Thursday, February 15, 2018

Donald Trump has security clearance lite. The candidate loophole. .

How did Donald Trump
Pass.  What process vetted him.
When. Deathly silence.

Candidate loophole.
No full clearance? Relevant
To thinking voters.


By what law are candidates excused from scrutiny. See https://www.washingtonpost.com/  February 17, 2017, Opinions, "Citizen Trump likely wouldn’t get a security clearance. Here’s why."

Friday, December 15, 2017

An Elephant and a Donkey Went Into a Bar. Internet partiality.

Who does God love best?
Merry What?
First, see Republican National Party Platform 1860 (return until memorized); Apply to Internet Partiality now in effect.
 
I.  Background. 

God likes me best, said the donkey, because Mary rode one to Bethlehem for the birth, and Jesus rode one in Jerusalem, or if it was a colt,  it might have been.

Wrong there, said the elephant.  Matthew has no donkey at all for the birth, and neither does Luke.  Mark has nothing at all about the birth, although there had to have been one. At least, for Mark, there was obviously nothing remarkable about it, or anything that happened before. Not even an annunciation. Or a flight.  Bam. Jesus just appears from Nazareth to get baptized. Even Catholics agree:  There are very few similarities, if any, in the stories. See http://catholic-resources.org/Bible/Jesus-Birth.htm. John? No donkey, no birth either, just a sudden naming of Jesus at 1:17, baptism thing. And look ahead: not even a last supper in John, or a temptation, see http://ezinearticles.com/?Johns-Gospel-Portrait-of-Jesus-Christ&id=560843

The donkey was confused.  You mean all those pictures of the patient donkey thing are trumped up (PUN!)? Matthew's idea?  How about the donkey and Palm Sunday.

Elephant.  Colt. Matthew says so. Look it up.

Donkey. This one's a draw, then.

Matthew says there were two animals, a colt and an ass. Is an ass a mule or a donkey?  It says the colt is the foal of the ass.  Mark just says colt. So does Luke. John  So we can pick.

What else can we pick?  Party identities?  How to get it to get going?


 
1.  Republican platform: No room for speed partiality there. Rich and poor, same train, same speed.

Go back to before the Civil War, fair use here of a portion at the site http://www.cprr.org/Museum/Ephemera/Republican_Platform_1860.html: Find public works, support of the general government, exchanges to provide liberal wages, remunerating prices, adequate reward. Use land, not already settled by a landowner, for the public use. No abridging rights of immigrants. Provide for transportation, mail.
"12. That while providing revenue for the support of the general government by duties upon imports, sound policy requires such an adjustment of these imposts as to encourage the development of the industrial interests of the whole country, and we commend that policy of national exchanges which secures to the workingmen liberal wages, to agriculture remunerating prices, to mechanics and manufacturers an adequate reward for their skill, labor and enterprise, and to the nation commercial prosperity and independence.


"13. That we protest against any sale or alienation to others of the public lands held by actual settlers, and against any view of the free homestead policy which regards the settlers as paupers or suppliants for public bounty, and we demand the passage by congress of the complete and satisfactory homestead measure which has already passed the house.

'14. That the Republican Party is opposed to any change in our naturalization laws, or any state legislation by which the rights of citizenship hitherto accorded by emigrants from foreign lands shall be abridged or impaired; and in favor of giving a full and efficient protection to the rights of all classes of citizens, whether native or naturalized, both at home and abroad.

'15. That appropriation by Congress for river and Harbor improvements of a National character, required for the accommodation and security of an existing commerce, are authorized by the constitution and justified by the obligation of Government to protect the lives and property of its citizens.

'16. That a railroad to the Pacific ocean is imperatively demanded by the interests of the whole country; that the Federal Government ought to render immediate and efficient aid in its construction; and that, as preliminary thereto, a daily overland mail should be promptly established."
2. The Elephant and Ganesha.  In favor of multi-ethnicities enjoying same speeds.

How does this match with Internet Partitality?  A lesser Hindu god. Elephant-shape deity, the remover of obstacles, the god of creative works. Friendly, welcoming. Look at an old article in the NYT - In India, the Deity to Know, by David Colman, Sunday 6/27/2004. A silent task-assistant. The article is about a designer of textiles, but the description of the role of Ganesha in human endeavor is lovely. Very gentle.

See
 full size image

Fair use thumbnail from http://ganeshutsav.org/Images/ganesha_symbolism.gif/ - Good poster: The writing shows the meaning of the elements of the elephant.
  • These things are big: ears for listening, head for thinking, stomach for digesting the good and bad in life.
  • These things are tools: hold rope for attaining a goal; axe to cut off attachments to extraneous diversions.
  • These things are small: mouth for less talking, eyes for concentrating.
  • What it does: blesses.
  • What it has: unique trunk showing adaptability.
  • Surrounds: A mouse, representing desires out to distract, get you. And a bundle of prasada - the world is available to you.
4.  Internet partiality.  How did we ever get there?  Nothing traditionally Republican there.  Only greed. Are there ever conclusions? What happened? Wha' hoppen'?

Revert:  From the disappointing elephant above, see that the elephant has its benign side. This is the one intended to dominate thought about internet partiality so we won't think -- awwww.

 For the benign, nothing here to hurt you, see the chubby, cute 18th Century western culture - old japanning pattern. Cute little corpulent fellow. No pale-eyed glare from orange face.  This from our old book, The Ladies' Amusement, showing old japanning patterns, nobody's copyright any more.


5.  Back to Republicans.

Internet partiality:  In the 1870's, Republicans were social liberals - http://www.statemaster.com/encyclopedia/Social-liberalism/ That represented a dual stance, favoring free enterprise but also government role in providing guaranteed, regulated services in education,

An 1874 cartoon shows the elephant as a "confused behemoth" lunging toward inflation and chaos. In later years, it was shown as ailing, a nostalgic, retrospective of what the animal once was.

6.  The donkey?

The donkey originally represented northern Democrats who opposed the Civil War from the start. "Copperhead" Democrats, who, in the view of Mr. Nast, desecrated even the memory of Lincoln's by-then deceased Secretary of War. In a later depiction of the donkey in a lion's hide, the idea was that the Democrats want to seem predatory, but are really harmless.

Friday, July 7, 2017

CNN. Trump as Government. A Regime cannot abridge free speech, can it? Please report. So Sade.

 Contain the bully pulpit.

Answer me this. How can the president dump on any citizen, corporation, abridging rights of free speech with particularity, targeting, like CNN as an example, attacking their coverage. If allowed, then by what standard and with what proofs offered simultaneously, not like a great fog of "dishonest" or "unfair."

 If CNN is wrong in something, let them acknowledge and correct as appropriate and fact transparency suggests or public outcry on its own requires.  President, or Regimer-in-Chief, limit your yada to suggesting what the Congress might do if you think CNN is dishonest or unfair.  Pot calling kettle.  Otherwise, let the public decide what and how to value what. Does he derive pleasure from inflicting pain on others? Humiliation? So Sade. See disturbing link.

Ask also: Has the Regimer-in-Chief the right also without accountability, to trigger possible devaluation of a corporation's stock value, sale value, on the market, based on his personal affront and access to bully pulpit?  Is that his option? If news is a commodity, being bought and sold across state lines, is this also interference with that.  Contain the bully pulpit.

Thank you.  Somebody explore and report back to us all.



Shemyakin. Chemiakin. Translations vary.  Sculpture grouping, Bolotnaya Park, Moscow:  Children are the victims of adult vices.

Wednesday, March 22, 2017

Education goals. No, Judge Gorsuch. No limits fixed in advance based on status. No mestnichestvo here.


Mestnichestvo in America.
Creeping Crud in the Social Realm.
Russia saddled. 

Russia couldn't rid itself of it, and neither can we 
If mestnichestvo takes hold even one inch more. 

Russia? Russia? Did somebody say Russia? 

I.  Topic.  Reasons to say no to Judge Gorsuch:  Our kids.  Reject his position to fix status by statute, to  limit in advance what education is appropriate for a child unable to attend school in a regular classroom.  See https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/22/us/politics/gorsuch-education.html?_r=0.  Extend a hand to the child measured as an individual, and the caretakers who yearn to breathe a little more freely, by funding regular opportunity at a reasonable level. Choose equitable, as part of any policy.

That helping hand  is as American as -- as what?

Well, look at our own heritage.  Freebies, strategically and equitably offered, are our warp and woof. Warp and weft?
  • Freebies. Part of our great tradition? Yes, freebies are just that. Part of our warp and woof. See Freebies in American History. The main problem is not the fact of someone gets a chance to improve quality of life. It is is that someone who had felt superior feels threatened by the movement of others, outside the imposed lower rank allotted to them as the exploitable, there to be exploited. That may even mean that the person on top is not there by merit. So the ones on top put back the fence, make it higher.
    • Remember the era of 40 acres and a mule to former slaves after the Civil War. Once it was realized that whites also could use that land, the benefit disappeared for blacks.
    • Freebies: Look at its broader context, its role in the "superiority" of those on top. Inheritance rights even with some tax is also a freebie. It is a matter of law. No merit required. Statutory succession is there for you, apart from objective merit.
    II. Purposeful Ramble

    A. Examine ranks, status in our society. How is it like mestnichestvo. Other cultures have worshipped rank, hierarchy and status as fore-ordained:  How did that work out?  Feudalism, and, in old Russia, mestnichestvo.   Rights recognized as to children. or those born outside the marital sheets, or on a non-center area in spectrum of gender, all reflect hierarchy and conscious law. Some are valid for other reasons than mere status; a child's rights do not extend to his making his own health and safety decisions all the time.
    B.  Mestnichestvo. Back to current politics.  Judge Gorsuch whose opinion determined that a child need get from the state only minimal education if he cannot attend a regular classroom. Clear mestnichestvo. System of rank and privilege predefined.  Just plug the person in the slot.
    Mestnichestvo: A system to fix status and privilege, role and rank. See https://russiacontextrussiaroadways.blogspot.com/2016/11/russia-glossary-ranks-A-Z-boyar-russ-rus-varyag-varangian-more.html  Mestnichestvo was abolished by statute finally in the 19th Century.
    • Since that formal repudiation of legal mestnichestvo in Russia, however, there have been and are those who get around that legal inconvenence by simply taking more than their reasonably fair share of something, or issuing executive orders, kleptocracy-like. 
    • These swipings have ramifications in social attitudes, resources to be allotted,and must be examined, contained if need be for a common good.  Let them stay around long enough, and they tend to become "normal."

    C.  What provisions can we make, as a nation, to foster merit rather than definition by condition that is beyond that person's control.  Who gets opportunity affects productivity not only of that person, by foreclosing possbility, but also of the caretakers who get no reprieve.
    • Start with financial support for overall quality of life, in a spectrum of activities, arts, child care, eduction, mobility, training for modern jobs, enrichment, health so somebody can decently get out of the house to do more of something.  
    • This also means a look at caretaking for elderly now sitting in rings in their wheelchairs, noddingly drugged.  For whose benefit is that? In privately run facilities, it does increase the profit margin because less physical supervision is needed. Is that inevitable?
    • What does that enrichment equitably cost?  For the families freed of anxiety, and the person. Example.  
      • What if we allocated a percentage of all income from all sources derived and from anywhere that exceeds triple the poverty level as set by (think bipartisan, how to factor regional differences, etc).
    D. Funding reasonable opportunity so more people can be productive, including caretakers:

    An allocation (yes, tax for the privilege of being an American, perhaps) of everyone's income over 3X poverty, and problem solved and nobody put in poverty, many lifted out, and why not/  Think about it.  Budget problems solved, some equity restored, and, really, like the workers on Bloody Sunday, 1905 St. Petersburg Russia, demands of regular people are not outlandish.  Just bend, you tsars, just a little.

    Common sense for a common good. The people hope that the idea of a common good has taken root in Gorsuch.

    1.  Explore, Judge Gorsuch.  What are our kids capable of? Not yours, who are fine and in your accepted parameters of worthiness. Ours is a reasonable inquiry.  We don't throw assets away.
    • Explore and find that my kid exceeds yours in compassion, street smarts, historical knowledge, initiative, job performance over 20 years and still going.
    • How did that happen? Him, himself, plus systems that welcomed him.
      • Outside school  No two families work out the same mix of interest, risk-tolerance, combined with the qualities of the kid in question ( now adult), but let people find out. 
        • Financially a little help  property dispensed and overseen (yes, there is a place for agency administration) would make a big difference and lead to more productivity for more than the child.
        • We budgeted for him, less than a car would cost a "normal" guy, he contributed, and he went to where the history was, and it stuck.  He has a lifetime fascination going.   That is freeing for all of us.
        • What would other families do? Not our route, probably (very nontraditonal) but let them work it out.
    Could Judge Gorsuch think big and more broadly in terms of society's total productivity, of course.  Judge Gorsuch.  Rights to opportunity have a ripple effect.




    Hear the opposition: No opportunity that those on the bottom do not earn, now. Let serfs stay serfs, let the landed keep their lands and privilege and welcome another Bloody Sunday. Down Syndrome in Russia: may be improving but ,ong way to go, while we regress? http://www.newsweek.com/2016/07/01/down-syndrome-kids-russia-472276.html
    Hear the families, not raised to enjoy Mrs. Burgwin's Dancing Classes. How does anyone raise a child these days, much less include enrichment?  See  Parents and the High Cost of Daycare)  Universal basics even makes more (here you go) capitalism possible because people have money to spend.  How will you rule, Judge?  For American mestnichestvo, as the current majority House and Senate now seem to want? Or a higher water level for everyone, and (ahem) more capitalism opportunity, but of course that means competition and the uppers can't have that, can they.

    Mestnichestvo says you have no rights to quality of life. You serve the Estate. And they hold the Estate. So far. 

    Wednesday, March 8, 2017

    Enough. Table the Trump diet.. On to sliding premium healthcare.

    Welcome to the odd crossroads:  Where the size of the buffet overwhelms the ability to chose what to put on today's plate.  And more is coming in from the kitchens, Too much, Satiety. Can't manage another sound-bite. Push away from the table.

    1.  Recalibrate.  Health lies in balance, stepping back  Other matters are worthy of attention. Return to them, for a while.  What concrete information, history, emerges to clarify, explain. Withdraw for a while.



    2.  Next topic. And no Trump rant.  Inspired by Daniel the Hermit.

    Poor healthcare, lack of sustenance at basic levels,, all getting in they way of people's full participation in America. Wait. Is that the purpose? Keep them that way so they can be more easily manipulated, ignored?
    • Healthcare solution. Make it affordable by making it affordability-based.  You pay what you can afford. 
    • Instead of premiums going up with age, premiums go up with income, assets. Up the premiums for elites earning, pick a figure, over $125,000 adjusted, whatever.  A sliding scale.  All income from all sources derived, wherever. 
    There. New topic dealt with. Sliding premium healthcare. Affordable healthcare. You pay into the system what you can afford. If poverty level is (you name it), you pay even 3% of what you make above that. Works? Earn a million, pay, you get the idea.  Next?

    3. So, time out.  Voices in current political and religious events are useful. They help us analyze, vet, dig for facts. Vetting current events fosters autonomy, and initiative, if not nausea at the ignoring of basic facts.  Too many voices, however,even on that topic, merely add to cacophony. 
    Urp.




    The Education of the President. Who is responsible, if not the President. Dawisha Book recommendaiton.

    Staffing was not commenced in time for effective guidance for the president.  Who can and will step in?  We can recommend a book. Putin's Kleptocracy, by Karen Dawisha. Find videos, start at https://www.c-span.org/video/?321811-1/book-discussion-putins-kleptocracy.  For red meat, go to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E9yZ_52w60w. You get the gist. Then go back to the book itself.

    Recommended reading.  Why is this book useful as a gift to President Trump?

    I.  The White House staff confronts two main obstacles to success: The President knows what he likes and does not like, but does reads for himself, say some, see  Fortune; ; or does not read much, say others, see Washington Post.  Is it wasted time to send a book for the staff?

    Information on his habits seems to have stopped by January, including as to participation in briefings. Fair enough -- no president satisfied everyone as to direct participations. It has led, however, so some misconceptions about current events, policy pitfalls, how getting laws passed and executive orders implemented.It also eases use of the fake news category, if a matter is not recalled or was not brought up in his presence.

    II.  Today's topic:  Facts about Russia, who lives well, who does not, why, and why. It may be time to counter the gauzy admiration.

    If Russia is close to some in the administration, now or earlier, look at some angles all of them might have missed. What does Russia have to offer except for money-making opportunities for the elite. As voters here, which comes first:  how a country elsewhere might model ways of governing, dealing with disparate populations so there is health, mobility, opportunity; or that those in power get more of it.

     Read Putin's Kleptocracy, by Karen Dawisha, Go to the final chapters if time is short, and then go back.

    In particular look at the chapters entitled, The Founding of the Putin System;  His First 100 Days and their Consequences, May-August 2000; then the next chapter, Russia, Putin, and the Future of Kleptocratic Authoritarianism.

    Putin's Kleptocracy should satisfy the most demanding of source providers. The paging ends at 350 pages, with the balance dedicated to sources, acknowledgments, for personal vetting.and inded, to page 445.


    Tuesday, January 17, 2017

    FBI and unfairly prejudicial acts and omissions; Russia; 2016 election. Get independent commission going.

     Progress scorecard. Independent commission, investigate FBI.

    How to keep track of issues, in the midst of huge bureaucracies and current political circular firing squads. The justice department is already reviewing the FBI's handling of Hillary Clinton's emails, but that does not go far enough to clear issues of malfeasance by the FBI affecting, or likely to have affected, the outcome of the 2016 election.  How did the FNI handle their information of Russian hacking into the DNC, contacts between Russia and the Trump people, what duty did they have and to whom, and if volunteered, did they then follow through on how they acted or omitted to act.  Failure to warn is a clear tort claim. Does it apply.  The email investigation: http://heavy.com/news/2017/01/michael-e-horowitz-inspector-general-department-of-justice-fb-investigation-james-comey-hillary-clinton-email-review/

    The more pressing issue now is whether to appoint a special commission to investigate the FBI's involvement in the 2016 election, some such steps made public voluntarily by James Comey. What can ordinary people with keyboards find out, since there appears to be media silence.

    7.21.2015 -- FBI directive for employees:  Types of physical threats to report.  If employees "identify credible and specific information indicating an impending threat of intentional killing, serious bodily injury or kidnapping of an individual or group shall immediately report this information to their IC (who is that?) element for a determination by the element whether to warn the intended victim."  See https://fas.org/irp/dni/icd/icd-191.pdf/Members of the IC as a whole, or Intelligence Community, are listed at https://www.dni.gov/index.php/intelligence-community/members-of-the-ic. It includes the FBI.

    7.26.2016 -- US Cyber Security Policy.  Online security threats to report. Codifies Agency roles. Protections for people in their ordinary lives during investigation. See https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/new-us-cyber-security-policy-codifies-agency-role.  FBI motto shown:  Fidelity, Bravery, Integrity.  Fidelity to the buddies, or FBI, or Justice Dept, or "American people?" Tho whom are the duties owed?  Among many other precepts: " *** And the government will respect the privacy, civil liberties, and the business needs of victims of cyber incidents.*** "  See the cyber crime section at https://www.fbi.gov/investigate/cyber

    1986 --  Russia-Trump contacts begin, see Financial Times chronological listing, https://ig.ft.com/sites/trumps-russian-connections/

    11/10/2016 -- Russia in contact before election with Trump people, see Financial  Times, https://www.ft.com/content/3e1dfbdc-a74b-11e6-8898-79a99e2a4de6

    1/2017 -- Is the FBI in possession of information of ties or contacts between Russia and the Trump people.  Need timeline. Ask the Senate Intelligence Committee, see http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/01/fbi-information-investigation-trump-russia-wyden 

    1/9/2017 -- Democrats request independent commission. See http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/trailguide/la-na-trailguide-updates-democrats-call-for-independent-1483999498-htmlstory.html


    1.10.2017 -- FBI not talking, see http://www.businessinsider.com/fbi-director-trump-russia-cant-comment-investigation-2017-1

    1/11/2017 -- John McCain shares information regarding such contacts, see https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/10/fbi-chief-given-dossier-by-john-mccain-alleging-secret-trump-russia-contacts

     1/13/2017 --  John Lewis points out that Trump is not a legitimate president, but should have identified the reasons:  not only Russia's intervention, but whether the FBI itself tilted the scales, a matter for an independent commission (another swamp to drain?), see  https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/01/13/john-lewis-doesnt-think-donald-trump-is-a-legitimate-president/?utm_term=.54e4032898e7.
    Instead of merely hitting back, opinion against opinion,  Trump needs to clear his name and reputation. Support the independent commission. When it makes its findings, then have an opinion.

     


    Wednesday, January 11, 2017

    Stop this thing. Trump is an addict. Trump is what? Why not wait and see? Can we afford it..

    Update.  At an early stage, before the inauguration, concerns were raised about personal enrichment through office: was that too much of the President's interest.  By way of update, Charles Blow has called for a "pause" for this presidency until questions of relationships with Russian interests raised -- do those serve the United States, or just the Trumps. See https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/06/opinion/pause-this-presidency.html?_r=0

    Obviously No inauguration illusion was illusory.  Even a 30 day return did not work.  But the imagined recourse for the post-White House Trump is worth filing away. A 12-step program for addicts, specifically those addicted to money. See idea at  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-tian-dayton/money-addiction_b_221937.html Add a category for those who not only enjoy it, but enjoy hindering others with it.  Does that apply, Huffington?  Exploiters Anonymous, to the other three at http://www.12step.org/directory/addiction/money.php.

    This may be our last rant, as enough unsubtlety is enough. Time for patience? Meanwhile,
    addiction to money:  If we cannot stop the presses, cancel the dancing bears, we can keep to the forefront the addiction as explanatory of behavior. See https://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/19/opinion/sunday/for-the-love-of-money.html?_r=0

    Hush, child. Maybe somebody will set up Joe Biden as interim President until Mr. T cashes out his businesses and settles down to work for us.

    Sunday, December 11, 2016

    Congress alert. Malfeasance in the aggregate may ground impeachment. Do not condone suspect acts or omissions now.


    Official misconduct, malfeasance, nonfeasance, grounds for what sanctions?
    Is a president-elect an "official" -- what preserves actions until he is?
    What ethical obligations constrain him?


    Q. Are we reaching a point where a collection of acts (you pick) constitute an actionable pivot point as to not only elected officials observing, but also officials-elect, awaiting oaths of office.

    Officials (including the president-elect) even before the oath of office is taken, appear to be engaging in patterns of acts and omissions that, if accepted by Congress or voters or electors, could conceivably be used as a defense to impeachment if raised after the oath of office. After all, the behavior was known. What are the ethical obligations applicable to the president-elect, president. See Ethical obligations of officials in delegating authority, see http://sassafrastree.blogspot.com/2016/12/how-to-bell-the-trump-cat-if-in-office-contain-if-not-yet-there-are-procedures.html

    The alternative of recall does not appear to be a feasible option at the Federal level, given majority-minority lineups, and premature as to a new official who can argue that everyone should wait and see.  See http://www.senate.gov/CRSpubs/ee067ba0-db71-4394-9a37-453316aeb453.pdf.  At the State level, there are more choices, see https://ballotpedia.org/Laws_governing_recall, but those of course take time and coordination.

    Journalism and morning talk shows will not help.  They could have, and did not help with assessing facts in the past election. They set a pattern (ongoing) of responding to ratings and ad income, reporting mostly a silly menu, a panoply of free-floating opinions. Take away the microphones. Who cares. Get out the facts first, then ask those people about the facts, add to understanding of facts. Instead, reporting stops with what the gurus simply think about the price of eggs in China.

    A.  Yes. Plan now.

    Malfeasance.  See https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/malfeasance.  At a lesser level, nonfeasance or misfeasance, same site.  Intentional conduct wrongful or unlawful -- can be one or the other.  Inappropriate.   Broader than crime.  Crime or misconduct will suffice -- see https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/impeach

    Start thinking.  Malfeasance in the aggregate can surely suffice for the otherwise unexplained "misdemeanor". Cite common sense.
    1,  Muster evidence as it accrues
    2.  Record and notify the actor of the problem with the behavior that you see.

    And here,
    3.  Prepare pleadings and disseminate drafts now to voters and anyone, to show what pleadings are like.  Draft this or that. Tweet it. Address the possibility of a lesser-than-criminal ground for impeachment; the mis-demeanor, that in the aggregate create a pattern that calls for impeachment.  Identify the standard. See Congressional Record by Congress USA 2/12/1999 at S1484.

    The country we lose, etc.

    What outside help is there? Expect from journalism and schills only the ad nauseum reporting of what selected moguls and mainstreeters think about it to make your story, apart from the standards applicable and whose opinions may be worth something, and whose worth naught a shilling.  Gee, I like it.  Wow. I don't like it. Now you've heard the evening news, seen the feeds, talking heads, talking heads, dupe in the street. See standards of ethics, at least, at Ethical obligations of officials in delegating authority, see How to bell the Trump Cat.

    Monday, November 21, 2016

    Immigration, deportation, divestment. Put back the Writs. Legalism overwhelms equity and regrets It.

    Puttin' Back the Writs.  
    Writs of Equity: When the unlawful act is identified, restore fairness to the consequence.
    A behavioral penalty; not just a fine, easily enough paid.

    Equity Remedies; Equity Writs.
    Fairness; Accountability, both sides.

    Update to 2016. Equity issues looming large. Prevention, make the injured party whole again, not just focus on punishment for a perpetrator. Must a president-elect divest himself of his business interests, give up all hope of future benefit from them (no arrangement for buy-back).  If he acts as Commander in Chief for the nation as to a matter where he has hotels, he will not have divided loyalties. Prevention. How to define failure to divest as a legal violation, how to examine the emoluments clause and apply a fair consequence where mere money damages will not prevent recurrence.

    Can someone get a declaratory judgment for a looming imminently impeachable offense? Is conflict of interest an impeachable offense?

    Other application for equitable remedies, equitable balance.  Must people be deported where a government has condoned their entry without documentation, and for decades. What now of some 11,000,000, where the accuser failed to act in a reasonable time. Equity. Who slept on what rights? What was condoned. Who is estopped from changing course radically now. What now. See other legal and equitable terms at http://www.obstacledelusions.com/Definitions.htm

    A. How to approach a need for prevention, where matters are likely to recur but evade review? Where a fine or money damages can be paid and not stop the issue.

    Deterrence in come case must be ongoing, not mooted out each specific instance.

     Look closely at equity jurisprudence, the opportunities that equity provides, where there is a breaking of a law, a violation of constitution. Money alone will not deter for the very rich. Just pay the price.  Define the duty to divest as a necessary preventive; a way of ensuring governments do not use emoluments to get an in, by adding to business interests, offering business incentives.  Divest now is the only way to prevent that.  Equity may act even though in this era legalism is prominent, a platform for partisanship.

    B.  Proposal:  Define omission to divest fully (cash it out, now, if you want to be president); and prepare the papers for immediate impeachment on constitutional grounds if that is not done by the swearing-inn.  In addition, where a president elect holds his assets without divestment by the time of the Electoral College Ball, the electors shall be free to vote their consciences, free of direction and consequence from party or State. 


    C.  How we got here, ignoring equity as though it is not part of our system of justice.

    1937 was a fateful year for American jurisprudence: In 1937, law and equity were combined in one proceeding, in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. It seemed to be a good thing. Other countries had already done so, but our lax effort formally to incorporate fairness into legal matters, even at ony the penalty phase.  Without a named place for equity in the courts, going to automatic sentencing instead too much, we give enforcement extremists firmer ground for judging others and taking punishment into their own hands. Did we forget that equity is as much our heritage as is law.

    1937 was a buffet of extremes. In 1937, the nation also began levying taxes on people's earned waged, for social security; North Carolina established the first state contraceptive clinic; the Pope had an encyclical read in churches, including in Germany, berating Nazi "paganism and racism," then apparently sat out the rest of the war, is that so?; Italy banned marriages between Italians and Ethiopians; a year of great births, arts, feats, slaughters (Guernica; and Picasso's mural of it), the Appalachian Trail was dedicated, Buchenwald labor camp in Germany started operating, Dr. Seuss published his first book, "My Funny Valentine" was a hit, Los Angeles - site of the first drive-in  bank, Hitler stated his intentions to his advisors, see it all at Timelines of Historyhttp://timelines.ws/20thcent/1937.HTML 

    D  Effectively incorporating an equitable remedy is not difficult. Take it in steps.

    1) Law -- Identify a statute; and who, if anyone, violated it; then apply, to the consequence,

    2) Equity -- What, in fairness and accountability, should happen next.

    Decline of equity is a decline for jurisprudence, in effect says Roscoe Pound, a 19th Century jurist, whose views are laid out at Jacqueline M. Nolan Haley's paper echoing ideas of Cardozo at http://www.cojcr.org/vol6no1/CAC105.pdf/
    • Legalists ask, skip all this. Why not just impose a fine? Respond: punishment is not the focus. Addressing the problem, is.Law enforcements like punishment, incarceration, money damages, all not a fit for some behaviors, the kind of obligation that evades review, recurs easily once the fine is paid. 
      • The bringer of the action, however, has to act speedily. 
      • There is, in equity: laches, sleeping on your rights, undue delay before seeking a remedy, so that the other has relied to his detriment in the arrangement. See Equity Decides DNC Rules; Apply Laches.  Clean hands. The requirement that one who seeks fairness but also have done, must do, fairness. .
    I.  Law. 

    Quick look, before moving to the less familiar Equity.  Law cases gave the right to a jury, equity cases did not.  But constitutionally, people had the right to a jury - always subject to interpretation.  Most States now combine the concepts, with preservation in equity for sentencing to a degree, for example.  Some States retain equity courts, or "Chancery" - as Delaware, where corporate matters are considered "equitable."  For an overview, see http://supreme.justia.com/constitution/amendment-07/06-continuing-law-equity-distinction.html/


    Equity jurisprudence. Puttin' Back The Writs

    Fred Astaire sets the stage for WritsPuttin' On The Ritz from 1929, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j02k9t4rP50.














    II.  EQUITY JURISPRUDENCE

    Equity provides specific behavioral tools for accomplishing a specific goal, where an award of mere money damages will not make the injured person whole again.   Count the ways:

    1.  The Injunction - You. Stop that.
     
    2.  Declaratory Judgment. The Judicial Interpretation In Advance ("Declaratory Relief") - If you do this, it will be found ok or not ok.  A declaration in advance.

    3.  Forfeiture - You give up what you have and do not get it back. You get none of it.  Generally this extreme is abhorred.

    4.  Reinstating a Contract - You broke this part of it but it is not forfeit. Make the contract operative again

    5. Trusts and Liens Imposed Involuntarily - You may continue to hold this, but only for the benefit of someone else

    6.  Reforming a Contract - Change this or that

    7. Rescinding a Contract - Cancel it out

    8.  Damages - The value of something lost, not received, or altered. This is the usual compensation in legal matters now. Easy, fix a number, enforce it.

    III. PUTTIN' BACK THE WRITS

    Prerogative Writs - These are the ones in the news now, with habeas corpus and Guantanamo particularly.

    Go back to find an overview at this summary legal procedure site, at  http://www.geocities.com/melanie_lawnotes/NotesonLegalHistoryOutline.txt.  Why is that now a redirect?? Yahoo? Get out of there.

    In the old days: an action had to fit in one of the writs to get before the court.  Then equity found other matters that still did not fit, so the powers broadened. See ://www.lawteacher.net/Equity.php
    • Habeas Corpus - "You have the body" - the big one in the news today, about the Supreme Court granting rights of Habeas Corpus (the right to request a hearing on the reasons for a detention) to enemy combatants/ others and whoever else at Guantanamo. Since there have never been hearings, we have no idea whom the great governmental vacuum cleaner sucked up. Thus, the Great Writ, the Writ of Habeas Corpus, arises. See ://www.lectlaw.com/def/h001.htm; and http://www.aclu.org/safefree/detention/habeastimeline.html
    • Prohibition - "Stop that!" to keep a lower court from acting, or person, see ://www.bwlap.org/TAPs/writs.pdf
    • Mandamus - "We command" - to force a lower official to act. See ://www.lectlaw.com/def2/m079.htm
    • Certiorari - to make something more "certain"- permits appeals to a higher court. See ://usinfo.state.gov/journals/itdhr/0405/ijde/messitte.htm.How to pronounce it? Think sert-chor-ar-eye or sert-chor-ar-ee
    • Quo Warranto - by what authority does a lower official act. See ://www.enotes.com/wests-law-encyclopedia/quo-warranto
    Applications to modern issues:

    Immigration?  It is not enough to find a law broken by this person or that.  How did they come to need to get here, what did we do to encourage it, and with 10,000,000 "illegals" here, without documentation, how do we move forward without making 10,000,000 enemies.  Arizona, we need your input, but not your draconian system.  Law and deportation simply don't work -- need to expand the jurisprudence as has been done any time the system is overwhelmed with the problems.

    IV. COMPARING LAW AND EQUITY JURISPRUDENCE

    LAW SIDE. Legislatures write and pass laws. People obey the clear, unambiguous laws. Judges enforce the clear, unambiguous laws.

    But what if something does not fall within a "law," or there is an ambiguity, a twist?

    Law cannot do it all. It still takes interpretation. Whether the person has obeyed or not depends on how the judge interprets or construes the law - judges indeed and properly make new law by discussing and making further grounds for past laws that almost fit, but not quite.

    Maybe an older law does not apply at all to this new situation. This is not judicial "activism" - it is a venerable part of the common law - how we regulate human behavior, what do you do when the shoe don't fit.

    EQUITY SIDE:  This adds concepts of fairness to a sentencing, to a penalty.  On the criminal side, how to punish a perpetrator, to deter.  On the civil side, how to make an injured person whole again. Is there something in application of the LAW that does not fit - the injured party is not made whole yet, or the guilty one not appropriately punished in order for deterrence and other reasons to work out.

    See the "Maxims" of Equity for the basic principles applied in equity. Fairness things, not just the letter of a law, but how the person behaved also. Taking advantage.

    Equity - a Long Tradition of Protections


    What powers does a judge have, and what rights does a defendant have in resolving issues rather than just money to right a wrong. See ://www.jtblaw.com/legal_remedies.asp.

    People may want a piece of property back, or a possession back, or to get someone off their land, recover the value of something, stop people from this, force people to do that, the human community. 

    Current events:  Immigration, deportation, unduly onerous prison sentences

    Rights of habeas corpus:  Know what it means. That is only the right to ask for a hearing. For Guantanamo, an inmate can find out what the government has against them. Is it justified?  It does not mean they are released. Inmates just get the right to make their case that they were in the wrong place at the wrong time, and as to some that may be true. A legal strainer.

    Like your own child caught in a riot abroad, and arrested. You would want the right to challenge why he or she is there at all. Basic.

    When money damages won't do it, look to equity with equal purpose and stature.  See ://basic Civil Procedure text.  Was its slow death over the years fair?  Or was it mechanical. Refocus on equity jurisprudence.  Balance the punitive focus. Sometimes the just do die. The fact of a death is not a judgment on merit.

    Death by Firing Squad, Jovan Simonon Plamenac, Memorial, Cetinje, Montenegro





















    Jovan Simonov Plamenac, see .Montenegro Road Ways, Memorial, Jovan Simonov Plamenac, Cetinje, Montenegro.

    The criteria are the circumstances of the case, with acknowledgmenet that individual attention may have to be limited. As to a president-elect, ask if the penalty of having to divest is fairly balanced with the need of a nation to have objective, non-personally-invested-financially iinterests at the helm.
    That shocks the conscience of all of us. Someone not taking a needed step, in order to save his hotel?  Give us a break. Start the impeachment now, nerds, so it can be filed in the first day.