Independent Investigations
A Place For Considerate Political Discourse!


After a while, one just has to wonder if Donald Trump really believes what he says. Is every word out of his mouth designed to stimulate a certain portion of the electorate that he believes will propel him to become the leader of the free world?  Sometimes I have a hard time believing he is stating his beliefs.   If he really believes what he is saying, it is not hard to make the argument that he is the least qualified nominee for President in our lifetime and maybe in the history of the Republic.

Trump on Torture

Back in February of this year, Trump made the following statement:  “Torture works. OK, folks? You know, I have these guys—”Torture doesn’t work!”—believe me, it works. And waterboarding is your minor form. Some people say it’s not actually torture. Let’s assume it is. But they asked me the question: What do you think of waterboarding? Absolutely fine. But we should go much stronger than waterboarding

 There has been no evidence that information gained during “enhanced interrogation” as practiced by the CIA during the past decade or so has resulted in gaining truthful information.  In fact, the information gained during these sessions has been shown to be reliably false and nothing more than an attempt to say what the victim of torture thinks his torturers wanted to hear.

In 2014, the  Senate Select Committee on Intelligence said: “The CIA’s use of its enhanced interrogation techniques was not an effective means of acquiring intelligence or gaining cooperation from detainees.” The report, released in 2014, adds, “The CIA’s justification for the use of its enhanced interrogation techniques rested on inaccurate claims of their effectiveness.”

Those who have studied the effects of torture have shown that it doesn’t work, and in fact is counterproductive, resulting in false information.   Since the point of the interrogation is to gain information, using techniques that provide false information while staining the integrity of the United States worldwide is counterproductive to everything we believe in about the nature of our country.

Note – In a letter to the Wall Street Journal, Trump has disavowed his previous statements on waterboarding, stating that he would not require members of the armed forces to do anything that was against the law.  That being said, this is just one instance of him saying something to make himself appear tougher than his opponent that backfired on him causing him to flip-flop on the issue.


  Trump on War

In November 2015 Trump made the following comment at one of his rallys.  “”I love war, in a certain way.”  He also commented that he  “knows more about ISIS than the generals do” and calling “nuclear, the power, the devastation … very important to me.”

I find it interesting that a man who has never served in the military, never experienced the horror that is war, would make a comment like that.  I also find it interesting that a man such as this has recently made a comment indicating that our soldiers who are suffering the effects of PTSD were basically to weak to overcome the effects of war.

Anyone who has served in combat, or who knows someone who has served undoubtedly knows the ignorance of the “I Love War” comment.   But then, ignorance does tend to be visited quite often during his rally’s.

Khan family

Trump on Nuclear Weapons     

Trumps own comments about Nuclear Weapons are fairly easy to find.  Here are some of the more interesting ones:

  • Trump said he might use nuclear weapons and questioned why we would make them if we wouldn’t use them.
  • Trump said he was open to nuking Europe because it’s a “big place”
  • Trump said that “you want to be unpredictable” with nuclear weapons
  • Trump said he wasn’t that worried about more countries getting nukes since “it’s not like, gee whiz, nobody has them”
  • Trump had no idea what the “nuclear triad” was.
  • Trump started talking about nuclear weapons in Pakistan and made no sense at all
  • Trump said he’d be OK with a nuclear arms race in Asia
  • He said it didn’t matter if Saudi Arabia acquired nuclear weapons because “it’s going to happen anyway”


Trumps supporters tend to discount these statements as irrelevant.  That being said, it is obvious that Donald Trump has no idea of the devastation that would occur on the planet should he unleash the country’s nuclear arsenal or allow others to gain one.   That kind of ignorance has consequences, ones that tend to be lost on his supporters.

Trumps stances on torture, war, and nuclear weapons illustrate, once again, the complete lack of knowledge on the issues and a complete disregard for the qualifications required to be the leader of the free world.



Donald Trump is the gift that keeps on giving!

As much as his supporters would like to prove otherwise, it is painfully obvious that he is “that guy”.   We all know the type.  We have seen him many times over our lifetime.  Words do not adequately describe his behavior or the sense of entitlement that fosters it.   The hard truth is that Donald Trump is a man that believes that women were placed on this planet to serve him.

There is no disinfectant for contact with this type of man.  There is no way to explain away the thought processes within him that are at the core of his beliefs.  He is repugnant.  He is disgusting.  He is demeaning to the human condition.  He is a nightmare of a human being.   Contact with him, or his words, requires the one to burn their clothes and take a bath in the hopes of washing the stench off.  Unfortunately, there is no cure for contact with him.  Once infected, always affected.

I am amazed at the early attempts to justify his lewd and demeaning comments about women.   Those who dismiss his comments immediately claim that Hillary Clinton is every bit as bad a human being because she is married to whom she is married to as if that somehow justifies their support for this dumpster fire of a candidate.   Basically, the comments flow along the following lines:  “What he had said is bad but I can still support him because Hillary is married to Bill”.   Let me say this for the record.  If you can still support Trump after hearing his latest remarks, there is a distinct possibility that you have a complete lack of understanding as to what those remarks indicate about him.

Explain that to your sons and daughters.  Explain that to your wife.  Explain that to your mom or your dad.  Explain that to your secretary or any other woman that you come in contact with.

One other possibility for supporting him is that your core ideological beliefs outweigh any supposed spiritual enlightenment that you have received as you travel down the highways and byways of your life.  To some, that statement may seem harsh.  The truth is not always pretty.   If you claim to be a person with spiritual values, dismissing the obvious truths about the man you support to be the leader of the free world, is proof that said values take second place when it comes to evaluating an individuals’ qualifications for the Presidency of the United States.   If that is the case, what you are saying is that your political beliefs trump your spiritual beliefs.

Any evaluation of the Republican political machine at this point in the race has to take into account the fact that the ship is sinking and those who have remained on it through this journey are jumping off at a rapid pace.  Republican politicians are coming to the conclusion that remaining in support of the Trump candidacy will affect their own political careers.  Once infected, always affected.  Politically speaking, remaining with Trump after these latest revelations of his character as a human being will damage their standing with the people they serve.

There are those who think he should terminate his candidacy immediately.  After a fairly strong performance in the Vice Presidential debate, Mike Pence kicked reporters out of the room and refused to answer questions about his running mate.   I have a suggestion for Mr. Pence.   Terminate your candidacy.   Staying on this sinking ship will forever scar any attempt at future candidacy.  Terminating your candidacy in the face of these latest revelations will do more for your future political life than any other action.   Standing up to Trump at this point in time will absolutely solidify your position within the Republican Party.  This ship is not going to float much longer.  There is no justification for staying on a ship that will be at the bottom of the political ocean soon.  Is your loyalty to a specific person or is it to those whose political beliefs match yours?

There is one other observation to be made here.   It is not lost on me that Donald Trump is going to be described as the one person in the history of the United States that was defeated in a battle for the Presidency by a woman.  There is something satisfying to me in that eventuality.  A man, who has spent his life with the belief that woman are placed on the planet to serve his needs, is going to live the rest of his life knowing that a member of the group placed on earth to serve him has completely destroyed his dreams.   Destruction of his dreams is the payback for a life lived with a sense of entitlement.  It is only fitting that the dreams of leadership of the free world were destroyed by a member of a group of people that he has disrespected and marginalized for most of his life.

One of the quotes that was revealed yesterday was when Donald Trump said of a married woman “I moved on her like a bitch”.    No Donald, payback is a bitch.



This is the 3rd in a series of blogs listing reasons why I will not vote for Donald Trump.  This one probably isn’t something that most think about.  It involves Trumps latching on to the tired old fiscal theory that has come to be known as “Trickle Down Economics”.  I will keep this one short, since the vast majority of us are definitely not economists, and the topic may not create any interest.

Image result for Trickle Down Cartoons

First of all, “trickle-down” is not a term used by most economists.  It is a purely political term.  Basically, this economic theory suggests that giving large tax breaks to the rich will give them even more money than they already have.  This theory depends upon those who are getting the tax break to create more jobs with their extra money which then boosts the economy. A growing economy would be good for the middle class.  In essence, the money “trickles down” from the rich to the middle class.

The most recent experiment in the “cut taxes for the rich” crowd involved our most recent Republican President, George W. Bush.  As a result of the Bush-era tax cuts, the highest-income earners paid the lowest rates in U.S. history and that net job growth during the Bush administration was zero.   The idea that the rich would create jobs with their extra money definitely fell flat on its face.

The real question is “what are those that receive the tax breaks doing with their extra money”?   Generally speaking,  money from these tax breaks usually ends up being hoarded in overseas tax shelters and other “safe havens”, or if it is invested, it is typically in the equities market where the profits are taxed at a mere 15%-20% because they are considered Capital Gains.

The tax plan that Donald Trump has revealed is basically the same fiscal policy that has proven to provide very little job growth, exploded the debt, stymied economic growth, and increased the gap between the very rich and the middle class.  Since I presume that most of those who read this would not be classified as belonging to the “very rich” crowd, a vote for Trump is a vote that, at its most fundamental form, is a vote against our own economic interests.    In this fiscal environment, it makes no sense for most of us.


Generally speaking, Republicans vote for Republicans and Democrats vote for Democrats.  It has always been that way and nothing that has happened in this year’s contest will change that general trend in the future.  However, this election is different.   With about 6 weeks to go before the November election, there are rumblings from a large number of significant Republicans.  The bottom line is, a great number of them refuse to back Donald Trump.

There is no way one can downplay the significance of the Republican exodus from Donald Trump.  There is no other way to describe the reasons for this other than the fact that those who are not supporting Trump, see him for who he is and realize that he is the least qualified candidate.  They tend to think he is dangerous. They doubt his capability.   They tend to think he doesn’t support their Conservative ideology.  They tend to think a Trump Presidency would be a disaster at home and abroad.  In a nutshell, they think he is bad news for their political party and are willing to risk their reputation within the party by refusing to vote for him just because he is a Republican.  Here is an incomplete list along with some of the comments they made.

Richard Hanna – Current member of Congress (Called Trump a National Embarrassment)

George H.W. Bush – Former President of the United States

Henry Paulson – Former Treasury Secretary (Bush)

Carlos Gutierrez – Former Commerce Secretary (Bush)

Louis Sullivan –health and human services secretary(Bush) (“I detest Donald Trump”)

Rosario Marin – U.S. Treasurer (Bush) (I will stand against a tyrannical Presidency)

John Negroponte – Director of National Intelligence

Richard Armitage – Deputy Secretary of State (Bush) (Doesn’t appear to be a Republican)

Brent Scowcroft-Advisor to 3 Republican Presidents (Doesn’t have judgement and knowledge required)

James Clade – Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (There is no choice)

Richard Painter-Chief White House Ethics Lawyer (Hillary Clinton is the only qualified major party candidate)

William Reilly – Environmental Protection Agency

Allen Steinberg – Regional EPA Administrator

9 Other Bush Administration Officials

Frank Lavin – Reagan Administration Political Director (Donald Trump deserves to lose)

Doug Elmets – Former Reagan Spokesman (Can’t live one day with Donald Trump as President)

Jim Cicconi – Former Reagan and Bush Aide (he would set our nation on a very dark path)

Charles Fried – Former Solicitor General (brutal, substantially incoherent and authoritarian tendencies)

Robert Kagan – Advisor to both McCain and Romney

Max Boot – Council on Foreign Relations (Hillary is vastly more preferable than Trump)(the more he talks the more obvious he makes it that he is totally unfit to be commander in chief.)

Peter Mansoor – Former Aide to CIA Director David Petraeus (First Democratic President I will ever vote for)

Meg Whitman – Former Hewlitt-Packard Chief Executive (His demagoguery has undermined the fabric of our national character.)

Chris Shays – Former Congressman – (There is a time when you put your country first)

Mark Salter – Former McCain Advisor (Whatever Hillary Clinton’s fault, she is not ignorant, hateful, or a nut!  He possesses the emotional maturity of a 6-year old)

Sally Bradshaw – Former Jeb Bush Advisor (I can’t look my children in the eye and say I voted for Donald Trump)

Mike Treiser – Former Mitt Romney Aide (In the face of hatred, bigotry, violence, and small-mindedness, this time I am with her)

Colin Powell – Former Secretary of State (Donald Trump is a National disgrace who is in the process of destroying himself)

Harry Sloan – Major Republican donor  (Does not embody the values that make me a life-long Republican)

Frank Lavin-Former White House Political Director (The bankruptcies reflect a man who either lacks reasonable business judgement or lacks business ethics)

Tony Fratto – Former Deputy Press Secretary (Bush) (is not fit for office)

Mitt Romney – Former Republican Nominee For President (I wanted my grand kids to see, that I simply could not ignore what Trump was saying and doing, which revealed a character and a temperament unfit for the leader of the free world.) 

Karl Rove – Former Bush Political Director(a complete idiot who is graceless and divisive)

Susan Collins – Senator from Maine (I have become increasingly dismayed by his constant stream of cruel  comments and his inability to admit error or apologize)

Lindsay Graham – Senator from South Carolina (If anybody is looking for an off-ramp, this is probably it. There will come a time when love of country will trump hatred of Hillary)

George Shultz – Secretary of State (Reagan) (God help us!)

Paul Wolfowitz – Deputy Secretary of Defense (Bush) (The only way you can be comfortable about Trump’s foreign policy is to believe that he doesn’t really mean anything he says)

Robert Gates – Former Secretary of State and head of the CIA (Trump is beyond repair and unfit to be commander in chief)

Donald Gregg – National Security Advisor (Bush) (Dangerous, doesn’t understand the complex world we live in, and is without any moral or international philosophy)

Erick Erickson – national conservative radio host (I will put my country before my party, and decline to help the voters in this country commit national suicide)

John Warner – Former 5-term Senator from Virginia – announcing endorsement on 9/28/16 (Comments to follow)

There are literally hundreds more that I could have included in this post.  Neither you or I have the time to include them all and read all of their comments.  That being said, the Republican exodus from Donald Trump sends a clear message to the electorate.    The real question that will be determined in November is whether or not the electorate is listening.

Comments always welcome




This is the first in a series of blog posts that explains my reasoning behind my refusal to vote for Donald Trump.  At this point I have eleven main reasons, but honestly, I could have come up with more.

Reason #11 – Donald Trumps Experiences Do Not Qualify Him For The Highest Office In The Land

Let me get this straight.  Donald Trump wants to be President of the United States, the most powerful position on the planet.  He expects me to vote for a complete novice at all things political whether they be related to domestic policy or foreign policy.  He expects me to trust that his business career has prepared him for the highest office in the land.  At this point, I will not discuss his other qualifications or lack thereof; however, this one is both amusing and confusing to me.

I am amused because I have followed politics pretty heavily since 1972 when I was among the first 18 year old Americans to vote in a Presidential election.  At times I have agreed with the man sitting at the desk of the oval office.  At times I have disagreed.  But the point is this.  All of the men that sat at that desk had some semblance of experience that prepared them to do the job.  Obama served in Congress.  George W. Bush was Governor of Texas.  Bill Clinton was Governor of Arkansas.  George H.W. Bush was head of the C.I.A. among other things.  Ronald Reagan was Governor of California.  All served the country in one way or another prior to taking office.  Donald Trump has never served the country.  In fact, he has never served anyone but himself.  Serving others is completely foreign to Donald.

The experience of running a business, while an important endeavor, does not prepare one to run the most powerful country on the planet.  Business acumen or lack thereof, is not a legitimate qualifier for this position.  The government is not run like a business.  There are built in checks and balances to the power of the Presidency afforded by the Constitution of the United States.  In Trump’s businesses, he has all the power and all of the decisions are his alone.

Trump has never commanded anything close to the Armed Forces of the United States.  He has never dealt with Congress other than making contributions to members who he felt would treat him and his business interests positively.  He has never dealt with the Supreme Court unless one of his thousands of business and personal lawsuits has reached that hallowed hall.

The civil servants that make up the government outnumber political appointees by about 1000 to 1.  Donald can fire his political appointees.  He can’t fire civil servants.  The complete control he enjoys over his business interests is not what he would find if he serves as President.  He has never served in any political position, and in fact, has a questionable record as to whether he served anyone but himself during his entire life.   Yet, he wants me to give him the keys to the Whitehouse.   I think not.

I am somewhat confused by his request for my vote.  Does he think so little of my reasoning powers to suggest that I forego all rational thought processes and go against my basic instincts and vote for him?  Does he think that the way he talks, and acts, will somehow overcome my ability to discern his utter lack of qualification for the job?  Does he think that so little of the American electorate that he believes that their desire for a “change candidate” will overcome their ability to discern that he is the least qualified individual ever to be nominated by a major political party?

Obviously he does, and obviously it has worked up to this point.  That is the scariest part of this race for the Presidency.  Does the majority of the American electorate really have such a low opinion of the Office of the President that they will completely ignore the obvious and cast their vote for a complete novice?  Obviously, he believes they do.

You are always welcome to comment on my posts.  They are meant to stimulate dialogue.  Whether you agree or disagree, your reasoned comments are always welcome.

Look for my next post in this series.  It will deal with the fact that so many highly qualified Conservatives completely reject the Trump candidacy.



I just found out from that pillar of all that is truth, that indeed Barack Obama was born in the United States.  After almost eight years in office, what a relief it is to discover that Obama met the qualifications for seeking the Presidency of the United States.  I can now rest assured that the past 8 years were legitimate.  Imagine my relief!

Let’s talk about the reality of the movement largely created and energized by the words and actions of Donald Trump.  First, and foremost, there was never any doubt that Obama was born in the United States.  The effort to delegitimize the Obama Presidency was nothing more than a personal attack designed to undermine his efforts as President.  There was never any “there, there” and yet, people who knew better continued their ignorant and incessant claims that lingered throughout his two terms in office.

I am no fan of conspiracy theories or theorists.  I have always felt it took a special lack of intelligence and honor to propagate that which has no relationship to the truth.   To persuade like-minded individuals to rally with their conspiracy-driven brothers and sisters is a special act of cowardice reserved for individuals to whom truth and fairness are not part of their DNA.

Donald Trump is King among this group.  His role as King Conspirator immediately qualifies any utterance from his conspiracy-driven soul to the trash heap of ignorant ideas and provably false dribble.  Yet, a fairly considerable number of individuals in the United States support his efforts to gain the Presidency.  Many of them will refuse to believe his terse claim made today that Obama was born in the United States.

Imagine the relief felt in the State of Hawaii.  Now they can rest assured that their State is actually one of the 50 States comprising our country.   That is no small deal.

There are three possible scenarios for why the Donald spread this ignorant dribble.

  1. The first is that he actually believed it.  That alone disqualifies him from serving in any public office, let alone the Presidency of the United States. One who believes ideas and utterances that have been soundly refuted by fact is living in a world of their own making that very few relate to.  It takes a special lack of inquisitiveness to believe that which is provably false.  Yet thousands believe.
  2. The second is that he knew that his ignorant claims would find fertile ground in a rather large group of individuals that might one day propel him to become the Republican nominee for President of the United States. You see, any Republican worth his salt could never agree to an Obama Presidency.  It is against their political DNA.  Imagine the horror experienced in the bowels of the Republican Party when they come to realize that they could not find a candidate to defeat the first African-American candidate from their rival party.  In fact, it happened twice.  The embarrassment is palpable.
  3. The third is that he knew his ignorant claims would draw attention to himself and thus get the opportunity to revel in the spotlight created by his efforts. There is nothing more appealing to Donald Trump than the affections of those who believe in him.

The utterances of Donald Trump today regarding the birthplace of Barack Obama have completely pulled the rug out from underneath a huge number of his followers whose support he is counting on.  They believe in him.  They trust him.  They want to support him.  Now they discover that he has been lying to them for 8 years.  Imagine my relief.   However, you can count on one very disturbing result.   It will not make a difference in their support.

Remember, they still have that “Obama is a Muslim” fact to base their support on.  Trump couldn’t possibly change his stance on this one could he?  Possibly they could count on the “Clinton Death Squad” theory.  Maybe they could hang their allegiance to the “Vince Foster Was Murdered” scenario.  Better yet, let’s focus on the “Whitewater Affair”.    If all of those fall to the wayside, their best bet will be that Hillary is suffering from some kind of physical ailment that makes her behave incoherently and irrationally.   “It’s true, I saw it on Fox News!”   Isn’t that the same place they learned about Obama being born in Africa?

What does it say about one’s base of political support that requires belief in provably false ideas and statements?   It says that they believe their nominee is qualified to be President of the United States.


No attack on the Clinton’s is a more perfect illustration of the phrase “there is no there, there” than the pseudo-scandal known as “Whitewater”.   There is no better example of the lengths to which Conservatives will go to undermine and attack anything and everything Clinton.   Most of those who understood and experienced the all-consuming fire brought by Clinton antagonists have to admit that it was an effective effort that created incredible ill-will towards Bill and Hillary Clinton that still exists to this day.  This ill-will is exhibited every day on the campaign trail as Hillary seeks the office of the Presidency.   The truth about Whitewater is not elusive.  The Clinton’s were completely exonerated as the process was brought to a close, and in fact, the Clinton’s were the only individuals who lost money in this failed investment scheme.

Whitewater began before Bill Clinton was elected and ended on the day before his second term concluded. Early on in the feeding frenzy known as Whitewater, the Clintons were completely exonerated by two investigations. The conclusions of those investigations were never proven to be wrong. However, the conclusions of those investigations did not fit the agenda of the political right wing.

Right wing ideologues invested millions of dollars fabricating accusations against the Clintons during this time. Once these accusations reached the media, they were turned into massive efforts to fan the flames of scandal.  Media outlets were climbing all over one another to come up with stories related to the Clintons’ and their unlawful actions.   Many members of the news media at that time are still on the job today.  The Clintons became fair game as accusation piled upon accusation.  The result was that no self-respecting Republican member of Congress would ever place himself in the media’s crosshairs by agreeing with, or working with Bill Clinton.  To illustrate how these flames burn white-hot today, you have to look no farther than my Facebook feed which featured an article making claims about the list of people who stood against the Clintons who ended up dead.  For those whose feeble thought processes lead them to believe in conspiracy theory, Clintons are arranging the deaths of certain individuals and the bodies keep piling up.  There can be, and will be, no limit, to right-wing efforts to undermine Bill and Hillary Clinton and keep Hillary from becoming President of the United States.

Here is a perfect example of the media feeding frenzy. On March 4th 1994, the New York Times published a front-page article regarding Whitewater.  “Grand Jury Is Reportedly Told Of Shredding At Little Rock Firm: One Box Had Initials of Aide Who Killed Himself”.  Take a good look at all of the potential scandal in that title.  Secret Grand Jury testimony leaked, shredding of documents, a dead law firm aide.  Those Clinton’s must be corrupt.  However, in the 28th paragraph of this hit-piece it was noted that the documents that were shredded had no relationship with anything related to Whitewater.   Such was the media environment at that time.  They completely shredded their own article when they mentioned it had nothing to do with Whitewater.  It was an attempt to compare the Whitewater scandal with the destruction of documents during Watergate.  If was very effective.  It was a lie.

Republican members of Congress joined in the feeding frenzy. For example, Congressman James Leach began making accusations and promising a “block-buster” revelation about the Clintons.  He claimed that the Clintons made money on their Whitewater investments. (They lost money).  He claimed they used the funds to pay of campaign debts.  (They didn’t).  He claimed that the fraud committed by David Hale during the Whitewater investment was at the behest of the Clintons. (It wasn’t).   From his official government office, Leach became a source of leads, suggestions and documents for all reporters covering Whitewater.  Leach fell silent after the congressional Whitewater hearings produced no shred of evidence to support any of his charges.   Silence is not apology.  There was no apology to be heard.

In the summer of 1995, Senator Alfonse D’Amato, the ranking Republican on the Senate Banking Committee decided to hold Whitewater hearings. They lasted for 3 years.   The Whitewater committee heard 159 witnesses, 20 of them more than once, took 281 depositions and processed more than 35,000 pages of documents provided by the Clintons.  Newspapers reported that Hillary would be proven to be a perjurer, the President would be proved to be obstructing justice, and the “secret” files relating to the suicide death of Vincent Foster would be revealed.  In the end, the committee could not prove that any charges against the Clintons were warranted.  Three years, millions of dollars.  No charges.   The pattern continues.

As an interesting side note to the congressional investigation, L. Jean Lewis who had been hailed as a critical witness against the Clintons was completely rejected and proven to be without credibility.   When confronted on the witness stand by Senator Paul Sarbanes regarding her testimony, she collapsed on the witness stand, crying and fainting.  It was a dramatic scene illustrating, once again, the length that right-wing individuals would go to undermine the Clintons.  Unfortunately for her, her testimony ended in tears and loss of consciousness as she was shamed in front of the committee.  It was never reported in the press.

Attorney General Janet Reno chose Robert Fiske to investigate all things related to Whitewater as an independent counsel. Reno was acting under the instruction of Bill Clinton when establishing an independent counsel investigation.   Clinton made the decision as a way of finally ending the scandal.   Interestingly enough, Senate Republicans who had allowed the Independent Counsel Act two years earlier to lapse while a Republican President was in office, reversed themselves when a Democrat was in office.  Prior to that time, Lawrence Walsh, a Republican Lawyer from Oklahoma, served as Independent Counsel during the Iran-Contra hearings.  Those hearings resulted in eleven convictions of Reagan Administration officials and their accomplices.  After those investigations, Republicans determined that the Office of the Independent Counsel represented a run-away fourth branch of Government.  They brought it back for Bill Clinton.

Fiske moved quickly with his investigation. Five months after beginning the investigation he issued a definitive report clearing up the Vince Foster suicide and Clinton’s obstruction of justice.   His report rightfully asserted that Vince Foster, the President’s personal attorney, had committed suicide after an intense bout with depression relating to the attacks on his personal character in the Wall Street Journal and other media outlets.

Subsequent work by the independent counsel resulted in indictment of Webster Hubbell and Arkansas Governor Jim “Guy” Tucker for bank-fraud schemes having nothing to do with Whitewater or the Clintons. In fact, Hillary Clinton turned out to be a victim of Hubbell who had embezzled money from the Rose Law firm that she worked for.

Within one year, the investigation of the independent counsel had been completed and the Clintons were exonerated from any and all wrong doing.   End of story.

Maybe not….in my next post we will get into the efforts of recently demoted leader of Baylor University, Kenneth Starr, who lost his prized position as a leader of a terrific Southern Baptist University because of ignoring the claims of female students who were raped by members of the football team.

I couldn’t possibly include all of the information I wanted to in this post. For a fairly complete revelation of issues involving Whitewater see The Clinton Wars by Sidney Blumenthal.  The well-documented text is 800 pages long and well worth the read.


Before I start, I have an admission.   I don’t have a degree in political science.  My degree’s are in the field of science where I was taught to look at evidence, sometimes called data to see where it leads.  That being said, 62 years of living has brought with it, the ability to observe and make reasonable conclusions from what I see.

All of the political events we have been exposed to for the past year have brought me to the following conclusion and a few predictions.   First, and foremost, Donald Trump is not the savior of the political right wing.  I don’t necessarily blame someone to believing that he is based upon the way he mowed down his adversaries in the battle to win the Republican nomination for President of the United States. I think it said more about the qualities of his adversaries than it does about him.  Second,  if Donald Trump is nominated at the upcoming Republican Convention, it is my belief that he will receive a major drubbing at the polls in November.

However, it is not the purpose of this post to drag Trump through the mud.   That being said, the election of Hillary Clinton will bring back the scandal machine that we experienced during the Bill Clinton administration.  It is that scandal machine that I want to call your attention to.

During his time in office, Bill Clinton, and his wife, faced a continuous barrage of scandalous press releases and accusations no President of the United States has had to endure.   If and when Hillary Clinton is elected, the rejuvenated scandal machine will put on a barrage that makes their previous efforts pale in comparison.  There will be two reasons this will be so.  The first is that she is a Clinton.  That fact alone will cause right wing meltdowns from the day of the election until she leaves office.  The second is that she is a woman.  The factions are already lining up and preparing their ammunition for the battle.  Don’t kid yourself, it is a battle.  It is a battle that is designed to limit her effectiveness and destroy her Presidency.   If you think it was bad during President Obama’s Administration you haven’t seen anything yet.

When the Clinton’s arrived in Washington, salvo after salvo was launched in an effort to undermine his Presidency.  In the minds of right wing political operatives, he was an outsider, ignorant in the ways of Washington, and not qualified to be President.  It has been said that the Clinton’s were the poorest Presidential family to ever gain the Whitehouse.  They were outsiders, from a very poor Southern State and they did not qualify to be there.   Those that were considered the rulers of Washington society completely rejected them until they left the scene.  They were not accepted by the “ruling class” in our nation’s capital.

That was all it took to engage the scandal machine in Washington and the rest of the country.   In future posts I will address some of the Clinton “scandals” as to their origins, their coverage in the press, the investigations that created havoc in Washington, and lastly, the evidence that was uncovered that was basically ignored by the nation.

First up, will be Whitewater and the firestorm and dumpster fire it became.   I guarantee you, the Whitewater scandal will be mentioned over and over during the campaign.  It has been, and will forever be, one of the main salvo’s against the Clinton’s.  Be ready for it….it is going to return very soon.  If you are going to be exposed to Whitewater again, as one who is deciding who to vote for, one needs to know the nature of that scandal and the outcomes of the millions of dollars spent on investigating it.


I can’t begin to fully understand what it is like to be female in our society.  The truth is, no man can. Until you have experienced the things that females of all ages experience one can not accurately identify with their experiences.

Now females of all political persuasions are faced with the opportunity to support Donald Trump in the upcoming election.  They are faced with casting a vote for an individual that has spent quite a lot of energy in his life demeaning females he disagrees with.   Here are some verified examples of Trump’s treatment of women.

Donald called Rosie O’Donnell “untalented and of less than average intelligence”.  He has called her a “big fat pig, a real loser, a disgusting pig, and my nice fat little Rosie”.  He also commented that Rosie O’Donnell is “disgusting both inside and out, she is a slob.”

Of Arianna Huffington he has said “she is a dog who wrongfully comments on me”.  Donald also sent a woman named Gail Collins a picture of Huffington with the following written on it. “The Face Of A Dog”.

He called Attorney Elizabeth Beck “disgusting” when she requested a break from a legal proceeding to pump breast milk.

Referring to Carly Fiorina he said “look at that face, would anyone vote for that?  Can you imagine that, the face of our next President”.

Once he referred to Nicollette Sheridan by commenting that “a person who is very flat-chested is very hard to be a 10.”

His recent battle with Megyn Kelly of Fox News is just the latest example of comments that demean women.

Some have used the term “misognyst” to describe Trump.  There are several definitions that one can use to describe the term.  Some go as far as to claim it means one who hates women.   I don’t think we can go that far.  After all, he has married three of them and divorced two of them.  That being said, a more accurate label would be that Donald Trump is “sexist”.   That term implies a general attitude that is explainable only by stating that he treats them with disdain and thinks he is better than them because of his inheritance of a Y chromosome. Voting for a man with this attitude is voting for a man who regularly thinks women are beneath him.  He is better than them.

So I ask you, women of the country, how is it that a person that behaves as he does towards women could ever gain your vote in a Presidential election?

I have heard quite a few answers to that question.   One common one I have heard is that there are other things about him that make him their choice in spite of their dislike of his sexist behavior.  In other words, other things are more important.  We can hold our nose and vote for this guy because other things about him are more important that his documented attitude towards women.

Here are a couple of questions you might ask yourself before you make up your mind.

  1. If Donald Trump was a Democrat would you vote for him?
  2. To those of you with daughters, if those comments were made directly at your child, would you still vote for him?
  3. Are you comfortable with putting a man with his attitude towards women into the most powerful leadership position on the planet?

It is not surprising to most of us that Donald has said “I have always treated women with great respect.”    That, my friends, is just one of the lies he uses to persuade.  The sexist man is the last person to realize he is sexist if he ever does.

I think for many women who plan to vote for Trump the real reason is that their dislike, and possibly hatred for one woman with a different political ideology than theirs, grants them the ability to ignore hurtful and vicious behavior that many of them have had to deal with, and been scarred by, in their lifetime.  In spite of the pain of those experiences, they will vote for a man who personally attacks women on a fairly regular basis.

If that is the case, admit it to yourself and stop defending Donald Trump’s sexist behavior.


First things first.   Any citizen of the United States that is an eligible voter has the right to vote for any candidate that they want to.   If you want to vote for Donald Trump, do it.   It is your right.  Trump’s efforts to gain the nomination of the Republican Party are on many levels an accomplishment that no one predicted.

That being said, the rise of Donald Trump can be attributed to several  factors which have combined to give him the opportunity to be considered by the voting public.   The factor that is most often used as an explanation for his popularity among certain conservative voters is the anger of the Conservative electorate.

However, one recent study suggests that only about 25% of those who are voting for Trump in the primaries are doing so out of anger.   That leaves a large portion of his followers with other reasons.  I suggest that one big reason is that members of the political party that has not held the Presidency for 8 years in a row consistently do their best to see to it that a member of their party succeeds the sitting President.  The most recent example is the Obama election.  There was a very large turnout of liberal voters voting for Obama because they were tired of the Bush Administration.  There is nothing new about that.

That being said, one can not deny the anger that is being expressed in the Republican primaries.  The question then becomes: “What has fueled their anger?”   There is no simple answer to that one.  Why are they so mad that they will consider an ego-driven, crude, non-politician as a man to put their trust in?   Too often the pundits don’t give full consideration for the causes of the anger that has fueled Trump’s rise in the polls.

Factors That Fuel the Anger of the Electorate

Foremost in the mind of the angry electorate is the inescapable fact that they feel that politicians they elected have failed them.  Consider the fact that many evangelical voters voted for George W. Bush based upon the belief that he would govern in a way that reflected their basic evangelical beliefs.  After 911, the Iraq War, failure of their WMD arguments to justify the war, and, at best, superficial attempts to support the firmly held political beliefs of evangelicals, it became obvious that the promise of George W. Bush for evangelicals was a failure of the highest order.

Another bitter pill for conservative members of the electorate is the failure of the House of Representatives and Senate to thwart the policy prescriptions of the political left as represented by the Obama Administration.   Rarely, has any group of Republican legislators made more noise about what they were going to do for the conservative electorate and failed so miserably to actually get something accomplished.  If you ask “What has Congress been doing since the Conservatives took over?”  The answer is: basically nothing.

Not only have conservative members of Congress failed at stopping legislation proposed by their political opponents, they have pretty much failed to get anything done at all.   This Congress has rightly been identified as the “accomplish nothing” Congress.  In the eyes of a large portion of the electorate, Washington politics can be characterized by a lot of noise with nothing getting said or done.   Don’t think for a moment that their lack of accomplishment has not been perceived as a failure to fulfill the promises made to their political base.  In short, for the most part, the conservative electorate is tired of promises made by individuals they elect.

One should also note, that those who consider themselves center-right, or progressive are frustrated on many levels also.  However, most of that frustration is directed towards conservative politicians whose main goal was to thwart the policies of the Obama Administration.  Washington, as a governing entity, has become largely ineffective in the eyes of both political parties.

One other factor that has given rise to conservative anger is the fact that the Obama Administration has been effective in moving its policies forward and blocking the policies sought by Conservatives.  A question not often considered, is whether or not the anger that is fueling the rise of Donald Trump would be as intense had a Republican been in the White House for the past four or eight years.

Both conservatives and progressives are tired of the influence that money has in our politics.  Basically a group of about 100 large donors, who donate in secret, are unbelievably influential in determining who gets elected.

When a certain political party has had its representative sitting in the White House for 8 years, there is always momentum to effect change.   There is nothing new about that part of the anger that is being expressed about the country.

Do You Know What You Are Getting In Donald Trump?

So the conservative electorate is angry.  I get it.  Does the level of that anger cause conservative voters to abandon their basic political and spiritual beliefs for the purpose of electing someone who claims to be able to change the way the country is run?

At this point, I would have to say without reservation that the answer to that question is “absolutely”.  Many Conservatives believe that electing Donald Trump will be the answer to their anger.   In the mind of a large portion of the conservative electorate, nothing that Trump does or says eliminates him from their consideration.

To many evangelicals, it doesn’t matter that Trump is perceived by most as having a distant relationship with the basic beliefs they have required in their past candidates.   His pandering to the Liberty University crowd with his comment about Two Corinthians is an obvious clue that he has, at best, a distant relationship to scripture.  Sorry folks, the only reason he even brought those verses up was that they mention the word “Liberty” and he was at Liberty University.   To deny that exhibits a lack of clarity about what he was doing.   Many of the policy statements that are uttered from his mouth exhibit a complete lack of understanding of evangelical positions as revealed in scripture.

In short, believing that Donald Trump represents members of your faith is a compromise of your beliefs.  You can’t have it both ways.   Donald Trump has not, and probably will not be a man who represents evangelical beliefs.  His words, actions, and policy ideas could not be farther away from any scriptural imperative we claim to want in a candidate.   Those who deny that are either exhibiting a complete lack of understanding of the faith they claim to adhere to or their political beliefs outweigh their spiritual beliefs.

The question for evangelicals to answer is: Does it matter that he doesn’t represent your basic spiritual beliefs?   Sadly, the anger and desire for change inside the evangelical conservative electorate indicates that it doesn’t matter.  That fact alone, casts a long shadow over past proclamations from evangelical voters over the type of individual they want representing them in Washington.   Basically it boils down to this:  The desire of many Trump supporters to have an evangelical represent them is not nearly as important to them as their conservative political beliefs and their dislike of President Obama.  Dislike of all things progressive trumps their need for a President that represents their spiritual beliefs.  In other words, spiritual  beliefs are not as important as conservative beliefs in spite of all of the proclamations to the contrary.

Another question that must be answered before casting your vote for Donald Trump is whether or not he is really a Conservative , or even a Republican.    His entire message is designed to fire up the conservative base.  Take a hard look at his stances on “building a wall”, destroying ISIS, expanding the military, overturning the Iran Treaty, overturning Obama’s executive decisions, reversing the Affordable Care Act, and other items on the Conservative hit-list.   Regardless of the fact that he will not be able to make Mexico pay for his wall, he has no answer other than bombing and torture to destroy ISIS, our military is the strongest in the world, the Iran Treaty isn’t close to being as bad as conservatives claim, Bush had more executive decisions than Obama, conservatives have no answer for what to do after they overturn the affordable care act, and on and on. He makes these outlandish and foolish claims to fire up his base and get himself nominated.   His proclamations are a sure fire way to fire up his base, regardless of the fact that they are guaranteed to cause progressives to turn out in large numbers to make sure he doesn’t get elected.

For the first time that I can remember, Conservative politicians are considering not supporting Trumps’ presidential ambitions.  Think for a minute about what that really means.  What it means is that they would rather have another Clinton in the White House with all that it implies, than have Trump in the White House.  Considering all of the attacks on the Clintons’ over the years, that is an amazing development.   It is almost as if they are saying that they will take their chances with the Clintons’ rather than risking the soul of their political party by electing someone who doesn’t represent their basic beliefs and will be a horrible representative of the Conservative Party.

Expressing Your Anger At What Cost?

Another issue to consider is whether or not giving Trump the nomination will negatively affect those Republicans running for the House of Representatives and the Senate.  Without Trump on the ballot, the Republicans are at a distinct disadvantage regarding controlling both houses of Congress.  With him on the ballot there is a good chance that control of the Senate will be turned over to the other party, and a large number of House seats will be lost.    It is entirely possible that the anger of the electorate will cost them the Presidency, the Senate, the Supreme Court, and reduce their majority in the House of Representatives.  Each of those outcomes will be a disaster for the Republican Party.

The cost of nominating Donald Trump could result in a huge drubbing in the general election.  He can’t win any legitimate percentage of the woman’s vote in spite of his claim that “women love me”.  As of today he has a 73% disapproval rate among women.   He can’t win the Hispanic vote that is even more crucial to winning this year than ever before in spite of his claim that “Mexicans love me”.  He can’t win the African-American vote in spite of all of his claims.   He could very well win the “older white man” vote but there are fewer of those around these days.  No one who could be considered knowledgeable in the political arena gives him much of a chance to beat the nominee of the Democratic Party.

With all that being said, you have the right to express your anger.  Many have died fighting to make sure you maintain that right.  However, expressing your anger without examining the costs is a prescription for failure.  How angry will you be then?