Do not expect Jeffrey Epstein to go down without a fight. He frankly has nothing to lose. If convicted, he will almost certainly spend the rest of his life in jail. He apparently has no family to protect. The last time he was in trouble he hired Alan Dershowitz. We will never know what really happened in that prior plea deal, but there is no doubt that a full-fledged trial of Mr. Epstein would have been a world class fiasco. Part of the plea deal included immunity for “co-conspirators.” It seems very likely that the DOJ was getting a lot of pressure from some very powerful people to make this go away.

Epstein will hire the most expensive, creative and ruthless legal counsel on this planet. They will start by calling witnesses who definitely won’t want to participate. There is already one “leaked” list that includes Donald Trump. It is extremely unlikely that Trump will testify. Other “witnesses” may be equally reluctant but with fewer legitimate options for dismissal. The list of well known people allegedly involved is mind blowing. Top of the list will be Bill Clinton. He has already issued a statement, easily disproved, that he only flew on Epstein’s plane 4 times. Pilot logs appear to show about 27 trips. Since Mr. Clinton has already been disbarred for committing perjury, no competent counsel is going to want to see him testify under oath. I wouldn’t be surprised to see him plead the 5^th.

The MSM will try to make this all about Trump, but that is not likely to work. For one thing it was the Obama DOJ that defended this plea deal for years and it was the Trump DOJ that reopened the investigation. William Barr recused himself, because he worked for one of the firms that defended Epstein, but he also said he would see that this was investigated. He appears to have kept his promise and assigned someone to take this on.

This is a real mess. It is going to be hard to make this go away with a plea deal this time. Yet, Epstein has a lot of interesting names in his Rolodex and it wouldn’t be a shock to learn he has interesting video recordings of people engaged in “not for prime time” activities. It boggles the mind.

Mr. Epstein is in jail and that just may be the safest place to be. Few people are expressing any concern for his well being and a whole lot of people would sleep easier if he just quietly departed this planet. This is impossible to predict. There are extremely powerful forces exerting pressure from all directions. The least likely outcome is that we will ever learn the full story. There is almost certainly a worldwide search for a sacrificial lamb. Bill Clinton would seem to be the ideal candidate, but he is probably not interested in volunteering. Bill might also consider how convenient it would be for a lot of people if he took an early exit from this earth. No one said a sacrificial lamb has to be alive.

This is certain to get very ugly. For one thing, Epstein doesn’t think he did anything wrong. Justice is supposed to be blind, but it is not color blind. That is why when O.J. Simpson was on trial I reminded one of my black friends that O.J. was not black, he was green. No one is greener than Jeffrey Epstein. I don’t need my Enchroma sunglasses to see that.

TDM

Jeffrey Epstein has been arrested and if the accusations are accurate it is about time. This seems to be a classic example of another rich and famous guy getting away with despicable behavior for years. The main stream media will immediately try to link Epstein with Trump. They will focus on one statement made by Trump years ago. During an interview with New York Magazine Trump said the following:

“He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side.”

But, unless there is more, this is less than nothing. I think it is safe to assume that if the MSM had any information linking Epstein to Trump we would already know all about it. One problem is that the opposite may be true. There are reports that Epstein was banned from Mar-a-Lago for hitting on the underage daughter of a guest. It appears she was working as a massage therapist and Epstein demanded “special treatment.” Her father went nuts and Epstein was banned from the premises. This was probably done by a manager and Trump may not have been involved. However, it looks like the ban was real and Trump almost certainly knew about it.

Labor Secretary, Alex Acosta is accused of cutting Epstein a sweet heart deal when he was a U.S. Attorney. At the time Epstein was represented by Alan Dershowitz. This happened in 2008, during the last year of the Bush presidency. That does look very bad for Acosta. But there is zero evidence that Trump had any connection with that plea bargain. Democrats would be wise to be very careful about trying to connect Trump with Epstein, as that could easily backfire.

The person probably sweating bullets is Bill Clinton who allegedly flew on Epstein’s plane at least 26 times. So far, there is no evidence of Trump traveling with Epstein. At most he may have flown on his plane once. That makes sense, because Trump had his own plane. There was a lawsuit accusing Trump of an assault on Jeffrey’s island, but that was quickly dismissed. Even Snopes viewed this as a fraudulent claim with no basis in fact. Again, if there was any evidence linking Trump to Epstein you would already know all about it.

Nancy Pelosi’s daughter said a lot of “friends” are going to be embarrassed. I doubt she considers Trump to be a friend. This is a time to watch and see who is and is not commenting on this case. It is interesting to note that Alan Dershowitz has approved releasing documents. That probably means he is not involved. It definitely means he is distancing himself from Epstein. There were times when Dershowitz was on the same plane as Epstein, but since he was representing him as legal counsel that makes sense.

Rich people seldom do well when faced with the prospect of long prison terms. Jeffrey Epstein is looking at serious prison time and that has to rock his world. This is impossible to predict, but one would hardly confuse Epstein with someone who has an ounce of character. That means he just might be willing to do and say almost anything to spare his own hide. That makes him a very dangerous person.

The question of the day is: “how far up does Jeffrey’s ladder reach?” Based on the magnitude with which this was covered up in 2008, the sky’s the limit.

TDM

According to John Ratcliffe, the DOJ Inspector general probe of FISA abuse is complete. It is important to note that John Ratcliffe is a former US Attorney and he is one of the most serious people in Washington. Unlike people like Adam Schiff, when Ratcliffe talks, people in both parties listen. He reported that this investigation is complete and they are drafting the report.

These types of reports seldom to turn out as strong as one hopes or as weak as others fear. The final product seems to always end up somewhere in the middle. But in this case, there are some important differences. One is that if Horowitz had found that the FISA warrants were properly documented, he would have reported that. That would seem to indicate that the big question is not whether they are deficient but rather why this happened.

Even if Horowitz only finds that the FISA warrants were deficient but there was no evidence of bad faith that is a huge problem for the Mueller investigation. It would mean that there was inadequate support for the investigation from day one. But, if Horowitz determines that the FISA warrants were fraudulent or that they failed to include exculpatory evidence, the results would be monstrous. That could literally render invalid all of the Mueller investigation. There are numerous court cases on this subject. If there is an investigation without a basis in probable cause there is a potential none of the evidence can be used. If there was fraud or material misrepresentation in obtaining a warrant, nothing obtained by that warrant, directly or indirectly is admissible.

Yesterday, Mike Pence cancelled an out of town appearance at the last minute. The White House is very cryptic about this, but said we will all know in a few weeks. We do not know if these two events were related. However, we do know that William Barr already has seen the unredacted report and odds are so has President Trump. The delay is in getting redactions processed. That impacts what will be reported to the public.

This caused me to ask simple questions? What would be important enough to drag Pence back to the White House that did not involve health and did not involve national security? The only previous occasions I recall where this happened was when the President was going to have an operation and be under general anesthesia. The VP was called back to provide continuity of government.

That does not appear to be happening here. There is zero evidence of a health issue with Trump. Then I asked: “What if the DOJ was about to announce indictments of people like Brennan, Comey, Clapper and perhaps even Susan Rice, or even Loretta Lynch or Hillary Clinton.” If Trump was the one who announced these decisions it would immediately turn into a political circus. The MSM would immediately attack the messenger, Trump, in a desperate attempt to distract public attention. But what if Mike Pence was the one who handled this instead? That would make it much harder for the MSM to pull that stunt. In addition, Pence is more disciplined than Trump and would be certain to stick to the message.

I only know this. Horowitz is done, a report is coming and no one is talking about this. It is often quietest just before the really big storm.

TDM

Following is my open letter to Nike:

Today, as I get ready to celebrate our country on July 4, 2019, I am ashamed of what used to be an iconic American brand. I am a Vietnam Combat veteran and served several tours of duty in South East Asia. During that time I became used to people who protested those of us who were defending our country. I fully understood that among other things, I was fighting for the right for them to protest. Freedom of speech applies to everyone, even those with whom we disagree and those who are hopelessly misinformed.

I was appalled and disgusted when Nike chose Colin Kaepernick as a symbol of justice and freedom. I was amazed that you supported his anti-police antics, primarily based on a false narrative. Every credible statistics shows that the shooting of unarmed black men is rare, much rarer than it used to be. They also show that regardless of circumstances the liberal left will assume that the police are murderers.

We recently lost a young female police officer in Sacramento. Colin Kaepernick couldn’t be bothered to protest that. Instead people inspired by the Colin Kaepernick’s of this world were literally screaming insults at the police while she was lying there in a pool of blood, bleeding to death.

The sad reality is that Colin Kaepernick was not a superstar; he was a failing professional athlete who had been benched for poor performance. He didn’t sacrifice ANYTHING for sitting down during the national anthem. Instead, he was hugely rewarded for insulting behavior. Nike was thrilled to praise Kaepernick as some kind of heroic figure and throw money at him. Now, incredibly, you have decided to cancel production of a pair of shoes because, gasp, Colin Kaepernick is offended by the American flag on the heel. Well guess what geniuses.  I flew on over 200 combat missions wearing that flag on my flight suit. That was 20 years before Kaepernick was even born. He can’t even spell sacrifice.

I will never again buy another product with a Nike logo.  I have already ordered American flag patches so my wife can sew them over any existing items I have with a Nike Logo. I realize this will offend people like Colin Kaepernick, but the Nike Logo offends people like me.

TDM

Kamala Harris filleted Joe Biden like a fish. But her staff was too busy celebrating to notice a couple of things. What she did amounted to stolen honor. Vietnam veterans are all too familiar with that. For example, Senator Blumenthal  tried to talk about how his war experiences in Vietnam influenced him. The problem was that although Blumenthal was in the service, he never came close to serving in Vietnam. Those of us who actually are Vietnam combat veterans were not amused. Well Kamala Harris was a black girl, but she went to school in Berkeley which had been integrated since before she was born. Her parents were very affluent, her mother was a breast cancer scientist and her father was a Stanford Economics professor. Her problem is not with how white folks view this; it is with how this is viewed by the real little black girls who actually were bussed to white schools in places like Alabama. They are very unlikely to be impressed.

She also forgot that while many of us like fresh meat, we don’t necessarily want to see the animal slaughtered. At some point, you start hating the butcher. Joe Biden is a jerk who did actually hang around with racist Democrats. But after lecturing everyone  else on the stage to avoid a food fight, it was Harris who promptly started throwing garbage.  You do not lift yourself up by putting someone else down. All of the Democratic candidates would be wise to remember that.

Harris forgot that accusing Trump of racism, with no evidence, is fine but skewering a fellow Democrat is not fine. Doesn’t Harris understand that if she starts really pointing out who was and was not a racist, she is going to be pointing at mostly Democrats? Democrats want people to feel that Republicans are the real racists and their whole narrative collapses if people start reporting the actual facts.

It may surprise people to learn that it likely to be African Americans who are the loudest voices defending Joe Biden, for exactly that reason. Bill Clintons mentor was a racist. Al Gore’s father was a racist. The last thing, and I do mean the last thing, the Democratic party can afford is an honest historical account of this.

Perhaps the most interested comment was by House Majority Whip James Clyburn, the highest ranking African American in congress.

“But I think the sentiment is something that we all know in the legislative body – that you work with people you don’t agree with.”

I would word that quite differently. I would simply point out that much of the legislation passed to give entitlements to African Americans was designed by racist Southern Senators. Perhaps it is time to ask an important question. Did they really denounce racism, or did they merely design another way to keep the minorities they despised in their place? That is exactly what LBJ said was the intent during a conversation on Air Force One.

Either way, this little one act play by Kamala Harris is more likely to end her chances at winning the DNC nomination than it is to elevate her to position “A.”

TDM

We used to play kick the can during the annual three hours of summer while growing up in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. OK, I may be exaggerating on the length of summer just a tad. But we did play kick the can, a lot, and we always yelled “OLLY, OLLY OXEN FREE.” Or so we thought.  I always thought it was “OLLY, OLLY OX IN FREE.” That doesn’t make much sense either, but Oxen Free made no sense at all.

Actually, it means the game and over and it is safe to come out from your hiding spot. That seems to be the perfect way to describe the DNC debate.

This was so bad; Donald Trump didn’t even bother to tweet much at all. He just said: “Boring” and went to visit the troops in Alaska. Even NBC, which tried and failed to moderate the debate, said that Trump was the big winner. Perhaps they sabotaged their own audio signal to reduce the level of embarrassment.

One way to know when a performance has really bombed is when your own fans start to boo.  The setting was the last Monday Night NFL Football game scheduled before a threatened strike. The Jets were stinking up the field. A TV camera focused on this guy in the upper deck. He had a paper bag over his head and was holding up a sign that said: “GO AHEAD AND STRIKE.” I understood exactly how he felt. The debate last night was so bad that even the usual class of left-wing wacko liberal Hollywood elites were disgusted.

This brings me to the whole point of OLLY, OLLY, OXEN FREE. The real issue here is that the debate was destined to be filled with Oxymorons. An Oxymoron is a set of words that are not inherently mutually exclusive but when used together express an opinion that is impossible. For example, “loyal opposition” or even better “liberal tolerance.” In other words, It is difficult to make a coherent explanation for policy positions that are impossible to achieve in the real world.

In addition, the policy positions demanded by the liberal left are not the same as what most Democrats want. For example there are reports that 70% of Democrats want some restrictions on abortions, but Julian Castro wants to make abortions available for men too. All over the country, men who are desperate for an abortion are already lining up at Planned Parenthood Clinics. Actually, this does happen, but only when they want their girlfriend to get an abortion. I wonder how many Democrats watching this at home ended up sitting there with a paper bag over their head. I suspect most of them switched the dial to something better, like reruns of “Heidi.”

The problem is that when you are trying to explain nonsense you have a tendency to resort to gibberish. If you are dumb enough to believe this crap you are unlikely to be smart enough to debate anyone about it. That is why liberals seldom debate with anyone. They only associate with people who believe the same things they believe. They consider anyone who disagrees to be too biased and stupid to matter. As a result, when asked serious questions, even the soft ball questions lobbed by NBC moderators, the results are predictably awful. In this case, so bad that the big winner appears to be the one who said the least?

I can’t wait to not watch tonight’s’ debate either.

TDM

Robert Mueller has agreed to testify before congress. It is guaranteed to be a circus. Democrats and their liberal cheering squad in the MSM will portray this as the first step on the path to impeachment. They will be wrong, of course, just as they have been wrong at every juncture since day one. If anything, Mueller is likely to do more harm to their cause than good. Republicans are sure to ask him hard questions, like unnecessary redactions in parts of his report and areas that appear to be contradicted by other evidence.

Mueller cannot say anything negative about Trump that is not already in his report. If he does that, he will be admitting to perjury. He is likely to just read word for word from his report. At best, liberal commentators will be left to hyperventilate over the tone of his voice or inflection.

My prediction is high theater that will end up boring the audience to death. By the time this is done Mueller will, hopefully, be on his way to a long and very silent retirement. His report will go down in history as a huge mistake. If the president was guilty of something, Mueller failed to document it. If he was not guilty, that what, exactly, was the point? That is the real question a lot of people are asking today. What was the point of this? Republicans can legitimately argue that at least as much effort should be spent investigating Obama, Biden and Clinton. If Democrats have any brain cells left, they will be terrified at the prospect of that.

If the Obama administration had just cause to spy on Trump, Trump has just cause to permanently plant a GPS tracker and a wire on Biden. Talk about someone who has openly conspired with foreign governments. Biden looks like a case study in corruption. There was a recent report about blue collar Joe and his three homes, one of which rents for $20,000 a month. Biden may really regret running for President.

He has reportedly been getting $200,000 per speech. Who on earth would pay $200,000 to hear someone like Joe Biden. The obvious answer is someone paying off a bribe. Or, at a minimum, someone is returning a HUGE favor. This is the same reason Barack Obama has been showered with cash since leaving office. In Biden’s case it is excruciatingly obvious since, he draws massive crowds of about 100 people. At least Obama pretends to attract an audience. In reality, not so much. Remember all the news coverage of those massive Obama rallies lately? Nope, me neither. If Obama was drawing big crowds, the press would be all over it. Ain’t happening folks.

It is even worse with Biden. It is impossible to imagine a scenario where Biden gives a speech worth $200,000.

I really think this is an act of absolute desperation. The intent is to run out the clock, because the real investigations are heating up and none of the people indicted will have any connection with Donald Trump.

Always remember it is darkest just before dawn and when you start getting serious flak you are getting very close to the target. “Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive.” Sir Walter Scott wrote this line in Marmion a poem about the Battle of Flodden Field in 1503. It is difficult to determine the actual facts surrounding the Battle of Flodden Field, but by any measure the Scots were slaughtered.

TDM

This year on March 11, which was a Monday, the Sacramento police review commission met. They passed a unanimous motion to recommend city leaders support Assembly Bill 392.

That bill would restrict the use of deadly force by police. Now police may use deadly force only when “necessary to prevent imminent and serious injury or death as opposed to when “reasonable.”

Office may not fire their weapons if nonlethal alternatives are available.

The city brilliantly adopted AB 392, before it went into effect:

“The bill doesn’t take away the ability of police officers to use force if it is necessary, if their life is in danger or the life of someone else is in danger,” Commissioner Mario Guerrero said. “What this bill does is say if that isn’t the situation; there are steps that you can take to ensure the safety and sanctity of life for everyone.”

The police union responded with the following comment:

AB 392 is a deeply flawed and unconstitutional bill. We are supporting SB 230, which will help achieve better outcomes for everybody by providing officers clear guidelines and training on de-escalation and alternative tactics.”

SB 230 is different from the AB 392 because it focuses on policies and de-escalation training instead of redefining when officers can resort to use of force.

In case you were wondering how this would work in the real world, well now you know. Police responded to a domestic violence situation last week. They were there to help a woman collect her belonging. They were allegedly ambushed by Adel Sambrano Ramos. He has a long criminal record. A judge twice granted domestic violence restraining orders against Ramos in 2004 and 2007. In both cases he was required to give up his guns. Either those orders expired or he didn’t really care.

A black family who lived next door said that Ramos had threatened three children with kitchen knives and frequently shouted racial slurs. They complained to the police, but no one was willing to do anything.

https://heavy.com/news/2019/06/adel-sambrano-ramos/

Video appears to show that when officers arrived on the scene Ramos started shooting. There is no evidence that the police ever shot back. Instead, they took cover. Officer Tara O’Sullivan was lying in the back yard seriously wounded. The decision was made to wait for an armored vehicle to arrive before attempting rescue. There are reports that she lay on the ground bleeding for more than 45 minutes and that the suspect blasted every time he saw movement.

The Police Chief explained that they waited for the armored vehicle because they did not feel a police car offered adequate protection. He complained that the suspect had an illegal assault weapon. He had an AR15 with a pistol grip. An Assault Rife. THAT IS THE PROBLEM.

In the meantime there is video of anti-police protesters celebrating and insulting the police. The suspect was not arrested until after an 8 hour stand-off. Office O’ Sullivan was already dead. He eventually just walked out and surrendered.

The police department is now reporting that she suffered a non-survivable wound. They, of course, blame the assault rifle. They always blame the rifle. Maybe she couldn’t have been saved, but is that really an excuse for not even trying?

There were numerous police officers at that scene, many, if not all of them wearing bullet proof vests. Most, if not all of them, were armed. What, exactly, would an imminent threat look like if it was not a man literally shooting at a wounded police officer? In Florida a police officer is being accused of cowardice for not confronting a school shooter. Here police are being praised for showing restraint by not confronting someone who just shot a cop. By the way, that school shooter had an AR15.

The local media is praising Officer O’Sullivan, which is great. The police chief said she was like family. Wonderful. Imagine you are a 26 year old police officer lying wounded in that backyard. You are surrounded by fellow police officers, all wearing body armor, crouched behind their patrol cars. You are being shot by a mad-man with a rifle. In the meantime, everyone is waiting for an armored vehicle to arrive. I suspect she would rather someone at least try to rescue her.

I know. It’s the gun. This guy had an illegal AR15. Let’s pass more gun control laws to ban a gun that is already illegal. That’s what really matters here. We desperately need to pass more gun laws to make this gun that is already illegal, even more illegal. Someone like Ramos would never consider owning an illegal fire arm. Right?

Welcome to the family.

TDM

Several candidates for the 2020 DNC nomination for President are openly supporting reparations for descendants of slavery. Like most things promoted by liberals, they are more than a little short on logic and ignorant of obvious facts. This issue is one that is guaranteed to backfire big time. The problem is that those pushing for reparations are ignoring something really important. It was Democrats, not Republicans who were responsible for slavery.

The justification for compensation is for people enslaved or their descendants. Liberals are very good at identifying who was hurt by slavery. They just give little consideration to who should be to blame.

We know that there were about 35 million Americans here in 1865. Approximately 3.5 million of them were African American. Another 20 million people arrived between 1865 and 1900. They were almost all white, because few black people were immigrating to the United States. I have seen some estimates that over 90% of the black population descended from slaves. But a only a very small percentage of white people descended from slave owners.

So while it is pretty easy to say that a high percentage of African Americans do have an argument that they were harmed by slavery, that does not mean that a high percentage of white people were responsible. In fact, it is morally irresponsible to blame the descendants of people who were not even here when slavery existed. It is also hard to hold people in the north, where slavery was banned, for the action of Southern Democrats. It is even difficult to hold people in the south who did not own slaves responsible, since they hardly benefited from slavery. The sad truth is that slavery made a small number of rich people even richer and benefited almost no one else.  If anything it made it harder for a non-slaver owner in the south to find work, because the rich people owned all the land and why pay someone to work when you have all that free labor.

So, we should give reparations. They should be paid primarily by descendants of the 275,000 people living in the south who actually owned slaves. That is only fair. Certainly a majority of the blames belongs to them. Let’s assume that they are responsible for 90% of the damage.

Let’s then split up the remaining 10% among others who share “some” level of shared responsibility. We can exclude anyone descended from people who arrived here after 1865. Since slavery was illegal in the north it is hard to justify charging their descendant for reparations. If there should be some charge, a majority should be charged to people who descended from Democrats. The Republican Party was founded in opposition to slavery, so one could argue that their descendants should also be exempt. Why should Republicans be forced to pay for things they opposed done by Democrats?

This means the remaining 10% should be charged to descendants of people who lived in the south, prior to 1865 and allowed slavery to exist and Democrats in the north who supported pro-slavery southern Democrats.

This brings up the next question, which is how to allocate costs. Some of these people, descended from rich southern plantation owners, may have significant assets. Since one could argue that those assets were only possible because of slavery, they should pay the highest price. This is complicated by the fact that at least some of these plantation owners could not survive financially when they actually had to pay for labor. So while their descendant may be justifiably liable, they don’t necessarily have any significant assets with which to fund compensation.

And, oh, there’s this other problem. If we start actually looking at who was responsible for slavery that is going to be embarrassing for the Democratic Party. In fact the entire history of the Democratic Party was that of institutionalized racism. That only ended when Al Gore’s father along with friends like Robert Byrd lost the last battle to block civil rights legislation.

Then these same people started handing out money to African Americans to show them who their real friends were. They also set about to explain why the Republicans are the racists. This worked remarkably well and typically about 90% of African American vote for Democrats. I suspect most of them don’t really understand the true history of racism in this country. Trying to fund reparations from slavery might offer some embarrassing facts with regard to who was who most definitely was not responsible.

TDM.

In 1965 I was a senior in High School. I knew we had some people fighting in Vietnam, but wasn’t sure were Vietnam was and this was of little interest to me. I had zero interest in joining the U.S. military. I should have known better. The winds of war were already blowing and I would soon be caught in the path of destruction. On August 2, and August 4, 1964 two U.S. Navy Destroyers, the U.S.S. Maddox and the U.S.S. Turner Joy were allegedly attacked in international waters in the Gulf of Tonkin. It is still unclear if the attacks actually occurred. However, on August 7, 1964 congress passed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution that authorized President Lyndon Johnson to “take all necessary measures to prevent further aggression” by the communist government of North Vietnam. It seemed like a good idea at the time.

That set off a chain of events that resulted in me being notified that I was about to be drafted. I chose to enlist in the Air Force, primarily because I wanted to avoid combat. That almost worked. But, I made some serious career miscalculations and ended learning to speak Vietnamese at the Defense Language Institute. Ultimately I spent most of my Air Force career flying combat missions and frankly I consider myself lucky to have survived the experience.

This was hardly the first time a major war started with a relatively minor incident. Hitler invaded Poland after the Gleiwitz incident. Most people believe this was a false flag operation where Nazi troops posed as Polish nationals and staged an attack on Germany. Regardless of what really happened, the result was the invasion of Poland and World War II was the final result.

On June 28, 1918 Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria was assassinated in Sarajevo. I still am not sure why this resulted in World War I, but most historians believe this was the precipitating incident.

There were two occasions where North Korean attacked us in international waters. One was the shoot down of an EC121 on April 15, 1969. Richard Nixon was President and he backed off from attacking North Korea. North Korea actually captured the USS Pueblo on January 23, 1968. This took place a week after Lyndon Johnson gave his State of the Union address and one week prior to the start of the Tet Offensive. There were unconfirmed reports that Johnson seriously considered attacking North Korea with nuclear weapons. Ultimately, he did nothing.

Earlier there was an incident, never reported in the media, where a U.S. fighter pilot reported that his wingman had been shot down, over international waters, by a Chinese fighter plane. Johnson ordered a Defcon 2 and prepared to attack China. Fortunately, there was a U.S. reconnaissance plane in the area monitoring the Chinese Air Force and they quickly notified Washington that China had not shot down that plane. I know this because I knew a Chinese Linguist on that plane. It turned out that the navy pilot had got lost and accidentally shot down his own wingman.

The point is that these types of events are extremely dangerous. They have resulted in major military conflicts. It is impossible for anyone to predict all the possible outcomes. I do know that the most dangerous thing anyone could do under these circumstance is what Democrats did in the House today. They passed a resolution blocking Trump from taking action. This is a meaningless effort, since there is zero chance the Senate will ratify this act of stupidity. However, if Iran fails to realize that Trump has the power to deal with this they may be tempted to do more. Any escalation by them would be almost certain to start some kind of military conflict. Ironically the self-righteous fools in the House are not only making the situation worse, they will undoubted blame Donald Trump if things go south.

If Barack Obama was President and Republicans tried to handcuff him like this Democrats and the MSM would be outraged. They would be right to be outraged. Whether we like him or not, trust him or not, the reality is that we only have one President at a time and he absolutely needs the authority to take whatever action is necessary to protect us. This is further evidence that neither the DNC nor members of the MSM have the character necessary to just do what is right, for once, without regard to the politics. Whether this was done because they are merely stupid or hopelessly biased doesn’t really matter. Either way, we can never risk trusting them with national security. We can only hope that neither President Trump nor our enemies will take this silly and childish act seriously, because the consequences of that could be beyond catastrophic.

This is unfortunately not all that new. Even after Hitler invaded Poland and France there were people in high levels of the British Government who still thought the smart move was to try and negotiate a peace settlement with him. Fortunately the prime minister was Winston Churchill and he knew exactly what to do.

TDM