The prosecution may well have terrible consequences beyond the department for our politics and the rule of law. It will probably inspire ever more aggressive tit-for-tat investigations of presidential actions in office by future Congresses and by administrations of the opposing party, to the detriment of sound government.
— New York Times, 8/8/23

A little late for cautionary introspection.

Then again, such a “tit-for-tat” would be of concern if Republicans had balls, which obviously is a tall order.

Imagine the shit storm that would ensue had a Republican DA indicted Hillary Clinton in 2015 regarding her unprotected server and the deletion of thousands of subpoenaed emails. The Democrats would be screaming about “election interference”, the media would be whining about the appearance of partisan lawfare, and her supporters would engage in their tradition of “mostly peaceful” protests resulting in hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of dollars in private and public property damage, not to leave out injury and possible deaths.

The most recent indictment of Trump swirls around his audacity to question the results of the 2020 election; an election we’re all told was on the up-and-up and we must accept it because Democrats say so. Most laughable is that some, demanding we accept election results, are the media sanctimonious; many of them forgiven-and-employed wife beaters, substance abusers, repeat plagiarists, and Lucite block awarded gaslighters. Media persons had no problem cheerleading Democrat efforts to overturn the election victories of Republicans, including those where recounts proved they still won.

If this is the new metric, then all of the following Democrats MUST be indicted and tried for election denial conspiracy and attempting to overturn a certified election. Citing the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act would be a nice touch.

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Barbra Lee (D-CA), Maxine Waters (D-CA), Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX), President Joe Biden, Al Gore, Tipper Gore, former President Bill Clinton, former President Jimmy Carter, former Governor Terry McAuliffe, Rev. Jessie Jackson, Sr., former DNC Chairwoman Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL), Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC), Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX), former Rep. Corrine Brown (D-FL), former Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA), former Rep. Stephanie Tubbs (D-OH), Reps. Bennie Thompson (D-MS), Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ), Senator Ed Markey (D-MA), former Senator John Kerry, Teresa Heinz Kerry, former DNC Chairman Howard Dean, former Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL), former Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA), former Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA), former Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), former Sen. Barrack Obama (D-IL), Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), former House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Rep. Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Danny Davis (D-IL), former Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), former Rep. William Lacy Clay (D-MO), former Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-CA), Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY), former Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Robert F. Kennedy Jr., former Rep. Cedric Richmond (D-LA), former Rep. John Lewis (D-GA), Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA), Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Stacey Abrams, Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ), Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Attorney General Eric Holder, Andrew Gillum, former Rep. Anthony Brindisi (D-NY), former State Sen. Rita Hart (D-IA), Vice President Kamala Harris (D), Biden Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, Kamala Harris’ Communications Director Jamal Simmons, Biden HUD Secretary Marcia Fudge (D-OH) and more should all be indicted for conspiracy to sow the seeds of mistrust in our election system and overturning the results of an election.

Okay, we can give the dead a pass with honorable mentions.

And seeing how the notion of the “statute of limitations” would be suggested to shield them from legal unpleasantries, the Constitutionality of such protection would also need be questioned since that phrase appears nowhere in our founding document and articles.

I don’t recall any battle or war ending just because the side on the offensive met little to no resistance. Democrats need to actually suffer the ramifications of their bully tactics and if that means they face possible personal financial devastation because of legal defenses, so be it. If some have to actually do jail time, boo fucking hoo. How does it feel?

The political purge of Donald Trump is not the beginning but also a warning to all Americans by an unrestrained Democrat left. They won’t call off their dogs until those at their top suffer and the only thing stopping that is the fact too many elected Republicans, who could return the favor, are too chicken shit to do so.

We can only pray that one day changes.

It’s been a constant as far back as most of us can remember that Democrats have been playing fast and loose with their variation of the sociopathic mental disorder known as projection: disparaging others for doing what they knowingly do themselves.

Today’s Democrat Party and their media depend on the cultivated ignorance of their voters to portray Republicans as extremists for daring to look into numerous, blatant irregularities in the 2020 election while demanding the American people accept Democrat victories as legit and final simply because they say so. No denial is tolerated when the Democrat wins.

However, it IS standard operating procedure for Democrats to reject Republican victories despite their convenient denials….

Biden and Democrats have a long history of contesting election outcomes.

Many Democrats, including Hillary Clinton and Barbara Lee (D-CA), Maxine Waters (D-CA), and Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX), have cast doubt on every single Republican presidential victory in the last two decades.

Every single Democrat president since 1977 has cast doubt on the legitimacy of U.S. elections.

As recently as this year, Biden cast doubt on the legitimacy of the upcoming 2022 midterms.

DEMOCRATS CALLED THE 2000 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION ‘STOLEN’, ‘FRAUDULENT’, AND A ‘COUP D’ETAT’

For years, Democrats have refused to accept the results of the 2000 presidential election.

Al Gore repeatedly claimed that he was the real winner of the 2000 election.

In 2002, Gore claimed he “would have won” if every vote in Florida was counted and that he “absolutely” believed he would become president after the ordered recount.

Gore’s wife, Tipper, said that “I still believe we won“.

In 2016, Gore brought up the 2000 election during a rally for Hillary Clinton and did not refute chants from the audience saying he won.

In 2017, Gore implied Jeb Bush “may have had something” to do with him losing Florida.

Gore, in 2017: “Actually, I think I carried Florida.”

Hillary Clinton, more than once, questioned the legitimacy of the 2000 election.

In 2002, Clinton said Bush had been “selected” and not elected president.

In 2016, Clinton said that the Supreme Court “took away a presidency” in Bush v. Gore.

Then-President Bill Clinton in 2001 claimed that Gore actually won the election, suggesting that all the votes in Florida were not counted and that the Supreme Court had altered the outcome.

Clinton: “The only way [Republicans] could win the election was to stop the voting in Florida.”

Former President Jimmy Carter has repeatedly denied the results of the 2000 election.

Carter, in 2005: “There is no doubt in my mind that Al Gore was elected president“.

Carter, in 2014: “I don’t think that George W. Bush won the election in 2000″.

Terry McAuliffe repeated claims that the 2000 election was “stolen” for over two decades.

Repeatedly in 2001, then-DNC Chairman McAuliffe claimed that Al Gore won the election.

In 2004, McAuliffe falsely accused Republicans of “stealing” the 2000 presidential election.

In 2008, McAuliffe accused Republicans of “stealing” the 2000 election in his autobiography.

In 2017, McAuliffe once again claimed that Al Gore “did win the election“.

In 2021, McAuliffe doubled down on his previous “stolen” election claims and refused to say that Bush won the 2000 election.

Former presidential candidate Rev. Jessie Jackson, Sr. said Gore’s election was “essentially taken and stolen“.

Former DNC Chairwoman Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) in 2016 said that Al Gore won Florida.

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), a member of the January 6^th Committee, has repeatedly suggested the 2000 election was illegitimate.

In 2002, Raskin wrote that the Supreme Court had “[frozen] the election results” in an “outrageous assault on democracy,” saying the Court had “determine[d] the outcome of a presidential election“.

In 2003, Raskin called Bush America’s first “court-appointed president.”

15 House Democrats even objected to counting Florida’s electoral votes.

Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) questioned the 2000 Florida election results, calling them “fraudulent” and staging a walkout of the House chamber.

Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC) questioned the integrity of the election and “the future of our democracy“.

Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX) claimed that there was “overwhelming evidence” that Bush did not win the 2000 election and vowed there would be “no peace” as a result.

Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX) called the Florida electoral count “inaccurate“.

Former Rep. Corrine Brown (D-FL) said that Bush “was not elected,” saying in 2004 that Bush was chosen by the Supreme Court and that the election was stolen in a “coup d’état“.

DEMOCRATS REPEATEDLY CAST DOUBT ON THE LEGITIMACY OF THE 2004 ELECTION

The election in 2004 was no different than 2000, with Democrats once again denying the results of an election they did not agree with.

In 2005, then-Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and then-Rep. Stephanie Tubbs (D-OH) filed an objection to the certification of Ohio’s electoral college votes.

31 House Democrats voted to reject electoral votes from the state of Ohio, including Reps. Bennie Thompson (D-MS), Barbara Lee (D-CA), Maxine Waters (D-CA), Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ), James Clyburn (D-SC), and now-Senator Ed Markey (D-MA).

In 2005, House Democrats authored a report claiming there were “‘numerous, serious election irregularities” in Ohio’s presidential vote.

John Kerry raised questions about the election on multiple occasions, claiming that many voters were “denied their right to vote; too many who tried to vote were intimidated”.

In November 2005, New York University professor Mark Crispin Miller said that John Kerry told him he thought “the election was stolen”.

Kerry’s wife Teresa Heinz Kerry also claimed the presidential election could have been hacked and stolen.

In 2004, then-DNC Chairman Terry McAuliffe commissioned a “comprehensive investigative study on election practices in Ohio” to address “legitimate questions and concerns”.

In 2006, then-DNC Chairman Howard Dean stated that he was “not confident that the election in Ohio was fairly decided” in 2004.

In 2008, Dean accused Republicans of stealing elections and inferred they stole the election in 2004.

Then-Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) questioned the “integrity” of electronic voting machines in the 2004 election.

In January 2005, then-Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) claimed there were many “legitimate” questions regarding the “accuracy” and “integrity” of the 2004 election.

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) applauded objections to the 2004 election and thanked Sen. Boxer for objecting to Ohio’s electoral votes, saying voters can’t be confident their vote will be counted.

Then-Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA) applauded Sen. Boxer and Rep. Tubbs Jones for objecting to Ohio’s electoral votes, calling their objections an “important service for American democracy”.

Harkin also accused Republicans of a “concerted effort to suppress the vote” and suggested electronic voting machines could lead to “serious fraud”.

Then-Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) in 2005 applauded Democrat efforts to contest the 2004 election, called the election “flawed,” and suggested problems may have been the result of “manipulation”.

Then-Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) alleged “systematic voter disenfranchisement” and faulty voting machines in the 2004 election.

In September 2008, then-Sen. Barrack Obama (D-IL) joked about the 2004 election, saying it helps that in Ohio “Democrats are in charge of the [voting] machines” in the upcoming election.

Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) questioned the use and efficacy of electronic voting machines in the 2004 election.

In January 2005, then-House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) praised Sen. Boxer’s challenge of the election, saying the debate is “fundamental to our democracy”.

Pelosi said it is “appropriate” to have the debate concerning the 2004 election and claimed that there were “legitimate concerns” regarding the “integrity” of U.S. elections.

Then-Rep. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) argued the 2004 election was “riddled with unnecessary problems”.

Rep. Danny Davis (D-IL) claimed the 2004 election contained widespread “fraud”.

Then-Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) claimed that “dirty tricks occurred across the state” of Ohio in the 2004 election.

Then-Rep. William Lacy Clay (D-MO) blamed “inadequate and malfunctioning” electronic voting machines for “numerous irregularities”.

Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA) claimed democracy was once again “thwarted” in 2004 and blamed the use of electronic voting machines for voter suppression.

Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX) said, “the system of voting broke down Nov. 2, 2004” and called for an independent audit of discarded ballots.

Jackson Lee then said, “we cannot declare that the election of November 2^nd, 2004 was free and clear and transparent and real for all of those who attempted to vote”.

Then-Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-CA) in 2005 attacked the efficacy of voting machines saying they “can’t be trusted.”

Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY) repeatedly claimed there were irregularities in the 2004 election.

In November 2004, Nadler said that “we are requesting an investigation into all the allegations, of irregularities with respect to the electronic and other voting machines”.

In November 2004, Nadler said that “well, we have received…any number of communications, e-mails, everything about all kinds of irregularities”.

In December 2004, Nadler said that “paper ballots are extremely susceptible to fraud”.

In January 2005, Nadler said the right to vote was “stolen” from voters.

Then-Rep. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) cast doubt on the security of electronic voting machines in the 2004 election saying he was “worried” that some machines do not have a paper trail.

Then-Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) said Boxer And Tubbs performed a “very valuable public service” and stated he was concerned with all “reports of voting problems in many parts of the country”.

Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) said the problems with the Ohio election could have been “outcome determinative”.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. in 2006 wrote an op-ed claiming that Republicans “stole” the 2004 election.

Rev. Jesse Jackson, Sr. “questioned the legitimacy” of the election and suggested the Bush victory was the result of “fraud and stealing”.

Of course when their guy won, Democrats had nothing but uniform praise for the integrity of the 2008 and 2012 elections. Michelle Obama was finally proud of her country.

But when Donald Trump won in 2016….

DEMOCRATS REFUSED TO ACCEPT THE RESULTS OF THE 2016 ELECTION

In 2017, seven House Democrats tried to object to the 2016 election electoral votes.

After President Trump’s victory in 2016, 67 Democrats boycotted his inauguration, with many “claiming his election was illegitimate“.

After the 2016 election, Hillary Clinton repeatedly questioned the legitimacy of the election and claimed the election was stolen from her.

In September 2017, Hillary Clinton said she would not “rule out” questioning the legitimacy of the 2016 election.

In March 2019, Clinton smiled in agreement when former State Sen. Hank Sanders (D-AL) said the election was stolen from her.

In May 2019, Clinton said the 2016 election was “stolen” from her.

In September 2019, Clinton dismissed Trump as an “illegitimate president” and said “he knows” he stole the 2016 presidential election.

In October 2019, Clinton said that Trump knows that he is “an illegitimate president“.

In December 2019, Clinton nodded in agreement that she won the election.

In July 2020, Clinton said Trump is scared for Americans to see “how illegitimate his victory” was.

In October 2020, Clinton claimed that the 2016 presidential election was not conducted legitimately, saying, “we still don’t really know what happened“.

Former President Jimmy Carter said he believed that “a full investigation” would show that Trump didn’t actually win the election in 2016.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) said “I believe” Russian interference altered the outcome of the election.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) dodged answering whether Trump was “a legitimate president“.

Rep Raul Grijalva (D-AZ) said the “legitimacy is in question” of Trump’s presidency.

Then-Rep. John Lewis (D-GA) said he did not believe President Trump is a “legitimate president“.

Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA) “applauded” John Lewis and said that he was “right on target”.

Then-Rep. Cedric Richmond (D-LA) said that John Lewis’ remarks on Trump not being legitimately elected “are reasonable”.

Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA) said “there absolutely is a cloud of illegitimacy” to Trump’s presidency.

Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY) said that Trump’s election was “illegitimate” and that Trump “is an illegitimate president“.

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) justified his decision to object to certification saying Republicans engaged in “deliberate voter suppression … in numerous swing states“.

Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) refused to attend President Trump’s inauguration ceremony because Trump’s election victory was “tainted” by “foreign interference and voter suppression”.

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) refused to say if Trump was a “legitimate president“.

DEMOCRATS HAVE CONTINUED TO CAST DOUBT ON OTHER ELECTIONS SINCE 2016

In 2018, Stacey Abrams refused to concede after losing the Georgia governor’s race and repeatedly challenged the “legitimacy of the election” after her loss.

Following her defeat, Abrams never conceded and continued to argue that she truly won the election.

Abrams said she would not concede a race that was an “erosion of our democracy,” was “not a free and fair election,” and was simply “not just“.

She called her defeat “fully attributable to voter suppression” and argued there was widespread voter disenfranchisement.

Many other prominent Democrats supported Abrams in her stolen election claims:

Hillary Clinton said Stacey Abrams “would have won” Georgia’s gubernatorial race “if she had a fair election” and that Stacey Abrams “should be governor” but was “deprived of the votes [she] otherwise would have gotten.”

Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) said “I think that Stacey Abrams’s election is being stolen from her“.

Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) said that “if Stacey Abrams doesn’t win in Georgia, they stole it“.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) said “the evidence seems to suggest” the race was stolen from Stacey Abrams.

Former Vermont Governor and DNC chair Howard Dean said Abrams “should not concede” and that the election was “almost certainly stolen”.

Obama Attorney General Eric Holder said “I tend to think Stacey Abrams won that election“.

After losing his Florida gubernatorial race in 2018, Andrew Gillum withdrew his concession and pointed to “questions over the handling of the vote” in certain counties.

In 2020, after losing his House race, former Rep. Anthony Brindisi (D-NY) called for authorities to investigate voting irregularities and issues of “massive disenfranchisement of voters“.

Former State Sen. Rita Hart (D-IA) contested the election results of her House race loss in 2020, arguing that ballots were improperly rejected.

BIDEN AND HIS OFFICIALS HAVE PUSHED STOLEN ELECTION CLAIMS

In both 2013, and in 2016, Biden claimed that Gore won the 2000 presidential election.

In May 2019, Biden said he “absolutely agrees” that Trump is an “illegitimate president“.

Kamala Harris has repeatedly cast doubt on election results over the years.

Following the Georgia gubernatorial race in 2018, Kamala Harris claimed that “without voter suppression, Stacey Abrams would be the governor of Georgia” and that Gillum would be “the governor of Florida”.

In 2019, Harris agreed that Trump was an “illegitimate president“.

Multiple Biden administration officials have a history of denying election results.

For nearly two decades, Biden’s Chief of Staff Ron Klain claimed that Al Gore won the 2000 election.

Biden Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre tweeted that the 2018 Georgia gubernatorial race was stolen.

Jean-Pierre also cast doubt on the 2016 election, tweeting “stolen election …..welcome to the world of #unpresidented Trump”.

Kamala Harris’ Communications Director Jamal Simmons for years tweeted that Bush “stole” the 2000 election.

Cedric Richmond – Biden’s former Director of the White House Office of Public Engagement – said that John Lewis’ remarks on Trump not being legitimately elected were “reasonable”.

Then-Rep. Marcia Fudge (D-OH), now Biden’s HUD Secretary, said that Trump “may not be a legitimate president“.

And there’s probably more to come after every election Democrats lose from here on, so Joe Biden should be careful when he refers to “election deniers” being “enemies of the state”.

Liberals may be numerically-challenged when convenient.

Republicans can count and that’s what they’re afraid of.

“U.S. Special Presidential Envoy for Climate” John Kerry was interviewed by BBC Arabic and considering the usual death and collateral damage that comes with war, he made one of the most tone deaf statements to date, and that’s saying a lot given a Biden administration that was widely praised by the corporate media for bringing back the “adults” in U.S. politics….

Of course, when it comes to anything the public obviously took the wrong way, the administration explained how we all should have understood what we heard.

Secretary Kerry strongly condemns the unprovoked and unjustified attack by Russian military forces. On Monday prior to the attack, he was asked about the climate implications of a potential future conflict.
— State Department spokesman

Yeah, he was and perhaps he spoke a tad too much again.

Kerry excoriated for hoping Putin will focus on climate change amid Ukraine invasion
Kerry is slammed for saying he hopes Putin stays ‘on track’ to fight CLIMATE CHANGE as Russia prepared to invade Ukraine
John Kerry and the Adults Who Weren’t

At least, that’s how it was taken by those who chose to report it.

So, it you were currently in hiding in Afghanistan, running low on money, food and knowing that at any time your door could be kicked in and you’d either be shot there or dragged in the street to be beheaded, would you have any optimism that the U.S. Department of State (under Joe Biden) would be soon coming to get you out?

On Monday Secretary of State Antony Blinken declared ‘a new diplomatic mission has begun’ in Afghanistan to try and get those remaining Americans out. He vowed to use diplomacy and leverage to bring out any Americans, allies, or Afghanis who assisted the US and want to leave, as critics pounded Biden for allowing the withdrawal before all Americans were out, comparing those who remained to hostages.
— Daily Mail, 8/31/21

While the left and their media have been gaslighting the American people on a variety of issues for years, their latest is the whole Afghanistan debacle is the fault of Donald Trump and with regards to those left behind, oh well. Let’s move on to things more important, like January 6th.

One thing is for sure: Donald Trump would NEVER leave hang Americans out to dry behind enemy lines and wouldn’t leave it solely to the State Department to use “diplomacy” (“strongly-worded” letters) on tyrants.

He’d didn’t rely solely on the impersonal Department of State bureaucracy to deal with some of the United States’ prominent adversaries (North Korea, China, Iran, Yemen) and his track record gave room for optimism.

For example….

Otto Warmbier, an American sentenced to 15 years’ hard labor by North Korea for alleged “anti-state acts,” has been released. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson announced Tuesday morning that Warmbier, 22, was on his way back to the U.S. to be reunited with his family.

Warmbier has apparently been in a coma since shortly after his trial, according to The Washington Post. He was sentenced in March 2016. A statement from his parents, Fred and Cindy Warmbier, dated June 13, stated: “Otto is on a medevac on his flight home. Sadly, he is in a coma and we have been told he has been in that condition since March 2016. We learned of this only one week ago. We want the world to know how we and our son have been brutalized and terrorized by the pariah regime in North Korea. We are so grateful he can finally be with people who love him.”
— Newsweek, 6/13/17

Three UCLA basketball players released from China for shoplifting thanked President Donald Trump, who later said, “you’re welcome.” Freshmen LiAngelo Ball, Cody Riley and Jalen Hill spoke at a news conference Wednesday at the UCLA basketball stadium, the first time they had spoken publicly since Nov. 7, when they were held in Hangzhou. The three athletes were arrested a day before Trump’s arrival in China, and Trump said he spoke to his Chinese counterpart about the situation.

I had a great conversation with President Xi,” Trump said aboard Air Force One on Tuesday. “He was terrific, and they’re working on it right now. And hopefully everything is going to work out.”
— NBC News, 11/16/17

Since President Donald Trump took office, his administration has secured the release of 17 prisoners foreign governments had detained.

“We’ve had 17 released, and we’re very proud of that record. Very proud. And we have others coming,” Trump said Saturday evening as he welcomed home Joshua Holt, an American citizen who had been detained in Venezuela for two years without trial. Unlike his predecessor, the president has managed to bring these prisoners home without freeing terrorists or paying millions of dollars in suspected ransom payments.
— Daily Caller, 5/27/18

The names of the released include Sabrina De Sousa, Aya Hijazi, Mohamed Hassanein, Sandy Phan-Gillis, Joshua Boyle, Caitlan Coleman, Kim Dong-Chul, Kim Hak-Song and Kim Sang-Duk.

And that was as of 2018. Who knows how sooner these could have occurred had it not been for the partisan, and in some cases, manufactured scandals that took up valuable time and attention of the Trump Administration.

President Donald Trump announced Thursday that Lebanese-American Amer Fakhoury has been released from prison, describing the development as “very big.”

“Today we are bringing home another American citizen, big thing, very big,” Trump said at the beginning of a coronavirus task force briefing. Trump also said that the US is working hard to secure the release American journalist Austin Tice, who disappeared in Syria in 2012. Separately, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced that Iran has released American Mike White on medical furlough.
— CNN, 3/9/20

President Donald Trump has secured the release of two American hostages held captive by Houthis in Yemen, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said on Wednesday. The two Americans, Sandra Loli and Mikael Gidada, and the remains of a third, Bilal Fateen, were released in exchange for the return of about 250 of the Iranian-backed Houthi rebels from Oman, according to the White House.

Kash Patel, a deputy assistant to Trump who worked on the deal, told The Wall Street Journal that Loli had been held by the Houthis for about three years and Gidada was held captive for about a year.
— Fox News, 10/4/20

One would think President Joe Biden would personally understand and appreciate the American tradition of not leaving anyone behind.

Erik Prince, the co-founder of defense contractor Blackwater, ​is responding after the White House took a shot at him for offering to fly people out of Afghanistan on charter flights for $6,500 a seat — recalling that Blackwater ​soldiers had to rescue Joe Biden, Secretary of State John Kerry and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel when they got lost in a snowstorm in 2008.

“They were on a congressional visit to Afghanistan in the winter and their US Army helicopter got lost in a blinding snowstorm and set down in Taliban territory on the side of a mountain,” he told Tucker Carlson. “And the US military launched a ground convoy to get them and they got lost and the Blackwater guys launched and they did not get lost. And we recovered them. We rescued them from Taliban territory. That was the winter of ’08,” he said.
— New York Post, 8/26/21

Meanwhile…

An Afghan interpreter who helped rescue then Senator Joe Biden and two other senators in a valley in Afghanistan is stranded in the country under Taliban rule pleading to be rescued on Tuesday.

“Hello Mr. President: Save me and my family. Don’t forget me here”, the Wall Street Journal quoted him as saying.

Mohammed’s (who asked not to use his full name) visa application became stuck after the defense contractor he worked for lost the records he needed for his application. The Afghan interpreter tried to join the thousands of people who swarmed Kabul airport in an effort to get on one of the evacuation flights out of the country, but he was “rebuffed by US forces.” He says he could get in but US forces would not allow him to take his wife and four children with him.
— Al Arabiya English, 8/31/21

Obviously some people are more deserving and entitled to rescue than others and it must’ve been a relief to Joe Biden as it’s doubtful “strongly-worded” letters from the State Department would have been of any meaningful assistance when HE needed it.

We’ve made the case before that it’s very easy to predict events 50 to 100 years from now (or 12) when few will be around to call you on it. Both Al Gore and now Barack Obama have proven they know they’ve been spewing bullshit for years and their actions prove it.

Al Gore predicts that our shores will be flooded and sea-bordering cities will sink beneath the water leaving millions of people homeless. His narration tells the audience that, due to global warming, melting ice could release enough water to cause at 20-foot rise in sea level “in the near future.”
— ScienceLine.org, 12/1/08

As many of us are sensitive and may have experienced something as traumatic as a flooded basement after a freak torrential rain, if you knew a house has the potential to float away “in the near future”, why would you buy it?

That is, if you knew it wasn’t true but saying so could make you a lot of money.

In a move that critics may cite as his own inconvenient truth, former Vice President Al Gore and his wife, Tipper, have added a house in secluded Montecito, Calif., to their real estate holdings.

The couple spent $8,875,000 on a gated ocean-view villa on 1 1/2 acres with a swimming pool, spa and fountains, according to real estate sources familiar with the deal. The Italian-style house has high ceilings with beams in the public rooms, a family room, a wine cellar, terraces, six fireplaces, five bedrooms and nine bathrooms in more than 6,500 square feet of living space.
— World Property Journal, 5/13/10

Granted, he’s not on the water line per se but when the pending flood arrives, Gore’s home would be in the zone where much tumult would ensue and anyone in his right mind, who truly believed in the whole “rising oceans” thing, would have purchased property far inland. That is, if what he was saying was something he truly believed.

Add former president Barack Obama, who also implored his supporters that there’s this “97% consensus” of scientists who say climate change is real, and he also says the oceans are rising at a perilous rate.

Oceans and their nearby regions are also highly vulnerable to the effects of a changing climate — a once-distant threat that is now very present and is affecting ecosystems and shoreline communities on every coast. Rising sea levels, coastal storms, and a growing risk of erosion and flooding are looming realities faced by seaside towns.
— Barack Obama, Presidential Proclamation: National Oceans Month, 5/31/16

Well, that sounds like a good reason to avoid purchasing property at “shoreline communities on every coast” because of eventual “coastal storms, and a growing risk of erosion and flooding” at “seaside towns”. That is, again, if what he was saying was something he truly believed.

Despite the White House denying it, President Barack Obama is believed to have bought a beachfront Hawaii home with a celebrity past. Located in a secluded section of Honolulu, the property was once used in the filming of the hit television series Magnum P.I.

The property recently sold to a newly-formed LLC, with Marty Nesbitt—a close personal friend of Obama—signing the paperwork. It is likely that Obama bought the home using the LLC and his friend as a proxy. With the President’s term ending in less than two years, the timing gives him (and wife Michelle) just enough time to complete renovations. Either that, or Nesbitt is a big fan of the Aloha State and Magnum P.I., has $8.7M laying around, and shrouds his real estate deals in secrecy. But we wouldn’t bet on that.
— American Luxury, 3/26/15

Now, this house is right on the water; susceptible to a “rising ocean” that would almost totally submerge his home. Not a very good investment for someone who says bad things are coming.

Especially when you do that stupid thing twice….

Barack and Michelle Obama are reportedly trying to buy a sprawling estate in Martha’s Vineyard from Boston Celtics owner Wyc Grousbeck. The home is on the market for $14.85 million, and features seven-bedrooms and nine bathrooms inside the 7000 sq ft main residence.

Outside the main house, there’s 29 beachfront acres, a pool, chef’s kitchen, outdoor fireplace, and two guest wings.
— Daily Mail (UK), 8/22/19

Obviously, very few of those who’ve been forced to endure valuable classroom time watching “An Inconvenient Truth” or voted for and supported Barack Obama will ever get an up close and personal opportunity to ask both why they scared the bejeezus out of millions of children, prompting visuals of dying-by-drowning, while millions more try and pick up their lives after losing everything now floating aimlessly out to sea.

But there is always wisdom in some of our most simple of sayings and whomever came up with “Do as I say, not as I do” must have been in close proximity to P. T. Barnum who supposedly said, “There’s a sucker born every minute”.

Speaking of suckers, add President-Select Joe Biden’s “envoy for climate” John Kerry….

John Kerry and wife Teresa Heinz just plunked down a small fortune to purchase a historic property up island, far from the madding crowds that characterize Edgartown and Oak Bluffs in the summer.

Indeed, the former secretary of state, who likes to consider himself a man of the people, will be very hard to find at Seven Gates Farm, an exclusive enclave in Chilmark. Kerry and his wife — using a private trust to negotiate the deal — shelled out $11.75 million for the spectacular 18-acre property overlooking Vineyard Sound.
— Boston Globe, 4/26/17

And when you’re a hypocritical elitist, all you have to add is, “private”.

Impeachment isn’t enough.

Impeachment would remedy Trump”s “high crimes and misdemeanors.” But impeachment would not remedy Trump’s unconstitutional presidency because it would leave in place his vice president, White House staff and Cabinet, as well as all the executive orders he issued and all the legislation he signed, and the official record of his presidency.

The only response to an unconstitutional presidency is to annul it. Annulment would repeal all of it – recognizing that such appointments, orders, rules, and records were made without constitutional authority.
— Robert Reich, 8/24/18

The problem with such irrational thinking is it comes back to bite you.

The most recent example came thanks to former Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, first in 2005.

If all goes as planned, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) will rise after several days of debate beginning today over one of President Bush’s judicial nominees and call for an end to Democrats’ delaying tactics. The presiding officer will then rule in his favor.

Democrats will protest the ruling and ask for a vote to overturn it. The Republican leader will seek to table that appeal. If Frist and the GOP majority prevail, a long tradition of filibustering will be narrowed and a new precedent will be set allowing the Republicans to force a vote on a nomination with a simple majority instead of three-fifths of the Senate.

But Democrats contend that the Republicans are essentially breaking the rules to change the rules. “If there were ever an example of an abuse of power, this is it,” said Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-NV). “The filibuster is the last check we have against the abuse of power in Washington.”
— Washington Post, 5/18/05

But Harry Reid’s position began to unravel when Democrats assumed the majority….

In 2008, Reid continued to condemn the fact that the Republicans even contemplated using the nuclear option: “The Senate was set up to be different, that was the genius, the vision of our Founding Fathers. That’s why you have the ability to filibuster, and to terminate filibuster. They wanted to get rid of all of that,” Reid said.

Then he was asked if he would ever consider invoking the nuclear option himself: “As long as I am the leader, the answer’s no,” Reid promised. “I think we should just forget that. That is a black chapter in the history of the Senate. I hope we never ever get to that again because I really do believe it will ruin our country.”

Fast-forward to 2013. Now, Democrats held the White House and a Senate majority. The Republican minority had been stalling nominations and appointments by Obama, including filibustering the nomination of former Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel for secretary of defense. Senate Democrats decided to go nuclear after the Senate GOP made clear that they had no intention of allowing three vacancies on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to be filled.
— PolitiFact, 11/22/13

But the most fun example came courtesy of the super-majority Democrats in the Massachusetts Legislature.

In 2004, the state’s junior senator, John Kerry, was the Democratic presidential nominee. Party leaders knew that if Kerry won in November, state law allowed the governor — then Republican Mitt Romney — to appoint Kerry’s successor, and that person would presumably be a Republican. So, the Democratic leadership of the legislature drew up a measure to strip the governor of his senatorial appointment power.

The measure passed both chambers and was vetoed by Romney. The Democrats then muscled a two-thirds majority to override the veto. Of course, Kerry never won the presidency, but the law remained on the books.

Fast-forward to 2009. Democrats realized that the law they had enacted in 2004 forced the state to have only one senator for roughly five months — and after Kennedy’s death, that meant the state would be short one senator. From a political standpoint, that meant the U.S. Senate would have one less Democrat at a time when a Democratic president was trying to reach a 60-vote threshold to enact landmark legislation on Kennedy’s signature issue, health care. And this time, the governor, Deval Patrick, is a Democrat and presumably would appoint someone from his party.

So legislators quickly passed legislation that would keep the special election but still allow the governor to appoint an interim senator to serve until the special election. The measure passed both chambers, and on Sept. 24, 2009, Patrick named former Democratic National Committee chairman Paul Kirk, a Kennedy family friend, as the interim senator.
— Politifact, 9/24/09

So, if Robert Reich and Democrats really want to strip Donald Trump of his presidency and annul all of his accomplishments, fine.

But politics continues to remain a rather consistently cyclical thing and one day, there will be a Democrat in the White House; a Democrat who may do really bad things. If Democrats do manage to have President Trump’s presidency stripped, precedent will be set and there will be calls to do the very same thing to that Democrat, deserved or not.

Who’ll be screaming like a stuck pig then, Robert?

Barack Obama is no longer president and John Kerry is no longer his Secretary of State, so WHY is he meddling in foreign affairs against the Trump Administration?

Former Secretary of State John Kerry has fielded dozens of private meetings and phone calls in recent months in an effort to preserve the Iran nuclear deal, as President Trump appears poised to withdraw from the pact.

The Boston Globe reported on Friday that Kerry, who helped broker the 2015 nuclear agreement, met with Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif at the United Nations in New York last month to discuss ways to salvage the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) — the formal name for the Iran deal.

He has also met and spoken with a handful of European officials. Last month, he met with German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier, according to the Globe, and spoke by phone with Federica Mogherini, the European Union’s top foreign affairs official. Kerry also reportedly met with French President Emmanuel Macron, both in New York and in Paris.
— The Hill, 5/4/18

This is not an isolated incident when it comes to Kerry’s “shadow diplomacy” disruption.

Former Secretary of State John Kerry recently urged Palestinian Authority chairman Mahmoud Abbas to resist President Donald Trump, telling the PA leader to ‘stay strong’ and ‘play for time’ – while suggesting he may make a second bid for the White House.
— Arutz Sheva, 1/24/18

In keeping it simple, Iran is a formal enemy of the United States and it can be argued that John Kerry has no business engaging in any kind of diplomatic discussions with any nation, especially without the expressed permission and logistical guidance of the State Department.

State Sponsors of Terrorism
Designation under the above-referenced authorities also implicates other sanctions laws that penalize persons and countries engaging in certain trade with state sponsors. Currently there are four countries designated under these authorities: the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea), Iran, Sudan, and Syria.
— U.S. Department of State

President Trump has publicly stated his opposition to the mysterious “Iran nuclear deal” with cash payment and his historically justified mistrust of the Iranian regime. The way it went down still stinks.

The Obama administration is acknowledging its transfer of $1.7 billion to Iran earlier this year was made entirely in cash, using non-U.S. currency, as Republican critics of the transaction continued to denounce the payments. Rep. Ed Royce (R-Fullerton), chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, also introduced a bill that prohibits cash payments to Iran and demands transparency on future settlements.

“Sending the world’s leading state sponsor of terror pallets of untraceable cash isn’t just terrible policy,” Royce said. “It’s incredibly reckless, and it only puts bigger targets on the backs of Americans. … This cash bonanza has emboldened Iran’s radical regime, and undermined America’s national security.”
— Los Angeles Times, 9/7/16

While the average American is required to return an employee manual upon leaving a place of employment, it’s not clear how many in the Obama administration still have theirs, which can be extremely problematic for obvious political reasons and Kerry’s unauthorized meetings with an enemy regime could be highly illegal; not like that’s a deterrent.

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
— 18 U.S. Code § 953 – Private correspondence with foreign governments

This appears to be yet another prime example of Democrats who still refuse to accept the results of the 2016 presidential election and the political “elections have consequences” ramifications that came with it. While the left still considers the “Iran nuclear deal” a monumental success (simply because it was signed off by Obama), they have no business meddling against the ongoing negotiations of the Trump Administration, IF such negotiations are going on at this time or not.

Kerry has been on an aggressive yet stealthy mission to preserve the agreement, using his deep list of contacts to try to apply pressure on the Trump administration from the outside. President Trump has a May 12 deadline to decide whether to continue abiding by deal’s terms.
— Boston Globe, 5/4/18

The unsanctioned John Kerry intervention is obviously not in line with the Trump State Department and for any other American, this would be an easily prosecutable offense.

BTW — In case you’re wondering what Kerry’s doing for an official day job, he’s on the “Advisory Council” at an L Street, DC nonprofit called “Diplomacy Works” alongside other Obama fan favorites like Wendy R. Sherman, former Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs and Director of EMILY’S list; Michèle Flournoy, Under Secretary of Defense for Policy; Puneet Talwar, Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs, Special Assistant to President Obama and Senior Director for Iran, Iraq, and the Gulf States at the White House National Security Council; Colin H. Kahl, Deputy Assistant to the President and National Security Advisor to the Vice President, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for the Middle East at the Pentagon; Robert Malley, Special Assistant to the President and White House Coordinator for the Middle East, North Africa, and the Gulf Region, Senior Director on the National Security Council Staff, Special Assistant to the President for Arab-Israeli Affairs (Clinton administration); Jon Finer, Chief of Staff and Director of Policy Planning for Secretary of State John Kerry; and Jen Psaki, White House Director of Communications, Spokesperson for the U.S. Department of State, White House Deputy Communications Director, White House Deputy Press Secretary.

A nonprofit whose sole mission is to push back on anyone messing with Obama’s Iran deal.

Diplomacy Works provides information and analysis that empowers policymakers and stakeholders to make the case for upholding the JCPOA as a model of effective foreign policy with diplomacy as the tool of first resort reinforced by our unparalleled military capabilities – a policy which keeps America safe and strong at the same time.
— Diplomacy Works

But since when does the rule of law apply to well-connected, senior federal government officials….

“The first U.S. official told CNN the intelligence assessment shows the attack was ordered at the “highest levels” of the regime. That official declined to specifically say whether al-Assad ordered the attack but did not rule it out. ‘We are not saying Assad himself had his finger on the button. But he is responsible for the stockpile and any attack like this would have to have been approved at the highest levels,’ he said. He rejected the notion the evidence of regime involvement was circumstantial.” Now, Syria must disprove it.

The ultimate evil of a Stasi, a NSA, or a CIA spying and listening to all communications, is that they can put words in your mouth, which you might deny, but with which the State will incriminate and destroy you. That the government or its agencies lie should be no surprise. http://www.truthinjustice.org/FBI-crime-lab.htm With the “evidence” presented by Kerry or Obama, there is no chance “to confront the witnesses.” You must trust what a US government agency generates.

False evidence presented to a gullible public is the M.O. of most governments. A famous example was in Stalin’s show trials, where ardent true believer communists were convicted of plotting against communism. “In the Indictment of the trial of the Old Bolsheviks Pyatakov, Radek, Sokolnikov, Serebriakov, Muralov and others, it states: ‘The investigation has established that LD Trotsky entered into negotiations with one of the leaders of the German National Socialist Party with a view to waging a joint struggle against the Soviet Union…The principles of this agreement, as Trotsky related, were finally elaborated and adopted during Trotsky’s meeting with Hitler’s deputy, Hess…” “Khrushchev finally reveal[ed] that the Trials were in fact f[r]ame-ups.”

Right now, we get US government confirmations by unidentified and unquestionable government hacks that the Syrian army used the poison gas, not the rebels. “Last Wednesday, in the hours after a horrific chemical attack east of Damascus, an official at the Syrian Ministry of Defense exchanged panicked phone calls with a leader of a chemical weapons unit, demanding answers for a nerve agent strike that killed more than 1,000 people. Those conversations were overheard by U.S. intelligence services, The Cable has learned.” Were those the same intelligence agencies and their hacks which confirmed WMD in Iraq? Did those agencies tell Susan Rice that the video incited the mob to attack in Benghazi?

Those poor dumb Syrians weren’t aware that electronic communications were being monitored world-wide and foolishly allowed their plans to be intercepted. How come those rebels keep losing to the Syrian army, when their enablers have complete intelligence about all planned Syrian army acts?

The Stalin Show trials have been replaced with the Obama Trials, where the defendants, here Syria, are found guilty by Obama and punished summarily by Obama. (Summary judgement is used by US judges to dispense with a trial, because the judge has determined, without any witnesses or defense presented, that the facts are irrefutable and a trial unnecessary for his final decreed judgement.) Why is the word of NSA or the CIA of what was communicated deemed fact, when it is easily manipulated or a total lie. Why did the framers with the sixth amendment demand the ability to confront witnesses and a public trial? At least, Stalin held a public trial where the false evidence was presented. Did framers envision a President as a secret judge and jury, and the executioner with drones of American citizens? Does absolute power always corrupt?

Who is next? Obama’s government has revealed: “Not only was it implied that Evangelical Christianity is as dangerous as a terrorist organization, but it was at the top of the list of threats,” which included: Evangelical Christianity, Ultra-Orthodox Jews, Christian Identity, Catholicism, Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, and with“Islamophobia” was also listed as a form of religious extremism.

Once, Obama came for the Syrians, and pronounced his summary judgement after a secret trial held among his advisers. The basic lie is that the government is better qualified to run your life. Another lie you must tell yourself, is that you ought trust your government with its data, what it says others said and what it will say you said. Stalin is dead, but his spirit goes marching on in government.

Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick said Wednesday he would support changing state law to allow him to appoint an interim successor to Sen. Edward Kennedy’s seat while a special election is held.

The succession law was changed in 2004, when Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., became his party’s presidential nominee and Republican Mitt Romney was the state’s governor. Before the change, the governor would have appointed a replacement to serve until the next general election.

Guess who was behind that…?

What Mr. Kennedy doesn’t volunteer is that he orchestrated the 2004 succession law revision that now requires a special election, and for similarly partisan reasons.

John Kerry, the other Senator from the state, was running for President in 2004, and Mr. Kennedy wanted the law changed so the Republican Governor at the time, Mitt Romney, could not name Mr. Kerry’s replacement.

“Prodded by a personal appeal from Senator Edward M. Kennedy,” reported the Boston Globe in 2004, “Democratic legislative leaders have agreed to take up a stalled bill creating a special election process to replace U.S. Senator John F. Kerry if he wins the presidency.”

Now that the state has a Democratic Governor, Mr. Kennedy wants to revert to gubernatorial appointments.

Here’s the “personal appeal from Senator Edward M. Kennedy” for your inspection.

If Senator Byrd can rename the health care bill after Senator Kennedy, then we can call this partisan flip what it is: the Kennedy Hypocrisy Act.

However, the last section of that column provoked an unusual response. That section read as follows:

Depends On What “Special” Means

Kerry, taking a page out of the John McCain playbook, called President Bush a tool of “special interests”. Kerry accuses Bush of outsourcing our jobs to other countries. But how would or could a President Kerry deal with leaders of countries where Mrs. Kerry owned factories?

The Heinz Corporation owns 79 plants and 57 of them are located in countries outside of the United States. Remember that when Kerry talks about Bush shipping our jobs overseas.

Heinz’ factories are located in Taiwan, Ireland, France (no surprise), Portugal, Spain, Italy, Greece, Poland, Russia (imagine that…?), Egypt, Israel, The Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, Belgium, Italy, Canada, Venezuela, Costa Rica, South Africa, Zimbabwe, Australia, Singapore, New Zealand, Japan, the People’s Republic of China (hmmm…), South Korea, Thailand, India, Indonesia, the Philippines, and Hong Kong.

These food products can be easily made here and shipped there. Quite frankly, I’d much rather my ketchup be made from tomatoes grown in America instead of Zimbabwe.

For any of you who despise Dick Cheney and the numerous times you cite his intervention and preferential treatment on behalf of Halliburton, I’m sure you feel the Kerrys will conduct themselves with the utmost in integrity, right?

History often has a way of repeating itself.

Remember Whitewater…?

Now while I admit to not having a research staff at my disposal, I did do as thorough a research as one man can do and the information I cited was uniform throughout the many sources I examined. So you can imagine my amazement when I received a forwarded email from one of my editors….

Dear Editor,

We would like to correct misrepresentations in Bob Parks’ column on August 2.

First, in accordance with its corporate governance policies, H. J. Heinz Company is a publicly traded corporation with a diverse shareholder base of both individuals and institutions comprising Republicans, Democrats and Independents alike. Neither Mrs. Teresa Heinz Kerry nor Senator John Kerry nor any of the Heinz trusts or endowments – either individually or collectively – holds a significant percentage of shares of the H.J. Heinz Company. (Their current holdings are under 4 percent.) No Heinz family member is involved in the management or board of the H. J. Heinz Company. They have no involvement in the Heinz ketchup business or any of the company’s other brands or products.

Second, 60% of the sales of the H.J. Heinz Company are outside the United States. The company accommodates those customers by providing facilities closer to those markets and maintains a number of overseas facilities that provide products for consumers in those markets. This allows Heinz to pack the freshest ingredients, tailor its recipes to local tastes and deliver the final products in a timely and efficient manner. In the United States, Heinz makes its flagship ketchup in factories in Fremont, Ohio; Muscatine, Iowa; and Stockton, California.

Sincerely,

Debora S. Foster
Vice President
Corporate Communications
H. J. Heinz Company
600 Grant Street
Pittsburgh, PA 15219

The letter included a phone number as well, but some of you can be quite passionate.

I’d like to believe I am a reasonably intelligent person and after a few days to dwell on this letter, I grew increasingly insulted and angry. Calling my words a “misrepresentation” is essentially calling me either dumb or a liar, especially when Ms. Foster probably only wrote the first line herself and pasted it onto an existing form letter. Suspiciously similar verbiage has been issued to other critics as well.

Like I said in my column, I do believe Teresa Heinz Kerry and her husband, should they be elected president, may face the same conflict of interest issues with the Heinz Corporation as those Dick Cheney is constantly being accused of with Halliburton.

The Kerry campaign website (www.johnkerry.com) says, “Corporate profits are soaring, the government keeps expanding, but the opportunities for our middle-class are shrinking. It’s time to bring those opportunities back. John Kerry and John Edwards know that we’re stronger when we create good-paying jobs here, not ship them overseas.”

On the campaign trail Kerry recently added, “If a company is torn between creating jobs here or overseas, we now have a tax code that tells you go overseas. And that makes no sense. And if I am president, it will end as soon as possible.”

But our current tax laws allow American firms to delay paying taxes on income earned by their foreign branches until the money comes back to the United States. If the money stays abroad, those companies avoid paying taxes all together. Kerry’s election plan would require businesses to pay tax on their foreign income immediately. However that new system only covers future profits, and is conveniently not retroactive.

Now while published reports say Kerry personally helped author tax legislation designed to punish companies that relocated overseas, he then pushed for a major loophole that would exempt Heinz from the same penalties.

According to Donald Luskin, Chief Investment Officer of Trend Macrolytics,

Kerry’s economic proposals seem tuned to serve his wife’s economic interests. His proposal last March to end tax breaks for U.S. corporations that do business overseas was designed with a loophole that would allow the H.J. Heinz company keep its overseas tax breaks and get a lower domestic tax rate at the same time.

The loophole will exist for companies located in a foreign country that make a product there but don’t ship that product back to the United States for sale. That company will pay no taxes. I don’t think Heinz or any other corporation that has overseas plants will argue with that code, but I fail to see how that will save domestic jobs, but that’s just me.

But back to our story….

Ms. Foster “wrote” in her letter that the Kerrys own less than four percent stock in Heinz. Now while that’s probably true, to assert that the amount is virtually insignificant and that they have no say in company policy is pure spin coming from a corporate communications pantsuit. As a person who believes in black and white without a whole lot of gray, let’s do some simple math, shall we?

Let’s round that “under 4 percent” to a hard four percent and let’s say the Heinz Corporation is only worth one billion dollars. Unless corporate math is different than that of us mere consumers, the Kerrys’ interest of four percent adds up to around $40 million. And that’s only taking into account that Heinz is worth only one billion dollars, which is a real low-ball figure.

Now if Joe Schmo wrote a letter to the Heinz Corporation, chances are pretty good that if he did get a response, it would most likely be a form letter. But if Joe owned at least $40 million in company stock, I’d be willing to bet Joe would receive a more personalized response in an expedited manner. To assert the “under 4 percent” essentially makes Teresa one of us is what I’d call a “misrepresentation.”

And as for the comments on making the product closer to where the people will buy it, is of course logical and good business. But John Kerry has been accusing President Bush of essentially encouraging the loss of jobs overseas when those very same corporate strategies, in some cases, mirror that of the Heinz Corporation. I was not attacking Heinz per se, but alluding to yet another example of Kerry hypocrisy.

I can understand the Heinz Corporation wanting to distance themselves from the ongoing chatterings of Teresa. But if she’s that much of a loose cannon now, one can only imagine what kind of commotion a First Lady of her crust would make on the world stage. Only an ostrich would believe that she would hide the Heinz Corporation card in her Rolodex for four years, especially since she loves the pretext that the rules don’t apply to her.

I know Ms. Foster is only doing her job and I don’t hold this against her personally. But I don’t mislead, except only in the eyes of those who disagree with me politically.

Unlike some on the left, I’m not going to use this as an opportunity to call for a boycott on Heinz products, because I really could care less. I’m not even going to tell them to “shove it.”

I already buy Hunt’s.