Why did he nominate her?

“Trump withdraws Treasury nomination of former U.S. attorney for D.C. Jessie Liu”

This header titles an article in Stars & Stripes, attributed to Washington Post writer, Keith L. Alexander.

The article questions why the president would withdraw the appointment of Ms. Liu.

But according to his conservative supporters Liu as the president’s nominee was about to face interrogation by senators about her accepting a token jail term for someone in the Mueller probe whose offences normally exacted a far grater jail penalty than the 2 month token.

Though I learned of the likely reason for the withdrawal yesterday, still no one has bothered explaining why the president nominated her in the first place. Since everyone assumes he vindictively removed hostile witness Vindman from the White House; then similarly anyone like Ms Liu who treated his investigators sympathetically during the Mueller investigation, the president should not have nominated for a promotion.

"Change" & the State

I remember when former president Obama’s campaign promise was “change”, the “change” that could be believed in that voters have yearned for but have never got. He knew that the word “change” was beloved by everyone because most people believed that “change” resembled the horn of plenty. But real “change” frightens almost everyone: when inquiring about the cause of illness the ancient historian Herodotus said that he believed that illness was caused by “change”. Today almost everyone who says anything about politics hates President Trump -“Trump Haters” – because he threatens to “change” how things are done in the “deep state”- the state – bureaucracy that fears the temporary demands that may be put upon them every election period by disrupting officials who do not understand how things are done. Those whose work days follow procedures for keeping government functioning smoothly fear that anyone not initiated in its ways could be a tyrannical outsider demanding that they perform their duties his way.

Who needs a gun?

No one needs a gun. When I was growing up in the city of Toronto not long after WWII I didn’t think anyone had one. And with several news papers publishing two or three editions a day I’m certain I’d have known if they did. I do recall that when I’d gotten in my teens there were reports that some old guy not far from where I lived shot somebody with a rifle. Years later Toronto mayor Miller reacted to a shooting that was the first of string of hand gun shootings that have been increasing in frequency to the present. I recall fifteen years ago after a young person had been shot a few miles away a neighbour asking “Does that mean every kid has a gun?” Well less than 2 weeks ago a 15 year old left his school and was shot dead by another 15 year old.

“Whose Fare Share” look out Warren!

https://apnews.com/83239d9fd0fd041aee0a5ecdf001f5a4</div&gt;

“Billionaire Bloomberg proposes tax plan aimed at wealthy”(Feb. 1,2020)

I once published a piece that I titled “Money meets money; money wins.” about how the winner of millionaire investor, Governor Romney’s and millionaire supported President Obama’s competition for president will be lots of money. The most recent confirmation of this crazy notion is (once a Democrat now a Republican) wealthy Mayor Bloomberg’s recent endorsement of Mr. Obama’s candidacy. Now way back on October 20, 2012 I think I was being prepared for this endorsement by a New York Times article entitled “Ever Bipartisan, Bloomberg Jabs Both Candidates” in which I read Mr. Bloomberg’s criticism of the President: “This business of ‘Well, they can afford it; they should pay their fair share?” Who are you to say ‘Somebody else’s fair share?’ and his admonishment of Romney: “I do think that Romney’s business experience would be valuable, but I don’t know that running Bain Capital gives you the experience to run the country.” But less than two weeks and one hurricane later Mayor Bloomberg announces his support for Mr. Obama because he feels that Hurricane Sandy may be evidence of global warming which Mr. Obama is better equipped to manage than Mr. Romney, and not Mr. Obama’s most repeated rhetoric since he took office in 2008/09, which is that the rich should pay more in taxes (their “fair share”).

Mr. Trump/Mr Sanders( 6. GDP, not 6.9)

I felt this way several times before, but I think I’m seeing fewer articles about President Trump online. But sadly that does not mean objective reports about his policies and supporters will ensue. Now it seems he’s being replaced by Bernie Sanders articles from both liberal and conservative commentators; everyone seems to be championing or at least defending Sanders the socialist against his not so socialist challengers.

Maybe journalists know that media consumers won’t consume critiques of Mr. Trump’s spending enormous public debt to fund military equipment for the very Generals he’s been criticizing, or why America’s 2.1 GDP is as impressive as China’s new low of 6., or that great wealth and power are still available to individuals like Huawei  in communist/socialist China and that socialist Sanders has a lot more money and influence than most North Americans.

Whistle Blower

The expression whistle blower has been printed and voiced often in the last few months. When I first started being made aware of it I thought it was a colloquialism, a metaphoric expression that people use to poetically draw attention to something untoward happening in the work place, like the image of someone blowing a police whistle to get help in an emergency.

I still am not used to it. It doesn’t exist in my 1991 Oxford Dictionary, where whistle for and whistle-stop are the only expressions included after the main entry for whistle.

I did a search for its legal definition online to learn that it does seem to have a legal justification. All that I recall is that the whistle blower law seemed to be made to draw attention to anyone dishonestly adding to government expenses. Before that I used to think a whistle blower simply snitched on someone in any workplace and had the right to do so without retribution, but I always felt that there must have been a more legally accurate formal term to express the notion embodied in whistle blower.

And recently, maybe today even, because I haven’t heard that the whistle blower is drawing attention to unnecessary government or even business spending, she/ he seems like a researcher providing research to the political opponents of his employer.