enough trouble of his own (impeachment coming!) making, he announced 10 days ago what appeared to be a peremptory withdrawal of U.S. troops from Syria.

The decision ignited an immediate domestic firestorm because it gave the green light to Turkey’s aspiring dictator, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, to invade Syria and attack the Kurdish forces who had demolished the ISIS caliphate under American tutelage and air power. Erdogan regards Kurds as terrorists, which they are elsewhere. So, his forces moved within hours.

And Trump’s (retreat!) withdrawal virtually guarantees the reemergence of a cohesive ISIS.

Americans have come to realize that Trump is a transactional president, meaning his decisions almost always involve some kind of deal of convenience, not adherence to any particular code or philosophy. This can be quite convenient, self-serving and, in this case, immoral.

What shocked many was Trump’s cold-hearted abandonment of the Kurdish troops who’d done virtually 100% of the deadly fighting to fulfill his loud campaign vow to crush ISIS, and do it quickly.

The U.S. departure leaves another vacuum with ominous implications for the tumultuous area’s future. While Trump’s pullback betrayal surprised aides and military commanders, the bipartisan blowback appeared to surprise Trump. And he went on the defensive.

“We have to bring our people back home,” he said. That’s a campaign message resonating with many Americans tired of costly foreign military involvements. The trouble with that message is the U.S. had only 1,000 special operators in Syria. They’re leaving Syria. They’re not coming home. They’ve simply moved elsewhere.

Trump wrapped his decision in another popular message: “We are getting out of the endless wars.” If U.S. involvement in Syria has been a war, we need more like it. It was a proxy military operation.

The American Special Forces gave intel and strategic advice to Kurdish commanders and, when necessary, called in aggressive air cover from the Incirlik air base in – wait for this, too – Turkey.

Kurds did the dirty, deadly work of annihilating the ISIS caliphate before its terrorist tentacles could do much U.S. damage. In that fight, Kurdish forces lost 11,000 men and women during the last three years. That’s four times U.S. losses in 18 years of Afghanistan fighting.

Then, five days after his Syria withdrawal announcement, Trump blithely dispatched 2,000 additional U.S. troops away from home to Saudi Arabia, another foreign military involvement with no end date, to discourage Iranian adventures. Trump said that transaction was OK with him because the Saudis will finance it.

As Turkey’s troops and proxies bombarded Kurdish forces in northern Syria and killed Kurds, Trump then sought to downplay Kurds’ achievements at our behest. He said they hated ISIS anyway. But isn’t that the art of a good deal, both partners getting something they want?

And Trump also claimed the U.S. owes Kurds little, with a completely cockamamie statement that they were not U.S. allies in World War II. That actually is quite true. Of course, neither was Japan nor Germany, now close U.S. allies for mutually beneficial reasons.

As further cover, Trump said he threatened Erdogan (the name means “born a brave warrior”) to lay waste to Turkey’s economy if he harmed the Kurds. Let’s see now if that vow becomes Trump’s Syrian red line, as empty as former President Barack Obama’s on Syria’s chemical weapons.

In a photo op, Trump signed an executive order giving himself the power to impose “serious” economic sanctions on Turkey, the kind of popular political punishments that have not changed anyone’s behavior in Russia, Iran or Venezuela in recent years.

Trump’s Syrian withdrawal decision came immediately after a phone conversation with the Turkish strongman. Coincidentally, or perhaps not, Trump’s sudden Syria withdrawal announcement last December also followed a phone chat with Erdogan. That hasty decision, later ignored by Trump himself, prompted the resignation of Defense Secretary James Mattis, who’s written that great powers cannot survive without strong allies.

Being unpredictable like Trump can be helpful when confronting opponents. With allies, not so much. They value reliability and trust, actions not words. Which is why the U.S. could rely on NATO allies post-9/11 to join the hunt for Taliban and al Qaeda, the only time in NATO’s 70-year history that its mutual defense clause has been invoked.

Trump has said that NATO is obsolete. He’s also praised it for following his advice on strategy and vowed support. Allies wonder which presidential opinion is real and enduring, if either.

Despite his belated professed public support for Kurds in the path of Erdogan’s modern military, Trump’s actions cutting them loose are bound to raise questions in the minds of local loyalists helping U.S. military or diplomats elsewhere. Or those asked to in the future.

If, for instance, I was a dedicated Afghan interpreter for the U.S. as Trump resumes talks with the Taliban to withdraw American troops after 6,585 days of that endless war, I’d be completing my own transactional deal right about now: packing up my family to exit the country, too.

---

Racism and Antiracism - echo excerpt

As a professional nurse, I believe this excerpt from the book "How To Be An Antiracist" matches with my understanding about the sociology of medicine, and how racism is a public heath risk for poor health and early death. 

This blog is an echo excerpt from the book by Author Ibram X. Kendi.  His concept of antiracism reenergizes and reshapes the conversation about racial justice in America--but even more fundamentally, points us toward liberating new ways of thinking about ourselves and each other. Instead of working with the policies and system we have in place, Kendi asks us to think about what an antiracist society might look like, and how we can play an active role in building it.

In his memoir, Kendi weaves together an electrifying combination of ethics, history, law, and science--including the story of his own awakening to antiracism--bringing it all together in a cogent, accessible form. He begins by helping us rethink our most deeply held, if implicit, beliefs and our most intimate personal relationships (including beliefs about race and IQ and interracial social relations) and reexamines the policies and larger social arrangements we support. How to Be an Antiracist promises to become an essential book for anyone who wants to go beyond an awareness of racism to the next step of contributing to the formation of a truly just and equitable society.

Kendi wrote (p. 21-22) this autobiographical segue to the data he presents that correlates race with poor health and life expectancy:

I am one generation removed from picking cotton for pocket change under the warming climate in Guyton, outside of Savannah, GA.  That's where we buried my grandmother in 1993. Memories of her comforting calmness, her dark green thrum, and her large trash bags filled with Christmas gifts lived on as we drove back to New York from her funeral.  The next day, my father ventured up to Flushng, Queens, to see his single mother, also named Mary Ann. She had the clearest dark-brown skin, a smile that hugged you and a wit that smacked you.

When my father opened the door of her apartment, he smelled the fumes coming from the stove she'd left on, and some other fumes.  His mother was nowhere in sight, he rushed down the hallway and into her back bedroom. That's where he found his mother, as if sleeping, but dead.  Her struggle with Alzheimer's, a disease more prevalent among African Americans, was over.

There may be no more consequential White privilege than life itself. White lives matter to the tune of 3.5 additional years over Black lives in the United States, which is just the most glaring of a host of health disparities starting from infancy, where Black infants die at twice the rate of White infants. But, at least my grandmother and I met, we shared, we loved. I never met my paternal grandfather. I never met my maternal grandfather, Alvin, killed by cancer three years before my birth. In the United States, African Americans are 25 percent more likely to die of cancer than Whites. My father survived prostate cancer, which kills twice as many Black men as it does White men. Breast cancer disproportionately kills Black women.

Three million African Americans and four million Latinx, secured health insurance through the Affordable Care Act (ACA), dropping the uninsured rates for both groups to around 11 percent before President Barack Obama left office. But, a staggering 28.5 million Americans remained uninsured, a number primed for growth after the Republican Congress repealed the individual mandate in 2017. And, it is becoming harder for people of color to vote out of office the politicians crafting these policies designed to shorten their lives.  Racist voting policy has evolved from disenfranchising by Jim Crow voting laws to disenfranchising by mass incarceration and voter-ID laws. Sometimes these efforts are so blatant that they are struck down: North Carolina enacted one of these targeted voter-ID laws, but in July 2017, the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit struck it down ruling that its various provision "target African Americans with almost surgical precision." 

Nevertheless, others have remained and been successful. In fact, Wisconsin's strict voter-ID law suppressed approximately two hundred thousand votes- again primarily targeting voters of color, in the 2016 election. Donald Trump won that critical swing state by 22,748 votes.  

In Maine Writer's  summary about the above excerpt: Race and politics and health share a negative correlation for people of color. Data demonstrates how people of color are obstructed from voting for the people who could improve their human condition.  

Kansas echo in metaphor - Donald Trump's doomsday effect

Putin, Assad, Erdoğan and Khamenei — the four horsemen of the apocalypse 2.0- published in the The Witcheta Eagle

https://www.kansas.com/opinion/article236377108.html"Trump’s causal tweet-to-terror relationship reanimated the Biblical fearsome four horsemen who, in their initial iteration, represented Conquest, War, Famine and Death. This is no small feat."

Texas tornadoes are potentially caused by the “flap of a butterfly’s wings in Brazil” according to the Butterfly Effect theory. Determining the ultimate cause and effects in weather is a tough call, however, given how many random physical factors ultimately come into play. But it’s fascinating to think that a distant and peacefully fluttering butterfly has so much potential power.

Easier to determine is how one man’s wanton tongue wagging and temper tweeting can not only cause a political storm but has now unleashed the four horsemen of a modern regional apocalypse: Turkish President Recep Erdoğan, Syrian President Bashir al Assad, Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, and the ever-present Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Donald J. Trump, in his “great and unmatched wisdom,” has shown that not only can he distract a domestic electorate but that the power of his presidency can create limitless distant chaos, death and destruction with the tap of a thumb and the flip of a finger. Now that’s power!

Trump’s causal tweet-to-terror relationship reanimated the biblical fearsome four horsemen who, in their initial iteration, represented Conquest, War, Famine and Death. This is no small feat. In one feckless action, the president of the United States has whipped up the apocalyptic forces that one hoped the world’s most powerful man would instead be able to tamp down.

This is how the metaphor theoretically unfolds:

The first horseman rode in, chuffed and bare-chested on his nag, a vision of strength and wearing the religious symbols of a loving God. But in the form of Vladimir Putin, this rider drew behind him a fierce and unmerciful flock of jet-powered birds dropping bombs on the sick and infirm, raining explosive charges on targeted Syrian hospitals both to sow fear and remind the beleaguered recipients of his desire for conquest — that he alone can decide individuals’ fate.

Turkey’s Erdoğan galloped in as the second horseman, but always saw himself as the first to plow the field that borders his earthly realm. He, too, seeks conquest, but initiates this latest war against not only Kurds, but the rest of humanity. His steed leads both mechanized infantry and coordinated shelling. Irregular troops, mercenaries and retributive forces walk the plains to find families it can force to flee. Contemptible men seek the already suffering in order to show them the real meaning of torture. They reveal their true colors and cruelty when a bound and frightened prisoner must not only face a Geneva Convention-breaking level of humiliating indignity, but is ultimately put down like a dog in a ditch. For Armenians, this is a tragically familiar story.

Horseman Assad, the “Butcher of Damascus,” initially came to his people hidden, Trojan horse-like, in the form of a healer, an ophthalmologist who presumably once took the Hippocratic Oath to “First, do no harm.” Instead, he rode his father’s coattails and despotic style to defy the healing gods and apply his brutal hand to blind a nation to the distant freedoms it could once see. His marauders now ride roughshod with Russian ravagers over territory where a few short days ago American troops balanced a relative peace. Assad enforced a famine that starved his opponents and deprived them of medical supplies. He now has civilian enemies on the run while his starved dogs of war eat from the abandoned American tables. 

As a result, we all taste the bitterness of Trump’s dishonorable retreat.

Let us not forget the final of the four: Iran. America’s president effectively invited the Persian potentate to come to town, enlivening his proxies and apostles of death. Ayatollah Khamenei keeps his robes clean while he deploys merciless men who seek to extend his revolution from the Gulf to the Mediterranean. 

They never left Assad’s side and never lost sight of completing their Shia crescent. Iraq had already entered Iran’s sphere of influence; Assad was always Tehran’s partner in crime. A policy-indifferent Trump who, willy-nilly, dumps allies and revokes treaties has created another opening to an empire-oriented Iran with great ambitions, educated people, oil reserves aplenty and a willingness to flaunt its confederates’ firepower, whether with refinery-destroying drones or ship-sinking stealth. The Ayatollah is on a roll.

Lo and behold this prophesy: The four horsemen of the regional apocalypse are revealed to be upon us now. Neither the desire to rein them in by Trump’s handwringing congressional sycophants, nor the post-American retreat media spin, nor any post-tragedy justification from he who unleashed the beasts can lasso them back into the stable.

"The first horseman rode in, chuffed and bare-chested on his nag, a vision of strength and wearing the religious symbols..." 

Trump catalyzed a war “7,000 miles away” in a “land that has nothing to do with us.” He let his tweet fly. The Butterfly Effect has whipped up the winds of war that are now sweeping across the Middle East in renewed violence. Let us pray that they do not grow and gust at biblical proportions.

Markos Kounalakis mounts Western, not English, and hopes to ride off peacefully to a distant California sunset near the Hoover Institution, where he is a visiting fellow.

Markos Kounalakis