Archive for the ‘Accountability’ Category

It’s clear that CNN’s Jeffrey Toobin can’t take being humiliated any longer. Toobin’s ongoing humiliation triggered this eruption:

Our constitutional system never contemplated a President like Donald Trump. The Framers anticipated friction among the three branches of government, which has been a constant throughout our history, but the Trump White House has now established a complete blockade against the legislative branch, thwarting any meaningful oversight. The system, it appears, may simply be incapable of responding to this kind of challenge.

The President has been candid about his plans for responding to investigations from the House of Representatives, which has been controlled by the Democrats since January. “We’re fighting all the subpoenas,” Trump said, last month, and the pace of his defiant actions has since quickened. The President and his Administration have defied congressional inquiries about security clearances, access to the full Mueller report, the President’s bank records, his tax returns, and the continuing investigation of his campaign’s ties to Russia.

First, let’s talk about Congress’s request for “access to the full Mueller report.” The minute this fight reaches the Supreme Court, it will be unanimously defeated. Congress isn’t entitled to information that’s been put off-limits by … Congress. Let’s not stop there, though. Let’s talk about why grand jury testimony shouldn’t be public information.

In a grand jury investigation, the accuser isn’t allowed to be cross-examined by the defense attorney. Further, the witnesses are questioned only by prosecutors. What part of that procedure sounds like the accused person’s due process rights were followed? If a person’s due process rights are violated, then that testimony should be off-limits with only a few exceptions.

Next, let’s talk about Toobin’s supposed “meaningful oversight.” President Trump has been in office for 27-28 months. Why does the House Ways & Means Committee need 6 years of President Trump’s tax returns? Congressional oversight isn’t meant for private citizens. It’s meant for legislative purposes. Let’s throw that intellectually feeble argument into the garbage where it belongs. This is the Democrats’ attempt to harass President Trump. This doesn’t have anything to do with providing with proper oversight.

Finally, congressional oversight is about finding out new facts about government operations. Why would any person with a functioning brain think that a bunch of publicity-seeking politicians will find anything that 50 FBI agents and 20 trained attorneys couldn’t find?

So, after nearly two and a half centuries, Trump will create a new constitutional norm—in which the executive can defy the legislature without consequence. The only likely remedy, therefore, will lie with the voters, next year.

Actually, Obama did that. Actually, Obama and Holder did that. When AG Holder sent guns to south-of-the-border drug cartels without having a plan in place to track them, he was showing he wasn’t ready for a heavyweight job like Attorney General. When he refused to cooperate with a legitimate oversight investigation, he showed that he was a corrupt AG who wasn’t ready for primetime. When he and other Democrats acted like refusing to actively participate in a legitimate investigation, they blazed a path that’d never been blazed before.

Any trash-talking from lightweights like Toobin might confuse some but not all. The truth is that he isn’t a convincing spinmeister or history re-writer. That’s why he’s employed by CNN. That’s why he’s a Democrat.

If Democrats keep hitching their wagon to the media’s clickbait articles, they soon won’t have any credibility left. It isn’t like Democrats have much left but they’re spending what little they have left on questionable reporting because they’re desperate. Andy McCarthy laid out the Democrats’ latest nothingburger bombshell in this article.

McCarthy, a former assistant US attorney, wrote “‘Mueller complained to Barr about memo on key findings.’ That’s the banner headline at the top of the Washington Post’s website Wednesday. But when you click your way to the actual story, it turns out that the headline is not true. Special Counsel Mueller’s complaint, which targeted Attorney General Barr’s March 24 letter explaining the report, is not about the ‘key findings.’ It’s about the narrative.”

Actually, it’s about the media’s attempt to stir controversy in the hope that it’ll lead to President Trump’s impeachment. If pots of gold were found at the bottom of rabbit holes, Democrats would have enough money to fund their campaigns for a generation or more.

On the other hand, if William Barr got a pot of gold each time he stood his ground against an airhead Democrat, he’d have at least 1 pot of gold. Check this out:

KABOOM!!! That’s as close to a pancake block as you’ll find in the legal profession. Usually, pancake blocks are found only on college football stadiums on Saturday afternoons. In another instance of standing his ground, watch how AG Barr stood his ground against Sen. Hirono, (D-HI), the Democrats’ corrupt pit bull from Hawaii:

Sen. Hirono is a disgusting human being. Chairman Graham was right in saying that she “slandered this man from top to bottom. So if you want more of this, you’re not going to get it. If you want to ask him more questions, you can.” Sen. Hirono is one of the most disgusting Democrats in the Senate. She made at least 4 inaccurate partisan statements. She accused Barr of a) protecting President Trump, b) lying to Senate Judiciary Democrats and c) being “no different from Rudy Giuliani or Kellyanne Conway or any of the other people who sacrifice their once decent reputation for the grifter and liar who sits in the Oval Office.”

Sen. Hirono, you’re a steaming pile of animal waste. You’re out of control, dishonest and, honestly, even worse than Adam Schiff.

I’m normally a fan of HotAir’s Allahpundit. This isn’t one of those times. After reading this post, I can’t help but object to some of AP’s statements.

For instance, I must object when AP says “Here’s my question for Kushner, though: What would he have had Rod Rosenstein and Bob Mueller do? Granted, the Russiagate probe was bitterly divisive and contributed to Trump’s delegitimization among his critics. But given all the contacts between Trump officials and Russians during the campaign, given Trump’s weird apologetics for Putin and Wikileaks, given the fact that his campaign did benefit to some negligible degree from Russian interference, how could the DOJ not look into it?”

The answer is simple. The DOJ shouldn’t have named a special counsel since it hadn’t identified a crime that was committed. So what if Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi and other Democrats whine all day long? Who cares if Adam Schiff and other Democrats lie about having seen evidence of Trump-Russia collusion? I don’t care if these Democrats stomped their feet and held their breath until they were blue in the face.

The special counsel law is pretty precise. If Shepard Smith wants to throw a hissy fit, that’s his problem. When his contract expires, here’s hoping he isn’t rehired and that they replace him with Trace Gallagher or Ed Henry. They’d be miles ahead if they did that. Listen to Smith’s temper tantrum:

Why is anyone surprised that Putin tried contacting both campaigns or that Putin tried interfering in our election? That’s as surprising as finding out that Bill Gates is rich.

Here’s a question for lefty Smith: why isn’t he interested in the Clinton campaign’s using Russian sources for the infamous discredited dossier? It isn’t news that both parties compile an opposition research file. What is news is that the Clinton campaign, then the FBI, relied on the dossier to trash a man with unverified information. Why isn’t Shepard Smith upset about that? Why aren’t other Democrats upset, too?

It’s time for that no-talent hack (Smith) to get fired.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren is nuttier than any other Democrat running for president with the exception of Sen. Bernie Sanders. Recently, Sen. Warren proposed a “$1.25 trillion education proposal.”

The article starts by saying “On Monday, Democratic presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren released an ambitious $1.25 trillion education proposal that would address rising college costs and the student debt crisis. ‘Higher education opened a million doors for me,’ the senator wrote in a Medium post introducing the plan. “It’s how the daughter of a janitor in a small town in Oklahoma got to become a teacher, a law school professor, a U.S. Senator, and eventually, a candidate for President of the United States. Today, it’s virtually impossible for a young person to find that kind of opportunity.”

Universities used to be required for people to ‘get ahead’. That isn’t as true anymore. I won’t say that universities don’t serve a purpose but they don’t serve as much of a purpose as they did 25 years ago. Trade schools, apprenticeships and other types of training might be more helpful than a 4-year degree. Also, these alternatives often lead to solid middle class jobs without the student getting hit with a pile of debt.

Finally, many of the degrees that universities hand out like candy won’t produce a job that’ll pay off the student’s loans. Students are starting to figure things out. Unfortunately, politicians haven’t. Then again, I’m not surprised even slightly.

What a dipshit! She wants to punish people who’ve been productive while letting the freeloaders, aka endowments and administrators, get off without punishment. Talk about sending the wrong signal.

Let’s be blunt about what Virginia Democrats are trying to do. Virginia Democrats are pushing to become the nation’s first political party associated with infanticide. Of course, their defenders are saying otherwise:

Gov. Ralph Northam added gas to the fire Wednesday by describing a hypothetical situation in a radio interview where an infant who is severely deformed or unable to survive after birth could be left to die. That prompted accusations from prominent Republicans that he supports infanticide.

Democrats said their views were being deliberately mischaracterized by the GOP for political gain. “Republicans in Virginia and across the country are trying to play politics with women’s health, and that is exactly why these decisions belong between a woman and her physician, not legislators, most of whom are men,” Northam spokeswoman Ofirah Yheskel said in a statement.

The story’s language says otherwise:

Northam said that if a woman were to desire an abortion as she’s going into labor, the baby would be “resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue” between doctors and the mother, leaving open what would happen next.

The mother of what? The mother of an unviable tissue mass? (That’s what NARAL and NOW used to call unborn babies.) It’s clear that Gov. Northam is referring to the mother of a fully born baby. This woman (Monica Klein) is clearly a propagandist who isn’t interested in the truth:

Check this out:

The interview began with Carlson asking Klein for her thoughts on comments made by Virginia’s Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam, a pediatric neurologist, that calls to reduce restrictions on late-term abortions. Klein accused Carlson of wanting to go back to a time when women resorted to back-alley abortions and used “coat hangers.”

“I think that right now, reproductive healthcare is under attack by the Republican Party. Seventy-two percent of Americans support right to choose,” Klein said. “We have [President Donald] Trump and sexual predator [Supreme Court Justice Brett] Kavanaugh trying to repeal Roe v. Wade and trying to take away control over our bodies. This isn’t about babies. This is about you attempting to control women’s bodies.”

Sexual predator Kavanaugh? Seriously? This Klein woman is nuttier than a peanut farm. Sen. Ben Sasse issued this response:

This is morally repugnant. In just a few years pro-abortion zealots went from ‘safe, legal, and rare’ to ‘keep the newborns comfortable while the doctor debates infanticide.’ I don’t care what party you’re from — if you can’t say that it’s wrong to leave babies to die after birth, get the hell out of public office.

I couldn’t agree more. This isn’t a matter of Roe v. Wade. It’s a matter of endorsing infanticide.

In 1996, when the Senate debated whether to override President Clinton’s veto of a bill that would’ve banned partial-birth abortion, Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, (D-NY), said this:

“It is as close to infanticide as anything I have come upon.”

It should be noted that Sen. Moynihan was staunchly pro-choice. Still, he was intellectually honest enough to call it what he thought it was. Sen. Moynihan died in 2002 or thereabouts. Moynihan’s Democratic Party died shortly thereafter.

Is It Important For Chancellor Devinder Malhotra To Have Followers On Twitter?
by Silence Dogood

Last December, SCSU President Robbyn R. Wacker posted her support to “unleashfollowers” to encourage faculty and staff to follow Chancellor Devinder Malhotra on Twitter. This was posted to SCSU Announce by Jeffrey C. Wood in University Communications:

I don’t care about following anyone on Twitter especially when the you consider the best ‘worst example’ of Twitter use comes from the current U.S. President. However, the idea that the Chancellor will “love us if we help push him over the 1,000 mark” is just plain silly. Hopefully, the Chancellor is not that much of a ‘diva.’ But, today who knows?

The idea that counting the numbers of Twitter followers as some measure of importance is probably one of dumbest things I have ever heard. If it were true, then one of Chancellor Malhotra’s faculty members in the Minnesota State University System at Mankato with 17,400 followers must be truly brilliant and deserving of a pay raise! And it didn’t take a plug from a university president or PR staffer for Dr. Sprankle to get his followers.

SCSU is facing serious problems from declining enrollment. It’s truly sad that a university president and PR subordinate think it’s worth their time to pitch increasing the number of the Chancellor’s Twitter followers. Unless, of course, the object is to distract people from important issues.

P.S. It worked! Chancellor Devinder Malhotra has blasted past 1,000 Twitter followers!

At this rate it will only take 136 years to catch Professor Sprankle.

Disturbing Enrollment Trends in the Minnesota State University System
by Silence Dogood

A post last fall to the SCSU Discussion list gave the enrollments for the seven Minnesota State Universities and the projected enrollments for FY2019, FY2020, and FY2021. NOTE: The current 2018-2019 academic year is FY2019.

Except for Metropolitan State University, enrollment for all the universities is clearly trending downward. However, the data shows some universities are declining a lot faster than others.

The data contained in the table above can be overwhelming to process making it somewhat difficult to see the whole enrollment picture. If we take the actual enrollment for FY2010 as the starting point and compare it to the projected FY2019 enrollment (for which summer is in the books; at the time the projection was made in October, fall semester was essentially complete and registration for spring was almost finished), the data is graphically presented in the following figure.

Additionally, SCSU’s enrollment drop is larger than the total enrollment of either Bemidji State University or Southwest State University. If the current trend continues for another 667 FYE, the enrollment drop at SCSU will exceed the total enrollment at Minnesota State University Moorhead as well. Since SCSU likes to compare itself with MSU—Mankato, it is also interesting to note that SCSU’s enrollment drop is more than seven times larger than Mankato’s.

In FY2010, SCSU’s FYE enrollment was 758 larger than MSU-Mankato. In FY2019, MSU-Mankato’s FYE enrollment is 2,525 larger than SCSU’s! The differential is 3,283 FYE, which is nearly equal to the total enrollment of Southwest Minnesota State University!

Since the universities in the Minnesota State University System are not the same size, using percent measures may give a relative comparison but not accurately illustrate the magnitude of the problem of declining enrollment. The following Table shows the numeric decline in enrollment at each university and how much of the university system’s enrollment decline is due to each university as a percentage of the total decline. NOTE: Metropolitan State University is omitted from the Table because its’ enrollment increased.

The sum of the third column in the Table shows that from FY2010 to the anticipated FY2019 enrollments, the Minnesota State University System’s universities enrollment declined by 8,631 FYE, which corresponds to a decline of 16.45%. From the data in the Table, nearly, 52% of the Minnesota State University system’s enrollment decline is due to St. Cloud State University! That needs to be said again. More than half of the enrollment decline in the Minnesota State University system’s universities is due to one university alone—SCSU! Perhaps, SCSU should not try to be so ‘AMAZING.’

Sometimes a picture is helpful to see the ‘Big Picture.’ When depicted as a pie chart, the enrollment decline in the Minnesota State System Universities attributed to each university is quite spectacular.

Metropolitan State has shown an enrollment growth over this period of 10.37%. Bemidji (-5.02%), Minnesota State University, Mankato (-5.62%), and Southwest Minnesota State University (-8.27%)-all show declines less than 10% over this same time. Winona State University is next with a decline of 17.36%, followed by Minnesota State University, Moorhead with a 23.69% decline. However, St. Cloud State University stands out from the pack with a whopping decline of 29.62%!

In a nine-year period, St. Cloud State University has lost nearly 30% of its FYE enrollment!

The big red section in the Figure is the percentage of the enrollment decline in Minnesota State System Universities due to St. Cloud State University.

Some see this as a problem. Others just call it ‘Fake News.’ The administration of the Minnesota State System and SCSU’s administration has explained SCSU’s enrollment decline over the past few years by first saying it wasn’t real. Then, saying that it was due to “Right Sizing.” This was then followed by blaming “Demographics.” This are just the ‘big three’, the actual list of excuses, however, is much longer.

The first step in solving a problem is to admit that you have a problem. Otherwise, you are just reacting and blaming external forces for what is happening—both of which have happened a lot at SCSU over the past nine years. Secondly, unless you understand how you got into the situation in the first place, it is very difficult to develop a plan to successfully solve the problem. Rebranding (Unleashing Amazing), “Right Sizing” or reorganizing will not likely solve St. Cloud State’s problems. Essentially, one might just see these efforts as putting ‘lipstick on a pig,’ with apologies to pigs.

Several of the plans by the administration have sounded a lot like the overly optimistic plans of the former Soviet Union. Plans are great. However, unless you assess how your plans have achieved their goals, all you are doing is ‘spin.’ Consider, President Potter repeatedly calling the loss of more than 10 million dollars on the Coborn’s Plaza Apartments a ‘SUCCESS.’

What is needed to solve SCSU’s enrollment decline is a detailed plan with built in assessment AND buy in from the faculty and staff. Simply cutting staff positions, increasing class sizes and teaching loads will not likely accomplish what will be necessary to turn the university around.

It seems that the comics often provide a relevant way to see the logic behind certain actions. The Wizard of ID Comic recently had the following exchange:

Unfortunately, it seems like the administration is continuing denying the reality of the enrollment decline, which for FY2019 may be higher than 7% as well as the significant financial strain that such an enrollment decline places on the financial resources of the university. But more importantly, it seems that the administration is working their ‘alternative math’ to show that the enrollment decline is a good thing. Maybe all the people who have lost their jobs at the university since the reorganization in 2011 might disagree about how good it is. Additionally, the landlords and businesses that were supported by the students that make up those 4,471 FYE that are no longer enrolled might also not see it as a good thing.

At least no one seems to be complaining about not being able to find a parking space! Maybe this enrollment decline is a good thing after all!

I first started writing about the upcoming pilot shortage in this post in 2011. Of course, Earl Potter and Steve Rosenstone ‘knew’ better. Potter shut the program and Rosenstone kept it shut. What a pair of idiots.

This article highlights how disastrous their decisions were when it says “Boeing, for example, is estimating that over the next 20 years, North America will need about 117,000 more pilots. With this growing need, colleges and universities are starting to ramp up their aviation programs. Most recently, Rochester Community and Technical College announced they are looking at starting an Aviation Pilot Education Program. If the program is approved, the college says it will be designed for students to get an associate’s degree in aviation and then transfer to Minnesota State University, Mankato to finish their bachelor’s degree.”

Minnesota doesn’t need another aviation program. It needs at least 2 more aviation programs at the universities. In addition to training pilots, there’s room for training drone operators and aerial fire rescue programs. Let’s not forget that we’ll need air traffic controllers, too.

Wright Aero is the only flight school in Central Minnesota and a former partner to the SCSU aviation program. Bill Mavencamp is the owner of Wright Aero. He says they currently have four flight instructors, about 10 less than they had at their peak in 2009.

“You can see what we’ve gone down to, it’s going to be difficult to build back up with the lack of new pilots in the industry. Especially new local pilots, it’s difficult to talk to a new flight instructor, who lives in Florida, to move to Minnesota.”

Dave Kleis has campaigned for a regional airline here in St. Cloud. What airline is stupid enough to move here when there’s such a half-hearted effort to maintain their workforce? We can now see that answer — none.

Chris Stirewalt’s latest opinion column makes me wonder if he gets paid. It’s that mindless.

Among his most mindless statements is where he states “Now, Trump is going to use his first-ever Oval Office address, the .44 Magnum in the presidential communications arsenal, to lay out this comprehensive plan. He will also, presumably, throw in some bar talk about invoking a national emergency to use extraordinary executive powers to get his way. The intent here is to get Pelosi on defense and cast her as unwilling to deal with a huge issue of major importance to most Americans. It’s not a format that suits the president, who struggles with scripted speeches, but if he can pull it off, could dramatically alter the political moment.”

Apparently, Mr. Stirewalt’s memory is pretty worthless. I recall the turning point of the 2016 presidential campaign. It happened when he started speaking from the teleprompter. This was mostly attributed to Kellyanne Conway.

Let’s remember that Stirewalt was the ‘analyst’ who said that Don Blankenship had the best night of the 3 candidates during the GOP debate. After the night, Blankenship finished a distant third in the primary:

It’s time to admit that Mr. Stirewalt isn’t the brightest bulb in the chandelier.

One of the first things out of Nancy Pelosi’s mouth is potentially stupid. In her op-ed, cowritten with Jim McGovern, Pelosi said “In November, the American people went to the polls and sent an unmistakable message to Washington. By a historic 10 million vote margin, they asked for a Congress that would be more transparent, ethical and focused on debating and advancing good ideas no matter where they come from. They asked for a Congress that would prioritize a positive, forward-looking agenda for the people.”

It’s worth remembering that Ms. Pelosi didn’t initiate a review into Keith Ellison’s alleged molestation of Karen Monahan. Further, Ms. Pelosi is the personification of the Swamp, having started serving in Washington, DC, in 1987.

Ms. Pelosi didn’t check into Rep. Ellison’s alleged misdeeds because that might’ve gotten into her way of becoming speaker again. Is that the personification of a person who’s going to clean the swamp? I don’t think so. Then there’s this:

Third, we will restore Congress’ constitutional role recognizing that the legislative branch is Article I, the first branch of government, coequal to and a check and balance on the executive and the judiciary. We will strengthen the representation of all Americans, and expand the voting rights of representatives elected by our more than 4.5 million fellow Americans from Washington, D.C., and the territories.

This is nothing more than the Democrats’ justification for non-stop investigation into President Trump rather than passing legislation that helps people. The truth is that expectations aren’t high that Pelosi’s House will attempt to accomplish much substantively.

During her speech, Ms. Pelosi said that they “would debate good ideas no matter where they came from.” She’s already failed on that count because walls have protected Israelis from terrorists and South Koreans from invading armies. Frankly, Ms. Pelosi lied during her speech because that’s the Democrats’ nature.

The only question left is how long it’ll take before Democrats go too far.