Peter Wang, 15, an American Hero

Peter Wang, 15, an American Hero

My uncles, my Dad, my Mom (we intern her ashes there, next to my Dad, this spring) and several extended relatives are all buried at Arlington, with full military honors (except my Mom, she will not get military honors).

I think all of them would be proud to have Peter Wang with them.

He was a patriot who wore our country’s uniform proudly and stood bravely at his assumed post – while under fire – to hold the school door open so others might quickly escape first.

Wang was not part of a military branch (JROTC) that does offers basic training — so he technically does not qualify for such an honor – but I think most people would agree, the virtues he displayed last week, bravery under fire, and willingness to risk his own life, so that others might live – is enough.

He wore that uniform proudly and bought respect for it – with his life.

It’s enough for me.

I plan to sign the petition for this young soldier, to be buried like one.

Posted in Peter Wang, 15, an American Hero, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Trump For Romney?

Trump For Romney?

Romney went overboard in his criticisms of Trump during the heat of the election and he should be forgiven. Fifty million Americans have said or thought worse and as they gradually come around, they too, need to be forgiven.

Trump has been a great president so far and he could go on to be a historic one, but that REQUIRES widening his base. This mid-term and the next presidential election are the two chances he has to do that.

Widening the base is a complicated feat. Trump has to bring new believers on board, whilst not alienating the ones he already has. I think he has brilliant political instincts and will make the right choices.

Trump also needs to be less sensitive to HONEST criticism — I understand the need to fight lying leftist loony tunes Pelosi and Schumer, they are human garbage, lie after lie, but Romney isn’t in that category, he is a man with a following in the exact camp Trump could pick up supporters in, something that would be very good for him in states other than just Utah.

I hope the President’s political team has this critical factor under consideration. Whichever way the President goes, I support him, I just hope he hears McConnell, because sometimes he whispers when he should be shouting.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell from this AP report:

AP — Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said that President Trump should back Mitt Romney‘s Senate bid, saying that the former presidential candidate bolsters the GOP’s prospects of holding onto the seat currently held by Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah).

“We don’t want to lose the seat, and this looks like a pretty formidable candidate,” McConnell told The New York Times in an interview on Friday.

Asked whether Trump is comfortable with Romney’s Senate bid, McConnell replied: “I can’t imagine that he’s not.”

After months of speculation, Romney announced this week that he would run to succeed Hatch, the longest-serving Republican currently in the Senate. Hatch, 83, said last month that he would not seek an eighth term in office.

The White House had pressed Hatch to run for reelection in 2018, largely in hopes of deterring Romney from seeking the Senate seat, according to the Times.

Romney, a former Massachusetts governor who challenged former President Obama for the White House in 2012, has been a vocal critic of Trump. Speaking at a GOP dinner in Provo, Utah, on Friday, Romney vowed to break from Trump when he believes it is necessary.

“I’m not always with the president on what he might say or do, and if that happens, I’ll call them like I see them, the way I have in the past,” Romney said, according to the Times. He did, however, mention that he supports much of Trump’s domestic agenda.

McConnell told the Times on Friday that Romney would enter the Senate with a profile similar to the one Hillary Clinton had when she ran successfully for Senate in 2000. 

“The best way to think about that, and I told [Romney] this a couple of months ago, I said: ‘You’ll be a freshman like Hillary Clinton was,’ ” McConnell said. “He will come in here with a level of national identity and respect that will make him effective from Day 1.” 

Posted in Trump For Romney?, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Jeremy Corbyn is a traitor and maybe a spy!

via Jeremy Corbyn is a traitor

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

What a real newspaper would do…

What a real newspaper would do…

The NYT and The Washington Post owe me something.

They have a pipeline to Hillary and Obama, where is their questionnaire for them concerning Sidney Blumenthal, Cody Shearer, the funding of the dossier, the use of the dossier, their roles in the creation and use of the dossier, etc.

Where are those questions and answers? I want them for the record.

They are SUPPOSED to be newspapers of record. If they have a point of view, fine, if they have a bias, fine, if they want to write 50 anti-Trump stories for every one balanced story they write, I also say fine, it’s a free press and they are entitled to their opinion and even entitled to run a sloppy news room – if they want.

BUT, if they claim to be a newspaper of record, they should at least live up to the minimum standard associated with that and ASK the Clintons, and Obama, how involved they were, what did they know and when did they know it?

If they don’t want to disturb their friendly relations with those two, they could simply forward Senator Grassley’s list of questions to Susan Rice, concerning her now infamous Inauguration Day memo – to the former Secretary of State and former President, with a sweet little note along the bottom:

“Dear O and H — Real bummer about the election, we’re still crying over here but we feel like we did our best, it was all those redneck states!

By the by — would you mind sending us an answer or two — to just a few of these stupid pesky questions Senator Grass-for-brains sent to Susan? She isn’t calling us back. Please don’t be offended; we just need this so we can establish something about the “Other” side of this??

Much love, Thx, XOXO.

P.S. By the way, can I get a few more trinkets autographed for the grandkids??

Signed, The NYT and WaPo editorial team.”

Posted in Uncategorized, What a real newspaper would do… | Leave a comment

The FBI is in Crisis…

The FBI is in Crisis…

The FBI now admits, they had been given the name and location of a young man threatening to do a school shooting, TWICE, specifically the exact same Nickolas Cruz, who carried out the shooting this week in Florida — and they did nothing.

Two times, from separate sources they were warned and they did NOTHING. The last warning was as late as January 5th of this year. Sessions has called for a review, but that won’t be enough.

The FBI will accomplish one of two things if they continue their unlawful behavior of meddling in politics while foregoing real law enforcement.

a.) Either the FBI will be radically made over in a wave of reform,

b.) Or they will succeed — and Americans will eventually vote to relinquish their 2nd amendment rights.

Allowing these mass killings, which there is now substantial evidence the FBI has been doing (or are so incompetent as to be unnecessary), must serve some purpose — and the only purpose I can fathom — is that the FBI brass wants stricter gun control in the US, and this is really the only way they know of — to get it.

Mueller, the second most incompetent FBI head in recent decades, (Comey gets the Gold here) announced this week he had indictments for 13 Russian election influencing bad actors, or Internet trolls depending upon your point of view. This indictment list and particulars is an embarrassment to the United States.

I’m sure they are reading this in Beijing and wondering, why China isn’t the dominant nation in the world?

Rod Rosenstein delivered the good news in all this, which was for Trump, putting out a statement for the record; “That no Americans were involved” or even knew of such an electioneering scheme and/or ads, and furthermore Rosenstein stated, the efforts were so small time and contradictory, as to have “No effect on the election.”

So, Mueller and the FBI cleared Trump, but embarrassed the country by then charging these two bit Russian actors with election interference by claiming a Russian attempt at meddling by funding (wait for it) a bunch of Anti-Trump (Yes!) rallies, and Anti-Trump ads (along with some supporting ones) as well as a bunch of positive Bernie ads. I think they are positive, these ads are so strange, and it’s hard to say whether they were supporting Bernie or mocking him. These Internet ads were accompanied by pro Hillary ads, pro Hillary rally funding and Pro Democratic Party themed issue type ads. They even paid a man to stand by the highway with a birthday sign. Another one of these ads was a color by number of a body builder type image of Bernie – for children!

This nonsense is not just in the indictment; its all there is in the indictment. No wonder Mueller couldn’t catch the anthrax guy and pointed the finger at the wrong man in that case, whom the government then had to reimburse — this Mueller guy is an idiot, a stone cold idiot.

Although in principle I think it’s good to keep the Russians out of our elections, this was not a strong or even coordinated effort to do anything that would have influenced anybody. Mueller also makes no connection whatsoever to Putin or Moscow.

If we had a real press corp in this country, questions about all these problems would be circulating in the stories, instead of the lies the press is still peddling. I’ve concluded the major newspapers Steele and others have admitted briefing — cannot come clean on these stories; the FBI agents being arrested/demoted/questioned were their sources. The DNC member’s lawyering up right now — were their sources. The DOJ and State Department administrators and appointees who participated in this near coup against the US government were their sources. These press people were shown these documents — and were convinced they were true. Some of them were paid by these people to write stories.

The NYT and the Washington Post haven’t been writing stories like they knew the Steele dossier was true because they are wicked and hate Trump (although both of those are also true) but because they were shown evidence, their sources said this checked out – and would eventually come out – and Trump would be finished.

They wrote all these lies, because in the echo chamber they live in, the idea that somebody could falsely manipulate this many people in positions of law enforcement and authority is essentially unthinkable.

But it happened.

I was furious with the WaPo and the NYT as a former journalist – as I read their coverage everyday this past year, coverage I knew was false and therefore assumed they knew was false.

But all that changed for me when I read the Strzok Page text messages. It became clear to me, that the WaPo and the NYT had sources at the every top of the FBI counter espionage division and were ACCURATELY quoting them.

If I had a source, at the top of the FBI’s counter espionage division, and they were this friendly with me and gave me this kind of access, data, and feedback, you can bet I would print it, I would rely upon it and I would be silly not to. When the FBI lies to a newspaper, you have to expect the newspaper to believe the lie, that’s how they work, they get data from people in high positions and leak it, and 99% of the time, that data is accurate – BECAUSE of it’s source.

Which is why the FBI is in Crisis – because if the truth is fully told, it was the FBI itself, that was the biggest outside influence and/or effect on last year’s election, not the Russians. And the FBI had this influence illegally – by botching the Hillary email investigation, by falsely obtaining wiretaps of Trumps team through the FISA court — and by injecting the FBI itself (Comey’s election eve antics) into an American election.

I wonder if Mueller will ever get to that part of this narrative?

Posted in The FBI is in Crisis…, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Go with Grassley

Go with Grassley

Senator Grassley from Iowa is a good man, a fair man – and an honest man.

He has a fully developed immigration bill, already introduced (it lost, as did the other 3 bills), which honors President Trump’s four pillars.

The President, in a tweet, has pledged to sign Grassley’s bill.

We need to go with Grassley.

Now is the time for America to stand up, with one voice, and fix a series of immigration mistakes that have been accumulating for 30 years — and get our Senate to pass the Grassley Immigration Bill with 60 votes!

If you don’t know who this man is, look him up, Senator Chuck Grassley has been the voice of reason, patriotism, fair play, and common sense on more issues in a single year, than most politicians tackle in a lifetime. The man is a living legend and we need him now, more than ever.

The Common Sense Coalition must live up to their name and get onboard this Grassley Bill, no other compromise, especially theirs — will get the President’s signature — something everyone needs to accept; especially Senator Chuck Schumer, whose popularity in his district! — in his secret internal polling — has dropped blow the critical 50% mark, something he is correctly in a panic about.

The really scary thing for Schumer isn’t his overall popularity fall, it’s the huge increase in his negatives that he is really worried about.

After a big jump in negatives, many politicians fall from office, it’s their Achilles heel.

Schumer knows this and is terrified of pushing that negative number even higher — no matter which direction he turns on this. If he push’s the CSC into a 60 vote Graham Bill, he still has the House and the Presidential veto to hurdle over – and if doesn’t make it, (no chance) and the Dreamers don’t get to Dream, it’s a nightmare for him, he’s the poster boy for their catastrophe.

If he folds and votes for Grassley, it looks like compete capitulation and the left in his base will literally despise him. He cannot afford that.

Look at Hillary, she had the ground game, the media, celebrity endorsements, Wall Street and Silicon Valley money and endorsements, and a ringing endorsement from a popular sitting president — and her negatives still clobbered her.

That and a right cross from Trump — she never really saw coming until about 1:30 in the morning on election night.

Schumer was watching though. Schumer is an idiot but he’s not blind, he saw all that and he remembers who delivered the blow. I predict Schumer will remain in opposition publicly, but will urge enough members of the caucus to split off and support Grassley.

This way, he can scream and cry and make a big scene, that they should have held on for more – while the members who need to make this compromise to survive the next election, like Heidi Heitkamp (who now has a REAL challenger), can do his dirty work and bring the 1.8 million Dreamers Trump has Ok’ed — in out of the rain.

This scheme, if he tries it — will also backfire on Schumer. His days of having his cake and eating too, are all over, Trump has his number — is in a superior board position, and is out playing Schumer at every turn, and the ending of this episode won’t be any different.

Go with Grassley – Make America Great Again.

That’s what Americans want to have happen, in the near 80 percentile.

That is the size of the force Schumer is bucking, even in his crazy district, people do not support completely open borders like he is endorsing. This is a force to be reckoned with that the Democrats have NOT woken up too — yet.

Think about the size of this miscalculation. The number of people afraid, downright afraid of the Democratic Party’s official immigration policies – from hard life experience – is 4 times the number — that support open borders and chain migration and the visa lottery. Schumer is under an anvil.

Trump knows this and every day the Democrats continue to bash their head on this piece of iron, they just get more and more unpopular and cede more and more power over every detail of this issue to the President.

Go with Grassley – Make America Great Again.

Posted in Go with Grassley, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

This picture is worth 10,000 treasonous words

Screen shot 2018-02-15 at 4.47.18 PM

Trump saved the US from a coup by this group of people, and it looks like it!

When I first saw this picture, I couldn’t put my finger exactly on what disturbed me about it.

I expected Obama’s staff to be unhappy about the election result of course, so that wasn’t it, but this picture now, tells me a much deeper story. Most presidential staffers, for all the time I have been alive (57 years), have been happy to serve in the White House, viewing it as an honor, even when it’s time to go. These types of group photos are always a smiling, laughing, posing kind of affair, where the seething hostility that is Washington, is momentarily held at bay.

That obviously did not happen here.

What happened here in this photo, is an outward visualization of a sickness that infected the entire Obama administration, a kind of “holier than thou” liberalism that revolved around their god like totem, Barack Obama. These people are not honored to have served, they are furious at the unwashed masses that ejected them from power — they most obviously believe they have a continued right too — something they feel so openly, it’s literally written right on their faces.

Trump’s election, a return of the power to the people, has almost certainly saved this country from a horrible constitutional problem, and maybe even a coup by a bunch of people pictured above — that think exactly of your civil rights — what their expressions say they do.

Posted in This picture is worth 10,000 treasonous words, Uncategorized | 2 Comments

The Florida Shooting

The Florida Shooting

Here’s what’s new. In September, a man contacted the FBI because a guy named Nicholas Cruz, left a message on his web board, saying he was going to be a professional school shooter. The FBI re-interviewed this guy yesterday.

A student, walking down the stairs with Cruz — after the shooting (he initially escaped by walking out with other students) made a comment to him that she thought, “Oh…I thought it would be you…(the shooter)”.

Administrators, counselors, school officials and other students had all repeatedly reported Cruz for threatening and erratic behavior, to the degree he was already banned from the school campus with a backpack.

Multiple videos are/were on line, of course, with him threatening others and of course, displaying weapons, and targets, he had ostensibly riddled with bullets.

This young man was mentally ill, needed help, sent multiple warning signs and was on law enforcement — and the school administrations radar — and yet; he was able to acquire dangerous weapons, bring them onto the campus unchallenged, and kill 17 people.

I asked myself this morning, why didn’t this happen to my son and/or daughter?

And the answer is multi-layered.

Although I think this could happen anywhere, I don’t think it was as likely where I sent, for example, my daughter, to high school. I’m not Catholic and am not rich, but I did spend a lot of money, money I really in all honesty — did not have — without loans, sacrifices and every compromise available – to a Catholic High School not so near where we lived. In other words, this also entailed a huge amount of driving and waiting in parking lots and car pickup lines, many miles from home.

But I did all this for a reason other than the fact that my daughter wanted to go there.

I also did it because they took everything seriously there. Everything. Every little factor is studied, weighed, judged, and accounted for. Fundraising has a committee, events, and goals and builds goodwill toward the school. Academics are superb and constantly watched over by the administration, faulty peer review, outside auditing, parent auditing, and a statistical analysis. Orientation involves meeting and sitting through a class, like she would attend, every year she was there, with the teacher she would have.

The building is always “locked” down, and in perfect condition, you can’t enter it except through a door the main office controls. And they watch. During the main exit and entrance hours, there is Montgomery County police car and officer at the school. Right in front. Every time.

Athletics were also handled with precision and professionalism at the coach’s level and with very high parental involvement. In fact, parents are involved at every level and they encourage this to the point that even if you didn’t start out as one of those parents who were inclined to be highly involved — they turn you into one.

And of course, they monitor the mental health of their student body. Constant interaction, and discussion, a feedback loop of extraordinary depth existed there. The students are involved as well, with an honor code and a strict behavior code, the school kept things under control to the point that that when problems arose with a student, which happens everywhere, they were on top of it early and from what I witnessed – were aggressive about making sure the student got help BUT were also aggressive about making sure the campus was protected.

I’m not suggesting this could not have happened where my daughter went to school, tragedy like this is indiscriminate, but I do think the kind of extraordinary commitment to professionalism at all levels, including security and mental health assessment underway at all times at the Catholic High School she attended, made it far less likely and also greatly increased the odds she would enjoy her experience there and go on to college, both of which fortunately happened.

Most people reading this will say, yea, but society as a whole, cannot do that, we cannot all afford private schools. This is actually untrue. Montgomery County spends nearly as much (within 10%) to educate a High School senior as the average Catholic High School does. The difference is, if I send my daughter to a private HS, religiously based or not, I pay the entire freight, and I don’t get a tax break or deduction to help, the state of Maryland specifically opposes a policy of supporting private schools and of helping them with funding and/or tax breaks. It’s a union thing.

So, I’m paying for schools in my taxes, just not the schools my daughter used, those I paid for separately, which of course then, became a gigantic burden and raises the perception in peoples mind that private schools are too expensive.

Simply put, if the tax and school funding formulas were changed around like Trump would LIKE TO DO, I think it’s feasible to provide safe, well run, and high achieving schools right here in America. We just need private school efficiency and management principles, injected somehow, into our public school system. I believe the public system must remain, although I believe it would be healthier if it were smaller.

In other words, make the two system’s competitive with each other, and also more balanced in size with each other. Do this by making funding available (through tax deductions), for the private system, which would cause that system to flourish, changing the mix between private and public, which would also greatly benefit the public system. Costs per pupil could rise if pupil numbers began declining. Class sizes would naturally shrink in the public system, allowing the level of change necessary to rescue our public school system, which is suffering from more than just shootings.

The shootings are a symptom, a symptom of something deeper; a loss of faith, a loss of precision, a loss of commitment from school administrators, a loss of discipline by students and faculty alike, a loss of cultural respect for education and educators, a loss of compassion for the mentally ill, a loss of the capability to spot them, help them — and protect ourselves from them.

If doing all this again sounds impossible, I can tell you, I saw it done.




Posted in The Florida Shooting, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Grassley lassoes Rice

Grassley lassoes Rice

Susan Rice made a serious mistake and will probably go to jail over it.
The main stream media isn’t writing about this because they are terrified.
Terrified their hero, former president Barack Obama is also a criminal.
If you think I’m making this up, and I know many of you Hillary lovers do, you should read the letter below, from the most respected United States Senator alive, Chuck Grassley of Iowa — about this exact topic. What did the former president know about the Steele dossier? When did he know it? and to what extent did he interact with the FBI and other IC members concerning it and the FISA warrants?
If, as rumored, Bill Priestap has become a cooperating witness, Rice is being trapped here. She needs to be careful, Grassley never goes this far without having the goods in advance. If she’s guilty, and I’m fairly certain she is, she should go to him and make a deal.
It’s that or prison, and although she would go to a nice one, prison is still prison.
February 8, 2018
The Honorable Susan Rice
Senior Fellow, Belfer Center
Harvard University
79 John F. Kennedy Street
Cambridge, MA 02138
Kathryn Ruemmler, Esq.
Latham and Watkins LLP
555 Eleventh Street NW
Washington, DC 20004
Dear Ambassador Rice:
The Senate Judiciary Committee has a constitutional duty to conduct oversight of the FBI and the broader Department of Justice.  Part of that duty involves ensuring that law enforcement efforts are conducted without improper political influence.  Accordingly, the Committee has been investigating the FBI’s relationship with Christopher Steele during the time his work was funded by Hillary for America and the Democratic National Committee, as well as the FBI’s reliance on his unverified third-hand allegations in the Bureau’s representations to courts. 
As part of that effort, the Committee sent a request to the National Archives for records of meetings between President Obama and then-FBI Director Comey regarding the FBI’s investigation of allegations of collusion between associates of Mr. Trump and the Russian government.  In response, the Committee received classified and unclassified versions of an email you sent to yourself on January 20, 2017 – President Trump’s inauguration day.  If the timestamp is correct, you sent this email to yourself at 12:15pm, presumably a very short time before you departed the White House for the last time. 
In this email to yourself, you purport to document a meeting that had taken place more than two weeks before, on January 5, 2017.  You wrote:
On January 5, following a briefing by IC leadership on Russian hacking during the 2016 Presidential election, President Obama had a brief follow-on conversation with FBI Director Jim Comey and Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates in the Oval Office.  Vice President Biden and I were also present.
That meeting reportedly included a discussion of the Steele dossier and the FBI’s investigation of its claims.[1]  Your email continued:
President Obama began the conversation by stressing his continued commitment to ensuring that every aspect of this issue is handled by the Intelligence and law enforcement communities “by the book”.  The President stressed that he is not asking about, initiating or instructing anything from a law enforcement perspective.  He reiterated that our law enforcement team needs to proceed as it normally would by the book. 
From a national security perspective, however, President Obama said he wants to be sure that, as we engage with the incoming team, we are mindful to ascertain if there is any reason that we cannot share information fully as it relates to Russia.
The next part of your email remains classified.  After that, you wrote:
The President asked Comey to inform him if anything changes in the next few weeks that should affect how we share classified information with the incoming team.  Comey said he would.
It strikes us as odd that, among your activities in the final moments on the final day of the Obama administration, you would feel the need to send yourself such an unusual email purporting to document a conversation involving President Obama and his interactions with the FBI regarding the Trump/Russia investigation.  In addition, despite your claim that President Obama repeatedly told Mr. Comey to proceed “by the book,” substantial questions have arisen about whether officials at the FBI, as well as at the Justice Department and the State Department, actually did proceed “by the book.” 
In order for the Committee to further assess the situation, please respond to the following by February 22, 2018:
  1. Did you send the email attached to this letter to yourself?  Do you have any reason to dispute the timestamp of the email?
  1. When did you first become aware of the FBI’s investigation into allegations of collusion between Mr. Trump’s associates and Russia?
  1. When did you become aware of any surveillance activities, including FISA applications, undertaken by the FBI in conducting that investigation?  At the time you wrote this email to yourself, were you aware of either the October 2016 FISA application for surveillance of Carter Page or the January 2017 renewal? 
  1. Did anyone instruct, request, suggest, or imply that you should send yourself the aforementioned Inauguration Day email memorializing President Obama’s meeting with Mr. Comey about the Trump/Russia investigation?  If so, who and why? 
  1. Is the account of the January 5, 2017 meeting presented in your email accurate?  Did you omit any other portions of the conversation?
  1. Other than that email, did you document the January 5, 2017 meeting in any way, such as contemporaneous notes or a formal memo?  To the best of your knowledge, did anyone else at that meeting take notes or otherwise memorialize the meeting?
  1. During the meeting, did Mr. Comey or Ms. Yates mention potential press coverage of the Steele dossier?  If so, what did they say?
  1. During the meeting, did Mr. Comey describe the status of the FBI’s relationship with Mr. Steele, or the basis for that status?
  1. When and how did you first become aware of the allegations made by Christopher Steele?
  1. When and how did you first become aware that the Clinton Campaign and the Democratic National Committee funded Mr. Steele’s efforts?
  1. You wrote that President Obama stressed that he was “not asking about, initiating or instructing anything from a law enforcement perspective.”  Did President Obama ask about, initiate, or instruct anything from any other perspective relating to the FBI’s investigation?
  1. Did President Obama have any other meetings with Mr. Comey, Ms. Yates, or other government officials about the FBI’s investigation of allegations of collusion between Trump associates and Russia?  If so, when did these occur, who participated, and what was discussed? 
Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.  Please contact Patrick Davis of Chairman Grassley’s staff at (202) 224-5225 or Lee Holmes of Chairman Graham’s staff at (202) 224-5972 if you have any questions.
Charles E. Grassley                                                     Lindsey O. Graham
Chairman                                                                     Chairman
Committee on the Judiciary                                Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism
Enclosure: as stated.
cc:       The Honorable Dianne Feinstein
Ranking Member
Committee on the Judiciary
The Honorable Sheldon Whitehouse
Ranking Member
Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism
Committee on the Judiciary


Posted in Grassley lassos Rice, Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Low Yield Nuclear Weapons use contemplated by Trump?

Low Yield Nuclear Weapons use contemplated by Trump?

Why do I say that?

My evidence is circumstantial, but logical.

The U.S. does not make war — or even conduct battle within a war — without legal boundaries. Many people in America will scoff at that statement, but from the top to the bottom, the military has rules, which carry the weight of law because of the legal structure of the military, and the vast majority of the time, those rules are followed, at least to the satisfaction of the commanders – which is where the law is translated into reality.

Therefore, for most things the United States military does, it first telegraphs into law. This has always been true, and if you follow the law in the U.S., you can follow our thinking, our strategic intent, our capabilities and even our vulnerabilities – at least for a budget and interest category as big as the military.

In the past year, the following physical things have happened.

North Korea detonated a fusion nuclear weapon.

North Korea fired two (2) medium range rockets OVER Japan.

North Korea successfully test fired an ICBM, w/o re-entry.

The US conducted three (3) war games exercises with SK forces.

China moved 15% of their active army (300,000) troops onto the NK border.

Chinese troops on the border with NK are equipped with Radiation detection equipment.

Chinese troops on the border with NK are equipped with SAM ability, 3 sites.

But the US options here conventionally are still very limited and all involve great risk to Seoul.

Only one plan has viability, one with a huge counter strike, reacting to a.) Another NK missile launch, b.) Using low yield nukes on strategic NK front line targets c.) And a massive aerial assault, d.) Combined with some covert operation to reach the NK General Staff with a peace offering, e.) Combined with another simultaneous operation — which attempts to wipe out the North Korea leader. Only such a layered plan — has a good enough chance of statistical success — to pass the computer simulation smell test at the Pentagon. This is a big problem because one of the things the computer doesn’t like is complicated, layered, plans – where one layer’s success is dependent upon another.

Hence the barely acceptable score this plan generates.

But even this just barely good enough plan (statistically speaking), would require some tweaking to US law — which coincidentally — is underway as we speak. The new US NW force authorization plan under consideration on Capitol Hill contains some juicy tidbits, like more low yield nuclear (LYN) weapons, even sub fired LYN warheads – and an important doctrine change, allowing the use of such low yield weapons, NOT SOLELY in response to another country’s first use (the old standard) but also in response to conventional threats against our national security assets from missile launches by nuclear states. In other words, North Korea.

Essentially, the military is asking Congress to extend their war fighting budgeting to include low yield weapons, LYN launchers, LYN platform launching support from existing nuclear assets like submarines, and finally — to legally contemplate a first use policy directly aimed at the country of North Korea.

The president probably does not need this NW authority to act in this manner — if he was reacting to a missile launch at Guam and/or Japan – anyway; but I suspect this is not just about notification, and/or permission from Congress, as much as a final round of intimidation aimed abroad. Trump plays 4D chess and this is the equivalent of moving your castle to the opponents back row.

He wants Kim, Xi and Putin to understand his intentions.

Chinese activity on the NK border indicates Xi believes Trump and is preparing for a war. They have abandoned their loud protestations over THAAD; they know we won’t dismantle that right now, not while NK is non-complaint. They are pushing their hand as hard as they can in the South China Sea – because they know Trump doesn’t want a two front problem, and they can take advantage of this opportunity to cement their presence on the dredged up sand bar atolls that are just big, stationary, militarily outposts.

Russia isn’t screaming about all this – because they are violating the Intermediate Nuclear Forces treaty (30 years old) and they want to continue doing that. They have developed and/or are developing a land-based cruise missile, which violates this treaty.

The US wants them to stay in the treaty, but that is threatened — frankly — by reality, which is that the US probably (almost certainly) also has a land based cruise missile with “special” (nuclear) capability, just not — in production, we want to develop low-yield weapons, the Russians want to do all this and more, how does this treaty stand up? If the US and Russia and China were smart, they would all agree, that nuclear proliferation was NOT in their long term national interests – and stop proliferating and strongly prohibit the promotion of proliferation in allies.

This isn’t pie in the sky liberalism, seriously, if the US, Russia and China, simply remained the three large nuclear powers on Earth, this would benefit each of them enormously, much more than they are benefitted by allowing proliferation to happen with their resources, their technology, and their money.

Even Xi and Putin, would admit, if being candid, that it would have been better to prevent Kim from getting a nuke, than it was helping him, after the US uses low yield tactical and/or battlefield nukes — on the NK peninsula — to stop Kim.

Trump is hoping Putin and Xi figure this out, before he has to act.

Posted in Low Yield Nuclear Weapons use contemplated by Trump?, Uncategorized | 1 Comment