Press "Enter" to skip to content

ResCon1

Senate Republicans Must Acknowledge Trump’s Wrongdoing—Even, If, and Especially If, They Don’t Convict Him

Given that we’re less than 10 months out from the Nov. 3, 2020, presidential election, it is reasonable and legitimate to conclude that:

a) what President Trump did vis-a-vis Ukraine was wrong and perhaps even impeachable. However,

(b) because of the proximity to the election, he should not be convicted by the Senate and removed from office. Instead,

(c) the voters should decide Trump’s fate at the ballot box.

If Republicans were making that argument, there would be little to quarrel with.

Unfortunately, too many Republicans have insisted that Trump did nothing wrong: that he is the victim of a political witch-hunt and an ongoing political vendetta by angry Democrats who have never reconciled themselves to his election as president.

Trump himself, moreover, has never acknowledged any wrongdoing. To the contrary: he continues to insist that his phone call to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was a “perfect conversation” and “totally appropriate.”

This is patently false and a complete denial of reality. In truth, as we now know beyond the shadow of a doubt, Trump abused his authority as president to try and secure personal political favors from a foreign government, and he tried to use Congressionally authorized aid to that government as leverage to secure these favors.

This is the very definition of an abuse of power and a violation of the public trust.

Now, whether this rises to the level of an impeachable offense is legitimately debatable. And whether the Senate should convict Trump for this offense and remove him from office is even more debatable. But there can be no debate about the underlying offense and wrongdoing by the president.

The facts don’t lie, but political partisans often do. And too many Republicans, in Congress and the media, are lying and spinning about what Trump did, why he was impeached, and why he is now being tried in the Senate.

In so doing, they are contributing mightily to a debilitating national cynicism that ascribes all political disputes to a raw lust for power and revenge.

To the cynics, and to the wild-eyed partisans, there can be no principled, good-faith disagreements, just high-pitched, life-and-death political struggles in which anything goes. Just win, baby. Truth, after all, is relative.

This, of course, does not serve our country and our politics well. It results in a hardening of the partisan arteries, political arteriosclerosis, and legislative paralysis. Nothing gets done because the two sides refuse even to communicate honestly, fight fairly, and legislate respectfully.

For Republicans eager to secure the border, check the regulatory state, reform entitlements, rebuild the military, and liberalize healthcare, this is an ominous and foreboding development.

Worse still, by failing to speak honestly and forthrightly about Trump’s wrongdoing, Republican officeholders are handicapping themselves when the next Democratic President abuses her power and authority to, say, ban and confiscate guns, grant amnesty and citizenship rights to illegal immigrants, limit options and choices in the health insurance marketplace, force local schools to accommodate transgender identity and “inclusion,” and make college “free.”

What standing, after all, will Republican congressman and senators have to oppose these naked power grabs after they spent the better part of a year rationalizing and excusing Trump’s abuse of power?

A republic if you can keep it, warned Benjamin Franklin. Let’s at least try to keep it by honestly calling out wrongdoing no matter where it occurs, and regardless of which side of the political aisle it originates. That may not mean convicting Trump and removing him from office; but it surely means leveling with the American people about his abuse of power and wrongdoing.

Note: Tim Carney and Quin Hillyer at the Washington Examiner, and the editors at National Review, share similar thoughts about the Senate Republicans vis-a-vis the Trump impeachment.

Feature photo/illustration credit: QuotesGram via Tunnel Wall.

Raheem Mostert’s Remarkable Story Shows Why We Love Professional Sports

Adam Kilgore’s wonderful profile of San Francisco ’49er running back Raheem Mostert, published in today’s Washington Post, reminds us again why we love professional sports:

Because the stories of the athletes can be so inspiring. Because the trials and tribulations that they endure and overcome can be so compelling.

And because we know that professional sports is a hard-fought and hard-won meritocracy, where only the strong survive—and where unheralded and overlooked underdogs can and do defy the odds, through sheer grit, perseverance, and determination.

Consider, for instance, the remarkable story of one Raheem Mostert. He

“entered the league out of Purdue after every team passed on him in the draft, signing as a free agent with the Eagles in 2015. The Philadelphia Eagles cut him after training camp… and signed him to their practice squad.

“The Miami Dolphins signed him, only to cut him a month later. He spent two months with the Baltimore Ravens and finished the season with the Cleveland Browns, who would cut him a week before the start of the 2016 season.

“After his rookie year,” Kilgore reports, “Mostert was unsure he could withstand the psychic toll of getting cut again. He talked with his wife about leaving football behind.

“She told me, ‘If you truly love this game, you’re going to do what you need to do,’ ” Mostert said. “That’s what I needed.”

“But his second season unfolded like his first. The New York Jets picked him up, only to cut him a week later. The Chicago Bears signed him, and Mostert lasted about two months before Chicago released him.”

In all, Kilgore notes,”six franchises waived Mostert before he stuck with the San Francisco 49ers. On some of those days, he did not believe he would make it in the NFL. On others, he considered quitting football…

“Not everybody can deal with that type of stress and pain and agony that I went through,” Mostert told Kilgore. ” I kept the faith in not only myself, but whoever gave me the opportunity.”

Since joining the ’49ers in 2016, no one had ever heard of Mostert. He spent the entire 2016 season minus the final game on the practice squad. He was placed on injured reserve for much of the 2017 and 2018 seasons and contributed little to the team. He was consigned to special teams, where he reportedly played well, but was still a bit player.

However, all of that began to change this season, as Mostert broke out in a big way, rushing for 772 yards on 137 carries. And, in the ’49ers’ resounding victory over the Green Bay Packers in Sunday’s NFC championship game, Mostert had a game for the ages, rushing for an incredible 220 yards on 29 carries while scoring four touchdowns.

To put that into perspective, only one player in NFL history has ever rushed for more yardage in a playoff game, and that player’s name is Eric Dickerson, who now resides in the NFL Hall of Fame.

“While Jimmy Garoppolo passed only eight times,” reports Kilgore, “Mostert exploded through holes, sprinted away from defensive backs, and bowled over defenders. Teammates admire his style—’fearless,’ left tackle Joe Staley said—and his story…

“He’s just earned everything,” ’49ers’ head coat Kyle Shanahan told reporters after Sunday’s win. “He earned today. He’s such a good person. I can’t say enough good about Raheem.”

“Mostert,” writes Kilgore, “called Sunday the happiest day of his life behind his wedding and the [June 22] birth of his son,” Gunnar Grey. And Mostert is especially grateful that he was able to hold Gunnar close and in his arms after Sunday’s spectacular performance and glorious win.

“That’s a moment I’m going to cherish forever,” Mostert said. “For him to be able to have that opportunity, be onstage with me after what I accomplished, after what I done been through, I can’t put it into words how it feels.”

Fortunately for us, Washington Post reporter Adam Kilgore has a way with words and has given us a strong sense of how it must feel.

I know how I feel after reading Kilgore’s profile: elevated and inspired. Motivated. Raheem Mostert was knocked down repeatedly; yet he never gave up. And his spirit of determination and ultimate triumph over adversity is what sports fans love about sports.

It is why we watch the game. And it is why we will be watching Sun., Feb. 2, when Mostert and his fellow ’49ers take on the Kansas City Chiefs in the Super Bowl. Mostert and his teammates are not yet done and neither are we.

Why, on Martin Luther King Jr. Day, Trump is Fighting for Black Votes and Dems Are Desperate to Stop Him

Martin Luther King, Jr.’s most significant political legacy, of course, is enfranchising millions of black voters in the South and raising the importance of the black vote there and, indeed, nationwide. Black voters before and since have voted overwhelmingly Democratic.

However, today, on Martin Luther King Jr. Day, 2020, we see clear indications that Democrats and Republicans alike are fighting hard, if not always scrupulously, for the votes of African Americans.

President Trump and Vice President Pence, for instance, both went to the Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial in Washington, D.C., to pay their respects to the slain civil rights leader. The White House made a video of their visit, which the President tweeted to his 71 million-plus followers.

Trump also issued a Presidential Proclamation commemorating Dr. King and pledging to ensure that all Americans, regardless of their race, class or gender, “have every opportunity to realize a better life for themselves and their families.”

Trump touted the nation’s historic economic growth, the creation of more than seven million new jobs, and record-high employment for backs and other minorities. “Economic opportunity,” he noted, “is the greatest engine for empowering individuals and families to overcome adversity, and we will continue to fight for opportunity for all Americans.”

And of course, Trump took to Twitter to underscore, in his own inimitable way, the good news for African Americans:

Trump and the GOP are wise to fight for black support. The President and his team have a very good story to tell and an impressive record of achievement that, arguably, has disproportionately benefited African Americans and other minorities.

Indeed, not only is the unemployment rate the lowest that it’s been in half a century, but wages are rising and the barriers to entrepreneurship and business formation are falling.

Trump and the GOP also can point to criminal justice reform, which disproportionately benefits African Americans and other minorities by allowing federal inmates early release opportunities and a second chance to find work.

Doubting Thomases complain that these efforts are all in vain because Democrats have a hard lock on the black vote. African Americans, after all, vote 90-percent+ for Dem presidential candidates and have been doing so now for decades.

History. This is true, but the past is not necessarily prologue. Recall that from the end of the Civil War in 1865 up until the New Deal in 1936, African Americans were a reliably Republican voting block. Voting patterns can and do change over time, but only when candidates and parties actively reach out to voters and seek their support.

So, it is good thing that Trump and the GOP are making a genuine, good-faith effort to reach out to black voters. It is not good for the country when one political party monopolizes a key voting demographic. Competition in the political marketplace, no less than competition in the economic marketplace, is beneficial because it spurs (policy) excellence and innovation.

As for the Democrats, they, too, recognize the importance of the black vote. Thus eight of the party’s presidential candidates locked arms today and marched together toward the state capital building in South Carolina to commemorate the King holiday.

Paradoxically, the Democrats’ utter dominance of the black vote may make them more vulnerable politically—if not in 2020, then certainly, in the years and decades to come. It would take just a small shift in the black vote, after all, to completely upend the Dems’ strategy for victory in presidential contests.

“Increase Trump’s share of the black vote to even as low as 15 percent, and Democratic chances of winning the electoral college become very low,” writes long-term political observer Henry Olsen, a senior fellow at the the Ethics and Public Policy Center.

Dem Desperation. In short, the Democrats desperately need to retain their lock on the black vote and they know it. Which is why their default position every four years is to accuse GOP presidential candidates of racism and bigotry. Their intent is to scare black voters, so that they keep voting Democratic.

It was not surprising, then, that Joe Biden went to a black church in South Carolina Sunday and charged that Trump is allied with the Ku Klux Klan. Although ludicrous, outrageous, and clearly beyond the pale, such a charge is utterly unsurprising.

This is what Democrats running for president do: because they know that they can ill-afford to lose black voters, either now, in the primaries, or in the November presidential election. Just win, baby.

These vicious and unscrupulous race-baiting tactics are a stain on American politics. The good news, though, is that both political parties recognize the importance of black voters and are competing hard for their support, and that’s something to be thankful for on this Martin Luther King Jr. Day.

Feature photo credit: The Valley City Times Record.

Critics Rely on Bad and Dated Nutritional Science to Lambaste Trump’s School Meals Reform

Self-anointed nutritionists and “children’s health advocates” have lambasted the Trump administration for giving local schools greater latitude and flexibility in the choice of food that they offer students.

In a separate post, I explain why these critics have it wrong. They adhere to bad and dated nutritional science that says fat and sodium are bad, but fruit and whole-grains are an unalloyed good.

In this post, I report in greater detail what the best and most recent science actually says about fat, carbohydrates, sodium, fruits, and vegetables. In truth, much of what we think we know about nutrition simply ain’t so.

Fat. Take, for instance, the longstanding proscription on fatty foods. Fat, we are told, is bad. However, there is absolutely no scientific evidence for this proscription. To the contrary: fat is highly beneficial and a much-needed macronutrient.

Fat is “a major source of energy,” notes the Harvard Medical School:

It helps you absorb some vitamins and minerals. Fat is needed to build cell membranes, the vital exterior of each cell, and the sheaths surrounding nerves. It is essential for blood clotting, muscle movement, and inflammation.

It is true that not all fats are created equal. Monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fats are found naturally in nuts, cheese, olive oil, eggs, and fish. These are the healthiest types of fats.

Artificial fats, otherwise known as industrial-made trans fats, are found in sugar-laden snacks and processed foods and are unhealthy. Saturated fats, meanwhile, are found in meat and cheese and “fall somewhere in the middle” of the health continuum, notes Harvard.

Fat consumed, moreover, does not ipso facto become fat on our body. That is not at all how human biochemistry works. Excess calories consumed become fat. And, for most people, excess calories come not from consuming too much fat, but from consuming too many carbohydrates.

“The reality is that fat doesn’t make you fat or diabetic. Scientific investigations going back to the 1950s suggest that actually, carbs do,” writes Nina Teicholz, author of The Big Fast Surprise: Why Butter, Meat and Cheese Belong in a Healthy Diet.

Carbohydrates. Unfortunately, it is all too easy to consume too many carbohydrates. They dominate our food choices and need to be strictly limited. Yet, critics complain that Trump’s regulatory rollback will allow schools to offer more pizza, burgers and other fatty foods.

But pizza and burgers are high in protein and fat, which are not the cause of poor healthy and obesity. Just about all of us, in fact—our children included—would benefit from more protein, more fat and fewer carbs.

These same critics also complain that, because schools have greater flexibility in choosing food, students will consume less whole-grain bread and cereal, and starchy foods like potatoes [will] replace green vegetables.” But as Teicholz points out,

according to the best science to date, people put themselves at higher risk for these conditions [Type 2 diabetes and heart disease] no matter what kind of carbohydrates they eat.

Yes, even unrefined carbs. Too much whole-grain oatmeal for breakfast and whole-grain pasta for dinner, with fruit snacks in between, add up to a less healthy diet than one of eggs and bacon, followed by fish.

Sodium. Likewise with sodium: The critics complain that greater flexibility will result in more more high-sodium foods, even as the Trump administration rolls back regulatory limits on the amount of sodium allowed in school meals.

But it is far from clear that sodium is a real problem, especially for our youth. (High blood becomes more prevalent as people age and is less common in children.) “Dietary guidelines often change, but ‘restrict your salt intake’ has resisted the advances of science,” write Drs. Michael H. Alderman and David A. McCarron. “Adequate sodium,” they note,

is crucial for biological processes including nerve conduction, muscle contraction, and sustaining the fluid balance necessary to assure blood flow and deliver nutrients and oxygen to every cell in the body.

As recently reviewed in the New England Journal of Medicine, human physiology has evolved a complex process, mediated by the brain, to maintain sodium balance precisely.

If we consume too little sodium, our kidneys will go to extremes to conserve it. If we consume too much, it is eliminated through our skin, intestines, and kidneys.

You’re far likelier to die from failure to maintain this precise control than from the modest impact salt may have on your blood pressure.

Fruits and Vegetables. What about fruits and vegetables? The critics say that, because of the Trump regulatory rollback, students will consume fewer fruits and vegetables, which are a great source of vitamins, minerals, and antioxidants. Again: untrue.

While the benefits of fruits and vegetables are undeniable, they are not an unalloyed good, and too much of anything can be a bad thing.

The problem with fruit is that has lots of sugar (fructose), “which causes the liver to generate triglycerides and other lipids in the blood that are altogether bad news,” Teicholz writes.

Vegetables don’t have any such complicating factor. They absolutely are nutritious and should be an integral part of every person’s diet. Still, they are incapable of satiating a person’s appetite and cannot fulfill our natural, innate need for fat, protein, and basic food variety.

In truth, by giving local schools greater latitude and flexibility in the choice of food that they offer students, the Trump administration is acting upon the basis of the best and most recent science.

The administration’s critics, by contrast, are relying on antiquated and discredited ideas that serious nutritionists and health experts increasingly reject, and for good reason.

Trump Administration’s School Meals Reform Will Help Reduce Childhood Obesity

The Trump administration announced Friday that it is rolling back Obama-era regulations that govern nutritional requirements for school meals and giving local schools greater latitude and flexibility in the choice of food that they offer students.

The media have depicted these changes as a sop to the food industry and a disservice to children nationwide—especially disadvantaged children from lower-income families, since they depend more on school meals. These youngsters supposedly now will be consuming less nutritious and unhealthy food as a result.

I hate to be the bearer of good news, but this is simply untrue. And the reason it is untrue is that much of what we think we know about nutrition simply ain’t so.

The longstanding proscription on fatty food is the most commonly held misconception. In a separate post, I report why this misperception and other conventional ideas about health and nutrition are wrong.

For the purpose of this post, suffice it to say that bad and dated nutritional science helps to explain why school administrators and cafeteria workers welcome the Trump administration’s move to make the school meals program less rigid and more accommodating of ground truth, so to speak.

It is not, obviously, that they are indifferent to children’s health, nor that they are shills for the food industry. Instead, their concerns are very practical. Students, they observe, are too often rejecting the food that is being offered to them.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) conducted a “School Nutrition and Meal Cost Study” that found “children are throwing 25 percent of nutrients straight into the trash can. This is not serving children well,” says the USDA.

Science Says. Why are students rejecting the food that is being served them? Because school meal plans too often are based on bad and dated nutritional science that says fat and sodium are bad, but fruit and whole-grains are an unalloyed good.

“Completely eliminating or limiting fat from your diet can actually make you gain weight, often because it leaves you feeling so deprived,” reports CNN. “Conversely, some studies have found that fatty foods can aid in weight loss.”

“The problem with most diets,” writes Mark Hyman, MD, author of the Eat Fat, Get Thin Cookbook, “is that they lack the key ingredient, [fat], that makes food taste good and cuts your hunger.”

It is not hard, then, to discern why students have rejected the ostensibly healthy meals foisted upon them by Michelle Obama and her coterie of self-anointed “children’s health advocates”:

First, these meals are not as healthy as advertised—mainly because they seek to radically reduce fat and sodium in a student’s diet; and second, because of their inflated reliance on carb-laden whole-grains, fruits and vegetables, these meals leave students hungry and longing for greater sustenance.

Local schools and school cafeteria workers know this, which is why they have pushed for greater latitude and flexibility in the choice of food that they offer students.

The Trump administration has wisely responded to their request, with regulations that retain legitimate nutritional standards (i.e., vegetables are still part of every student’s meal), while simultaneously ensuring that these standards are not so rigid and inflexible as to be counterproductive and self-defeating (because students discard the food given to them and procure unhealthy snacks elsewhere.)

Childhood Obesity. To be sure, Michelle Obama identified a real problem. Childhood obesity in America has become an epidemic—so much so that “roughly 31% of American youths [are] disqualified [from military service] because they are overweight.”

This is a national disgrace and a bona fide public health problem, which we ought to address and remedy as a nation. And, to the extent, that we are eliminating empty calories and excess carbohydrates from school meals, this is an indisputably good thing.

Indeed, soda and sugar water have no discernible health benefits whatsoever; they are genuinely harmful. Soda and sugar water induce obesity by replacing, crowding out, or superseding calories with real and requisite health benefits.

But trying to reduce or eliminate fat in a student’s diet is a big and health-debilitating mistake. Ditto the attempt to reduce or eliminate high-sodium food. And fruits and whole-grains are no panacea either because they are laden with sugar and carbohydrates, which are the real culprit in the obesity epidemic.

Even were it otherwise, students, like the rest of us, crave variety in their diet and food that is satisfying, satiating, and savory.

While well-intended, Michelle Obama’s school meal regs lost sight of this reality and were based on bad and dated nutritional science. Consequently, they were rejected by the very students they were designed to help.

The Trump administration, to its credit, recognizes that we can and must do better. Its reform of the school meals program is a promising start.