I am not much on sports though I love to play tennis. So I know very few of these people but I thought their comments were priceless and a dear friend and fellow memo reader, who did play all kind of sports, sent them to me.
Self deprecating humor carries the day. (See 1 below.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Now this I can relate to because Lynn cringes when I am with our young grandchildren. (See 2 below.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Frankly it is inconceivable that anyone believes there is no fraud in our elections.
You know something is fishy when Democrats align against the charge of fraud and questionable registration and over voting. (See 3 below.)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Our President's Day Speaker, Monday, February 19, John Bolton, offers Trump an Iran Deal solution.
Also, every time I hear N Korea launches new missiles and our Sec. of State says all options are on the table I say to myself: It is time to take them off the damn table and launch them. (See 4 below.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dick
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1)Don Meredith, Dallas Cowboy Quarterback once said: “Coach Tom Landry is such a perfectionist that if he was married to Raquel Welch, he would expect her to cook.”
Harry Neale, professional hockey coach: "Last year we couldn't win at home and we were losing on the road. My failure as a coach was that I couldn't think of anyplace else to play.”
Reggie Jackson commenting on Tom Seaver: "Blind people come to the ballpark just to listen to him pitch."
Doug Sanders, professional golfer: "I'm working as hard as I can to get my life and my cash to run out at the same time. If I can just die after lunch Tuesday, everything will be perfect."
Mickey Lolich, Detroit Tigers pitcher: "All the fat guys watch me and say to their wives, 'See, there's a fat guy doing okay. Bring me another beer.'"
Tommy LaSorda , L A Dodgers manager: "I found out that it's not good to talk about my troubles. Eighty percent of the people who hear them don't care and the other twenty percent are glad I'm having them."
E.J. Holub, Kansas City Chiefs linebacker regarding his 12 knee operations: "My knees look like they lost a knife fight with a midget."
Vic Braden, tennis instructor: "My theory is that if you buy an ice-cream cone and make it hit your mouth, you can learn to play tennis. If you stick it on your forehead, your chances aren't as good.”
Walt Garrison, Dallas Cowboys fullback when asked if Tom Landry ever smiles: "I don't know. I only played there for nine years."
John Breen, Houston Oilers: "We were tipping off our plays. Whenever we broke from the huddle, three backs were laughing and one was pale as a ghost.”
Bum Phillips, New Orleans Saints, after viewing a lopsided loss to the Atlanta Falcons:"The film looks suspiciously like the game itself."
Knute Rockne, when asked why Notre Dame had lost a game: "I won't know until my barber tells me on Monday."
Bill Walton, Portland Trail Blazers: "I learned a long time ago that 'minor surgery' is when they do the operation on someone else, not you."
George MacIntyre, Vanderbilt football coach surveying the team roster that included 26 freshmen and 25 sophomores: "Our biggest concern this season will be diaper rash."
Rick Venturi, Northwestern football coach: "The only difference between me and General Custer is that I have to watch the films on Sunday."
+++++++++++++++++++++++
2)"There was this loving grandfather who always made a special effort to spend time with his son's family on weekends. Every Saturday morning he would take his 5-year-old granddaughter out for a drive in the car for some quality time -- pancakes, ice cream, candy -- just him and his granddaughter.
One particular Saturday, however, he had a terrible cold and could not get out of bed. He knew his granddaughter always looked forward to their drives and would be very disappointed.
Luckily, his wife came to the rescue and said that she would take their granddaughter for her weekly drive and breakfast. When they returned, the little girl anxiously ran upstairs to see her grandfather who was still in bed.
"Well, did you enjoy your ride with grandma?" he asked.
"Not really, PaPa, it was boring. We didn’t see a single asshole, queer, piece of shit, horse's ass, tree hugger, socialist left wing prick, blind bastard, dipshit, Muslim camel humper, or son of a bitch anywhere we went! We just drove around and Grandma smiled at everyone she saw. I really didn't have any fun."
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3)Chicago had 14,000 more votes than voters in 2016 general election
by Thomas Lifson
President Trump continues to receive scorn over his assertion last year that vote fraud accounted for Hillary Clinton’s raw vote majority. Democrats and their shills are unanimous in denouncing the “false claims” (The Amazon Washington Post recently called it a “zombie claim.”) When the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity was announced, it was denounced as a waste, an attempt to intimidate minorities, and a scheme to violate privacy, which has caused states to refuse to release public data requested by the commission. Its investigator, J. Christian Adams, is being vilified. Even Republicansexpressed reluctance to Politico over the investigation.
Senator Chuck Schumer bizarrely linked vote fraud to Charlottesville.
In the wake of the confrontation in Charlottesville, Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) called for President Trump to disband the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity on Aug. 24. In a Medium post, Schumer said the actions of the commission were “wolves in sheep’s clothing” and a “ruse” designed to “revive the old playbook and disenfranchise minority voters.”
They really, really don’t want anyone looking closely at vote fraud. They claim there is none of any significance.
That must be why this report from Chicago City Wire has been so thoroughly ignored by the mainstream media:
More than 14,000 votes were cast in Chicago during the 2016 general election than there were voters to cast them, based on separate figures released by the Chicago Board of Elections, the chairman of the Chicago Republican Party has reported.
Chris Cleveland told the Chicago Wire that "on a whim," he filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with the board, which provided him with a list of 1,101,178 people who voted in the general election. An earlier post on the board's website said that 1,115,664 votes had been cast.
“There should be never be more votes than voters,” Cleveland said. “Every ballot cast should be recorded against a registered voter.”
The party did a breakdown of voting by precinct, and Cleveland said it found an uneven distribution of discrepancies. Fifteen precincts had 100 more ballots cast than voters, while others had fewer votes than voters.
Judicial Watch is also on the case:
Washington-based Judicial Watch named Illinois among 11 states that have another kind of discrepancy in their voting rolls: The number of registered voters exceeds the number of voting-age citizens as determined by a review of Census data.
In April, the group sent a notice-of-violation letter along with a threat to sue the 11 states.
Robert Popper, director of Judicial Watch’s Election Integrity Project and formerly deputy chief of the voting section of the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, said that not maintaining accurate voting rolls violates the National Voter Registration Act of 1993.
“People remember the act as the ‘motor voter’ law because it requires the states to offer voter registration forms with driver license applications,” Popper said. “But what a lot of people forget is that as a compromise for getting the act through, it requires states to maintain accurate voting rolls.”
Judicial Watch identified 26 Illinois counties where voter registration was higher than the number of people eligible to vote, according to Census numbers.
But we can expect that Democrats will continue to dismiss the possibility that vote fraud worked for them on a significant scale. The fact that they resist investigation is telling.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
4) How to Get Out of the Iran Nuclear Deal
Although candidate Donald Trump repeatedly criticized Barack Obama's Iran nuclear agreement, his administration has twice decided to remain in the deal. It so certified to Congress, most recently in July, as required by law. Before the second certification, Trump asked repeatedly for alternatives to acquiescing yet again in a policy he clearly abhorred. But no such options were forthcoming, despite “a sharp series of exchanges” between the president and his advisers, as the New York Times and similar press reports characterized it.
Many outside the administration wondered how this was possible: Was Trump in control, or were his advisers? Defining a compelling rationale to exit Obama's failed nuclear deal and elaborating a game plan to do so are quite easy. In fact, Steve Bannon asked me in late July to draw up just such a game plan for the president — the option he didn't have — which I did.
Here it is. It is only five pages long, but like instant coffee, it can be readily expanded to a comprehensive, hundred-page playbook if the administration were to decide to leave the Iran agreement. There is no need to wait for the next certification deadline in October. Trump can and should free America from this execrable deal at the earliest opportunity.
I offer the paper now as a public service, since staff changes at the White House have made presenting it to President Trump impossible. Although he was once kind enough to tell me “come in and see me any time,” those days are now over.
If the president is never to see this option, so be it. But let it never be said that the option didn't exist.
Abrogating the Iran Deal: The Way Forward
I. Background
The Trump Administration is required to certify to Congress every 90 days that Iran is complying with the July 2015 nuclear deal (the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action — JCPOA), and that this agreement is in the national-security interest of the United States.[1] While a comprehensive Iranian policy review is currently underway, America's Iran policy should not be frozen. The JCPOA is a threat to U.S. national-security interests, growing more serious by the day. If the President decides to abrogate the JCPOA, a comprehensive plan must be developed and executed to build domestic and international support for the new policy.
Under the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act of 2015, the President must certify every 90 days that:
(i) Iran is transparently, verifiably, and fully implementing the agreement, including all related technical or additional agreements;
(ii) Iran has not committed a material breach with respect to the agreement or, if Iran has committed a material breach, Iran has cured the material breach;
(iii) Iran has not taken any action, including covert activities, that could significantly advance its nuclear weapons program; and
(iv) Suspension of sanctions related to Iran pursuant to the agreement is –
(I) appropriate and proportionate to the specific and verifiable measures taken by Iran with respect to terminating its illicit nuclear program; and(II) vital to the national-security interests of the United States.
U.S. leadership here is critical, especially through a diplomatic and public education effort to explain a decision not to certify and to abrogate the JCPOA. Like any global campaign, it must be persuasive, thorough, and accurate. Opponents, particularly those who participated in drafting and implementing the JCPOA, will argue strongly against such a decision, contending that it is reckless, ill-advised, and will have negative economic and security consequences.
Accordingly, we must explain the grave threat to the U.S. and our allies, particularly Israel. The JCPOA's vague and ambiguous wording; its manifest imbalance in Iran's direction; Iran's significant violations; and its continued, indeed, increasingly, unacceptable conduct at the strategic level internationally demonstrate convincingly that the JCPOA is not in the national-security interests of the United States. We can bolster the case for abrogation by providing new, declassified information on Iran's unacceptable behavior around the world.
But as with prior Presidential decisions, such as withdrawing from the 1972 ABM Treaty, a new “reality” will be created. We will need to assure the international community that the U.S. decision will in fact enhance international peace and security, unlike the JCPOA, the provisions of which shield Iran's ongoing efforts to develop deliverable nuclear weapons. The Administration should announce that it is abrogating the JCPOA due to significant Iranian violations, Iran's unacceptable international conduct more broadly, and because the JCPOA threatens American national-security interests.
The Administration's explanation in a “white paper” should stress the many dangerous concessions made to reach this deal, such as allowing Iran to continue to enrich uranium; allowing Iran to operate a heavy-water reactor; and allowing Iran to operate and develop advanced centrifuges while the JCPOA is in effect. Utterly inadequate verification and enforcement mechanisms and Iran's refusal to allow inspections of military sites also provide important reasons for the Administration's decision.
Even the previous Administration knew the JCPOA was so disadvantageous to the United States that it feared to submit the agreement for Senate ratification. Moreover, key American allies in the Middle East directly affected by this agreement, especially Israel and the Gulf states, did not have their legitimate interests adequately taken into account. The explanation must also demonstrate the linkage between Iran and North Korea.
We must also highlight Iran's unacceptable behavior, such as its role as the world's central banker for international terrorism, including its directions and control over Hezbollah and its actions in Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon. The reasons Ronald Reagan named Iran as a state sponsor of terrorism in 1984 remain fully applicable today.
II. Campaign Plan Components
There are four basic elements to the development and implementation of the campaign plan to decertify and abrogate the Iran nuclear deal:
1. Early, quiet consultations with key players such as the U.K., France, Germany, Israel, and Saudi Arabia, to tell them we are going to abrogate the deal based on outright violations and other unacceptable Iranian behavior, and seek their input.
2. Prepare the documented strategic case for withdrawal through a detailed white paper (including declassified intelligence as appropriate) explaining why the deal is harmful to U.S. national interests, how Iran has violated it, and why Iran's behavior more broadly has only worsened since the deal was agreed.
3. A greatly expanded diplomatic campaign should immediately follow the announcement, especially in Europe and the Middle East, and we should ensure continued emphasis on the Iran threat as a top diplomatic and strategic priority.
4. Develop and execute Congressional and public diplomacy efforts to build domestic and foreign support.
III. Execution Concepts and Tactics
1. Early, quiet consultations with key players
It is critical that a worldwide effort be initiated to inform our allies, partners, and others about Iran's unacceptable behavior. While this effort could well leak to the press, it is nonetheless critical that we inform and consult with our allies and partners at the earliest possible moment, and, where appropriate, build into our effort their concerns and suggestions.
This quiet effort will articulate the nature and details of the violations and the type of relationship the U.S. foresees in the future, thereby laying the foundation for imposing new sanctions barring the transfer of nuclear and missile technology or dual use technology to Iran. With Israel and selected others, we will discuss military options. With others in the Gulf region, we can also discuss means to address their concerns from Iran's menacing behavior.
The advance consultations could begin with private calls by the President, followed by more extensive discussions in capitals by senior Administration envoys. Promptly elaborating a comprehensive tactical diplomatic plan should be a high priority.
2. Prepare the documented strategic case
The White House, coordinating all other relevant Federal agencies, must forcefully articulate the strong case regarding U.S. national-security interests. The effort should produce a “white paper” that will be the starting point for the diplomatic and domestic discussion of the Administration decision to abrogate the JCPOA, and why Iran must be denied access to nuclear technology indefinitely. The white paper should be an unclassified, written statement of the Administration's case, prepared faultlessly, with scrupulous attention to accuracy and candor. It should not be limited to the inadequacies of the JCPOA as written, or Iran's violations, but cover the entire range of Iran's continuing unacceptable international behavior.
Although the white paper will not be issued until the announcement of the decision to abrogate the JCPOA, initiating work on drafting the document is the highest priority, and its completion will dictate the timing of the abrogation announcement.
A thorough review and declassification strategy, including both U.S. and foreign intelligence in our possession should be initiated to ensure that the public has as much information as possible about Iranian behavior that is currently classified, consistent with protecting intelligence sources and methods. We should be prepared to “name names” and expose the underbelly of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard business activities and how they are central to the efforts that undermine American and allied national interests. In particular, we should consider declassifying information related to activities such as the Iran-North Korea partnership, and how they undermine fundamental interests of our allies and partners.
3. Greatly expanded diplomatic campaign post-announcement
The Administration, through the NSC process, should develop a tactical plan that uses all available diplomatic tools to build support for our decision, including what actions we recommend other countries to take. But America must provide the leadership. It will take substantial time and effort and will require a “full court press” by U.S. embassies worldwide and officials in Washington to drive the process forward. We should ensure that U.S. officials fully understand the decision, and its finality, to help ensure the most positive impact with their interlocutors.
Our embassies worldwide should demarche their host governments with talking points (tailored as may be necessary) and data to explain and justify abrogating JCPOA. We will need parallel efforts at the United Nations and other appropriate multilateral organizations. Our embassies should not limit themselves to delivering the demarche, however, but should undertake extensive public diplomacy as well.
After explaining and justifying the decision to abrogate the deal, the next objective should be to recreate a new counter-proliferation coalition to replace the one squandered by the previous Administration, including our European allies, Israel, and the Gulf states. In that regard, we should solicit suggestions for imposing new sanctions on Iran and other measures in response to its nuclear and ballistic-missile programs, sponsorship of terrorism, and generally belligerent behavior, including its meddling in Iraq and Syria.
Russia and China obviously warrant careful attention in the post-announcement campaign. They could be informed just prior to the public announcement as a courtesy, but should not be part of the pre-announcement diplomatic effort described above. We should welcome their full engagement to eliminate these threats, but we will move ahead with or without them.
Iran is not likely to seek further negotiations once the JCPOA is abrogated, but the Administration may wish to consider rhetorically leaving that possibility open in order to demonstrate Iran's actual underlying intention to develop deliverable nuclear weapons, an intention that has never flagged.
In preparation for the diplomatic campaign, the NSC interagency process should review U.S. foreign-assistance programs as they might assist our efforts. The DNI should prepare a comprehensive, worldwide list of companies and activities that aid Iran's terrorist activities.
4. Develop and execute Congressional and public diplomacy efforts
The Administration should have a Capitol Hill plan to inform members of Congress already concerned about Iran, and develop momentum for imposing broad sanctions against Iran, far more comprehensive than the pinprick sanctions favored under prior Administrations. Strong congressional support will be critical. We should be prepared to link Iranian behavior around the world, including its relationship with North Korea, and its terrorist activities. And we should demonstrate the linkage between Iranian behavior and missile proliferation as part of the overall effort that justifies a national-security determination that U.S. interests would not be furthered with the JCPOA.
Unilateral U.S. sanctions should be imposed outside the framework of Security Council Resolution 2231 so that Iran's defenders cannot water them down; multilateral sanctions from others who support us can follow quickly.
The Administration should also encourage discussions in Congress and in public debate for further steps that might be taken to go beyond the abrogation decision. These further steps, advanced for discussion purposes and to stimulate debate, should collectively demonstrate our resolve to limit Iran's malicious activities and global adventurism. Some would relate directly to Iran; others would protect our allies and partners more broadly from the nuclear proliferation and terrorist threats, such as providing F-35s to Israel or THAAD resources to Japan. Other actions could include:
- End all landing and docking rights for all Iranian aircraft and ships at key allied ports;
- End all visas for Iranians, including so called “scholarly,” student, sports, or other exchanges;
- Demand payment with a set deadline on outstanding U.S. federal-court judgments against Iran for terrorism, including 9/11;
- Announce U.S. support for the democratic Iranian opposition;
- Expedite delivery of bunker-buster bombs;
- Announce U.S. support for Kurdish national aspirations, including Kurds in Iran, Iraq, and Syria;
- Provide assistance to Balochis, Khuzestan Arabs, Kurds, and others — also to internal resistance among labor unions, students, and women's groups;
- Actively organize opposition to Iranian political objectives in the U.N.
IV. Conclusion
This effort should be the Administration's highest diplomatic priority, commanding all necessary time, attention, and resources. We can no longer wait to eliminate the threat posed by Iran. The Administration's justification of its decision will demonstrate to the world that we understand the threat to our civilization; we must act and encourage others to meet their responsibilities as well.
A May 17, 2016 meeting between then U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif in Vienna, Austria, to discuss the implementation of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. (Image source: U.S. State Department)
|
John R. Bolton, former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, is Chairman of Gatestone Institute, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, and author of “Surrender Is Not an Option: Defending America at the United Nations and Abroad”.
[1] Although this paper will refer to “the JCPOA,” the abrogation decision should also encompass the July 14, 2015, statement by the Security Council's five
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
No comments:
Post a Comment