Special Opinion to the Mirror by Paul Plante.

First off, people, to understand where I am going here, we, the actual American people, whether born here or naturalized, need to ask ourselves why it is that of all the types of government there are in the world, we have this particular frame with an executive not beholden to the House of Representatives, because he does not serve at the pleasure of the House of Representatives, although the incoming Democrat party seems bent on changing that by using the threat of impeachment as a whip and a goad to bring the president under their direct control.

Think the Lilliputians, tiny people who are about one-twelfth the height of ordinary human beings who live in Lilliput, said to be ruled by an Emperor assisted by a first minister who carries a white staff and several other officials who later bring articles of impeachment against Gulliver on grounds of treason, and you are in the right ballpark!

Getting back to the main story here, which is about Adam Schiff, a top Lilliputian if there ever was one (no, people, there is no Constitutional bar to tiny people who are about one-twelfth the height of ordinary human beings serving in the United States House of Representatives as Democrats from California), we are hearing a lot these days about the “founders” from the Democrats and what are supposed their thoughts on the impeachment of a sitting U.S. president, and according to them, we have now reached the patently absurd position in this country, thanks to the Democrats, that a U.S. president can be impeached for allegedly defrauding the voters of the United States of America, who, by the way, do not elect presidents in the first place; the electoral college does, by not specifically telling them that while he was running for president, he was actually making hush payments to some women not his wife who he was alleged to have had carnal relations with, as if that could somehow disqualify a person from holding the office of president of the United States of America.

So let’s see what the actual founders have to say about why we have the frame of government in this country that we do, as opposed to all the alternatives, such as can be found in the Congo, and Iraq, and Saudi Arabia, for example. 

Let’s start with FEDERALIST No. 6, Concerning Dangers from Dissensions Between the States, which is exactly what we are seeing in the United States of America today, actually, with red states and blue states, by Alexander Hamilton for the Independent Journal to the People of the State of New York, where we learn about our actual history, not the history being invented on the fly by the Democrats, from someone who was actually there when it was happening, to wit: 

THE three last numbers of this paper have been dedicated to an enumeration of the dangers to which we should be exposed, in a state of disunion, from the arms and arts of foreign nations. 

I shall now proceed to delineate dangers of a different and, perhaps, still more alarming kind— – those which will in all probability flow from dissensions between the States themselves, and from domestic factions and convulsions. 

end quotes

Focus on that last line there, people, and more specifically on the words, “domestic factions and convulsions,” where convulsions can be taken to mean “a violent social or political upheaval,” with such synonyms as turmoil, agitation, and disorder, as in “the political convulsions of the period,” which takes us directly to an article in The Hill entitled “Schiff: Trump may face ‘real prospect of jail time’” by Michael Burke on 9 December 2018, where we are told as follows:

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) on Sunday said that President Trump might “face the real prospect of jail time” after prosecutors indicated last week that he directed illegal payments during his 2016 presidential campaign.

end quotes

He “might,” Adam?

Do tell, dude!

Thanks for the timely head’s up, dude, but seriously, doesn’t the use of the word “might” imply that you are engaging in rank speculation?

Here, Adam, let me help you out by guiding you to an internet site entitled “Writing Explained,” and an article titled “May vs. Might: What’s the Difference?” where we learn that the two words may and might cause a lot of confusion in English and many writers aren’t sure when to use which one. 

As to “might” as the word is used in The Hill article by California’s Adam Schiff, who incidentally is a Harvard-trained lawyer, so he should know the meaning of words as well as I do, it is used to express what is hypothetical, counterfactual, or remotely possible. 

As the site tells us, right away we notice that might deals with situations that are speculative or did not actually happen, i.e. hypothetical, whereas may deals with situations that are possible or could be factual.

An easy way to express/remember this difference is that might suggests a lower probability than does may. 

If something is very far-fetched, you probably want to use might. 

You could say might is for things that are mighty far-fetched.

So, people, why then is California’s Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, who incidentally voted to invade Iraq based on bad intelligence, telling us in The Hill about something far-fetched?

And that answer is quite simple – California’s Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, is trying to inflame people’s passions in this country for the exact purpose of causing convulsions to disturb our national tranquility for cheap partisan political gain and in order to disrupt the functioning of our national government and to influence the next presidential election.

Simply stated, Adam Schiff is a Democrat bomb-thrower, which takes us back to The Hill, where bomb-thrower Schiff then states as follows, to wit:

“There’s a very real prospect that on the day Donald Trump leaves office, the Justice Department may indict him.”

end quotes

Oh, really Adam!

My goodness, how serious that sounds.

So, Adam, they may indict him on the very day he leaves office.

I see, I see.

But tell us, Adam, how is it that you happen to know the exact date that the Justice Department is going to indict Trump?

Are you colluding with the Justice Department to make that happen, Adam?

Getting back to The Hill:

“That he may be the first president in quite some time to face the real prospect of jail time,” he said on CBS’s “Face the Nation.”

end quotes

Now, people, really, can you believe this bull****?

Can you believe that the Justice Department, which doesn’t confirm or deny that it is conducting an investigation, is telling California’s Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, that the Justice Department is going to put Trump in jail after indicting him on the day he leaves office?

Is there anyone out there actually credulous (ready to believe especially on slight or uncertain evidence as in “few people are credulous enough to believe such nonsense”)enough to believe that crap?

But let’s not stop there, because it gets even wilder yet, as follows:

Schiff, who is likely to be the next chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, added that the next president may have to determine whether to pardon Trump.

“We have been discussing the issue of pardons the president may offer to people or dangle in front of people,” Schiff said. 

“The bigger pardon question may come down the road, as the next president has to determine whether to pardon Donald Trump.”

end quotes

Now, people, no wonder that the Democrats have made Adam Schiff of California into the top dog Democrat on House Intelligence Committee – it is because he is so intelligent, he not only knows what is going on now, but in the future, as well, as we can see right above here where he raises the serious existential question as to whether the next president will bother to pardon Trump after the Justice Department indicts him on the day he leaves office, or whether that next president, especially if a Democrat, will leave Trump to rot in jail, as the Democrats so clearly want him to, in retaliation for him defeating the Democrat’s own Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election they thought they had sufficiently rigged for Hillary to win. 

And that spew of speculative crap from Adam Schiff, the California Democrat who is likely to be the next chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, despite the fact that he himself seems to be greatly lacking in real intelligence, despite his Harvard law degree, takes us back to Federalist No. 6, as follows for a possible explanation as to why Adam Schiff of California is spewing such **** in The Hill, to wit: 

A man must be far gone in Utopian speculations who can seriously doubt that, if these States should either be wholly disunited, or only united in partial confederacies, the subdivisions into which they might be thrown would have frequent and violent contests with each other. 

To presume a want of motives for such contests as an argument against their existence, would be to forget that men are ambitious, vindictive, and rapacious.

end quotes

Enter Adam Schiff, people!

Stay tuned, for more is yet to come in this breaking story of drama and deceit from the nation’s capital of Washington, D.C. where truth, justice and the American way can no longer be found.
…

Special to the Mirror by Ken Dufty, unofficial notes on the the Town Hall meeting held this week at Kiptopeke Elementary School.

Meeting began shortly after 7 pm at Kiptopeke Elementary School,including attendance by the three new Planning Commissioners, including Sarah Morgan who is returning as a Commissioner from previous service.

I. Introduction
After thanking citizens for attending, Supervisor Coker updated the crowd on some of the projects the Board of Supervisor is working on. He started with the current budget deliberations and adoption, highlighting the fact that raises were given to teachers and the deputies, but no tax increase was levied on residents. However, he did stress that the county needs to find new sources of revenue in order to sustain the level of services that is now shouldered by the county.

A. VDOT update….Supervisor Coker (herein referred to as “John” for brevity and with respect) credited the work of Granville Hogg for encouraging the installation of a new stop light at the dangerous intersection at the Food Lion Plaza in Cape Charles. John did say the county played an important role in that decision, and said that the light probably would be installed next year.
B. New Bike Trail…..John explained that the fines that are received from drivers who are caught traveling with an open container go into a fund that is dedicated to the purpose of protecting pedestrians and bike riders from harm re: mainstream traffic. One project to accomplish this goal is to construct a new bike trail from downtown Cape Charles to the Food Lion Plaza. He said that 2 people had lost their lives traveling to and from the plaza over the last several decades.

C. Cape Charles Anchorage. Currently ships can anchor 1 to 2 miles off the coast of Cape Charles but the Coast Guard is proposing to move it to a confined area 3 miles off shore, but no decision has been made yet. John did run into an official involved in this decision making, and has been informed that no definitive decision has been reached but it is pending.
D. Railroad. John said that the railroad is owned by Accomack, Northampton, the state and the transportation commission. He said assets are being sold off to pay for maintenance and retire debt. He said Cape Charles and the county would work together to develop a plan for future use (reuse) of the rail yard.

E. Groundwater. John spoke of the need to protect the sustainability of our sole source aquifer, explaining that now we use about 9 million gallons/day (mgd) and our aquifer is being recharged by an equal amount. However, he said there is an additional 3 mgd proposed to be withdrawn by proposed uses such as the poultry industry in Accomack County, and we must be careful of overpumping, especially as it pertains to the potential for saltwater encroaching into our lower and more used Yorktown Aquifer. Note John is the Chairman of the A-NPDC Groundwater Committee. He spoke of the need to rely more on the surficial or Columbia aquifer which he said recharges at a rate 100 times greater than the Yorktown. He explained that the groundwater committee is working on legislation that would incentivize increased use of the Columbia and he expects progress on that initiative next year.

F.Schools….recent inspection by engineers revealed that the high school is not in danger of falling down nor is it not safe for students, although it does need structural work. He said the focus is on keeping the school there for 5 years while financing options are put in place to address the need for more modern facilities for our students.

G. Tourism Commission. John spoke of the plan to restructure the tourist commission and move its headquarters to a more central location.

H. Broadband Authority///John said the BA has borrowed $5 million and expects to be able to serve 70% of users within 2 years.

I. Health Care. John informed the crowd that the county now has a state of the art Nightingale Pad that allows a medical helicopter to land even in inclement weather as it can electronically guide in the craft. He also lauded Eastern Shore Rural Health’s plans to build their new facility on Route 13 in Eastville.

II. Discussion of Draft 2018 Comprehensive Plan.

The agenda that was handed out to attendees listed 10 facets of the draft Comp Plan that would start discussion in the spirit of a town hall meeting. John shared his thoughts on many of those topics and this discussion included Supervisor Dave Fauber (“Dave”) and his feelings on the draft. Note that after these supervisors shared their view and critique of the draft, the floor was open for comment and a healthy exchange of ideas and suggestions.

a)Introduction (tone and content): Both supervisors agreed that the introduction was hard to read and follow, and had an excessively negative tone.
They also thought that the Virginia Code would be more appropriately placed as an attachment rather than in the beginning text of the introduction. They said the language should be more straightforward and simple and easier to understand.

They also commented that the CPAC phone survey that was funded by the real estate industry should not be used as a major basis for the PC’s recommendations.
b) The supervisors commented that there seemed to be no rationale for the elimination of Hamlets and rezoning them into Villages with a higher density and commercial, industrial and institutional uses that are not allowed in our 28 Hamlets now.

c) The supervisors were adamant that the Oyster and Willis Wharf visioning statements should be left in, as a lot of work from the citizens in those areas went into updating that work in 2012 as part of the comp plan update that began 7 years ago.

d) Town Edge….both supervisors agreed that it made sense to encourage future development around the towns and areas that have sewer and water, but said that any development in the town edge should fully involve the towns that would have to provide services to any project.

e) Density Changes…during the discussion after the presentation, both supervisors agreed that any density changes needed to have a rationale, as it was recognized that there are many empty lots now that are not being developed. The supervisors opined that increasing density with no studies, expert consultants or a rationale seemed to only benefit the real estate interests and could not be supported without an evidentiary basis.

f) Overall comments: The supervisors seemed to agree that the draft plan needs to be sent back to the PC in its entirety, a consultant hired to assist the PC in updating the 2009 plan where needed, and have a more open and inclusive process than the one transpiring over the last 6 years. Dave commented that there are several sections that should be considered to be updated and left in, including Parts 5, 6, and 7. He agreed that a Comp Plan Update should not be a surrogate for a rezoning effort, and thought the economic development plan as written should be scrapped. He thought that 25% of part 4 should be scrapped, but did like the history and geography sections.
In closing, both supervisors and the attendees seemed to agree that Northampton County has to come up with ways to capture revenue from “pass through” exchanges past our borders. We need more revenue to support our schools, health care, services and county operations, but we need to find ways to do that without sacrificing our rural nature,environmental sanctity, and charm that attracts the tourist trade. John commented that building more houses on fewer acres will only tax services more and always results in a negative effect on county coffers.

PUBLIC COMMENT AND EXCHANGE

After the discussion by the supervisors, the floor was open for comment (although the supervisors fielded questions during their commentary.) Many people spoke of their concerns over the draft and the process that went into that effort. Some of the comments included: the lack of an open and transparent process with very limited opportunities for full public participation; Barrier Islands and the need to stabilize them as they roll towards the eastern coast of NC; reasons why people came here and the need to retain our rural character; more public access to the water; Bayview and the need for improvements there including the need for new or better management; VDOT involvement in a future Comp Plan update; the fact that hiring a consultant is not a “genie in a bottle” and the need to carefully choose that expert input; the fact that there are many platted subdivisions that have not been developed now; the fact that there are 9,700 vacant parcels in the county now and that there is no reason to increase density now because of that dynamic; the fact that Staaten Island used to be just like Northampton County until the developers convinced elected officials that density increase was needed to raise revenues.. a fallacy that sent taxes through the roof; the need to protect Route 13 from massive development as this is our primary recharge area (a point made repeatedly by John Coker); several residents of Oyster and Willis Wharf commented that Waterfront Hamlets need to stay and remain protected; a suggestion that the new Planning Commissioners should be encouraged to read the 2009 Comp Plan and use that as a foundation for a real update, and not a complete rewrite of the county’s vision for the next 20 years; a dissertation on the railroad, with John giving a detailed look into the finances and future of that asset, which is co-owned by county taxpayers; the fact that the hospital has left and the need to address the lack of immediate health care for those in need; dredging of the channels and suggestions on what to do with the dredge materials in regard to beneficial reuse(stabilize Barrier Islands…..a suggestion that may not sit well with the Nature Conservancy as discussed by participants); and, the fact that the draft Comp Plan is in direct contravention to the code of Virginia section 15.2-2223 et. al.; and kudos to the Kelley Lewis Parks for the work she and fellow Planning Department personnel put into this long and arduous process, noting that they were simply following the direction of the Planning Commission and must have spent thousands of hours on this project.

CONCLUSION

The meeting wrapped up around 8:30 and it should be noted that not one person spoke in favor of the draft plan or the process that was employed to prepare the draft. Overall, it seemed everyone was incredibly relieved that it appeared that the draft plan would be sent back to the Planning Commission for a REAL update of our prevailing Comprehensive Plan, an expert consultant would be retained to assist the new Planning Commission (and existing members) in that exciting work, and that the public would have ample opportunity to be as involved as they would like to be in this ongoing effort.

AUTHOR’S NOTE: Perhaps this marks the end of a 6 year controversy that has literally consumed many, many citizens who sought only to protect the 2009 Comprehensive Plan and the majority’s vision of what they want this community to look like over the next 20 years. Can you imagine where we would be today if the amount of effort that it took to defend this county against plans that were not embraced by the majority was spent working WITH our elected leaders to help address and solve our many economic and environmental challenges? Perhaps now we will get that chance.

Special Opinion to the Mirror by Paul Plante

Dear Chief Justice John Glover Roberts Jr.:

Recently, you were widely quoted in the media your capacity as Chief Justice of the United States saying as follows, to wit:

“We do not have Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges.”

“What we have is an extraordinary group of dedicated judges doing their level best to do equal right to those appearing before them.”

End quotes

As a loyal American citizen who is older than you, and who has sufficient experience with the federal court system as a civil rights litigant to have formed an informed opinion about it, and who in fact has been harmed, and intentionally so, by the federal court system you have chosen to defend in your recent op-ed, I would like to take this opportunity in this op-ed to challenge both of those statements, to show that they are not true, and are in fact, quite false.

First of all, Justice Roberts, yes, we do have Bush judges and Obama judges, as we can clearly see from an Associated Press article entitled “Obama pick for bench blocked by GOP for first time” by Larry Margarsak on May 19, 2011, as follows:

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama lost his first vote on a judicial nominee Thursday, as Senate Republicans derailed the nomination of a liberal professor who leveled acerbic attacks against two conservative Supreme Court nominees — both now justices. [Read more…]

Special Opinion to the Mirror by Paul Plante

Should a nation, to be considered a nation, have a history that is common to all of its citizens, if they be that, or its subjects, if they not be citizens?

Or doesn’t it really matter anymore, as is the case in the United States of America today, where it seems that if you have ten people in a room, you might get twenty or more versions of what the history of the United States of America really is, and hack politicians like Barack Hussein Obama making it up as they go along?

Which thought takes me to a recent essay courtesy of Marketwatch by Joseph Eugene Stiglitz (born February 9, 1943), a.k.a. “Bad Boy Joe,” because he dared to question the World Bank and was fired by the World Bank for expressing dissent with its policies, entitled “Opinion: The fight to preserve democracy has come home to America” published Nov. 6, 2018, where “Bad Boy Joe,” who also is making it up as he goes, informs us as follows, to wit:

NEW YORK (Project Syndicate) — The United States has long held itself up as a bastion of democracy.

It has promoted democracy around the world.

It fought, at great cost, for democracy against fascism in Europe during World War II.

Now the fight has come home.

End quotes [Read more…]

This is a special opinion to the Mirror by Chas Cornweller.

Bob Woodward, a journalist long associated with the Washington Post and of Watergate fame has released a book on the Trump administration. It has created an avalanche of backlash and an earthquake whiplash with both the media and the public. The pictured painted of our present Commander-In-Chief is one of a paranoid, unprepared president who is out of touch with the reality of today’s America. Someone who tape-loops over and over those political points that keep winning him favor with his base. A master at deception only because it is what he knows and has used for his entire life to manipulate the situation for the betterment of his personal gain and position. At any cost. Woodward shows us an administration reacting constantly to a child-man who knows neither the depth or scope of America’s responsibilities, nor has the wherewithal to deal with these responsibilities. It is an administration ramming through policies that enable the very rich and very powerful to maintain and solidify that power while the policies to protect the rest of us are daily eroded away. You have two very capable administrators in White House Chief of Staff John Kelly and Secretary of Defense James Mattis having to deal with what they “see” as an ‘unhinged idiot’ (Kelly) with the understanding of ‘a fifth or sixth grader’ (Mattis). Never in the course of American history have White House staff spoken about a sitting president in this manner. Ever.

 

Whether you choose to read or even believe this book, know one thing, this president has created havoc within our nation. That is an undisputable truth. If you choose to believe it is by design and not by the fact the president is unfit and incapable of being our president, that is your choice. But think about this: IF it is by design, what is this track doing to the prestige of America? Is it, as in the words of Steve Bannon? And I quote (GQ – January 30, 2017) “I’m a Leninist,” Bannon proudly proclaimed.

Shocked, (this reporter) asked him what he meant. “Lenin,” he answered, “wanted to destroy the state, and that’s my goal too. I want to bring everything crashing down, and destroy all of today’s establishment.” Bannon was employing Lenin’s strategy for Tea Party populist goals. He included in that group the Republican and Democratic Parties, as well as the traditional conservative press. End quote. And further, here is a direct quote from Donald J. Trump in 2014 with Fox News. “A lot of people live better without having a job, than with having a job. I’ve had it where you have people and you want to hire them, but they can’t take the job for a period of nine months because they’re doing better now than they would with a job.”

“You know what solves it? When the economy crashes, when the country goes to total hell, and everything is a disaster, then you’ll have riots to go back to where we used to be, when we were great.” End Quote. ‘You’ll have riots to go back to where we used to be…when we were great.’

I can only imagine what some of you would have thought, said or done…had President Obama had uttered those words in his inaugural speech in 2008. I can only imagine.

 

Tuesday, September 11^th, Bob Woodward’s book, “Fear-Trump in the White House” comes out. Unlike an extensive list of disgruntled or hackneyed books like “It’s Even Worse Than You Think” by David Kay Johnston or “Unhinged, An Insider’s Account of the Trump White House” by Omarosa Manigault Newman or Michael Wolff’s “Fire and Fury”, this book was written by a Washingtonian insider. An insider with credentials. An insider with insider knowledge. An insider who, with an insider small town newspaper, brought down an administration. It is not to be taken lightly. For those of you still holding out hope that this is your guy, I recommend going out on the deck, look up at the stars and enjoy the cool still night. Enjoy the band out there while you’re at it. I understand they play a killer version of ‘Nearer My God To Thee.’

Special Opinion to the Mirror by Paul Plante.

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

That, for anyone who recognizes it, is the language of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, and with respect to “freedom of the press,” it should properly be read as “Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.”

As I was taught when young, and God alone knows what is taught today on the subject, if anything, we in this country owe John Peter Zenger a debt for freedom of the press, not the First Amendment.

For those who have forgotten, or never were taught in the first place, John Peter Zenger (October 26, 1697 – July 28, 1746) was a German American printer and journalist in New York City who printed The New York Weekly Journal. [Read more…]

Special Opinion to the Mirror by Paul Plante

In a recent article in the Cape Charles Mirror entitled “Ferris Bueller’s Lesson: Trump’s Tariffs will be damaging to the US Economy,” this following comment was made, which comment deserves attention and consideration from every voting age person in America to wit:

“. . . nor will I disparage the only man who gives America a chance in the face of a long-term Democrat/Liberal/progressive plan to destroy us.”

Now, how that statement is to be interpreted is unclear without knowing exactly who is the “us” that are to be destroyed by this alleged Democrat/Liberal/progressive plan, but for the sake of argument, we can make some assumptions as to who the “us” might be, based not only on our political history, because Teddy Roosevelt was a true “progressive,” and we know who he was out to destroy, but also the political history of England circa 1900 to WWI, and perhaps more importantly Dutch history in the period of the Batavian Revolution, which was a period of political, social and cultural turmoil at the end of the 18th century that marked the end of the Dutch Republic and saw the proclamation of the Batavian Republic.

By the end of the 18th century, the Netherlands found themselves in a deep economic crisis, perhaps very similar to that we find ourselves in today in this country, and during that time in the Netherlands, the banks of the Dutch Republic held much of the world’s capital, with the government-sponsored banks owning up to 40% of Great Britain’s national debt.

This concentration of wealth in the Netherlands of that period led to the formation of the Dutch Patriots by a minor Dutch noble named Joan van der Capellen tot den Pol.

The Patriots who were the “progressives” of their time, were inspired by the ideals of the Enlightenment, and what they desired were a more democratic government and a more equal society.

Jump forward in time to America at the close of the “Gilded Age,” and the “progressivism” of Teddy Roosevelt, and one finds that same theme, just as one finds that same theme today in America, where like before, we are looking at the essence of class warfare – the haves versus the have-nots.

In that period of time, the people of the Netherlands grew increasingly discontent with the authoritarian regime of the stadtholder, William V, while in our times today, the people of America are growing increasingly discontent with the authoritarian regime of Donald Trump.

Back then, the Dutch Patriots built support from most of the middle-class and founded militias of armed civilians, which between 1783 and 1787 managed to take over several cities and regions in an effort to force new elections which would oust the old government officials.

Today, in America, instead of militias, voting blocs are being created in an effort to oust the “old government” of corrupt Democrats and equally corrupt Republicans, and it is that which apparently Donald Trump is supposed to save “us” from, assuming we are a part of what Donald Trump represents, which is the same greed that was good in the time of the “Gilded Age,” and again during the reign of American Republican political icon Ronald Reagan.

That Trump is the champion of the “haves,” and the “greed is good” mentality that the “progressives” like Teddy Roosevelt were very much against is very much apparent in a Slate article entitled “Trump Celebrates Tax Bill With Mar-a-Lago Friends: ‘You All Just Got a Lot Richer’” by Daniel Politi on Dec. 24, 2017, as follows:

President Trump was in a celebratory mood on Friday night and told a group of his wealthy friends, “You all just got a lot richer” after he signed the tax cuts into law.

Trump reportedly uttered the words to a group of friends who were having dinner nearby at Mar-a-Lago, including two friends who spoke to CBS News about the remark.

Anyone spending time at what has come to be known as the “Winter White House” is not exactly suffering economically, considering the initiation fee is $200,000 and annual dues are $14,000.

End quotes

Those are the people who fear the “progressives” in America today, and the “progressives” in America today are a reaction to those same people, just as was the case earlier in England, and before that in the Netherlands.

Without the one, there would not be the other.

The powerful few against the impoverished many, which takes us back to the Dutch Patriot Revolt, as follows:

After the halcyon days of the Dutch Golden Age of the first two-thirds of the 17th century, the Dutch economy entered a period of stagnation and relative decline.

The absolute size of Dutch GNP remained constant, but the economy was overtaken by that of other European countries in the course of the 18th century, and in a number of economic sectors, such as the fisheries and most industries that had sprung up in the early 17th century, an absolute decline occurred.

In a direct comparison with where we are today in this country, the deindustrialization of the Netherlands (“offshoring”) resulted in de-urbanization as artisans that had worked in the disappearing industries had to move to areas where work was still to be found, and the shrinking industrial base was also concentrating in particular areas, to the detriment of other areas where certain industries (shipbuilding, textiles) had formerly been prominent.

Thus, just as in America today, in the Netherlands of that time, economic inequality markedly increased during the 18th century with the Dutch economy becoming dominated by a small group of very rich rentiers, and the economy shifted to what we would now call a service economy, in which the commercial sector and the banking sector dominated.

As is the case in this country today, those shifts had a devastating effect on the people who experienced downward social mobility and ended up in the lower strata of Dutch society.

Just as is the case in America today, in the Netherlands back then, the disaffection with the perceived state of the economy and the diplomatic decline was paired with a growing disaffection with the political system of the Dutch Republic among middle-class Dutchmen.

The Dutch “constitution” defined the Dutch Republic as a confederation of sovereign provinces with a republican character, just like America started out so many years ago, where power was supposed to flow upward, from the local governments toward the provincial States, and eventually the States-General. ‘

Those local governments, however, though ostensibly representing “The People” according to the prevailing ideology, had in fact involved into oligarchies dominated by a few families that in the cities at least were not formally part of the nobility, but were considered “patrician” in the classical sense.

Just as is the case in America today, the concentration of power in a more and more closed oligarchy frustrated the middle class, that saw its opportunities for political and social advancement blocked, also because the political patronage in regard to all kinds of petty offices was concentrated in the hands of the oligarchs, who favored their own political allies.

So there is some necessary background, which brings us back to the central question in the minds of Americans all across America today  – who exactly is it that Donald Trump, himself a member of the oligarchy, or plutocracy, going to save us from, and how?

So stay tuned, and we will hopefully see what answer emerges here.