Mission Creep on the Federal Level

My Recent Posts

The legislative branch of our government Congress has become the judicial, and the judicial has become the legislative. Congress is calling for and initiating investigations and the courts are determining policy. How did this happen? Some people call it mission creep. Mission creep is where “a gradual shift in objectives during the course of a military campaign” the key phrase here being shifting in objectives. The Democrats in Congress have set out to impeach President Trump by any means available. The “activist judges” are determined to make policy when they could review the Supreme Court decisions that state specifically that they have no standing in the area of policy.

 

Some of this could be explained by ideology over integrity. It is becoming more and more evident that there are judges who believe anyone has the right to enter the United States, and members of Congress who believe that they can investigate anything that happens with which they disagree. No longer willing to accept the roles that they were elected or appointed to perform, they are now insisting that their ideologies become part of the political landscape, and they are unwilling to accept the legal limitations of their positions. The weakness is that the people are sitting by and allowing it to happen.

 

Certainly, the U.S. Congress has the right to investigate things, but there is no doubt that the investigations are ideologically driven, and, I might add, doing nothing for the American people, while they shirk their responsibility to create legislation. James Comey is the consummate bureaucrat, and his testimony before a rapt Congress did nothing to prove that the president did anything but to make a suggestion. There was no insistence, there were no threats of consequences, and the only evidence is his word against the president’s. But Congress is playing up that the president might have made an illegal suggestion, calling for more investigations that will lead to nowhere.

 

If Comey actually believed that the president was insisting that the investigation be dropped, he had the legal obligation to report that to the Justice Department, which he did not do. Further, Comey leaked information that he considered important to one of his elite pals, rather than adhere to his duty to keep confidential information confidential. Comey’s statement that the FBI was a happy place under his leadership is self-serving, and, from some reports, deceitful. Interestingly, Loretta Lynch’s suggestion that the investigation of Hillary Clinton be described as a “matter” should raise some eyebrows. It is now clear that Hillary did in fact communicate classified information on unsecure servers, but that doesn’t mean anything now, apparently.

 

While the U.S. Congress has the power to investigate, the ideologically driven investigations are not finding anything of any value. If President Trump violated the law, then I agree he should face consequences, but this game of “he said he said” is getting nowhere. Comey should have been fired when he overstepped his authority by stating that Hillary would not be prosecuted, a decision not his to make. More mission creep, more decisions made by people who are not authorized to make them, more decisions made from an ideological perspective, and not, as the people deserve, from a legal perspective.

 

Certainly, given the size of our government, there are people to address the important issues of our time, but the representatives and judges have taken it upon themselves to make policy and obstruct the government when they ideologically disagree, as opposed to doing their duty to serve the American people. This is dereliction of duty on a federal scale, when, as stated, they are not doing what they were elected or appointed to do. The deep state continues to pull the American government into a swamp that just gets deeper and deeper, with only a few suggesting that they get on with their obligations. What I find fascinating is that The U.S. Congress allowed President Obama to do things that many objected to, but he was the president, so they allowed it. Following the legal process, President Trump has, by executive order, cancelled a good number of things that President Obama foisted upon the American people. The sore losers in the U.S. Congress just can’t get over that, so they insist upon obstruction in every way possible. I don’t think this will lead to anything good, and the elected and appointed should go back to what they were elected and appointed to do, or leave office.

Comments

Mark Hunter Added Jun 11, 2017 - 2:27am
Ideology over integrity covers just about everything that's going on in Washington. I'm sure there are a few people in Washington who still h ave integrity, especially some who haven't been there too long, but they're being shouted down by the rest.
John G Added Jun 11, 2017 - 3:47am
Fraud is the American business model. American business rules over the government.
So it's all fraud all the time.
Americans just don't get it, yet. Though some are starting to wake up.
I hope Bernie Sanders has good security.
Jeff Jackson Added Jun 11, 2017 - 7:11am
Thank you Mark, and yes, it's all about ideology over integrity. Mr. Smith goes to Washington and it takes a while for him to realize that you have to go along to get along, so they abandon their ideas of what is best for their constituents and do what is best for themselves and their campaign donors.
Jeff Jackson Added Jun 11, 2017 - 7:13am
John, to some degree I don't disagree. Having read a lot of ethical material lately, I have to wonder how many of them rationalize what they do. Thanks.
Leroy Added Jun 11, 2017 - 8:02am
Another excellent article, Jeff. 
 
Comey's action has to be seen through the lens that he thought Hillary Clinton was going to be elected president.  He effectively works for the president.  He was between a rock and a hard place on the Clinton emails.  He chose the path of furthering his career.
 
Since the FBI director works for the president, he can be told to drop an investigation.  As Comey said, there may be protocols against doing such, but it is well within his power to determine what gets investigated and what does not.  There is no crime there, even if Trump ordered Comey to drop the investigation into Flynn.  It is time to move on.  Nothing to see.  A big "nothing burger."
 
Comey did some bad things.  The FBI is in a mess.  He has to protect his reputable for integrity.  He made a bad assumption about who would be elected and is paying the price.  He is part of the swamp and he knows it.  Now he has to cover himself.  He is starting to look like a fool.
Dino Manalis Added Jun 11, 2017 - 8:32am
They're wasting time; money; and brain cells and delaying important policymaking!
George N Romey Added Jun 11, 2017 - 8:49am
Jeff I think they do rationalize themselves in their respective Washington DC bubble.  They forget the agenda of the American people and create their own agenda.  Most Americans can't understand this side show.  The country will only grow more angry and more desperate.
Billy Roper Added Jun 11, 2017 - 12:50pm
This happened because liberal social engineers began to advocate legislating from the bench against the will and interests of the people, as they did with gay marriage and forced school integration.
Jeff Jackson Added Jun 11, 2017 - 1:48pm
I agree Leroy, Comey is the consummate bureaucrat, hoping that he stays while the elected come and go. Comey had a nice high-powered high-profile high-paying job, and Trump took it away from him, so this is all the revenge he could come up with. I agree, whether he knows it or not, he's making himself look stupid, or, a friend once described fools as "an unintentional self parody."
Jeff Jackson Added Jun 11, 2017 - 1:50pm
George ,desperate enough, I hop,e to vote out a bunch of these self-righteous servants of the wealthy and powerful. You're correct, they're in their own world, totally separate from ours, and if they do not understand what the American people are going through, they need to leave or be removed.
Jeff Jackson Added Jun 11, 2017 - 1:51pm
Exactamundo, Dino!
George N Romey Added Jun 11, 2017 - 7:00pm
Jeff I think its the system that is corrupt.  People go to Washington with good intentions and find themselves under a gauntlet that only wants to serve the needs of the powerful and connected.  Some get voted out, others get voted in and yet the saga continues.  Obama was suppose to reform the system that got corrupted by Bush and others before him.  He ended up part of the system.  Now Trump seems to be going down the same road. 
Jeff Jackson Added Jun 11, 2017 - 7:45pm
George unfortunately, for all of Trump's promises of serving the working man, he has lined his cabinet with those already rich and powerful, of course, those are the people that he knows. I am not criticizing Trump just yet for doing so; they have some time to prove themselves, and Trump has some time to restore some of the jobs for the working class. But if they simply pass legislation that protects the rich via investment income reductions and especially a reduction in inheritance taxes, I don't think they will win many favors.
The concept of Trump's campaign was that the wealthy can represent the people because they can't be bought. Let's hope that the wealthy are representing the people and not their wealthy friends and relatives.
Ari Silverstein Added Jun 12, 2017 - 9:58am
Outside of a temporary immigration ban on six countries do you have any other evidence to support the position that the judicial branch has become the legislative branch?  Assuming no, why get so worked up over such a meaningless executive order and judicial overreach.  It would be one thing if the ban wasn’t temporary or involved the many other countries with large Muslim populations.  With so many things that could matter if Congress actually passed some meaningful legislation, you should save this article for then.  Because you didn’t, you’ll sound like the boy who cried wolf.  
Jeff Jackson Added Jun 12, 2017 - 11:01am
Ari, I'm not going to do all the research for you, (there are fees involved) but an example: "In United States v. Blewett, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruled that the new sentencing regime should apply to all defendants previously sentenced to mandatory minimum sentences for crack cocaine offenses because the application of the 100-to-1 ratio that existed under prior law amounts to racial discrimination under the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution."-
 
Eileen de Bruin Added Jun 12, 2017 - 4:24pm
Well, with yiur apparently well meaning Mr. Trump doing things that are not in the interests of the USA as a whole, some mechanisms to put a brake on him are nexessary, it could be argued. I cannot see how any interests of the working people are served by Trump banning some Muslim travellers but not others. The others were just sold billions worth of arms by Trump. He is not being consistent or principled and if he is out of control in foreign policy, some application of rationale and good judgement can only help. 
 
What are you suggesting is the correct way then? In imperfect systems there are only imperfect means to do some things ethically are there not?
Jeff Jackson Added Jun 12, 2017 - 10:16pm
Eileen, courts do not make policy, and foreigners are not granted the rights of Americans. If the president knows that there are people who would endanger the citizens of the U.S. coming from another country, it is his duty to protect us, and he has considerably more information on who is coming into the U.S. than some court or some judge.
The president's job is to protect us. There may well be information that he cannot share with us as to why there are bans on foreigners coming into America. I really do not understand how people think that anyone has the right to enter America, that has never been the law, nor should it ever be the law.
Joanna Nutile Added Jun 13, 2017 - 9:25am
Eileen is right.  It’s the court’s opinion that the immigration ban violated the Constitution and you’re free to hold the opinion that the court has overstepped its duty and determined policy.  In situations like this the decision is appealed and higher courts must make the final call.  This is how our fore founders decided the Judicial Branch should be structured and short of eliminating the branch, I don’t see any other way. 
 
Furthermore, I think it’s ridiculous to suggest that the temporary ban on six countries has made us any safer.  Simply look at the nationality of every terrorism act in America and you’ll quickly learn the immigration ban would have done nothing to prevent any of them.  Besides, the ban was temporary so even if it wasn’t blocked by the court, by this time the ban would be over.  Are we safe now?   
Jeff Jackson Added Jun 13, 2017 - 10:56am
Furthermore, as stated, the president knows a lot more about who is plotting to kill us, a lot more than the courts, and has an obligation to keep those facts secret lest terrorist groups become aware of what we know.
Regarding suspending the ban:
Judge Gregory is ignoring a legal precedent that has been clearly established in the Supreme Court case of Kleindienst v. Mandel in 1972. The Supreme Court rejected the entry of a colleague of some American scholars, and made the following things very clear: “first, aliens have no constitutional right to enter the U.S.,; second, American citizens have no constitutional right to demand entry for aliens,; third, the decision to deny admission of an alien must be upheld if it is based on ‘a facially legitimate and bona fide reason.’”
If Judge Gregory didn’t know that, his incompetence is so glaringly obvious that his colleagues should quietly insist the he submit his resignation immediately. Feel free to read my essay on WB titled “Ideology Versus Integrity” where people like Judge Gregory believe that “opinions have become facts, and many of the sycophants have taken supposition as veracity.”
 
Pamalien TW Added Jun 13, 2017 - 4:45pm
When you want to build a case against someone; you take notes. Don't just run off and start telling everyone about what you saw or heard. When it's too early to tell, it's subjective. Over time a pattern reveals itself. Once the pattern is established and, the evidence mounted, you then have a case to present to your superiors.

Comey didn't have a case from one conversation alone. In less than 6 months, nine Private conversations involving his continued employment, despite an appointed 10-year term, are suspect– especially after having had only 3 private conversations between two sitting presidents. The fact that all these meetings occurred with one underlying subject and, that Comey was fired without any solid reason, are suspect.

Comey may as well just ignore the Russia investigation and focus on the reasoning for his termination. I bet he could collect unemployment because there was literally no legitimately good reason for his firing. I'm sure he's too well off to worry about the pittance paid by unemployment benefits. The reality is that Trump is unfit to lead our country since he appears to be incapable of making decisions without the influence of his own ego.

Repeated meetings initiated by Trump, may as well spell out his guilt, as a desperate man scrambles to stop what may be the only honest man in Washington, from finding a real reason for impeachment. There is potential that he could have found enough evidence to damn the whole of Government.

Trump didn't win the popular vote. He was elected by the Electoral College and, despite his "win," he has continued to state the election was rigged. We don't need Russia to Spell out misrepresentation within our own government. The Democrat's scramble to point fingers is equally suspect of foul play.

Bernie didn't have a chance against the Corporate backed Hillary and, most Republicans probably, honestly believed Trump to be unelectable. The election was rigged in Hillary's favor but, in the end, misrepresentation chose the Douche over the Turd Sandwich.

Trump signifies the outward takeover of government by private interests. It's not a secret. Everything. Every Bill. Every Law. Every Executive order... possibly since the 80s or even earlier, has been done in favor of Corporate America. 

The only effect the ACA was ever really intended to have on Americans, was pushing higher profits for the insurance industry while keeping the people's ire pointed at the Government. The only true solution is a single payer system. Go to a doctor and ask about their charges if you walk in without insurance and do self-pay. I can virtually guarantee that it will cost less and your doctors will earn more. About 40% of the charge you see on your EOBs is simply based on providers filing paperwork for insurance reimbursement. You would be surprised to see how blatantly insurance rips off of health services. I've had some doctors tell me that they will never see more than my copay.
Eileen de Bruin Added Jun 13, 2017 - 5:12pm
Joanne, yes, thanks. Jeff, the biggest terrorist in the US right now is Mr Trump. He is terrorising and he is not seeking peace. This fallacy that he can know about terrorist cells or whatever is immediately shown to be just that when he sells arms to SA. Here is the nesting ground for those people that you fear. And he is nurturing them. Why? It is not for your protection, that is for sure.
wsucram15 Added Jun 13, 2017 - 6:04pm
Jeff..I cant agree with all your points, however you do make valid argument and Ethics is NOT top of the list in DC.
Playing to the Donors has become the matter at hand.   But for a short time, both sides will be playing to their bases.
I do not agree with the travel ban as is...and am glad it was overturned again. It violated the broad powers of the INA which powers are somewhat restricted by Congress by statutory and Constitutional restraints.
The decisons could be overturned by Supreme Court if it steps in before the Expiration of the travel ban on June 14th.  If not, it has to wait until November.
Joseph Tizzano Added Jun 13, 2017 - 7:19pm
Jeff great article.  Unfortunately many people in this country have their head in the sand.  Most do not understand the responsibility they have when casting their vote.  Many vote for all the wrong reasons.  They vote because some celebrity endorses the candidate, mom votes for a particular party so they vote for that party and the best one I heard last election, "it's time for a women President.  We need term limits, the founding fathers did not envision Congress as a professional position, rather temporary position ruled by engaging in ethical standards and do what is best for American citizens.  It is time the people of our great country stand together, stop the supporting and sending people to Congress who care only about getting elected to office.  I am saddened by the though of what kind of government will represent our children's children's children.  I pray I am wrong about the future of our country but if things continue to go as they are I will be proven right.
James Currier Added Jun 13, 2017 - 8:18pm
Unfortunately too many of our citizens believe the Constitution applies to non-citizens - it doesn't!  That document only applies to US citizens and/or legal residents (to a limited degree).  To apply the benefits of our Constitution to non-citizens is a fraud - non-citizens have no protections or benefits under our Constitution.  To the extent any of our governing branches legislate, interpret, or execute initiatives, programs, or actions that become de facto conveyance of such rights and privileges to non-citizens are either traitors, exceptionally naive, or completely oblivious to our safety and security!
Jeff Jackson Added Jun 13, 2017 - 10:45pm
Rose, if it was Obama or Hillary being blasted by a member of the political class, I would say the same thing. Honestly, I feel Trumps was the lesser or the evils available, but not my first choice.
Jeff Jackson Added Jun 13, 2017 - 10:50pm
James you are exactly correct! I have no idea where these people got the idea that the minute you set foot on U.S. soil you suddenly gain all the rights of a U.S. citizen. Consider this: go to your nearest veteran cemetery and ask yourself if those fallen heroes fought and died so that anyone coming here could have the rights of a citizen. They died to protect the rights of citizens, not to give them to anyone who can make it here. I respect the people that want to come here, but instant rights was never the idea. The Supreme Court ruling that used said the same thing, no rights to aliens, no rights of citizens on behalf of aliens, and if there is a good reason, we can keep them out.
Jeff Jackson Added Jun 13, 2017 - 10:57pm
Thank you Joseph, and yes, people have gone into "identity politics" where  the qualifications or character or temperament aren't why they vote for someone, it is just because they are of a certain physical characteristic, such as a female. You are exactly correct in pointing out that the federal legislature was never meant to be a year-long thing, that the U.S. Congress would convene, pass a few laws and then return to their other occupations. The career politician was not what the founding fathers imagined.
Jeff Jackson Added Jun 13, 2017 - 11:12pm
Pamalien, perhaps you didn't see when Comey declared that the government would not prosecute Hillary for putting classified information on unsecured servers. Had I been Trump, I would have fired Comey in my first week of office. If you're looking for a conspiracy, look no further than a bureaucrat who oversteps his authority by stating that someone will not be prosecuted. Comey had zero, again, zero authority to decide if Hillary was to be prosecuted, that was the decision of the attorney general, not Comey. That would have been grounds for dismissal under any circumstances.
If Comey was asked to do anything illegal, his duty, again  the responsibility of his position, was to immediately report that request to the Justice Department, which he didn't do. Comey, like the political class bureaucrat he was, collected information so that if he got into trouble, he could play kiss and tell and reveal where all the bodies were buried.
Let's face it, Comey was a career bureaucrat. He claimed that the FBI was in great shape when he was fired, while there are reports that there were quite a few FBI agents who were unhappy with his investigations of Hillary, and especially unhappy with him declaring (again, without authorization) that Hilary would not be prosecuted. It was not his decision to make. Welcome to the swamp. Comey was trying for a lifetime membership. Comey needs to go to the private sector and see if his playing kiss and tell politics will work in the private sector where you have to make money, and ratting out the boss and making decisions that you are not authorized to make only gets you terminated. Being the bureaucrat that he was, Comey couldn't believe that making unauthorized decisions he made would have consequences.
All the political class bureaucrats are like that. They make decisions that are not authorized to make and then can't believe that they could be held accountable for behavior that was uncalled for and unauthorized.
Don Turnblade Added Jun 13, 2017 - 11:28pm
I am fairly sue that the first leader of the FBI, J. Edgar Hoover had way more evidence of misconduct both in Washington and inside his own FBI that Comey every will.  But, we see someone with the dignity to serve his country as best he could and then resign. 
 
Really, would Hoover testify before congress?  Mr Comey sets a new low bar for FBI directors.  Sad.
Jeff Jackson Added Jun 14, 2017 - 12:40am
No mistake about it, Don, Hoover had info on everyone. Many in Washington wanted Hoover out, especially when he was older and not really on top of his game, but Hoover had so many people afraid of what he could reveal that no one, no one in Washington would stand up to him. Hoover was very dedicated, no doubt, one of the last bureaucrats who really cared about the people that he served.
Eileen de Bruin Added Jun 14, 2017 - 3:46am
Actually, Jeff, I do know the point that you are making and it is a valid point. The weaknesses in the administration implies that the judiciary is looking, in alarm, to "what the book says". The morbid misuse of power by corny and self seeking bureaucrats is part of human behaviour, sadly. But imperfect governments and especially one so openly provocative brings out these kinds of panic reactions.
 
I am sure that your concepts of the founding fathers and the constitution being a right one has to earn, rather than have as a given,  are based on proud and personal patriotism. I do not necessarily hold with your views that war veterans have gone to fight to preserve your freedoms though, no, not at all. But your fundamental approach implies integrity of intent.
Jeff Jackson Added Jun 14, 2017 - 3:33pm
Yes, I'm sure that my great grandfather, father, and uncles all put on the uniform of their country, went abroad and risked their lives in order that someone from another country would have the right to come and go here in America as they pleased, as well as constitutional rights the minute they stepped foot on American soil. That must have been what they were thinking about when under fire, who will be able to come here from foreign countries unhindered by such things as laws or policies. Yes, that was it. My bad.
Eileen de Bruin Added Jun 15, 2017 - 2:43am
Did they do it so that anyone from other countries could come to the US? Who was the enemy? Who made and makes a lot of money from war? 
Would you put on a uniform to go on behalf of a Teump administration?
Jeff Jackson Added Jun 15, 2017 - 12:55pm
Que one: most likely not.  Que two: the British (yes, we go back that far) then the Mexicans, then the Confederates, then the Germans, then the Germans and the Japanese, probably some native Americans in there but I am part native American, according to correspondence of many years back.  Grandpa didn’t spend July to September at Ypres in 1918 so that anyone who wanted to could just enter the U.S. Que three: not us, my family that is, I can tell you. Question four: as far as I know there is no Trump administration army, just as there was no Lincoln army, Roosevelt army, Truman army, Nixon army, Bush army, on and on, please correct me if I am wrong on that. Exaggeration loses the point, the army is the U.S. Army, it represents the U.S., it is not President Trump’s personal army, no matter how you would wish to embellish that notion.   
Trump may be the commander in chief, but keep in mind the U.S. Congress holds the purse strings. Teddy Roosevelt decided to send the “great white fleet” around the world, and Congress objected, but Teddy had the funds to send them halfway, and he told Congress that if they wanted them back in the U.S. ports, they could pay for them to come back or else leave them on the other side of the world.
American is not obliged to allow entry by anyone. There are plenty of countries that only allow entry into their country by approval. Saudi Arabia must approve your entry, as well as your exit; i.e. you legally cannot leave until allowed to leave. There are people who hate America and have no intention of following the laws of our land, and admission of those people should be questioned. The United States has always had restriction on immigrants, I have no idea where people get this idea that everyone who wants to join our party is invited; read your history books, that was never the case.
Joseph Tizzano Added Jun 15, 2017 - 2:50pm
I agree Jeff this is not Trumps army it is the Army of the United States with a mission to protect the citizens of the U.S.  What I see here is hypocrisy on the part of liberals.  When Obama was in office anyone who disagreed with any of his executive orders was labeled  a racist.  People who did not support Obama's Presidency were labeled unpatriotic, they said he is your President you should support him.  What I find hypocritical is now I often hear liberal saying "he's not my President." The liberal's are up in arms because Trump is doing things that many citizens in this country though should have been year ago, like doing what  ever it takes to keep terrorist from harming another American citizen or coming to our country.  YES OUR CONUTRY.  If the ban Trump wants to place on some countries saves just one American citizens life then I say do it. Our governments first responsibility is to protect American citizens.  Do I agree with everything Trumps says or does, NO I do not.  Put the fact is that he is the President and liberals should do what they said the people of this country should have done for Obama support the President. I have heard people say that Trumps ban is unconstitutional.  No where in the Constitution does it give non-citizens of the U.S. the right to enter our country just because they want to come here.  There is a vetting process people have to go through if they want to enter this country.  It is clear that the one in place is not very efficient and needs to be  improved. If it takes banning some countries that have shown by word and deed they want to destroy the U.S. than to protect our citizens and way of life we should do what ever it takes and that includes banning.  Liberals would like people to believe that we are violating the rights they say protect non-citizens of the U. S.  This is just another form of liberal propaganda. 
Jeff Jackson Added Jun 15, 2017 - 3:25pm
Exactamundo Joseph.
Eileen de Bruin Added Jun 15, 2017 - 5:55pm
The statue of liberty is poignant, of course, to immigrants and its poem is wonderful to all of us. The wars you mention Jeff, are all fought on foreign soils and, yes, the US joined the Brits in the last third of the war after Pearl Harbour. 
Foreign policy is key to war avoidance or mongering or brokering. In terms of governance, it would be nice to have peace makers and less focus on arms manufacturing and huge gains for those industries. Yes, it provides lots of jobs but at the cost of many lives and the creation of refugees who go...where? And creation of extremist groups who then are terrorists.
Immigration policy was relatively free and open before 1882. The point being? I do not have the idea that I or anyone else, has the right to live in your country.
For the record, I love visiting the US, love driving around and love talking to all kinds of Americans. I love America. I am happy living in Europe. My best friend in Holland is a lady from Texas! I have friends in Maine and just over the border, in Canada and love visiting them.
As for those countries who want to destroy the US, Joseph, as if they could, take a good look at Saudi Arabia and then ask yourself why Trump is selling them arms in huge quantities.
What is the point of taking the view that anyone, generally, would want to destroy the US? You are a great nation of people even if I wonder at your choice of presidents and senators! 
Beem Weeks Added Jun 20, 2017 - 12:04pm
A well-written piece, Jeff. 
Bruce Ashby Added Jun 27, 2017 - 4:57pm
There's fine line between 'Policy' and 'Legislation'.....Policy being the Outline of what a society or a nation should do..........while Legislation is either the process or has now become the law with which the citizens should adhere to.........however, when you have Selections as oppose to Elections......much of these pondering as to how, what, why, where and who makes, takes, shakes and shifts things into position becomes a mind-boggling experience.......The ancient Greeks invented The Electoral College because they didn't trust the ignorant common man with the vote . This gave the false sense that the people had control over the government & were FREE . However when the educated citizens found out they were being cheated out of their votes they were simply killed everyone in the senate & returned to one person one vote . The founding criminals of the USA INC, put the electoral college in place in 1787, because they thought the common man too stupid to know how to vote . Hamilton even wrote in the federalist papers #68 that it was RIGGED so the rich -0.0001% of the WORLD could never lose an election, and the people couldn't even see how the Elite steal each and every election, and continue to go to the 'voting booth' ! Today America INC is MORE corrupt than ever ...... With monies being missed from Pentagon's budget at first $2.3 Trillion (announce by Rumsfeld on 9/10.........what a 'kooinky dink').... to the latest 8.5 Trillion.......and another 6.5 Trillion in between...........THIS COUNTRY IS BEING PLUNDERED IN FRONT OF OUR EYES>>>>and sadly, people are still losing sight of the 'trees for the forest'........as long as WE remain 'Divided' into Democrats, white, Hindu, Southern, Yankee, African.............down to the very granular level of being associated with a 'Football team' or Baseball............then those at the TOP of the Pyramid have the last laugh, and since THEY OWN the BANKS.....they don't even have to leave their homes to laugh 'all the way to the bank'......... enough of my rant.......thanks for listening.