2-19-2019

Federal Bureau of Anti-Matter

What a coincidence. Federal agents are screened for their honesty, trustworthiness and professionalism among other things. In law enforcement they are the cream of the crop, top of the line and trained to perfection in matters of criminal justice and the US rule of law. I’ve heard from experienced law enforcement professionals it is unadvisable to speak to them without legal counsel present – even during a routine traffic stop.

Have you ever gotten a traffic ticket? Do you attempt to pass the time of day with the officer? Ever confess to a minor offense in which you got off? As you prepare to depart the scene does the officer immediately leave at the same time? If not, have you ever wondered why not?

It’s important to remember this tip. The officer has an obligation to transcribe the entire conversation on paper in the event he must go to court over your offense. That sounds simple enough huh? What happens if you admit to previous wrong doing? What about an officer investigating a case that sounds similar to the event you admitted to? An officer is investigating and your name just happened to come up, because you told someone (the traffic officer) and now you’re a prime suspect.

Let’s say you end up going to court about the case you admitted committing. You are asked if you have any knowledge of that event and you say no or you don’t remember. The officer is called to the stand and asked if you ever mentioned it to him and he pulls out his notebook as he says yes. Then he reads your “confession” and you are charged with lying under oath “Perjury”.

That is why you should exercise your right to remain silent, especially at a traffic stop.

That’s why I said what a coincidence. Here we are and not one, but at least two high level FBI employees (former FBI director Comey; Assistant director McCabe; Special Agent Strzok and FBI Legal Counsel Lisa Paige have been called before congressional committees and under oath have answered many questions presented to them with, “I don’t remember”; “I don’t know”; or “I plead the fifth Amendment”. Even text messages and emails conveniently disappeared (although even a 15 year old hacker knows that text messages and emails are backed up daily or sometimes hourly on internet servers and kept for an extended period of time). One would think that FBI supervisors and agents would have clued in on that fact while conducting official investigations?

They are unable to recall specific events, dates, places or people they have interacted with over a certain period of time or pertaining to a specific incident when questioned by congressional committee members, under oath under penalty of perjury.

This is extremely interesting in that Comey AND McCabe each went on a “book tour” with various media outlets and described the events in detail which they couldn’t remember at the committee hearings. It would have been so considerate had they each presented the committee with copies of their soon to be released book prior to the hearings. Then questions could be referenced with page, paragraph and line number.

That’s why Special Counsel Robert Mueller himself a former FBI director made it a point to recommend prosecution of Trump associates who lied about unrelated matters under oath during HIS Special Investigation. Those “offenders” face substantial embarrassment, financial loss and/or jail time unless they “flip” on Donald Trump and admit incriminating evidence about Russian Collusion (which is still not a crime, even if it was true) – Which it is not.

It does appear that the Bureau, as it is called, has transitioned from the Federal Bureau of Investigation to its more proper title of Federal Bureau of Anti-Matter, because at the top the only thing that mattered was the smearing of and attempted removal of the sitting President of the United States, Donald Trump. – I am the Real Truckmaster!

Realtruckmaster.blog

MeWe.Com/The_Real_Truckmaster_Series

The Shaming of America

This could also be called the “shamming” of America. We have become accustomed to having prominent Athletes, Entertainers and Politicians trash talk our nation, our leaders and elected officials and even ourselves. We are called names, placed into categories and expected to remain in our places while those who are superior treat us like trash. It’s not about race, ethnic or national origin of our ancestors. It’s about power and money.

In the Radical Muslim mindset those who are not Muslim are to be killed. Those who are Muslim but not radical are to be killed. Only the radical Muslims are to dominate and by force. We see this played out in the Middle East and in European nations where mass migration was encouraged through open borders. This is a clear pattern of what hell is like. It’s like being in a gang where everyone wants to be the leader and have no problem eliminating all competition. In the end the leader is the only one left. Wow, what joy! A leader without a following is not a leader at all.

We are guided by the Constitution of the United States and it is the basis for the Rule of Law. In fact our form of government is not a democracy and we are not just another republic. The United States is a Constitutional-Republic unlike any other in the world. Our citizens are of state and of the nation. We can travel freely within the country.

Our states are sovereign each with its own Constitution, government, rules and laws and yet joined together nationally under the national Constitution and government. That is primarily why phrases like United We Stand, One Nation, Under God, America First and Make America Great Again are meant to inspire patriotism, pride and confidence in our citizens and beckon others to come join us living the American Dream.

The national tone is set by the President of the United States and his administration sets out to implement his agenda and guide the nation. Elected officials represent the will of the people and set the stage for feast or famine. It is the responsibility for the government to provide for the safety of its people by the creation and enforcement of a series of laws.

Unless the people join together in the common cause of Freedom, working together for the betterment of the nation AND its people, there can be no freedom. Common sense tells us that NOTHING IS FREE!

Everything has a price.

It costs someone to make a pair of shoes. It costs someone to sell a pair of shoes. If you do not work for it, it has cost you nothing and it means to you NOTHING!

Only a parent can watch as their child struggles through life. They celebrate the ups and suffer through the downs as the child goes through trials and tribulations. It is natural for a parent to want to jump in and “help” the child or prevent the heartache the child will go through. It doesn’t help, but hurts the child who must develop their own decision making process and learn by their own mistakes. Parents must learn to step back and watch as their child falls down and gets back up making that a success.

It is not the responsibility of government to feed, clothe and provide free stuff that ensnare and enslave its people. Yet politicians want us to believe that work is not necessary because free housing, free food, free phones, free cars, free everything can be provided by the government and all you have to do is sell your vote to keep them in political office. How is that sustainable? How is that even possible?

In recent weeks we have seen former Obama administration officials surface on the world stage and denounce the United States and trash talk President Trump and his administration and his policies. Never before in my lifetime have I seen anything like this.

It is unheard of and unprecedented that Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry and now Joe Biden all former senators and elected or appointed officials have stood before international assemblies and reporters to denounce and ridicule the President and the administration that succeeded them into office. It is very unprofessional and the most anti-American, unpatriotic example of disloyalty imaginable. At the very least it is treasonous, seditious and very much politically based as each of these individuals are lifetime members of the Democratic Party.

The Constitution makes it very clear that Congress has the authority and responsibility to invoke the powers of impeachment against EACH OF THEM and once convicted they could be banned from holding any elected government office. It is also clear that the President could revoke their security clearances and recommend prosecution for their actions.

What is also clear is that in order for there to be a United States of America, there must be United American citizens who are committed to working for a better America and a country that is not divided through political correctness or petty political party politics.

There are many serious issues facing the nation and to date there have been no viable solutions brought to bear on solving them by politicians in Washington or by state or city officials in whose districts they are in. Serious problems require serious solutions. Solutions do not come from politicians, but from the American people. It is time to take back America! – I am the Real Truckmaster!

Realtruckmaster.blog

MeWe.Com/The_Real_Truckmaster_Series

2-15-2019

Proposed Federal Anti-Lynching Law

Coming from California’s US Senator Kamala Harris is a proposed federal law that would make it a crime to lynch anyone for the first time in our 240+ year history. Sounds like a win – win situation for sure doesn’t it?

It’s not something I would think is beyond the grasp of the Congressional Black Caucus or members like Sen. Harris. Yet in its own sweet way it hammers yet another nail in the coffin of the Democratic Party platform or that of the CBC.

What you don’t see it? This proposed bill, if passed by the Senate and the House and then signed into law by President Trump would seal the deal. Yup for the past 2+ years what we see in the media and in the inner workings of Congress, as well as in various Department of Justice agencies has been the careful planning and execution of a systematic lynching of many good citizens.

Take the now infamous “Russia Collusion” hoax accusing Donald Trump’s campaign of colluding with Russian state actors to influence the 2016 election in his favor would be at best laughable, had it not been an overt attempt to tarnish now President Donald J. Trump and his good name.

Others who have been systematically lynched have been retired General Michael Flynn and even SCOTUS nominees, now Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh. Oh there have been others in the Trump Campaign, the Trump Administration and even Trump family members and administration official’s family members.

I haven’t seen the content of the proposed Anti-Lynching Bill but I’ll bet before President Trump finishes putting pen and ink to make it into law, his legal team will have drawn up articles to sue various members of Congress, former-members of the DOJ and current employees who partook of spreading false allegations to the media.

Yes there must be a correlation between lawyers and criminals who are interdependent upon each other to use the law for their own shady purposes. Criminals think they know the law but have lawyers as their backup against the law. Lawyers study the law and twist the law in order to get their clients off and know how to play judges and the jury. Many legislators are lawyers who use the same techniques under the guise of compromise to create laws that can be easily skirted or ignored. Career legislators utilize manipulation, mob tactics of intimidation or threats to insure compliance of their agenda.

It’s been said that criminals are often not too bright, just enough to get themselves caught. – I am the Real Truckmaster!

Realtruckmaster.blog

MeWe.Com/The_Real_Truckmaster_Series

2-8-2019

A History of Political Parties in the United States

In light of the political unrest that has surfaced during the 2016 Presidential Election and in the 2 years after I thought it pertinent to examine U. S. political parties and their history. Not trusting Wikipedia as a truly reliable source the next best would be the Encyclopaedia Britannica online at Britannica.com as a sort of an unbiased third party reference.

https://www.britannica.com/place/United-States/Political-parties

The United States has two major national political parties, the Democratic Party and the Republican Party. Although the parties contest presidential elections every four years and have national party organizations, between elections they are often little more than loose alliances of state and local party organizations. Other parties have occasionally challenged the Democrats and Republicans.

Since the Republican Party’s rise to major party status in the 1850s, however, minor parties have had only limited electoral success, generally restricted either to influencing the platforms of the major parties or to siphoning off enough votes from a major party to deprive that party of victory in a presidential election.

In the 1912 election, for example, former Republican president Theodore Roosevelt challenged Republican President William Howard Taft, splitting the votes of Republicans and allowing Democrat Woodrow Wilson to win the presidency with only 42 percent of the vote, and the 2.7 percent of the vote won by Green Party nominee Ralph Nader in 2000 may have tipped the presidency toward Republican George W. Bush by attracting votes that otherwise would have been cast for Democrat Al Gore.

There are several reasons for the failure of minor parties and the resilience of America’s two-party system. In order to win a national election, a party must appeal to a broad base of voters and a wide spectrum of interests. The two major parties have tended to adopt centrist political programs, and sometimes there are only minor differences between them on major issues, especially those related to foreign affairs. Each party has both conservative and liberal wings, and on some issues (e.g., affirmative action) conservative Democrats have more in common with conservative Republicans than with liberal Democrats.

The country’s “winner-take-all” plurality system, in contrast to the proportional representation used in many other countries (whereby a party, for example, that won 5 percent of the vote would be entitled to roughly 5 percent of the seats in the legislature), has penalized minor parties by requiring them to win a plurality of the vote in individual districts in order to gain representation.

The Democratic and Republican Party candidates are automatically placed on the general election ballot, while minor parties often have to expend considerable resources collecting enough signatures from registered voters to secure a position on the ballot.

Finally, the cost of campaigns, particularly presidential campaigns, often discourages minor parties. Since the 1970s, presidential campaigns (primaries and caucuses, national conventions, and general elections) have been publicly funded through a tax checkoff system, whereby taxpayers can designate whether a portion of their federal taxes (in the early 21st century, $3 for an individual and $6 for a married couple) should be allocated to the presidential campaign fund.

Whereas the Democratic and Republican presidential candidates receive full federal financing (nearly $75 million in 2004) for the general election, a minor party is eligible for a portion of the federal funds only if its candidate surpassed 5 percent in the prior presidential election (all parties with at least 25 percent of the national vote in the prior presidential election are entitled to equal funds). A new party contesting the presidential election is entitled to federal funds after the election if it received at least 5 percent of the national vote.

Both the Democratic and Republican parties have undergone significant ideological transformations throughout their histories.

The modern Democratic Party traditionally supports organized labour, minorities, and progressive reforms. Nationally, it generally espouses a liberal political philosophy, supporting greater governmental intervention in the economy and less governmental regulation of the private lives of citizens. It also generally supports higher taxes (particularly on the wealthy) to finance social welfare benefits that provide assistance to the elderly, the poor, the unemployed, and children.

By contrast, the national Republican Party supports limited government regulation of the economy, lower taxes, and more conservative (traditional) social policies.

In 2009 the Tea Party movement, a conservative populist social and political movement, emerged and attracted mostly disaffected Republicans.

At the state level, political parties reflect the diversity of the population. Democrats in the Southern states are generally more conservative than Democrats in New England or the Pacific Coast states; likewise, Republicans in New England or the mid-Atlantic states also generally adopt more liberal positions than Republicans in the South or the mountain states of the West.

Large urban centres are more likely to support the Democratic Party, whereas rural areas, small cities, and suburban areas tend more often to vote Republican.

Some states have traditionally given majorities to one particular party. For example, because of the legacy of the Civil War and its aftermath, the Democratic Party dominated the 11 Southern states of the former Confederacy until the mid-20th century.

Since the 1960s, however, the South and the mountain states of the West have heavily favoured the Republican Party; in other areas, such as New England, the mid-Atlantic, and the Pacific Coast, support for the Democratic Party is strong. Compare, for example, the 1960 and 2000 presidential elections.

By the early 21st century, political pundits were routinely dividing the United States into red and blue states, whose assigned colours not only indicated which political party was locally dominant but also signified the supposed prevalence of a set of social and cultural values.

According to the received wisdom, the red states—generally located in the South, West, and Lower Midwest—were Republican, conservative, God-fearing, “pro-life” (on the issue of abortion), small-town and suburban, opposed to big government and same-sex marriage, and enamoured of NASCAR.

The blue states—found mostly on the coasts, in the Northeast, and in the Upper Midwest—were similarly reductively characterized as Democratic, liberal, secular, politically correct, “pro-choice” (on abortion), urban, and connoisseurs of wine, cheese, and latte.

Both the Democratic and Republican parties select their candidates for office through primary elections.

Traditionally, individuals worked their way up through the party organization, belonging to a neighbourhood party club, helping to raise funds, getting out the vote, watching the polls, and gradually rising to become a candidate for local, state, and—depending on chance, talent, political expediency, and a host of other factors—higher office. Because American elections are now more heavily candidate-centred rather than party-centred and are less susceptible to control by party bosses, wealthy candidates have often been able to circumvent the traditional party organization to win their party’s nomination.

James T. Harris

The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica

The Britannica article ends with William Jefferson Clinton in the 1992 Presidential elections. So the hotly contested 2000 election of George W. Bush pivoted on the hanging chads of the Florida election machines, but settled by the Electoral College votes that gave him the presidency.

The following election was an entirely new style of candidate when Senator Barack H. Obama came from behind and received the Democratic National Committee nomination over Senator Hillary D. R. Clinton in the 2008 election. Obama became the first African-American to occupy the White House in our nation’s history and he went on to win a second term in 2010 against Senator John McCain.

That brings us to the 2016 elections when yet an unlikely candidate Donald J. Trump entered the race with no political experience and came from behind to eclipse more than 16 GOP candidates and beat Democratic candidate Hillary D. R. Clinton to occupy the White House.

What made the 2016 election unique in many ways was the amount of mostly negative publicity that was sure to sink his political ambitions. The fact that Trump won the election after spending a mere several hundred thousand dollars to run his campaign, compared to the several hundred million spent by Hillary Clinton on her failed attempt at the White House.

Recent political events lead one to believe that there may be major changes in the way politics continues in the United States. The Democratic Party leadership and the mishmash of various midterm 2018 campaigns have brought a broad spectrum of candidates espousing a variety of ideologies and really looney tune style rhetoric.

The traditional Republican Party may also experience a vast awakening as many have lost faith in the current political system. Under President Trump’s America First agenda I would not be surprised to see something along the lines of a new Make American Great Again Party that champions the rights of all American citizens as proclaimed in the Constitution. A party that values hard work, fair trade and a reinvigorated judicial system reform as well as immigration reform.

Much has changed in America in just the past 2 years and patriotism is on the rise, as is racial division when people lose sight of the flag that unites All Americans. – I am the Real Truckmaster!

Realtruckmaster.Blog

MeWe.Com/The_Real_Truckmaster_Series