Op-ed:
The Impeachment Show Part Two...Maybe
By: Diane Sori / The Patriot Factor / Right Side Patriots on American Political Radio

"A decline of public morals in the United States will probably be marked by the abuse of the power of impeachment as a means of crushing political adversaries or ejecting them from office."
- a paraphrase of the words of Alexis de Tocqueville used in the 1889 impeachment defense of President Andrew Johnson

And so we sit and wait as January 6th is fast approaching...the day when the Senate is supposed to start the beginning stages of part two of the Trump impeachment show...that is if Nancy Pelosi decides to send part one...the House impeachment...over to the Senate. And if she doesn't send it over then technically President Trump is not officially impeached no matter how much or for how long the Democrats throw their to be expected hissy fit, and besides the nation now knows that their “political coup” was both corruptly put together as well as being corruptly and maliciously sought.

In fact, Noah Feldman, the very Harvard law professor Jerry Nadler called to testify before the House Judiciary Committee as a constitutional expert, a man vehemently anti-Trump, now has stated that President Trump indeed might not technically be impeached and that the vote taken is illegitimate if Nancy Pelosi refuses to send the articles of impeachment over to the Senate. And why...as per Professor Feldman because, “Both parts (the House and the Senate) are necessary to make an impeachment under the Constitution. The House must actually send the articles and send managers to the Senate to prosecute the impeachment. And the Senate must actually hold a trial.”

And Noah Feldman added that, “If the House does not communicate its impeachment to the Senate, it hasn’t actually impeached the president. If the articles are not transmitted, Trump could legitimately say he wasn’t truly impeached at all,” thus leaving Nancy Pelosi with political egg on her face. Remember, while Article I, Section II, Clause V of the Constitution states that, “The House of Representatives...shall have the sole Power of Impeachment”...in Pelosi's refusing, to date, to send said articles over to the Senate she has actually put the Senate, through no fault of their own, in violation of the Constitution. How so...simply for their not holding a fair trial thus denying President Trump not only the chance to defend himself but denying him his constitutionally given right to do so as per Article I, Section III of the Constitution, something our Founders and Framers clearly did expect a House impeached president to do.

And so the impeachment debacle continues on as Nancy Pelosi whines that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has not yet revealed how a Senate trial would be conducted nor has he assured her that said trial would be fair, impartial, and not result in an automatic acquittal of President Trump. Translation: Pelosi does not want a Senate trial to be handled in the same way as she allowed the House “political coup” to be handled, as in their predetermined verdict to impeach. What goes around comes around is not part of Nancy Pelosi's liberal-speak agenda.

So now as I write this article we are left with a “he said, she said” battle of sorts with Pelosi and McConnell at each others throats with Pelosi calling McConnell “the grim reaper” and with McConnell saying that Pelosi had “cold feet” for her not wanting to send the two articles of impeachment...“abuse of power” and “obstruction of Congress”...over to the Senate because she knows the House case is both weak and would surely go down to a crashing defeat in the Republican controlled Senate. And weak it is for while Nancy Pelosi continues to erroneously bloviate that President Trump was “impeached forever” regardless of what the Senate now does or does not do, not only has Democrat shill Noah Feldman countering her assumption, but so too has Democrat attorney and internationally respected constitutional law professor Alan Dershowitz who posed two key questions. First (and I paraphrase), are there significant allegations to justify a Senate trial and second, how can Trump be impeached when the House articles of impeachment as written are not in the Constitution as grounds for impeachment.

And to both questions, Professor Dershowitz, the man who recently met with President Trump and who it's rumored might actually join Trump's Senate legal team, stated that he is “strongly opposed to the two criteria for impeachment...on the grounds proposed by the Judiciary Committee and voted upon by the House as neither is found in the Constitution.” Professor Dershowitz also added that said articles are the “kind of general, vague, open-ended criteria that is weaponized against any president when the opposing party has a majority in the House of Representatives.” And how right he is especially when there is no bipartisan support for impeachment as there was in both Richard M. Nixon's and Bill Clinton's impeachment cases.

Remember, Alan Dershowitz knows well that we are now seeing Alexander Hamilton's greatest fear coming to fruition...the fear he wrote about in Federalist 65 where he stated, "the greatest danger that the decision will be relegated more by the comparative strength of parties, than by the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt." And not to be forgotten is that unlike in a parliamentary democracy where a president can be impeached solely on the grounds of “no confidence,” this type of impeachment is not permissible under a constitutional republic...a fact Democrat politicians most especially choose to ignore.



Now as per the Constitution itself, Article II, Section IV, clearly states that the only grounds for impeaching a sitting president, as well as for impeaching the Vice-President and all civil officers, are for “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors,” none of which are included in the House articles of impeachment. And while the crimes of bribery, extortion, and treason were things Democrats placed on the anything but impartial hearing table they were not included in said articles because no grounds for such charges were proven let alone proven beyond a reasonable doubt. This left the Democrats only being able to throw a “blanket covering” as to what said impeachment was to be based upon as there was and remains no tangible proof that President Trump committed any actual crime nor that he even came close to committing such a felonious behavior as “abuse of power” or “obstruction of Congress.”

Also remember, whether the Democrats like it or not, President Trump's asking a foreign head of state in a (transcribed) phone call to look into their country's past corruption is not a constitutionally described crime, hence it is not a constitutional abuse of power. And when that government has a known history of corruption and is now seeking both U.S. foreign and military aid, asking its leader if said government in the past colluded with prior U.S. officials or presidents in any “suspicious activity” also is not a constitutionally described abuse of power. And here is where the Democrats case against President Trump not only falls apart but sees an innocent man being publicly railroaded solely for partisan political gain. And it's being done so while a prior U.S. vice-president did indeed collude with a foreign government and should be the one on trial for abuse of power.

In fact, past presidents from both political parties have abused power to one degree or another with no threat of impeachment being hung over their heads as it is with President Trump. Here are but two examples one from each party.

On September 15, 1863, during the height of the Civil War, Republican President Abraham Lincoln suspended union wide the Writ of Habeas Corpus...suspended an individuals right to appear before a judge to determine if their detainment is lawful before being imprisoned. And Lincoln's suspension specifically included cases involving prisoners of war, spies, traitors, or any member of the military, thus allowing the government itself to indefinitely imprison anyone suspected of being a rebel spy or saboteur without having to “show cause” or make a case for the arrest in court. And while some in Congress deemed that Lincoln had overstepped his bounds with this suspension, impeachment was not an option discussed.

Remember too, President John F. Kennedy also abused power when he agreed to the “limited wiretapping” of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. based upon allegations that two of his most trusted aides, Stanley Levison and Jack O’Dell, had communist associations. Now being pressured to go forward with the King wiretapping by then FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, Kennedy never challenged nor questioned any of Hoover’s allegations about Dr. King or his alleged communist ties. In fact, JFK himself warned Dr. King that he was in danger of losing his civil rights cause because of his loyalty to both men. And yet Dr. King never severed those ties and lied about doing so when asked. And this led to the wiretapping which even back in the early 1960's was a questionable act at best. And yet when this was found out no member of Congress called for Democrat President JFK's impeachment.

And President Trump's Ukrainian phone call and any other things Democrats are accusing him of pales in comparison to these two what actually could have legally been argued as possible impeachable “high crimes and misdemeanor” offenses...offenses wisely not perused for the good of the country which is something today's Democrats seem not to care about at all.

But the bottom line is that if the Founders and Framers wanted “abuse of power” or “obstruction of Congress” to be impeachable offenses they would have included such in the Constitution. Remember, there must be a specific violation of the Constitution's mandates regarding the act of impeachment for impeachment to occur. And when you add in that both Schiff and Nadler chose to omit the words bribery and extortion from either of the articles of impeachment...with bribery at least being a constitutionally stated impeachable offense but something the Democrats could not prove...you can now understand why, again as per Professor Dershowitz, both articles, especially "abuse of power," are written in a "general, vague, and open-ended criteria" type of way.

So where do we stand now as the battle between Nancy Pelosi and Mitch McConnell continues to heat up, and what has President Trump said about Pelosi's stalling tactics? First, our president has rightfully slammed Pelosi for her “crying for fairness” after she led a knowingly “unfair process” in the House. And second, Pelosi and McConnell remain at odds over what McConnell calls Pelosi's “shoddy work” and the fact that Democrats might simply be too afraid...as in the “prosecutors getting cold feet”...to send over the articles of impeachment now that Pelosi has deliberately held off sending them which at the same time allows “partisan rage at this particular president to create a new toxic precedent that will echo well into the future.”

But to make matters worse...to add to the Democrats maliciously partisan driven drama...Nancy Pelosi...who ever so foolishly fancies herself having control over the Republican majority Senate...stated that “we'll make a decision as we go along” regarding turning over said articles adding that “we'll see what the process will be on the Senate side” before doing so. Sounds a bit like extortion to me...a truly impeachable offense as does the House Democrats...courtesy again of Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler...having raised the distinct possibility of new impeachment articles being forthcoming. And it's all part of a misguided attempt to try and force former Trump counsel Don McGahn to testify at the upcoming Senate trial, something they know will not happen as long as Mitch McConnell stands strong and the Republican senators remain united in support of a president being publicly railroaded simply because Hillary Clinton is (thankfully) not president.

And in this case I'm sure Republicans will stand strong for if President Trump is not acquitted in the Senate...acquitted of crimes he never committed...the Second American Civil War might not be too far behind. Words of extortion...no, words of fact...yes, as “We the People” can only stand by for just so long watching our country being destroyed by the “enemy within”...with the “enemy within” sadly being today's Democrat party. Case closed.

Copyright @ 2020 Diane Sori / The Patriot Factor / All Rights Reserved. 

***********************************************************************************************************************************  
For more political commentary please visit my RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS partner Craig Andresen's blog The National Patriot to read his latest article, Hey, It's Only Money...Right?
 
************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************ 

RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS...LIVE!

Tomorrow, Friday, January 3rd, from 7 to 9pm EST on American Political Radio, RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS Craig Andresen and Diane Sori discuss 'The Impeachment Show Part Two...Maybe'; "Hey, It's Only Money...Right?'; and important news of the day.

Hope you can tune in at: http://listen.samcloud.com/w/73891/American-Political-Radio#history...or on Tune-In at: https://tunein.com/radio/American-Political-Radio-s273246/

Op-ed:
The Impeachment Show Part Two...Maybe
By: Diane Sori / The Patriot Factor / Right Side Patriots on American Political Radio

"A decline of public morals in the United States will probably be marked by the abuse of the power of impeachment as a means of crushing political adversaries or ejecting them from office."
- a paraphrase of the words of Alexis de Tocqueville used in the 1889 impeachment defense of President Andrew Johnson

And so we sit and wait as January 6th is fast approaching...the day when the Senate is supposed to start the beginning stages of part two of the Trump impeachment show...that is if Nancy Pelosi decides to send part one...the House impeachment...over to the Senate. And if she doesn't send it over then technically President Trump is not officially impeached no matter how much or for how long the Democrats throw their to be expected hissy fit, and besides the nation now knows that their “political coup” was both corruptly put together as well as being corruptly and maliciously sought.

In fact, Noah Feldman, the very Harvard law professor Jerry Nadler called to testify before the House Judiciary Committee as a constitutional expert, a man vehemently anti-Trump, now has stated that President Trump indeed might not technically be impeached and that the vote taken is illegitimate if Nancy Pelosi refuses to send the articles of impeachment over to the Senate. And why...as per Professor Feldman because, “Both parts (the House and the Senate) are necessary to make an impeachment under the Constitution. The House must actually send the articles and send managers to the Senate to prosecute the impeachment. And the Senate must actually hold a trial.”

And Noah Feldman added that, “If the House does not communicate its impeachment to the Senate, it hasn’t actually impeached the president. If the articles are not transmitted, Trump could legitimately say he wasn’t truly impeached at all,” thus leaving Nancy Pelosi with political egg on her face. Remember, while Article I, Section II, Clause V of the Constitution states that, “The House of Representatives...shall have the sole Power of Impeachment”...in Pelosi's refusing, to date, to send said articles over to the Senate she has actually put the Senate, through no fault of their own, in violation of the Constitution. How so...simply for their not holding a fair trial thus denying President Trump not only the chance to defend himself but denying him his constitutionally given right to do so as per Article I, Section III of the Constitution, something our Founders and Framers clearly did expect a House impeached president to do.

And so the impeachment debacle continues on as Nancy Pelosi whines that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has not yet revealed how a Senate trial would be conducted nor has he assured her that said trial would be fair, impartial, and not result in an automatic acquittal of President Trump. Translation: Pelosi does not want a Senate trial to be handled in the same way as she allowed the House “political coup” to be handled, as in their predetermined verdict to impeach. What goes around comes around is not part of Nancy Pelosi's liberal-speak agenda.

So now as I write this article we are left with a “he said, she said” battle of sorts with Pelosi and McConnell at each others throats with Pelosi calling McConnell “the grim reaper” and with McConnell saying that Pelosi had “cold feet” for her not wanting to send the two articles of impeachment...“abuse of power” and “obstruction of Congress”...over to the Senate because she knows the House case is both weak and would surely go down to a crashing defeat in the Republican controlled Senate. And weak it is for while Nancy Pelosi continues to erroneously bloviate that President Trump was “impeached forever” regardless of what the Senate now does or does not do, not only has Democrat shill Noah Feldman countering her assumption, but so too has Democrat attorney and internationally respected constitutional law professor Alan Dershowitz who posed two key questions. First (and I paraphrase), are there significant allegations to justify a Senate trial and second, how can Trump be impeached when the House articles of impeachment as written are not in the Constitution as grounds for impeachment.

And to both questions, Professor Dershowitz, the man who recently met with President Trump and who it's rumored might actually join Trump's Senate legal team, stated that he is “strongly opposed to the two criteria for impeachment...on the grounds proposed by the Judiciary Committee and voted upon by the House as neither is found in the Constitution.” Professor Dershowitz also added that said articles are the “kind of general, vague, open-ended criteria that is weaponized against any president when the opposing party has a majority in the House of Representatives.” And how right he is especially when there is no bipartisan support for impeachment as there was in both Richard M. Nixon's and Bill Clinton's impeachment cases.

Remember, Alan Dershowitz knows well that we are now seeing Alexander Hamilton's greatest fear coming to fruition...the fear he wrote about in Federalist 65 where he stated, "the greatest danger that the decision will be relegated more by the comparative strength of parties, than by the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt." And not to be forgotten is that unlike in a parliamentary democracy where a president can be impeached solely on the grounds of “no confidence,” this type of impeachment is not permissible under a constitutional republic...a fact Democrat politicians most especially choose to ignore.



Now as per the Constitution itself, Article II, Section IV, clearly states that the only grounds for impeaching a sitting president, as well as for impeaching the Vice-President and all civil officers, are for “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors,” none of which are included in the House articles of impeachment. And while the crimes of bribery, extortion, and treason were things Democrats placed on the anything but impartial hearing table they were not included in said articles because no grounds for such charges were proven let alone proven beyond a reasonable doubt. This left the Democrats only being able to throw a “blanket covering” as to what said impeachment was to be based upon as there was and remains no tangible proof that President Trump committed any actual crime nor that he even came close to committing such a felonious behavior as “abuse of power” or “obstruction of Congress.”

Also remember, whether the Democrats like it or not, President Trump's asking a foreign head of state in a (transcribed) phone call to look into their country's past corruption is not a constitutionally described crime, hence it is not a constitutional abuse of power. And when that government has a known history of corruption and is now seeking both U.S. foreign and military aid, asking its leader if said government in the past colluded with prior U.S. officials or presidents in any “suspicious activity” also is not a constitutionally described abuse of power. And here is where the Democrats case against President Trump not only falls apart but sees an innocent man being publicly railroaded solely for partisan political gain. And it's being done so while a prior U.S. vice-president did indeed collude with a foreign government and should be the one on trial for abuse of power.

In fact, past presidents from both political parties have abused power to one degree or another with no threat of impeachment being hung over their heads as it is with President Trump. Here are but two examples one from each party.

On September 15, 1863, during the height of the Civil War, Republican President Abraham Lincoln suspended union wide the Whit of Habeas Corpus...suspended an individuals right to appear before a judge to determine if their detainment is lawful before being imprisoned. And Lincoln's suspension specifically included cases involving prisoners of war, spies, traitors, or any member of the military, thus allowing the government itself to indefinitely imprison anyone suspected of being a rebel spy or saboteur without having to “show cause” or make a case for the arrest in court. And while some in Congress deemed that Lincoln had overstepped his bounds with this suspension, impeachment was not an option discussed.

Remember too, President John F. Kennedy also abused power when he agreed to the “limited wiretapping” of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. based upon allegations that two of his most trusted aides, Stanley Levison and Jack O’Dell, had communist associations. Now being pressured to go forward with the King wiretapping by then FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, Kennedy never challenged nor questioned any of Hoover’s allegations about Dr. King or his alleged communist ties. In fact, JFK himself warned Dr. King that he was in danger of losing his civil rights cause because of his loyalty to both men. And yet Dr. King never severed those ties and lied about doing so when asked. And this led to the wiretapping which even back in the early 1960's was a questionable act at best. And yet when this was found out no member of Congress called for Democrat President JFK's impeachment.

And President Trump's Ukrainian phone call and any other things Democrats are accusing him of pales in comparison to these two what actually could have legally been argued as possible impeachable “high crimes and misdemeanor” offenses...offenses wisely not perused for the good of the country which is something today's Democrats seem not to care about at all.

But the bottom line is that if the Founders and Framers wanted “abuse of power” or “obstruction of Congress” to be impeachable offenses they would have included such in the Constitution. Remember, there must be a specific violation of the Constitution's mandates regarding the act of impeachment for impeachment to occur. And when you add in that both Schiff and Nadler chose to omit the words bribery and extortion from either of the articles of impeachment...with bribery at least being a constitutionally stated impeachable offense but something the Democrats could not prove...you can now understand why, again as per Professor Dershowitz, both articles, especially "abuse of power," are written in a "general, vague, and open-ended criteria" type of way.

So where do we stand now as the battle between Nancy Pelosi and Mitch McConnell continues to heat up, and what has President Trump said about Pelosi's stalling tactics? First, our president has rightfully slammed Pelosi for her “crying for fairness” after she led a knowingly “unfair process” in the House. And second, Pelosi and McConnell remain at odds over what McConnell calls Pelosi's “shoddy work” and the fact that Democrats might simply be too afraid...as in the “prosecutors getting cold feet”...to send over the articles of impeachment now that Pelosi has deliberately held off sending them which at the same time allows “partisan rage at this particular president to create a new toxic precedent that will echo well into the future.”

But to make matters worse...to add to the Democrats maliciously partisan driven drama...Nancy Pelosi...who ever so foolishly fancies herself having control over the Republican majority Senate...stated that “we'll make a decision as we go along” regarding turning over said articles adding that “we'll see what the process will be on the Senate side” before doing so. Sounds a bit like extortion to me...a truly impeachable offense as does the House Democrats...courtesy again of Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler...having raised the distinct possibility of new impeachment articles being forthcoming. And it's all part of a misguided attempt to try and force former Trump counsel Don McGahn to testify at the upcoming Senate trial, something they know will not happen as long as Mitch McConnell stands strong and the Republican senators remain united in support of a president being publicly railroaded simply because Hillary Clinton is (thankfully) not president.

And in this case I'm sure Republicans will stand strong for if President Trump is not acquitted in the Senate...acquitted of crimes he never committed...the Second American Civil War might not be too far behind. Words of extortion...no, words of fact...yes, as “We the People” can only stand by for just so long watching our country being destroyed by the “enemy within”...with the “enemy within” sadly being today's Democrat party. Case closed.

Copyright @ 2020 Diane Sori / The Patriot Factor / All Rights Reserved. 

***********************************************************************************************************************************  
For more political commentary please visit my RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS partner Craig Andresen's blog The National Patriot to read his latest article, Hey, It's Only Money...Right?
 
************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************ 

RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS...LIVE!

Tomorrow, Friday, January 3rd, from 7 to 9pm EST on American Political Radio, RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS Craig Andresen and Diane Sori discuss 'The Impeachment Show Part Two...Maybe'; "Hey, It's Only Money...Right?'; and important news of the day.

Hope you can tune in at: http://listen.samcloud.com/w/73891/American-Political-Radio#history...or on Tune-In at: https://tunein.com/radio/American-Political-Radio-s273246/

Op-ed:
Leaving Allies Behind...or Are We?
By: Diane Sori / The Patriot Factor / Right Side Patriots on American Political Radio

“The Enemy of my Enemy is my Friend.”

- 4th century B.C. “Indian Machiavelli” Kautilya in the Sanskrit military book, the Arthashastra

On October 7, 2019, President Trump announced the withdrawal of our troops from along the northeastern Syrian/Turkish border, and from the moment he did the consternation from surprisingly both sides of the political aisle started building...reaching a level of what amounts to a public crucifixion of our president.

How so? Well for starters House Speaker Nancy Pelosi tweeted that, “The President’s decision to withdraw U.S. forces from Northern Syria is a deeply disturbing development that betrays our Kurdish allies who have been instrumental partners in our mission to eradicate ISIS.” And of course Rep. Adam Schiff got his jabs in by saying that, “We will be pouring over the intelligence to determine what steps Congress might need to take to protect American interests in light of this reckless, impulsive and dangerous action by the president.” Even Trump supporting South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham tweeted that, "No matter what President Trump is saying about his decision, it is EXACTLY what President Obama did in Iraq with even more disastrous consequences for our national security...So sad. So dangerous. President Trump may be tired of fighting radical Islam. They are NOT tired of fighting us.”

Hey Lindsay, I'm sure President Trump knows that.

And Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell was probably the worst for he issued a statement that, “A precipitous withdrawal of U.S. forces from Syria would only benefit Russia, Iran, and the Assad regime....As we learned the hard way during the Obama administration, American interests are best served by American leadership, not by retreat or withdrawal.” In other words, Mitch McConnell compared Trump's leadership regarding the Kurds to that of America-hating, islamic condoning Barack HUSSEIN Obama...a political backstabbing of our president if ever there was one.

It's one thing to disagree with Trump's decision...a decision made by his focusing on the big picture instead of on individual parts...but it's quite another to shame your president without knowing all the facts...facts few are aware of...but I guarantee they're facts President Trump knows well.

But let's begin by giving credit where credit is due in that since 2014 the Kurds have been our faithful ally in the ground war against our common enemy ISIS. But one must also know that the Kurds are seen by the Turkish government as an ally of the SDF Kurdish separatists...separatists based in both Turkey and Iran who Turkey claims has ties to the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK), the party responsible for ongoing violent attacks within Turkey itself...violence in name of the Kurds trying to secure a Kurdish state. In other words, our Kurdish ally appears to be our ally Turkey's enemy thus catching us in the middle of their fight...a fight that we're no part of.



And so a dilemma arose for President Trump...the very man who promised to start withdrawing our troops now bogged down in wars that seemingly have no end. Do we support the Kurds against Turkey as both sides brought their war to what is now the “buffer zone” between Turkey's southern border and Syria's northern border or do we support an allied NATO partner...albeit a tenuous ally at best. And while we all know that Turkey's President Recip Erdogen is an islamist supporter who pretends not to be one, he has for the most part stayed out of our and the Kurds way in regards to trying to rid Syria of ISIS. 
 

But all the players know well that ISIS is not defeated but laying low until all American troops are gone to make their return...just like the Taliban did in Afghanistan. And Trump I'm sure knows that while we as a country have witnessed numerous shifts in Turkish policy towards ISIS, Syria's civil war, and towards the Kurds themselves...the one thing that's remained an absolute constant for Turkey is their unwavering opposition to Kurdish autonomy... especially if said autonomy means that a Kurdish state would be sitting on and partly within what is currently the area encompassing their southern border.

The truth is that Erdogen wants to extend Turkey's existing so-called “buffer zone” into Syria's northern Afrin region even if it means having to kill the Kurds currently living there and replace them with at least two of the three million Syrians who sought refuge in Turkey, thus ridding himself and his country of people who are not only causing trouble but who are a drain on Turkey's economy.

In fact, I believe former National Security Adviser John Bolton knew of Erdogen's true motives, including that Turkish forces would start their ground and air onslaught against the Kurds as soon as we started pulling out... which they have in operation code name "Peace Spring." And more likely than not it's over the Kurds and Bolton's not wanting to pull out where he and President Trump did finally break ranks. But if this be the case then even John Bolton left out one key component in his thinking...the Kurds and the Turks have been at each others throats for well over a century in what amounts to a Turk/Kurd civil war...a civil war also seeing no real end in site...a civil war we have no “skin in the game.” And so if it's a game being played who better to play it than Donald Trump.

Let me explain. President Trump is getting the blame for us being in Syria when it was Obama who put us there to aid the so-called Syrian rebels in their battle against President Bashir al-Assad's government forces. However, those rebels turned out to be not rebels per se but ISIS fighters who themselves wanted inroads into Syria. And so Trump kept our Obama committed forces there, and with the aid of the Kurds together we drove most of ISIS out. Our job there was done with what's left being the Turk/Kurd civil war...a civil war we should not get directly involved in as both sides, for better or worse, we consider to be allies. So why not remove our troops from there, remove them but not bring them home, but move them elsewhere for strategical reasons.

                                                                                        

And so just last week the pullout began as 50 U.S. soldiers...50 special forces personnel...began leaving bases in Tel Abyad and Ras al Ayn near the Syrian side of the “buffer zone”...which many feel is a mistake not unlike the mistake Obama made in Iraq, the very country that has now ceded partial control of some of its territory to Iran...not unlike the mistake JFK made in regards to the Bay of Pigs.  

But what many are forgetting is never take President Trump at face value for to do so is a mistake in and of itself.

President Trump is not only our president but commander-in-chief of our armed forces, and as such he must make important tactical decisions based not upon what seems on the surface to be a simple solution, but upon military logistics as well. And it's actually military logistics that's being overlooked as being but a rash shift in our foreign policy directive when in reality it's anything but.

Again let me explain. Right now we know many are quite angry at President Trump for what they believe is the deserting of an ally during a time of war...an ally who helped us win, if you will, the battle against ISIS in Syria. And I must admit that I too was quite peeved at first, after all American policy has always been that America leaves no man...no troop...behind, and that such a policy should extend to our allies as well. But the more I thought about this the more unsettling it became as our president is not the type of man to leave an ally behind. And that in turn led to the fact that we have been equipping the Kurds with weapons of war for quite some time and that those very weapons while used against ISIS are now being used against another ally of ours..Turkey...all in the Kurds quest for an autonomous state.

And while Turkey is an ally...an ally we best always keep one eye open to...they're an ally nevertheless. And this led me to the realization that our troops still stationed along the border in question are but witnesses to yet another Middle East civil war...albeit a smaller scale civil war...a civil war between two allies that we were forced into the middle of.

And I believe this is why President Trump announced this particular troop withdrawal at this particular time, but it goes even deeper than that for I now believe he has a bigger plan in mind...a plan it seems few if any have figured out yet. The “Master of the Deal” has with this withdrawal sealed the deal that might see all American troops being able to soon come home...come home after one more battle that is...one more battle that just might set the world on the road to long sought after peace.

To understand what I'm about to say you need to look at the two maps below and the logistical end and my reasoning will fall into place. Let's start with Map 1. Here you see the regions key players...Turkey, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the UAE, Egypt, and most assuredly Israel. Now add in the United States as we have either troops and airbases in or have been allowed staging grounds within all the above stated countries, except Iran of course.

Now comes the logistics and what I believe to be President Trump's ultimate end game. First, President Trump is withdrawing us from Syria, a war torn country no use to us, but withdrawing is not for the reasons most think. Remember, Trump never stated that those in Syria were coming home just that they were being withdrawn. Second, I think he's sending them to either Iraq or Afghanistan to help bolster our forces in the region. Third, we have operational military bases in Turkey, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Afghanistan along with flyover privileges also from the Saudis and the UAE as well as unwavering Israeli and Egyptian support. We even have access to certain Pakistani military bases to use for logistics, relief efforts, and as a launching base for drone operations as well as us having access to use almost all the military airfields of Turkmenistan, including the airport in Nebit-Dag near the Iranian border. And Albanian officials have offered and we have accepted the establishment of U.S. military bases in Albania. Fourth, in other words the United States and our allies have a military presence to the north, south, east, and west of Iran...the very country that is not only the Middle East's but the world's most destabilizing force.
 

And fifth, the bottom line is that I believe President Trump's end game, to which he now has actually added more U.S, troops to without most being aware, is that if you look below at Map 2 you will see that we have Iran surrounded and that sooner rather than later we will launch from those bases in allied and somewhat friendly countries, and that together with Israel's, Saudi Arabia's, and Egypt's standing alongside us go in and take Iran out.

Too many people think President Trump to be an impulsive hothead, a tweeting cartoon character of what a president should be instead of seeing him as the strong, smart, clever, and patriotic leader that he is. President Trump knows that Iran must be taken out as much as he knows that we have been bogged down in wars that seem to see no end...but the no end is because Iran keeps fueling the fires of war as they think they have everything to gain and nothing to lose not realizing that they have already lost if only the true battle would begin.

And I believe President Trump has now set the stage for just that very battle...the only battle that really matters as it's the only battle that could actually in the end bring peace...if only Trump's naysayers would see the big picture and not focus on but one small piece of what is a much larger and more important game.

So a big thank you must go out to the Kurds for helping us fight ISIS, but now the time has come for the Kurds and the Turks to fight their own battles...and the Kurds are already doing so with weapons supplied to them by the U.S. And while we can still support them logistically we can do so without American troops being put in harms way. Their quest for autonomy is not our battle as we have a bigger fish to fry...a fish I think President Trump, after having seen the big picture, is now in the process of preparing to cast that final tactical net.

Copyright @ 2019 Diane Sori / The Patriot Factor / All Rights Reserved. 

*********************************************************************************************************************************** 
For more political commentary please visit my RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS partner Craig Andresen's blog The National Patriot to read his latest article, Alinsky's Rules for Rhetorical Radicals.

************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************ 

RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS...LIVE!

Tomorrow, Tuesday, October 15th, from 7 to 9pm EST on American Political Radio, RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS Craig Andresen and Diane Sori discuss 'Leaving Allies Behind...or Are We?'; 'Alinsky's Rules for Rhetorical Radicals'; and important news of the day.

Hope you can tune in at: http://listen.samcloud.com/w/73891/American-Political-Radio#history...or on Tune-In at: https://tunein.com/radio/American-Political-Radio-s273246/

Op-ed: 
Hey Schumer...Bring It On
By: Diane Sori / The Patriot Factor / Right Side Patriots on American Political Radio

Well well...so it seems that our dear Democratic ‘friend’ Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has been very quick with his tongue and his pen of late...so quick to spew out threat after threat on the Senate floor as to how the Republicans will be the cause of Democrats being forced to shut down the government if they insist on building a wall along our still unsecured southern border; if they dare to start mass deportations of illegals (their prime voting block); or if they try to defund (abortion mill and baby-parts seller) Planned Parenthood.

In fact those very threats...threats of “severe consequences” made by hypocrites and sore losers who not only destroyed their own party but who have fought long and hard against all Republican attempts to shut down the government over budget disputes... saw Schumer and other top Democrat senators write a letter composed of what they called “red lines” to Republican Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and to Appropriations Committee Chairman Thad Cochran. Saying, “If Republicans insist on inserting poison pill riders such as defunding Planned Parenthood, building a border wall or starting a deportation force, they will be shutting down the government and delivering a severe blow to our economy,” this letter is nothing but an attempt to try to get Republicans to back down...to get President Trump to back down...on promises made to ‘We the People.’

Hopefully that backing down will not happen even with the likes of RINO Senators John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and a few others, always on the ready to throw a wrench into the Trump and/or Republican mix.

And Schumer also was quick to remind them both in said letter that just last year the Republicans agreed to the Democrats' request that any government funding measure would move ahead without any of what he called “controversial policy add-ons”...like what they now claim Trump’s “$25 million per mile” border wall is...after Trump suggested the possibility of attaching money for it to the must-pass continuing resolution to fund the government...or even as per the rumor mill that Trump is looking to cut funds from the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and the U.S. Coast Guard in order to fund the wall. 

Saying that cutting money from those agencies to pay for the wall is a "pointless burden" and would make Americans less safe, Schumer went on to say in the letter that any cuts of that sort would never happen if he had any say in it.

Sounds like more threats to me...as it should to you as well.

Now as for Chuck Schumer’s threats to shut down the government if mass deportation of illegals begins in earnest...lost on Schumer and his cohorts is the fact that if you come or are already here illegally then you are by definition a criminal for you came to this country knowingly breaking our immigration laws. And nowhere in the Constitution does it say we must harbor or protect criminals of any kind.

So by the government allowing known criminals to remain here the government itself is actually in violation of the Constitution for the Constitution does not delegate to the federal government power over immigration, only over naturalization once someone is here legally...meaning naturalization happens only after going through the required legal processes which illegals obviously have not. Wonder what Schumer would say to that...what excuse he would have for Democrats now taking part in a law-breaking activity as they are the primary one’s fighting tooth-and-nail to stop said deportations. I’m sure he would find some excuse to make right what he well knows is wrong as his party can ill afford to lose one of their prime voting blocks. 

And whether illegals be granted some sort of citizenship or even voting rights...or if they continue as they do now...voting albeit illegally...Schumer knows well they do so predominately for Democrats... Democrats who when illegals put their hand out fills it up with whatever they deem they need in exchange for their vote. A vicious cycle indeed but one Schumer dare not allow to be broken.

And I hate to tell Schumer...actually I love to tell him this...but changing the moniker ‘illegals’ to ‘undocumented immigrants’ in no way changes their law-breaking status.

Lastly, as to Planned Parenthood and Schumer’s threats surrounding it as a reason why they would shut the government down...we know the Republicans (rightfully) want to strip hundreds of millions of dollars of Medicaid reimbursements and eliminate tax credits from any and all insurance providers who cover abortions and that includes from Planned Parenthood. But our Democratic ‘friend’ needs to understand the true facts about Planned Parenthood and the lies surrounding it. First, Planned Parenthood, contrary to the liberal hype, in no way has millions of women relying on them for their health care needs...period. Planned Parenthood serves only a small percentage of women’s health care needs as they perform less than 2% of all women’s cancer screenings; as they perform less than 1% of all pap exams; and as they perform less than 2% of all breast exams in the entire country, and that particular one is because Planned Parenthood does not provide mammograms and never has.

And second, what Planned Parenthood does best...or should I say worst...is perform abortions...not abortions as in the case of rape, incest, or the life of the mother, which the Republicans have rightfully left in their new health care draft...but abortions as population control or abortions on demand for a woman's selfish reason alone and even late-term abortions...you know where the baby could very easily survive outside the womb... murder in other words...abortions to the tune of 160 performed for every one child referred out for adoption.

And this is one of the things uber liberal Chuck Schumer and his cohorts want to shut the government down for...what amounts to the killing of babies...and no words I say can ever describe the vileness of this...no words at all.

But no matter the reasoning or the threats issued on the Senate floor, in the letter, or in media interviews, what is fact is that the Democrats shutting down the government over the upcoming $1 trillion spending package is not an impossibility. And why...because Chuck Schumer knows well that the spending measure needs 60 votes to pass and that doing so requires Democratic support. And he also knows Republicans only have a 52 to 46 majority in the Senate (there are two Independents) and therefore would need eight Democrats to cross party lines and vote with them in order to get the measure passed, and thus end any surely-would-come Democrat filibuster of it. 

And honestly, I do not see that happening...crossing party lines I mean...but the fact remains that even if the Democrats do force a government shutdown on April 29th...as the government is only funded through the 28th...life here in these United States would not come to an crashing end. 

And how do we know that...simply remember back to October 1, 2013, the first day of the 2014 fiscal year, when a ‘funding gap’ happened after disagreements over ObamaCare...as in trying to stop its implementation...thus causing the government to shut down for the first time in over 17 years. That shutdown lasted 16 days, and resulted in the temporary ‘furlough’ of what the Democrats insisted was hundreds of thousands of mostly Democratic federal employees... overpaid and seriously not needed federal employees...federal employees whose very numbers are now being rightfully trimmed by President Trump. 

But did that government shutdown really affect the daily lives of ‘We the People’ to any serious degree... no it did not...and neither will another government shutdown do so if it indeed does happen.

But in the case of the Democrats and their ever so in-your-face obvious vendetta against Trump because he is president and Hillary is not, if they do dare to shut the government down it not only makes them look even worse than they already do, it actually would throw the political ball into Trump’s court as he could now come back and say that he and the Republicans were just keeping promises made to ‘We the People’ and that it is the Democrats who are trying to stop the will of the people...the very people who overwhelmingly voted for him and who have in turn turned their collective backs on the Democrat’s agenda of socialism, inclusion, and freebies for all who have their hands out...an agenda based solely upon an exchange for votes that is.

And what has been Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s response to all this highly overinflated Democrat bravado and chest beating...McConnell said he was "amused by the Democrats apparently warming up to the idea that threatening to shut down the government is a good idea," knowing full well that the Republicans win either way as shutting the government down would rightfully hurt the Democrats big time in the upcoming midterm elections...as we know it well should.

So to Chuck Schumer I say ‘bring it on’ for whether the government is shut down or whether the funding measure passes as written, President Trump, the Republicans, and ‘We the People’ win and you and your fellow Democrats lose. But know that we have plenty of bubbles, crayons, coloring books, and therapy puppies at the ready to go into service when you and your minions run to your safe spaces to whine and cry...just saying and saying it with a happy wink and a nod.
Copyright © 2017 Diane Sori / The Patriot Factor

*********************************************************************************

RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS...LIVE!

Today, Friday, March 17th from 7 to 9pm EST on American Political Radio, RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS Craig Andresen and Diane Sori discuss Chuck Schumer's threats to shutdown the government, Rachel Maddow has a case of the Mad Cow, and important news of the week.

Hope you can tune in at: http://tunein.com/radio/American-Political-Radio-s273246/