The Real Reason Trump Was Investigated for Russian Ties

My hypothesis as to why President Trump was investigated for Russian ties is at least as plausible, and likely far more plausible, than the Democrat Party’s Trump-Russia collusion conspiracy. The Democrat Party is on a crusade to destroy Donald Trump’s Presidency. So far, an 8+ month investigation has returned exactly zero evidence that Donald Trump and his campaign colluded with the Russian government to defeat Hillary Clinton.

Note: There are no claims that the grossly embarrassing information exposed by the DNC server hack and John Podesta’s emails was faked.

The Democrat Party is well known for the tactic of going on the Offensive by charging opponents with accusations that they themselves are guilty of. They are quick to tar and feather the Republican Party and every member in it as racist supporters of the Ku Klux Klan working to bring back Jim Crow Laws for example. Of course the truth is that the Klan was the militant arm of the Democrat Party, and it was Democrats who invented and employed Jim Crow Laws. History shows that Republicans were the Party that fought the Klan and Jim Crow Laws.

It’s also well known that in campaigns the truth doesn’t always matter. October surprises often have some measure of truth, but their real intent is to quickly damage one’s opponent in the run up to Election Day. The election ends before the full truth gets out.

It’s with these two thoughts as background that I hypothesize that the investigation into Donald Trump and his campaign’s alleged ties to Russia was in fact:

  1. A weaponization of the United States intelligence agencies and
  2. Their use in opposition research for Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

Why? Remember, the book Clinton Cash clearly detailed Hillary and Bill Clinton’s ties to the Russian Government and Vladimir Putin. Bill Clinton was given over $700,000 for a speech that he gave in Russia. There were very clear ties between Hillary and Bill to wealthy Russian oligarchs.

Clinton Cash details the connections between the Clintons and Russian front companies in the sale of 20% of US uranium mines to the Russians. Clinton Cash also details how nine investors connected with the sale donated $145 Million to the Clinton foundation.

Hillary Clinton had no defense against these revelations. They were well documented and damning. Her campaign had to be concerned about her connections to Russia and Putin and her role as SECSTATE in moving the sale forward, so they needed a strategy to deal with it. Beyond ignoring the scandal, it’s likely that Hillary’s best strategy for blunting the impact of this bombshell was to have counter charges ready to go against Donald Trump.

Going on the Offensive against Trumps campaign might buy her enough time to get her safely through the election. In order to orchestrate an attack against Trump, Hillary’s political machine required a portfolio of evidence stockpiled and disseminated within Democratic operatives to be used at the moment of greatest need.

Unfortunately, the Russian connections to Clinton never became a significant issue during the election, despite its explosive nature. Clearly the Democrat Party and the minion media were completely convinced that Hillary Clinton was going to win the election, and so the blitzkrieg counterattack against Donald Trump and his campaign was never used.

Hillary Clintons campaign and the Democrat Party were shocked the night of 8 November, and Trumps win demanded an explanation. The Democrat rank and file was enraged, since the minion media convinced them Hillary was going to win in a landslide. From their perspective it wasn’t possible that Trump could’ve beaten her fair and square.

The Democrat Party/Minion Media conspiracy that came out was the unspent Opposition Research round that Donald Trumps campaign had ties to the Russians. In the end this witch-hunt will find nothing because there was nothing to it, and there never was intended to be anything of substance in it. The intent was merely to distract the American voter long enough to get Hillary across the finish line.

Further evidence as to my contention that ties to Russians and their impact on America’s elections really have nothing to do with this story is the clear evidence that no one is asking about Hillary Clinton’s ties to the Russians and what influence or leverage they may have had over her, had she become President. The fact that this is a one-way story, completely surrounding Donald Trump and his campaign, proves that facts really didn’t matter.

Update:

  • The recently released book Shattered details how Hillary’s Campaign was responsible for starting the conspiracy theory immediately following her 8 Nov loss.

Trump’s Victory and the Principles of War, Part III

P-51 Mustangs Over Washington D.C., 8 May, 2015; Arsenal of Democracy Flyover

P-51 Mustangs Over Washington D.C., 8 May, 2015; Arsenal of Democracy Flyover

  • This is Part III of my analysis of the 2016 Presidential Election through the lens of the Principles of War:(Definitions of each Principle)

Trumps Victory And The Principles of War: Part I

Trump’s Victory And The Principles of War: Part II

  • Simplicity: The more moving parts a campaign or operation has, the more likely something will break down and compromise the outcome. Donald Trump’s campaign was as simple as it could get, from his message to his operations, and broke the mold on how to wage successful presidential campaigns. Compared to Hilary, and his main GOP primary contenders, Trump spent less money, hired far fewer people in his campaign, and manned far fewer statewide victory offices. Trump did not pull out of campaigning to spend weeks plotting his responses to debate questions, holding mock debates where every possible response could be scripted and poll tested like Hillary did. He relied on simplicity, where he went out and talked directly to the American people, in person and through social media. Trump had only a few key surrogates, like Kelly Ann Conway and Newt Gingrich, who engaged the Minion Media directly, and that kept his message tight and consistent.

Trump relied on key paid campaign staff, volunteers and local GOP Party support for his simple election day operations, and they combined their efforts to defeat what was supposed to be the most vaunted political machine in history. Trump’s faith in his supporters getting out votes for him, was the epitome of Simplicity, and decentralized execution.

Hillary’s campaign was the polar opposite of Trump’s. Her campaign was a big money, high personnel, high spending, “Minion Media” colluding and intimidating effort that failed to see or believe the inroads Trump’s campaign was making in the “Blue Firewall” and traditional democrat voters. Hillary’s message was convoluted, complex, and failed to connect with voters outside of the progressive coasts.

Joint Principals (added post 911):

  • Restraint: Democrats are known for going for the throat, and Hillary was anything but restrained. She claimed the High Road but evidence such as the Wikileaks dump of her campaign manager John Podesta’s emails clearly showed they played dirty, including colluding with the media to get debate questions, and plotting with the DNC on how to rig the primaries against Bernie Sanders. In the general, her claims of racism and bigotry were nothing but a transparent effort to use identity politics to destroy the GOP candidate. Thankfully, Trump did not unduly restrain himself, and Hillary’s campaign had difficulty dealing with him as a result.

The Allies did not win WWII by using restraint. Fire bombings of German cites like Dresden or the bombing of Hiroshima were not example of restraint. Given that, Donald Trumps campaign was not an example of restraint. Previous Republican like McCain and Romney lost because they were grossly restrained. Republican voters were looking for a candidate to take the fight to democrats, and they elected Trump.

  • Perseverance: Trump clearly followed this Principle. He never retreated, never backed down, never slowed down, and never quit despite calls from media pundits through out the campaign that he was just in it for the publicity, to start a media company, as a fake to help Hillary, and other fake news motivations. In addition, Donald Trump was assailed by more negative press, accusations of racism, sexism, Islamophobia and bigotry than any successful candidate ever. Most others would have wilted under the assault, but Trump persevered and won.

Hillary on the other hand showed a lack of perseverance. She was ill, sat out the campaign for days at a time, and held a very light campaign schedule compared to Trumps. She did outlast her illicit home-brew email server scandal, but it eroded her already poor credibility. Hillary’s lifetime of baggage, combined with her server, the Clinton Foundation FBI investigation and the Wikileaks exposure finally did her in.

  • Legitimacy: As far as we know, both campaigns operated within the legal rules. Hillary morally acted outside those bounds by accepting debate questions and engaging in media collusion and DNC favoritism during the primaries. Cries of Trump not accepting potential election results gave way to Hillary and democrats not accepting the actual election results crying (illegitimate Russian intervention). Ironically, America depends upon the peaceful transfer of power from legitimate president to another. Democrats are out to delegitimize Donald Trumps presidency, and risk anarchy in the process.

5 Questions The “Minion Media” Won’t Ask About “Russian Election Meddling”

In the latest progressive meme, the “Minion Media”, The White House, and Democrat politicians around every corner are crying that the Russian Government hacked the Democrats to change the 8 November election in Donald Trumps favor. Note: democrats are blaming the Russian Government, Putin himself, not some random unsponsored Russian hacker.

The Minion Media ignores the real questions, while running full speed creating another Mountain out of a Mole Hill. The questions that they should be asking are:

Why would Putin want Trump elected over Hillary? Bill Clinton traveled to Russia and got paid a massive speaking fee. The Clintons helped broker a deal where the Russians bought 20% of US uranium mines. The Clinton Foundation received over $100M from wealthy donors involved with the deal.

Why harm an ideologically aligned globalist like Hillary over an anti-globalist like Trump? Democrats are known for loving communists and Marxists, and socialists, which is well documented in Trevor Loudon’s book The Enemies Within.

FBI Director Comey stated that it was extremely likely that Hillary’s illicit home-brew server was hacked by at least 5 foreign governments. If we can assume, as democrats are, that Russia hacked Podesta’s Gmail account, its a safe bet they hacked Hillary’s home-brew server, and have copies of all of her 33,000+ destroyed emails. If they have those emails, which would very likely contain damming information, why would the Russians not also use them to trash Hillary’s campaign?

Could the Russians have been led to John Podesta’s Gmail account from Hillary’s hacked home-brew server? Perhaps Podesta was hacked only because they had information from her unprotected, unsanctioned, and illegal server, and brought this on herself? This is, after all, why government employees must use protected government computers to conduct Americas business?

Why did Wikileaks publish Podesta’s emails yet nothing from Trump? Because Podesta’swere EARTH SHATTERING!

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange said WikiLeaks has ‘some information’ about Trump’s campaign but he can’t compete with what the candidate himself says”. In other words, I can’t harm Donald Trump anymore than he appears to harm himself, so why bother.

These questions, all very simple and basic for any true journalist, wont get asked let alone answered by the Minion Media or the progressives egging them on because they are devastating to Hillary Clinton and the Democrat Party. They will continue the Snipe Hunt instead, in a clear effort to delegitimize Trump’s election, and to destabilize America.

Trump’s Victory And The Principles Of War, Part II

Trump’s Victory And The Principles of War: Part III

  • Maneuver: The most prominent tactic in the Trump Campaign was his use of massive rallies. Trump crisscrossed the country hitting battle ground state after battle ground state, attending multiple rallies a day, often 7 days a week. He out maneuvered Hillary Clintons lack luster campaign, as she often took numerous days off, and let others campaign for her. Not only did Trump out maneuver Hillary in campaign appearances, he did so on social media, to dramatic effect as well. Trump often appeared on Fox News at night, constantly hammering his message.David Brock himself criticized her campaign by stating the fact that the campaign had no discernable online strategy.

Donald Trumps best use of maneuver was his wildly successful strategy to open up new, once solidly blue, battleground states. Trump was roundly criticized by beltway pundits for wasting his time, money, and energy in states like Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin. Its clear now that the waste was in the out maneuvered Hillary Campaign.

  • Unity of Command: Donald Trump was clearly in charge of his campaign. If anything, there was constant critique that he didn’t listen to his advisors enough. There were even inaccurate reports that they took his Twitter account away, which would have hampered some other Principles, which relied upon social media. That Unity of Command extended through his campaign advisors, staff and family. Trump exercised that Unity when he replaced Corey Lewandowski, his campaign manager, on 20 Jul despite Corey’s wildly successful performance during the Republican nomination process.

President Obama and numerous other surrogates heavily bolstered Hillary’s campaign by covering for her small and lackluster campaign events. She was missing from the campaign trail for days at a time, and despite her initial boast that as a woman she was best qualified to be president, she called for help from men as it appeared that she was unable to hold her own. Additionally, Hillary effectively outsourced her campaign to the “Minion Media”, relying on them for fawning coverage and leaked debate questions.

Centralized control and decentralized execution are a central component of Unity of Command. Trumps campaign, unlike Romney’s for instance, succeeded because it was decentralized in execution, adaptive and flexible as a result since it relied on local volunteers.

  • Security: Trump frequently spoke during the campaign about the stupidity of broadcasting Americas plans to our enemies, like ISIS, before acting. He understands the importance of Security in running a successful business, and instinctively understands its critical to national security. Trumps campaign never broke this Principle.

The greatest impact of the Principle of Security was Hillary’s gross violation of it. First, Hillary’s violated Security when she exposed National Secrets through her home- brew email server, which haunted her campaign throughout the election. Second, Julian Assange and Wikileaks provided another massive violation of campaign security. Assange released over 50,000 emails from Hillary’s Campaign Manager, John Podesta, and exposed the inner most workings of amount Hillary’s Campaign and how they colluded with the Minion Media. We will never know exactly how damaging these two breaches of Security were, but they most certainly didn’t help her.

  • Surprise: No Principal of War epitomizes the 2016 election more than the Principle of Surprise. To believe the Minion Media, even Trump himself was surprised that he won, which is ridiculous. Certainly the RCP averages did not predict his win, but there was plenty of evidence that Hillary was in a fight from polling to energy in Trumps supporters. Political races are known for October Surprises, and Hillary’s was the Billy Bush tape. The Trump Campaigns surprise was succeeding in his campaign strategy, to turn solid blue states red. He did so in WI, MI, and PN, and Maine’s 2nd Congressional District despite the wizards of smart and Hillary’s Campaign saying that it was folly. According to Hunter Lewis, one of the campaign’s most brilliant examples of surprise, and this could fall under the Principle of Maneuver and Offensive as well, was Trump’s press conference just prior to the second presidential debate.

“With virtually no time either to think or act, the Trump campaign managed to organize a press conference before the debate featuring accusers of Bill Clinton. It got the mainstream media to cover it by heralding it as Trumps reply to the tape, with no mention of the women invited to join him. Once the cameras were already on, and the women filed in, it was too late for the networks to turn them off.”

Trump’s Campaign effectively used “Surprise”, but the effect was amplified because of Hillary’s Campaign the Democrat Party’s hubris.

Why The Stein/Clinton Recount Was So Predictable

AnacondaHillary Clinton was soundly defeated on 8 Nov, losing to Donald Trump in an Electoral College blowout 232 to 306, with 270 needed to win. Now, consistent with the Anaconda Strategy, Green Party leftist candidate Jill Stein is leading a Democrat effort to overturn the will of the American People by demanding a recount ofthe results in MI, PA and WI.

NOTE: She isnt worried about challenging any states that Hillary narrowly won (ex. NH, NV or MN)!

The Stein/Hillary challenge also highlights the hypocrisy of the democrat party and Minion Media. From the last debate on 19 Oct, when candidate Trump stated his reluctance to blindly accept any election result, Hillary and her machine eviscerated Trump for attacking the heart of Americas democracy.

According to the left wing HuffPo on 7 Nov, not accepting the results could result in:

  • Undermining The Next President
  • Triggering Violence
  • Undermining Democracy

Has the HuffPo demanded Hillary accept the results? President Obama mocked Trump telling him to stop whining, and to accept the results. Is he telling Hillary to stop whining now? No!

rp_IMG_0606-194x300.jpgNo need for that, as Hillary and the progressive movement follow the Saul Alinsky model, which allows 11 extensions of Machiavellis The Ends Justifies the Means. Accepting election results is only for republicans who get beat, not for democrats. Thr

The Anaconda Strategy exposes that democrats resist at every turn to prevent the uncoiling of the Progressive Agenda. To that end, they can make any charge, invent any story, demand any recount to stay in power.

This is just the beginning of the Holding Phase. Hillary and Stein will fail, but the energy and money put into this hopeless effort only shows the strength of their authoritarian convictions.

Trump’s Victory and the Principles of War, Part I

Heavy Artillery Located at the Battle of Yorktown

Heavy Artillery Located at the Battle of Yorktown

Analysts are touting Donald Trump’s 8 November 2016 victory as the greatest political upset in American history. No doubt countless volumes will be written over the coming years on what happened in this race and how an outsider overcame the most vaunted democrat political machine any candidate ever had backing them, while also defeating an entrenched republican establishment, overwhelming “Minion Media”and Hollywood support, and double the campaign funding.

Hillary Clinton: $1.191Billion vs Donald Trump: $646.8 Million

In the end, the one thing that Donald Trump did have was the American people’s support.

Over the next three blogs I will assess the race from a singularly unique perspective. My 29 Sep, 2013 Blog “Applying The Principles of War to American Politics” discussed the US Military’s Principals of War, and how the Republican Party needed to learn from these principles, peacefully apply them to defeat progressives and the Democrat Party, and use them as a critical strategic component to return Constitutional freedoms to the American people. Donald Trump’s Campaign Manager, and recently selected chief strategist Stephen K. Bannon, recently said that “politics is war”.

Trump’s Victory And The Principles of War: Part II

Trump’s Victory And The Principles of War: Part III

President Elect Donald Trumps campaign, knowingly or instinctively applied thePrinciples of War to enable his victory over Hillary Clinton. The lessons are clear for republicans going forward: consciously apply these principles and win.

  • Mass: Donald Trump perfected the Principle of Mass. He massed his supporters at rallies across the country. Pundits argued that the size and energy of his crowds didn’t matter. They were wrong! Trump massed his small campaign staff, a fraction of the size and cost of Jeb Bush’s, or Hillary Clintons, to great effect. He massed his campaign funding, getting far out spent by Bush and Hillary. Trumps campaign also held most of their add spending until the last two weeks of the campaign, unleashing the adds and outspending Hillary down the stretch. This might have made the difference in the election. Finally, and most importantly, Trump massed his voters setting the record for the most votes any candidate ever got in the GOP Primary process, and soundly beating Hillary in the electoral college. Democrats are touting Hillary’s popular vote numbers as evidence of here greater support. In fact, it doesn’t matter. She massed voters in the wrong places, concentrated in California and New York, and not in critical states like Wisconsin, North Carolina, Florida, Michigan and Pennsylvania. The popular vote is debatable as well. If Hillary massed illegal voters, as some are claiming, then she may well have been beaten here as well.
  • Objective: Both Trump and Clinton shared the objective of winning the Presidency. Trump however spelled out his overarching objective in four words: Make America Great Again. That was his campaigns objective, clear and concise. Winning the presidency was only a means to Making America Great Again. In contrast, Hillary’s objective was purely winning the presidency. Her campaign slogans, like Stronger Together were mere window dressing enabling her election. The American people were more likely to support Trump’s objective, which elevated them, vs. Hillary’s which elevated Hillary. According to Vice President Joe Biden in a CNN interview:

     

    “Hillary Clinton felt compelled to run for president despite lacking a clear campaign vision”…”I don’t think she ever really figured it out”

  • Offensive: Donald Trump set himself apart from other GOP candidates by going on, and maintaining the offensive. Although he was criticized for defending himself too much, he never stopped going on the attack. In contrast with how John McCain and Mitt Romney treated Barack Obama, Trump went straight after Hillary, refusing to ease up, and maintaining the offensive. If anything, Trump was criticized for attacking too often, too harshly, and for attacking not just Hillary, but the corrupt media, Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan, President Obama, and others. In the end, America wanted a fighter, and they believe that they got one.In contrast David Brock, democrat strategist savant, lamented that Hillary wasnt more like Donald Trump in going on the offensive against the media saying Clintons biggest problem was simply not being more like Trump, at least when it came to dealing with the press.”
  • Economy of Force: Donald Trump wrote the book on The Art of the Deal, and during this campaign he wrote the book on political Economy of Force. No Principle of War was better put into practice than this one. Trumps campaign was run largely from his own money or small donors, which was wisely spent. His staff was only a fraction of the size of Hillary’s. Trump maximized the use of volunteers throughout the country, tying into local and state Republican Party volunteers. Support from the RNC and its get out the vote effort defeated the vaunted Democrat GOTV machine, even though it was outspent. Trump was also heralded for his skill at dominating news cycles. Although much of the “Minion Media” coverage was grossly pro-Hillary, Trump was still effective at getting his message out for free.
    • Significantly, Donald Trump used social media to go over the heads of the “Minion Media”. His 36 million followers between Twitter, Facebook and Instagram heard directly from Trump and they spread the word, at next to no cost to his campaign. The Trump campaign spent only $160,00 for example producing and posting short policy videos and got 74 million views.
    • Trump’s Social Media Director, Dan Scavino, described the slim nature of the campaign to Breitbart News “…there was not some boardroom of political consultants pre-testing talking points for tweets and Facebook and Instagram posts before they went out. It was him, Trump and his iPhone, that led the way in making this happen.”

 

A Sense of Belonging Why Trump Resonates

KC Chiefs vs Redskins FedEx Field 8 Dec 13

KC Chiefs vs Redskins FedEx Field 8 Dec 13

Humans are a social species and are ingrained with a need to belong, and its one of the reasons Trumps campaign is so powerful. Belonging is essential to humanity. We crave the others companionship, and form nearly infinite groups to soothe that craving.

Churches, national citizenship, sports teams, law enforcement organizations, the brother hood of arms, PTA, trade organizations, political parties, unions, civic organizations, political organizations, fan clubs, and rod and gun clubs name but a few.

The importance of our need to belong cant be overstated. Democrat Politicians are masters at using the same desires to belong to divide the country. They try to push each American into ever-smaller groups and to pit those groups against each other. White vs black, haves vs have-nots, LBGT vs non-LGBT, law enforcement vs oppressed, religious vs secular, majority vs minority, working vs unemployed, business owners vs employees, citizens vs immigrant, and the list goes on.

Instead of using groups to divide, Trump is harnessing that need in his quest to become President by uniting Americans. His campaigns slogan is Make America Great Again. So far, its gotten him past a Republican Primary field as large and talented as any in history. Why does it resonate?

First, any American who loves this country wants it to be great.

Second, most Americans recognize that the Democrat Party has been assaulting our country’s greatness for many years. Barack Obama just accelerated that assault, on both social and international levels.

Third, any US citizen who identifies as an American first feels that powerful unifying identity to belong to a group, other Americans.

Fourth, just like NFL football fans unify around their teams draft picks, new star players, and fresh coaches because they want their teams to win, Americans who love our country want it to win. Donald Trump hits that note in his message. You will get tired of winning once Im President because we will win at everything.

Americans love to win, and we love our Country. Trump does to.

15 Ways to Actually Balance The Federal Budget

Americans at Defund Obama Care Rally

Americans at Defund Obama Care Rally

Many Republican and conservative politicians talk about balancing the federal budget. (Democrats don’t because their party is too busy spending more to care about spending less), but very few have specific details on how to get it done. In the case of Donald Trump, the discussion centers on:

Significant tax cuts to dramatically grow the economy (well above OMBs projected 2.2% long term GDP growth rate) to outpace the cost of current government programs, and an increase to the Department of Defense.

Some people, like conservative radio host Sean Hannity, advocate the Penny Plan. The penny plan calls for reducing one penny out of every dollar that the federal government spends. Over a 5 to 6 year period the budget balances.

The devil, however, is always in the details. Specifically how do you reduce one penny out of every dollar that the federal government spends?

I spent 10 years building and balancing budgets in the Department of Defense and the details matter. The following list of ideas are the foundation of, and principles upon which, one penny out of every dollar, for example, could be found over six years in order to shrink the federal government, reduce the burden on American taxpayers, and balance the budget!

First, and a lynchpin to balancing the budget, the economy must be energized and grown beyond historic growth and current CBO projections of 2.2%. While this is well above the average for the Obama Administration, it isn’t nearly good enough.

Spur Economic Growth:

Growing the economy starts by eliminating laws and regulations that strangle small, medium, and large businesses instead of enabling their expansion and competitiveness. Minimum wage laws, Obama care, energy mandates, and oppressive tax laws, for example, should be repealed outright or dramatically simplified to unshackle America’s economy.

  • Minimum wage laws not only hurt small businesses and entry-level workers, they cost the taxpayers as well since the federal government also pays those higher wages.
  • Obama care is a well-documented job killer, massively expensive and the gateway program to institute socialized medicine.
  • Taxes must be reduced to spur business creation, expansion, and innovation. Letting the American people keep more of their own money is also a moral imperative.

We must enact an all the above energy policy and repeal penalties instituted by the Obama administration and the EPA upon nonrenewable sources like coal. Democrat policies drive the costs of energy up, and the federal government uses a lot of it. Cheaper energy means cheaper government. Reducing energy costs results in a net savings not just to the federal government but also to Americans and businesses. With reduced cost comes greater competitiveness, profitability and prosperity both at home and abroad. The United States has enough energy to lead the world for 100+ years. We will need it to balance our budget, pay back our national debt, and posture America for another hundred years of prosperity.

Growing the economy is critical, butwe must cut the budget.

Macro Level Reductions.

  1. Freeze hiring on all civilians within the federal government. There could be exceptions made in areas that are considered strategically important, such as the Department of Defense or Customs and Border Patrol, but on the whole the effort would be a freeze to further hiring across the federal government. A slightly less contentious option would be to institute something like a 3 to 1 hiring policy. In this case for every three people who naturally leave the federal government, such as to retire, one civilian hire would be allowed to replace them.
  1. This policy would reduce manpower in agencies across the federal government. There are duplication of missions and programs throughout our government. As personnel decline those duplicative organizations, agencies and programs should be collapsed into one another. As the organizations are collapsed into one another, the management overhead should be trimmed as well, effectively cut in half and taken as additional savings.
  1. Another benefit of smaller and simpler government is that the oversight and management of government itself becomes less complex, and more effective. The potential for savings and reductions in watchdog organizations like OMB (which oversee the federal government’s budget and budget building process) could be further reduced.
  1. The federal government, including the Department of Defense, owns or leases over 361,000 buildings, office spaces, and warehouses, with an annual operating cost of over $33 Billion.

Much of this infrastructure is excess to need, and should be sold or disposed of now. As the federal government is reduced through manpower reductions, even more excess office space and facilities will be exposed. Those facilities need to be returned to state and local governments or sold outright to businesses and the American people freeing taxpayers from the burden of maintaining them, paying utilities such as water, electricity, etc.

There is significant excess infrastructure and basing across the DOD. The Air Force, for example, constantly states that it has 30% access infrastructure and desperately needs a BRAC in order to cut excess bases down to the proper size to support the diminished Air Force. Done properly, a BRAC could save the Department of Defense billions every year without any adverse impact to our nations military capabilities.

Micro Level Reductions:

  1. There is waste in the Department of Defense when it comes to the military’s energy spending. The Obama administration turned the Department of Defense into a research and development arm of the renewable energy industry.

Untold billions of dollars, hidden within the Service budgets, are being spent every year by the Department of Defense on windmills, solar farms, development of renewable biofuels, and testing of biofuels on military equipment from aircraft to ships. Unfortunately biofuels are far more expensive than the fuels they’re replacing. They’ve also proven to be corrosive, contain less energy per pound of fuel than what the replacing, and effectively reduce the range and capabilities of the equipment in which they are used. They increase the cost of maintenance, wear and tear on assets, and decrease the longevity of jet engines and other components such as seals that are exposed to the more corrosive biofuels. All of this R&D should be stopped and the Department of Defense should no longer be used as an experimental arm for the progressive anti-global warming movement.

  1. Agencies and programs across the federal government need to be eliminated or drastically reduced. The list includes the EPA, the Education Department, Health and Human Services, the IRS, the Public Broadcasting System, and support for the Federal Reserve as a good start.
  1. Tax laws need to be simplified so that businesses can free themselves from the wasted cost of dealing with a tax code that’s become so burdensome no single person can possibly understand it.
  1. Reductions of the types listed above would shrink the federal government to the point where Congress could once again manage it. After all, Congress’s prime responsibility is to pass laws including those funding the federal government. They failed year after year to pass budgets because its become far too big and far too complex. With the reduced size comes an increased ability to manage. When Congress is able to properly manage agencies and their budgets further waste, duplication and costs can be found.
  1. We commonly hear the term too big to fail. In the case of government it’s failing because its too big.

The federal government needs to prioritize its constitutionally mandated responsibilities first. All other missions are secondary and subject to reduction.

  1. The border must be sealed! Illegal immigrants who are committing murders, rapes, robberies, dealing drugs, involved in human trafficking, to gang warfare must be caught, jailed or sent back to their home countries for jailing. Penalties must be stepped up as an effective deterrent to these brutal thugs ever returning to the United States.
  1. The wall must be built and America’s border controlled. We must significantly reduce the number of illegal aliens, and know who enters and stays within our borders. You wouldn’t let strangers into your house, and we should not let them into our country. Fewer illegal aliens will reduce burdens on local, state and federal governments. The costs to America’s schools and law enforcement alone would be a significant savings.
  1. Energy subsidies must be stopped. Let companies and technologies compete on an equal footing. The strong will survive and the inefficient will not.
  1. Waste, fraud and abuse of government welfare programs must stop. Welfare should be tied to work for the able minded and able bodied. The goal is to use the social safety net as a temporary support system, not a way of life.
  1. Finally, we must reform programs like social security, in order to ensure they exist for the long term. Without reform, costs will continue to eat the budget, and our children will see nothing but the bills.
  1. Balancing the budget is a national imperative, and should be codified as a Constitutional Amendment. It wont be easy, and will require courageous politicians with the insight to see, analyze and solve Americas spending problems. No such leadership exists in the Democrat Party. It’s GOP or Bust…literally.

12 Reasons Why Trump And Cruz May Need Each Other

Rally Against Big Government, Washington D.C.

Rally Against Big Government, Washington D.C.

Donald Trump likely needs Ted Cruz, and Ted Cruz likely needs Donald Trump to win the White House in November. The Republican campaign has gotten personal, but they may each need the other before the convention ends. Given the radical leftist vent dominating today’s Democrat Politicians, America will need them both to restore our Constitutional Republic.

Why Cruz Needs Trump:

  1. Trumps campaign is bringing new voters to the GOP. He’s tapped into the blue dog working class democrats that propelled Ronald Reagan to victory. They’re essential for the general election, but many may not vote for Cruz alone.
  2. The Trump campaign believes that his campaign potentially opens up states like NY, and New Jersey that otherwise are solid Blue. The more states that are in play, the better the odds come November.
  3. Trumps campaign is a huge anti-establishment movement wave. The GOP needs to harness that energy.
  4. Trumps won most of states and delegates so far. He is the most likely to reach 1237 before the convention, and to win on the first ballot.
  5. Trump has lots of money to fund him. Freedom from financial corruption is unique to his campaign, and a powerful factor.

Why Trump Needs Cruz

  1. Cruz’s policy positions are much more detailed and thought out. His tax plan for instance is implementable, and wont drive up the debt.
  2. Cruz won the second most states and delegates so far. He is the most likely to reach 1237 in a second vote if needed at the convention. He’s also supported by significant part of the rank and file GOP, but many may not vote for Trump alone.
  3. Cruz has a massive, state-by-state organization and ground game, which Trump lacks. Such an organization is essential to win the general election, and his campaign is tactically way ahead of Trumps.
  4. Cruz can provide list of solid SCOTUS nominees, to replace devastating loss of Justice Scalia. Will be a big motivator for many GOP rank and file.

Why Each Needs The Other

  1. Each may need to other to prevent the GOP establishment from stealing the nomination in Cleveland.
  2. Together, they’ve received over 65% of all votes cast so far, and over 80% of all delegates. The GOP must come out of the convention united behind its nominee. The potential for that to happen without Cruz and Trump calling for it is unlikely.
  3. Success in November should kick off a long-term strategy to keep Democrats out of the White House for decades. It will take changing the GOP, thinking long term, sound conservative policies, and educating the population on why liberal policies are so destructive. The Establishment proved that it wont deliver, so it must returned to its limited government roots. That will take time, and failure is not an option.

UPDATE:

  • Now that Donald Trump is sure to capture the GOP nomination, the calls for Ted Cruz to support his campaign are mounting, and for good reason.