Who Bought the Paintings?

To be sure, there are likely a few ways to determine who bought the paintings that were painted by Joe’s son. It could be a long tedious task. After all, Joe isn’t so much a good public servant, but he does know how to cover his sins.

You find out who initially laid the money down at the auction. Then, regardless of who does what with the so-called art works, there is likely a stack or two or three of money, may gold, maybe bit coin coming from others: the real sources of the bribes. These might be, but not limited to the communists, the Chicoms, the going green outfits and particularly those who build electric cars.

On the other hand, we could just ask Joe. He knows. It just is; he’s not going to say. However, it’s still simple. Just look at who is receiving the checks. I mean that is sort-of the object of the bribe. Also, you notice how quickly the crude oil spigots were shut down and the border was open. Do you suppose the cartels had something to do with the so-called purchase of the so-called art.

As the aside for today: I wonder just how many of those grand works are being displayed on a wall in some millionaire’s home and how many have found their way to the local garbage heap. Can you imagine some pennyless bum pulling out a half million painting… then learning it’s not worth a cup of capuchino. Then to, I suppose some could have been gifted the fabulous works of art. I mean it isn’t everyone who can claim they have a painting worth 500 grand hanging on their living room wall.

The Search Before the Search

Don’t you think they had a crew go into Joe’s abode before they did this last search of Joe’s property? They knew it would look bad if the FBI found something worse than the other locations.

So, before the FBI went through the premises I would suspect they first had a team go through paper-by-paper. Some pages would get removed, some shredded and some went up in smoke.

After going through it all for over two months, it doesn’t really surprise me the FBI found nothing. That was the plan. Indeed, they would have been surprised if they they found so much as one questionable page.

Then again, any lawman would know it was likely a big waste of time to put on the big show for the public. NOTHING HERE TO SEE, NOTHING AT ALL!

The Tenth Amendment

Many know not what it says or what it is for. Frequently, it is ignored. In some cases, methods are invented to get around it. When politicians in DC wanted to make all the states set a 55-mph speed limit, they were well aware that it would not get by the Tenth Amendment. No problem. the used the power of highway funding. Any state that would not drop the limit to 55, would lose the federal highway funding. So much for the spirit of the tenth amendment. It would seem that any time they want to nullify the amendment, they just make the appropriate threats. The feds, specifically the dems get around the tenth to control our schools. That’s a bad idea. The feds should have very limited control over schools.

Today, the Tenth Amendment has become the least effective amendment and it should be one of the most enforced. Today, our federal system is on the brink of collapse because most people just simply don’t know how important the amendment is. More and more, power is being transferred to the feds. it is just exactly what the founding fathers feared and for good reason.

For those who have no problem with the feds (effectively the dems) running everything, consider these two questions. How has it worked so far? How well will it work in the foreseeable future?

Well, let me add one more. Do we really want the feds determining how our children are being brainwashed? Do we really want our kids filled with a heap of false propaganda? (Actually, to some degree, this has already started.)

ObjectiveReporting

The other day I took note that Scripps is now on the Newsy TV channel. I saw an ad claiming they only report the news. Considering what Newsy called the news, you can imagine my doubts.

Nonetheless, I switched it over there a time or two to see what they wanted to call news. I was not impressed. The other day they had what was, at the least a biased documentary. They called it news.

Truth be told, it was a lengthy infomercial advertising solar cell energy. If the solar cell companies didn’t pay for it, they should have. The spokesperson spent the whole time talking of the advantages, completely ignoring the disadvantages. Considering most of our solar cells are made in China, I’d guess China got some free advertising.

It is the way of the liberal media and democrat politicians. It has gotten so much so that they are more than joined at the hip. Indeed, they are joined at the mind. If one is struck, they both recoil and cry out in pain. If one has a success they both cheer. It appears that Scripps is no different. They have their favorite party and they support it without shame.

Proof Positive

The dems say we are ruining the planet by the emissions of CO2, all while spewing out exhaust with their big cars, big houses, private jets and big yachts.

They claim the oceans are rising while they buy beach front homes, frequently in Florida. They do this while they claim that all of Florida will be under water inside a decade or two. It might almost be wishful thinking. It would tilt the Electoral College in their favor.

The question is, just what does this prove? Just think about it a while. You just might figure it out. I can’t, but I’ve narrowed it down.

If what they claim is true, they cannot be too bright buying land that will soon be well submerged. If they are so afraid of carbon dioxide, they’d not spend so much of their ill gotten gains to generate it.

To me, it looks as if it’s proof positive that they don’t believe what they preach.

On the other hand, it might just be outright stupidity. You take your pick. Sometimes I think the one way; sometimes the other. Sometimes, I think it’s a little of both. Sometimes I think it’s just to keep folks like me guessing. I mean, really. What sane person would buy land that they know will soon be useless?

Brilliant Strategy, Joe

Who would think to look in an unguarded garage for highly classified documents. I’m sure it woked very well.

There is a hitch. The proper thing to do at this time is to assume that they were all compromised. Moreover, there might have been secondary compromises. Every message that was transmitted with a code compromises the code; and thereby, any other message transmitted with that code.

Besides all that, who in their right mind stores highly classified documents in their garage?

Oh, yes. Mrs. Clinton did store her classified emails in a bathroom. That was a little odd, too.

Taxes, Churches and the US Government

From my youth, I found nothing wrong with tax exempt status for churches. Indeed, I was among the majority thinking it was a good idea.

Over the years, I’ve gradually changed my mind. By providing tax exempt status, Uncle Sam can control the actions & activities of the churches. Right now, they claim they cannot maintain their tax exempt status and take part in politics.

There are at least three problems with this. First, the scope of the definition of politics keeps enlarging. Most certainly this will continue, eventually envading the very foundations of Christianity. Already, it has started and it will only get worse.

Secondly, in many cases, the IRS intentionally go after churches and church oriented organizations (such as Christian schools) they don’t like. All the while, they ignore organizations they do like. [Incidentally, this is blatantly unconstitutional. The government may not prosecute one organization and let another do the same thing. ]

Third, it is an indirect method of providing funding of a political group while blocking another. It’s not just illegal; it’s blatantly wrong…encouraging churches to sin in the sight of God.

To my way of thinking, a preacher in a church should not have any restrictions on what is said behind the pulpit. It is indeed fundamental to the First Amendment. The exempt status is simply an end around run at that Amendment and the Constitution, itself.

Likely, the best way around the exception is for the churches to simply don’t claim exempt status. This would make it difficult for them to complete with other churches. On the other hand, it would free the preachers to do that which they should do anyway. Perhaps, it will give Christians from other churches some much needed guidance as well.

Regardless, I wonder. Would the church that speaks out really lose that many members? Would the members they lose be that much of a loss.

Mostly, it is time we send a message. God is not subject to the dems. Those who subject themselves to God, serve the LORD rather than man. In my way of thinking, that would be a good thing…for the Christians, for the churches and for the USA. However, I think that the dems wouldn’t like it so much.