Trump vs. Clinton: Are Americans Safe Or Not?

By Sal Bommarito

A huge amount of criticism at the Democratic Convention was directed at Donald Trump because he believes the world has become much more  unstable and dangerous during the current administration. After hearing Democratic speaker after speaker regurgitate the same perspective that everything is fine and dandy in America and abroad, I asked myself if I am frightened.

My answer is a resounding yes. I am concerned for my family and fellow citizens every time I go to the airport, into a subway or to a ballgame. I have repeatedly refused to visit global hot spots because I fear the growing animosity of others against Americans.

In major cities across America groups of people are publicly calling for the death of police officers. Every day our brave first responders risk their lives to protect us. There is no place that needs police intervention more than urban areas. Yet the residents in these places march, protest, destroy property in their neighborhoods as they denounce police brutality and procedures.

Around the world every nation denigrates the U.S. The reasons for this are many, but the one most often heard is that America is no longer a dependable ally. How is the proposed isolationism of Trump any different than the non-intervention policies of Obama (especially in the Middle East)? The latter has let down our friends repeatedly. This has resulted in great gains by terrorists and the most violent groups in the world. Our president would rather waste time debating whether those that wish us harm are just plain terrorists or Islamic radicals.

Donald Trump didn’t foment the conditions that have resulted in a world of hate and bigotry. Trump is not responsible for the terrorist attacks around the world or the police assassinations in America. Trump didn’t encourage out of control slaughter of thousands across the globe by religious fanatics. This all began long before his appearance on the scene.

Trump has correctly pointed out that warm and fuzzy diplomacy is not effective. America must assert itself or Russia will continue to illegally annex more former Soviet republics, the Chinese will abscond more territory near their country, North Korea will continue to develop intercontinental missiles, Iran will soon have a nuclear bomb and ISIS will keep the world on edge with more suicide attacks.

Rather than fighting with terrorists and murderers the current administration would rather wage war with the most affluent in America. Obama’s class warfare rhetoric has been more than shameful pitting American against American. This is not 18th Century France. The rich are not stealing from the poor.

The socialists, ultra liberals and the have nots are angry that some people  are successful,  go to great colleges,  earn a great living and enjoy their lives. The emphasis should be raising the prospects of all Americans, not taking money from the affluent and redistributing it without any conditions on the recipients.

Trump is playing an important role by pointing out what is wrong with America. Obama has done the same thing for years, focusing exclusively on those who are prospering in America. Trump is astute to recognize that things are not as rosy as Clinton and Obama would have us believe. Many Americans are frightened and/or hurting economically. The Democrats have proven that they are incapable of improving America. And they have poisoned worldwide relationships formed before Obama’s tenure began.

Trump is by no means a perfect candidate. I have indicated so many times on this blog . But at least he isn’t shy about telling us like it is. The last thing this country needs is a continuation of Obama’s presidency.

Hillary Clinton: Don’t Believe Everything People Are Saying About Her At The Convention

By Sal Bommarito

Hillary Clinton’s anemic resume as a First Lady and politician over the past several decades is being rewritten by her  supporters during the Democratic Convention. Is there anyone who really believes this claptrap?

For those of us old enough to remember Hillary’s early years, we know that she’s was involved in scandal and intrigue long before she became a candidate for the presidency. The list of shady deals and scandals is long and includes the following:

  • Whitewater- a property investment scandal. Everyone affiliated with the transaction was indicted except the Clintons.
  • Clinton Global Initiative- political favors for  contributions.
  • Chinagate- Bribes from Chinese operatives.
  • Travelgate- job favors.
  • Vince Foster- suicide victim resulting from involvement in Clinton scandals.
  • Filegate- accessed FBI files on opponents.
  • Cattle futures- $1,000 investment grew to $100,000 profit.
  • Lootgate- Absconded White House furniture and shipped it to home in Chappaqua, NY.
  • Numerous campaign donation violations.
  • Benghazi- resulted in the deaths of four Americans including the Ambassador to Libya.
  • Emails on personal servers when Secretary of State, and the destruction of evidence.

We should expect to hear more about Clinton’s long list of scandals over the next few months as Donald Trump unleashes  his henchmen. The point to be made is that corruption and disregard for the law are a trademark of the the Clintons.

It would be an understatement to say that many Americans were sick and tired of Hillary even before she ran for senator. During her husband’s tenure in the White House she worked on health car reform. Hillary’s recommendations were quashed resoundingly by Republicans and sensible members of her own party. As an aside, we should expect that Hillary will give Bill important assignments if she wins the election. It’s likely this will be done without any concurrence of Congress.

During Bill’s presidency Hillary was always actively engaged. She chimed in aggressively going far beyond the traditional role  of First Lady. When Bill’s dalliances with women became public, she was humiliated and became a sympathetic character. Ironically Bill’s sordid behavior propelled Hillary politically. Some observers were astounded that she didn’t walk away from her husband. But we know why.

Hillary stood by her man. Why would she subject herself to continued embarrassment by a husband who has no control over his libido? The answer is obvious. She’s not even in the same political solar system as Bill, and she knows it. Hillary needed/needs him to build her political career. It’s a relationship of convenience. Bill and others need to make syrupy speeches about her altruism and patriotism as they have been doing this week. Alas she’s not as saintly as some have portrayed her.

Hillary’s record as Secretary of State is now front and center.  Trump and other opponents have repeatedly said that the world is far more worse off and  dangerous now than it was when the Obama administration took control of the White House eight years ago. The U.S. no longer has trustworthy allies because we have broken so many promises. We have let down many world leaders, and Hillary was an active enforcer of Obama’s warped world view that has led us to this moment in history.

And now more scandal. Hillary has serious problems with modern technology. Clearly no one has advised her about the derivative risks of using email . Mrs. Clinton, here are some guidelines you might want to consider. Do not communicate any national security information on email . Do not discuss illegal activities, immoral behavior or make disparaging remarks on email. Pick up a phone (that is secure) and communicate.

Finally Hillary has been unabashed about lying and twisting the truth. And she depends upon her subordinates to fall on swords for her. Debbie Wasserman Schultz is the latest casualty.

Yet, carrying one the worst trustworthiness ratings in the history of politics, people vouch for Clinton. Some say she is the lesser of two evils. Maybe this is true, but she’s plenty evil.

 

 

 

Democratic Convention Is A Mess

By Sal Bommarito

The Democratic Convention is getting more interesting with each passing day. There’s all sorts of intrigue. It all  kicked off with the resignation of Debbie Wasserman Schultz as Chairwoman of the convention, after emails were published that indicated that the Democratic establishment attempted to discredit Bernie Sanders.

It didn’t take long for the convention to become  raucous. Sanders’ supporters have been marching and demonstrating outside of the convention. Many of them are openly attacking Hillary Clinton.

Inside the convention center Sander’s delegates are raising hell, interrupting speakers and verbally denouncing Clinton. Elizabeth Warren, the most famous hater of Wall Street companies and their employees, was heckled mercilessly during her ubiquitous income inequality speech. Sanders’ delegates have accused her of abandoning their guy.

Many delegates are carrying pro Sanders signs and negative Clinton placards. Even Sanders, in his Monday evening presentation, could not subdue his own base. He probably doesn’t appreciate that his loyalists are more loyal to his socialistic rhetoric than to him personally.

Two of the most interesting developments relate to Trump and Michelle Obama.

Many Democrats, in an effort to downplay the Schultz email scandal, are proliferating a rumor that Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin, the Russian autocrat, are in cahoots. Supposedly they’re admirers of each other, even though it’s been reported that they have never met.

Startlingly some diehard Clinton backers are saying that Russian hackers were responsible for publicly disclosing the embarrassing emails (certainly feasible), and then delivering them to the press on the day before the Democratic Convention began. The intent was to disrupt Clinton’s big moment. All this was a plan conceived by Trump and Putin.

Really? A Trump and Putin conspiracy? I don’t think so. Certainly Putin has a favorite between Trump and Clinton; and it’s probably Trump. Putin has a cold relationship with Clinton that dates back to her highly unsuccessful tenure as Secretary of State.  In any case I’m sure Putin will grow to despise President Trump after they meet.

But most important is a story in the NY Times that briefly touches on the enthusiastic support of Hillary by Michelle Obama. The public shouldn’t be fooled into thinking that  Michelle is a big fan of Hillary, or she’s so invested in the election of a woman president.

In the Times article the writer hit upon something that is  noteworthy. The Clintons and the Obamas dislike each other. Hillary bashed Barack when they opposed each other in 2008, and Barack supposedly is frustrated by Bill’s political and personal antics. According to the Times the four of them have not dined together since 2013.

Barack’s legacy will surely  be flushed down the toilet if Trump wins. Considering that Obama has so little to hang on to from a legacy perspective, it would be disastrous if Obamacare were cancelled or radically changed, and his anti-confrontational foreign policies were abandoned (among many other things). If Trump wins, Obama will barely be mentioned in history books.

Ergo- Michelle is trying to help her guy and not really supporting Hillary.

I’m sure there will be much more drama in the next few days as all the friends of Hillary fight it out for air time at the convention (another story in the Times).

 

 

 

Debbie Wasserman Schultz Upsets Democrat National Convention

By Sal Bommarito

Is it a shock to learn that the Democratic National Committee Chairman Debbie Wasserman Schultz and other party leaders acted to sabotage the efforts of Bernie Sanders? Is it a surprise that nobody to this point has even suggested that Hillary Clinton played a role in the conspiracy? Is it startling that the Democrats are saying that Russian operatives hacked their email on the orders of Vladimir Putin because the Russian leader would prefer Trump to be elected our new president?

Rep. Schultz is an ambitious political hack who was hoping to ride Clinton’s coattails to a greater role in government. Until today she had every reason to help Clinton win the election, even if she had to ignore her implicit responsibility to conduct a fair primary process for her party.

As Chairwoman of the DNC, Schultz was supposed to give all Democratic contenders an equal opportunity to compete in the presidential selection process. She didn’t, and Sanders supporters are rightly irate. It’s expected that they will now be a major disruptive force during the convention.

Ms. Schultz’s political ambitions overwhelmed her sense of good judgment and fair play, and so she conducted a crooked campaign for Crooked Hillary. Isn’t it eye popping how scandal follows the Clintons?

The 800 pound gorilla at the convention is whether the Clinton campaign knew about, or worse, coordinated with Schultz as a co-conspirator. Ironically Sanders, the socialist, had no real chance to win the Democratic primary. Yet he was tarred and feathered by the Democratic establishment.

This episode is reminiscent of the 1972 presidential election, when Richard Nixon’s henchmen tried to disrupt the Democratic campaign, even though Nixon was surely going to win  (George McGovern won only 17 electoral votes in 1972). One wonders whether a cover-up is now underway (the ultimate reason for Nixon’s resignation), to protect Hillary Clinton. So far the press has not focused on Clinton’s role, if any. I’m puzzled. It would be the first thing I’d investigate if I worked at the New York Times.

And finally we hear that the Russians are involved. The emerging conspiracy theory is that Trump and Putin are expected to become bff’s if Trump wins the election. Where have I heard this prediction before? Fact is that there is no chance the U.S. and Russia will develop close ties so long as Putin is in power. Nevertheless it is not out of the question that Russian hackers might have disclosed Schultz’s nefarious activities to WikiLeaks. Associating Trump to this whole thing is laughable. When will the bad guys  (and bad girls) learn that documenting stuff on email (and other types of social media) is risky especially if you’re contemplating something illegal or unethical?

This election, if possible, has become even more ridiculous over the weekend. The problem Americans are facing is not that hackers, disreputable political operatives or sore losers (like Sanders) are creating a fuss. The real issue is that we have two ruthless and undeserving megalomaniacs competing to become president of this nation.

 

 

Donald Trump For President

By Sal Bommarito

Those of you who have read Softball Politics over the past year know that I’ve been very critical of the two principal presidential candidates. To be clear I’m ashamed that America will nominate such undeserving people.

Nevertheless either Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton is going to be our next president. For some time I thought it best to vote for a third party candidate in protest. But in recent days I decided to go with Trump. Trust me, it’s difficult to admit to my readers and friends that I will side with this man. My rationale for doing so is anything but conventional. In fact it’s downright unorthodox and based upon two overriding perspectives.

Before digging into my reasoning, it’s important to reiterate that a huge number of people have reservations about both candidates, including many members of their own party. Their unfavorable ratings are among the worst in history for a presidential candidate. I’m still perplexed why our nominating process didn’t respond to this negativity and come up with candidates who are indisputably truthful, respected and statesmanlike.

The most important phenomenon is that many Americans have given up on the political establishment. Times are difficult economically, the political parties are constantly at each other’s throats, the legislative process is at a standstill, terror threats are more menacing than ever, race relations have deteriorated and the reputation of our country has been devastated by the warped ideology of the current president.

Those that feel strongly that this is the case are now in Trump’s camp. Many are white and don’t have college degrees. Very few are affluent. Some are attracted to Trump’s xenophobia. Others just want a candidate who isn’t from the political establishment.

As far as Clinton is concerned, I’m staggered by any support she receives from liberals. A self-proclaimed socialist gave her run for her money in the primaries, so many liberals won’t vote for her. Hillary has continued the Clinton propensity to stretch the truth (an understatement) to whatever is politically expedient.

The slack given to Hillary by the press and the liberal establishment was evident in FBI Director James Comey’s indictment (not in the legal sense, unfortunately) of her behavior relating to emails. It was clear that the law was broken, but there would be no indictment (in the legal sense). Ask Retired Gen. David Petraeus if he believes his treatment under the law for related indiscretions was the same as Clinton’s.

Back to Trump. I’m going to vote for Trump because I cannot deal with the thought of another Clinton White House. I cannot stomach the corrupt way that the Clintons lead (remember, they used White House bedrooms for political purposes). I resent their proclaimed destiny to build a political dynasty.

Bill’s tenure was a huge challenge for America, yet the country gave him a pass. I’m not prepared to ignore all the scandalous behavior of Hillary over the years and pull her lever on Election Day.

I’ve concluded that men and women who are ill suited to lead the U.S. can do so with a great cabinet and experienced advisors. Donald Trump isn’t going to map out a comprehensive plan to make peace between Israel and Palestine. He’s not going to write a thesis that outlines an economic strategy to make America great. His assistants will do it for him. He will just make speeches to deliver his administration’s policies developed by others.

As for the plethora of stupid suggestions that we all expect from Trump, Congress, his cabinet, his advisors and hopefully his family will be close by to insure that the Donald doesn’t get too far off track.

Many may disagree with me, but I believe Ronald Reagan wasn’t a great choice to be president. Like Trump he was a great communicator. But he put together a world-class cabinet that made him a great president. The same could happen with Trump.

I’m not minimizing the risks associated with Trump’s temperament or impetuous personality. Him saying inane things is a big risk. He may even insult one or two world leaders along the way. But with experienced people to guide him, it could work.

So there you have it. I hope I don’t lose too many friends because of my change of heart.

America Should Take A Political Mulligan

Our nation is on the verge of a major political crisis. A perfect storm is underway. Every day the pundits are telling us that, indeed, both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton are despised by huge numbers of Americans. The presidential election has become a contest to elect the least horrible person to assume the most important position in the world.

Consider that the next president will appoint a new Supreme Court justice who will likely have the controlling vote for some of the most important issues facing our nation. They include abortion, gun control, a wide array of state versus federal issues and so much more.

The next president will be responsible for establishing policies to deal with the continuing danger of ISIS, the deconstruction of the European Union and growing threats from Russia, Iran and North Korea.

The next president will direct the U.S. economy as it attempts to steer the global economic community away from another recession.

Most importantly the next president will have to rein in congressional animosity. We should not elect a president that will perpetuate even greater obstructionism and inaction by our lawmakers.

Do you really want Trump or Clinton to lead America during these important times? Both have proven without a doubt that they do not have the ability or the political IQ to handle the job. Frankly Americans don’t like either of them; the polls clearly indicate this is the case. Why shouldn’t the U.S. have two exceptional and accomplished people vying for the presidency representing each party?

Some golfers take another shot after they hit a poor one. The rules of golf do not allow such an action and so golf purists cringe when duffers take a “mulligan.” Similarly political purists refuse to admit that the two candidates are both losers who will be disastrous presidents.

Consider that Trump has proven to us time and again that he doesn’t have the character, experience or temperament to be the leader of the free world.

Clinton is a liar and surely guilty of crimes relating to the email scandal. The Justice Department should indict her even if it causes a political crisis. Scandal follows the Clintons everywhere they go. They cannot seem to avoid making political and personal choices that make the vast majority of Americans cringe with disgust. The thought of them in the White House for another four years is depressing at best.

There is still a chance that the candidates will crash and burn before the election. Trump is going to be trounced in November; the writing is on the wall. He doesn’t even have a nationwide political operation to help him compete in the general election. Rather he relies on Twitter and raucous rallies to sell himself. Plus the Republican establishment and most educated people in his own party abhor the man.

Clinton should be indicted as mentioned preciously for her missteps relating to her emails and the ensuing cover-up. Her performance as Secretary of State has been criticized far and wide. She was an accomplice of President Obama as he did everything possible to tear America apart, make the world hate the U.S. and enable terrorist to flourish.

Maybe I’m dreaming, but I still hope both parties break the rules and take a political mulligan. America deserves better presidential candidates from both parties.