Posted on Leave a comment

Republicans Fight for Democracy

A New York Times reporter claimed the Republican Party is turning against Democracy. Among several problems with that statement there is at least one that we will examine.

First of all, it was a lie. Worse than that it is impossible. Let me explain.

Democracy is defined as, ‘a government by the people, especially: rule of the majority.’

When our country was founded, and our forefathers wrote the Constitution they purposely decided that Democracy as defined above was not the right way to go. Instead, they chose a radically new idea: Representative Democracy.

Now to be fair, the average liberal or Democrat probably thinks that Democracy and Representative Democracy are the same. They are not. In true or pure Democracy, the majority of the people rule. There are no representatives chosen to speak on their behalf. The people rule.

True Democracy is best found in a mob. There you have a large group of people and usually one or just a few people who control it. The mob decides issues by what appeals to them. Reason and debate generally are absent. One reason is mob rule usually means one thought or direction; dissent is not allowed.

Representative Democracy, which our founders wrote into the Constitution, is totally different. In the United States Constitution, we have a Legislative Branch consisting of a House of Representatives and a Senate. We also have the Executive Branch (President) and the Judicial Branch (Courts). These three branches form a Constitutional Representative Democracy sometimes called a Republic.

But for many years, actually decades, our schools, news media, and the Democratic Party have blurred the distinction. In some cases, this was simply ignorance (never having been taught otherwise), but more and more it has been willful.

Now that we live in a society under the control of the News Media, Social Media, and Liberal political forces, the blending has been largely successful. So, it is possible that the reader of this article believes that Democracy is what we have.

Why is that important?

It is important because believing in Democracy as the rule of law is believing in a Constitution as defined by Nancy Pelosi and friends. Not the written Constitution, such as I own a copy of, but a Constitution that is ever evolving according to the will of the people as led by them. Or, put succinctly, mob rule.

More about this issue on the other side of this break.

TR-WritingServices.com brings you this blog post or podcast to keep you informed on the issues of today. Authors need to stay informed so that they can relate to their readers facts as well as entertain them with their imagination.

 TR-WritingServices.com is a service dedicated to help authors reach their potential as independent writers. Knowing the world you live and work in is essential to being a good writer, thus the need for the free flow of information.

To discover how we can help you be the writer you want to be, write to us at markting@tr-indbkstore.com. We will respond with a free copy of our Guide to Writing plus a brochure detailing our plans. We won’t ask for your credit card or any money, but we will send you these items for free.

Check us out and get your career moving.

Now back to the article.

We now live in a society where words and phrases we grew up knowing are being turned on their respective heads. We no longer have men and women as defined by birth, but now we have people born of one sex and later deciding they are of the other sex. The Bible calls this immoral and confusion. And we are seeing this played out right before our eyes.

But that is not all. We call abortion a right and we deny any rights to the unborn. We call Socialism, which can be termed the government taking away our hard-earned money and property, moral. But hard work, loyalty, and doing your best are considered outdated.

Unfortunately, the News Media and the big Social Media giants encourage this change. And they don’t like dissent. Which brings us to the true nature of Democracy. Namely, that it is a dictatorship. I said earlier that Democracy is like a mob. But there is always a leader of a mob and the mob follows the leader without thinking. So-called thinkers of the mob repeat ad nauseum whatever the leader says.

This kind of thinking is apparent in the Letters to the Editors where liberal contributors repeat as fact what NBC, CBS, ABC, along with CNN and other networks say. Especially if it came from the DNC. It doesn’t matter if what is being said is the truth or not, what matters is that the agenda is being promoted.

Perhaps you have heard the term ‘pack the court.’ This term is speaking of the Supreme Court and means that you increase the number of justices until you have enough that agree with you. It makes the Supreme Court irrelevant. I believe this scares our so-called conservative justices and explains their inaction in the last election.

The Republican Party is not perfect. It isn’t even close to perfect. But it believes in the sanctity of life, morality as defined by the Bible, a strong work ethic, the resilience of the American people, the Middle Class, and the Constitution of our forefathers.

What does the Democratic Party believe?

It believes it is fine for a person born a male to decide he is a female and then compete in female sports, thus destroying women’s sports. (By the way, the argument that women can compete against men equally is unsupported by biology or history.)

The Democratic Party also believes that stealing is fine as long as it is for a good cause. They talk about ‘fair share’ when in fact they want the rich to pay not just more, which they already do, but at exorbitantly higher tax rates.

In conclusion, it is the Democratic Party that is undermining Representative Democracy. They are in fact, using the tools and power of Representative Democracy to destroy itself and then turn the country into a dictatorship of mob rule whereby they run things.

This is their vision of the great new world.

If you are listening to this podcast it is being brought to you by T&R Independent Bookstore. We want to be your local bookstore and we are located on the internet at tr-writingservices.com. Drop in and check us out.

Posted on Leave a comment

Statehood for District of Columbia?

The following is a copy of an article by Rob Natelson.

Why the District of Columbia Should Not Be a State?

Commentary

In June 1783, the Confederation Congress was meeting in what is now Independence Hall in Philadelphia. Continental soldiers surrounded the building demanding back pay. They were peaceful, but the intimidation was plain.

Congress asked Pennsylvania authorities to clear away the demonstrators. Pennsylvania authorities refused to do so. Congress accordingly left Philadelphia for Princeton, New Jersey, thereby making that town the national capital for a short time.

This incident confirmed the American Founders in their opinion that the national capital should not be at the mercy of any state. The Founders also knew that in European countries, national office holders could be held hostage by mobs that local authorities were unwilling, or unable, to control.

In July 1783, therefore, Congress began to lay plans for a capital district outside of any state, and under direct federal authority. An independent capital district became a top congressional priority.

When the Constitution’s framers met in convention in 1787, they accomplished this by adding the Enclave Clause to the document. The Enclave Clause reads in part as follows:

“The Congress shall have Power … To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States …”

Securing the national capital from capture was one reason for locating it outside the boundaries of any state. But there were other reasons as well. The founding generation believed that for republican government to survive, decision makers (including voters) should be free from the undue influence of others. They had to be able to make decisions freely, based on full consideration of the evidence. Decisions made by people heavily dependent on others would reflect merely the will of the masters. It was like giving the masters extra votes.

Many participants in the debate over the Constitution expressed concern that residents of the capital district, who would consist largely of government employees and their families, would reflect solely the interests of the government upon which they were dependent. They did not want dependents of the federal government unduly influencing state or national elections.

The Founders also recognized that denying the vote to residents of the capital district would not leave them without influence. On the contrary, prior history showed that those residents would have an outsize influence—partly by reason of their proximity to federal institutions and partly because many would be government officials or employees. Allowing them to participate in national elections would unfairly magnify their power further.

The Constitution reflected all these concerns by making no provision for the capital district having seats in Congress or participating in presidential elections.

In 1788, the Maryland legislature formally offered to cede to the federal government jurisdiction over land for a capital district. Virginia did so the following year. In 1791, Congress accepted Maryland’s and Virginia’s offers. The District of Columbia was established formally 10 years later. The federal government later returned Virginia’s portion to that state, so all of what is now the District of Columbia is former Maryland territory.

In 1960, Congress proposed the 23rd Amendment, which the states ratified the following year. It permitted residents of the District of Columbia to choose three presidential electors. In 1973, Congress passed the Home Rule Act, permitting local self-government for the District.

As currently proposed, the new state would consist of all of D.C. except tiny strips of territory remaining under federal control. It would be called “Washington, Douglas Commonwealth”—presumably meaning the City of Washington in the Commonwealth of Douglas. Many of the arguments over this proposal center on such questions as whether the District is large or self-sustaining enough to be a state.

But those arguments are unnecessary. The history I’ve just recited and the modern implications should be enough to squash the idea.

As demonstrated by the 1783 incident in Philadelphia, D.C. statehood would put the federal government at the mercy of local state officials. “Douglas Commonwealth” officials could refuse to restrain rioters threatening federal institutions. They could threaten or intimidate federal officials to obtain political ends. One obvious tactic might be for Douglas police to harass members of Congress with traffic tickets until Congress passed a particular law or granted the Commonwealth more federal aid.

More about this issue on the other side of this break.

TR-WritingServices.com brings you this blog post or podcast to keep you informed on the issues of today. Authors need to stay informed so that they can relate to their readers facts as well as entertain them with their imagination.

 TR-WritingServices.com is a service dedicated to help authors reach their potential as independent writers. Knowing the world you live and work in is essential to being a good writer, thus the need for the free flow of information.

To discover how we can help you be the writer you want to be, write to us at markting@tr-indbkstore.com. We will respond with a free copy of our Guide to Writing plus a brochure detailing our plans. We won’t ask for your credit card or any money, but we will send you these items for free.

Check us out and get your career moving.

Now back to the article.

The terms of Maryland’s 1788 offer of cession also present objections to D.C. statehood. The Constitution authorizes Congress to assume jurisdiction over a portion of a state only if the state cedes it. As another part of the Enclave Clause makes clear, cession represents the consent of the state to loss of some of its territory.

But Maryland’s consent to cession, as well as Congress’s acceptance, was clearly based on the land being used as a national capital. The 1788 Maryland law provides that cession is to be of a “district in this State not exceeding ten miles square, which Congress may fix upon and accept for the seat of Government of the United States.” Maryland did not consent to the creation of another state out of its territory. Doing so would have required action under an entirely different part of the Constitution (Article IV, Section 3).

In other words, Maryland’s consent was effective for creating a federal “enclave” to be used as a national capital, but not effective for creating a new state. Turning all or part of D.C. into a state would require either a new agreement with Maryland, or a constitutional amendment.

Another objection arises from the results of the 23rd Amendment. Those results have vindicated fully the Founders’ concerns about allowing District residents to vote in federal elections. As the record shows, in presidential contests D.C. voters do not seriously weigh the merits or demerits of presidential candidates. The District is a dependency of the federal government, and its electorate invariably votes for the party that offers more government—the Democrats. D.C. residents have cast ballots in 15 presidential elections. They have voted the same way each time, and by huge margins: In 2020, Joe Biden took 92 percent of their vote.

These results—disturbing to any but the most rabid Democrat partisan—suggest that rather than admitting the District as a state, we should be discussing repeal of the 23rd Amendment.

Nor has the 1973 D.C. Home Rule Act been a success. In 2012, the Washington Post published a column by a long-time D.C. journalist. Its title tells you all you need to know about government there: “How D.C. became a District of Corruption.” America does not need more corruption in its national councils.

Robert G. Natelson, a former constitutional law professor, is senior fellow in constitutional jurisprudence at the Independence Institute in Denver. He is the author of “The Original Constitution: What It Actually Said and Meant“ (3rd ed., 2014).

Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author of the piece and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times from which it was copied. While I find the article informative, I had no prior knowledge of the subject nor was I involved in the research or the discovery of facts pertaining to it.

Find out the difference between Traditional Publishing, Self-Publishing, and Indie Publishing. I’ve written about this subject in the past. And remember this, Indie Publishing means you have more responsibility, better royalties, and, of course, more work to do. Why not be an Indie?

The blog has been made possible by WordPress where we have our site located.

If you are listening to this podcast, it has been brought to you by T&R Independent Bookstore. We want to be your local bookstore and we are located on the internet at tr-writingservices.com. Drop in and check us out.

Posted on Leave a comment

Incitement Charge Falls Apart!

The Riddle Report 02 09 2021

News Item #1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. THOMAS EDWARD CALDWELL, DONOVAN RAY CROWL, and JESSICA MARIE WATKINS, Defendants.

This affidavit is listed further down.

News Item #2

The Speech

Anyone who has been following President Trump would recognize his speech as a typical political rally speech. He was encouraging his followers to engage in political activism. In the same speech he encouraged them to “peacefully and patriotically” make their voices heard. No unbiased person would understand this to be a call to riot or for insurrection.

News Item #3

Warning, Warning

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. RYAN TAYLOR NICHOLS, ALEX KIRK HARKRIDER, Defendants.

In this affidavit the defendants are identified as conspirators to enter or remain and did knowingly enter or remain in any restricted building or grounds without lawful authority, or did conspire to knowingly, and with intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions, engage in, and, with the same intent, did engage in, disorderly or disruptive conduct while, during and in relation to these offenses, NICHOLS did use or carry a deadly or dangerous weapon, to wit a canister of OC/pepper spray and a crowbar, as described below, and HARKRIDER did use or carry a deadly or dangerous weapon, to wit, a baton, as described below, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1752(a) and (b)(1)(A) (conspiracy against both defendants, two substantive counts against NICHOLS, and one substantive count against HARKRIDER); that NICHOLS and HARKRIDER (2) did willfully and knowingly utter loud, threatening, or abusive language, or engage in disorderly or disruptive conduct, at any place in the U.S. Capitol Grounds or in any of the U.S. Capitol Buildings with the intent to impede, disrupt, or disturb the orderly conduct of a session of Congress or either House of Congress, or the orderly conduct in that building of a hearing before, or any deliberations of, a committee of Congress or either House of Congress, or parade, demonstrate, or picket in any of the Capitol Buildings, in violation of 40 U.S.C. §§5104(e)(2), 5104(e)(2)(D), 5104(e)(2)(G); that NICHOLS (3) did willfully commit or attempt to commit an act to obstruct, impede, or interfere with a law enforcement officer lawfully engaged in the lawful performance of his official duties incident to and during the commission of a civil disorder which obstructed, delayed or adversely affected the conduct or performance of a federally protected function; and corruptly did obstruct, influence, or impede any proceeding before the Congress, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 231(a)(3); that NICHOLS (4) did forcibly assault, resist, oppose, impede, intimidate, or interfere with an officer or employee of the United States or of any agency in any branch of the United States Government while engaged in or on account of the performance of official duties, and, in the commission of such offense, used a deadly or dangerous weapon, to wit a canister of OC/pepper spray, or inflicted bodily injury, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 3111(a) and (b); and that NICHOLS and HARKRIDER did (5) aid and abet the commission of these offenses against the United States, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2(a).

Please note the word conspiracy. If there was a conspiracy (i.e., a plan conceived before Trump’s speech) then there cannot be incitement.

News Item #4

Defendants

This Affidavit sets forth additional evidence establishing probable cause that CALDWELL, CROWL, and WATKINS conspired together, and with others known and unknown, to obstruct the United States Congress’ affirmation of the Electoral College vote regarding the results of the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election, and that they committed other related federal crimes in furtherance of that purpose, as set forth below.

News Item #5

Charges

Knowingly and willfully conspired together and with others whose identities are known and unknown to law enforcement at this time to commit an offense against the United States, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371, that is, to corruptly obstruct, influence, or impede an official proceeding in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2); and b. Conspired together and with others whose identities are known and unknown to law enforcement at this time to prevent, by force, intimidation, or threat, officers of the United States from discharging their duties; to injure them on account of the lawful discharge of the duties of their offices; and to injure their property so as to interrupt, hinder, or impede them in the discharge of their official duties, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 372; and c. Attempted to willfully injure or commit depredation against any property of the United States, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1361; and d. Corruptly obstructed, influenced, and impeded an official proceeding, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2); and e. Entered and remained in any restricted building and grounds without lawful authority, and knowingly, and with intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business and official functions, engaged in disorderly and disruptive conduct, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1752(a); and f. Willfully and knowingly engaged in disorderly and disruptive conduct, at any place in the Grounds and in any of the Capitol Buildings with the intent to impede, disrupt, and disturb the orderly conduct of a session of Congress or either House of Congress, and the orderly conduct in that building of any deliberations of either House of Congress, in violation of 40 U.S.C. § 5104(e)(2).

News Item #6

Conclusion

According to the FBI the whole charge of inciting insurrection falls apart. But the proceeding itself is unconstitutional. Any lawyer saying otherwise does not believe in the Constitution as it was written.

The Constitution outlines who bring the charges (House of Representatives), who tries the case (Senate), who presides (Chief Supreme Court Judge), and who can be accused or tried (the President). The current trial violates this by having a member of Congress rather than the chief judge preside and the charge is against a former President and not the sitting President.

This is a waste of taxpayer dollars, unconstitutional, and dead upon arrival.

Get free Guide to Writing at marketing@tr-indbkstore.com.

Subscribe to Author Alerts (click and submit signup form)

For information about us (“we edit, proof, and publish the book within you”) contact us at marketing@tr-indbkstore.com and get our Free Brochure which tells you about our services.

AUTHOR’S PAGE: amazon.com/author/rfrederickriddle.

ARE YOU A BOOK REVIEWER? Want to review our books? Contact me at marketing@tr-indbkstore.com with the subject line indicating that desire. Such as, ‘Seek to review [book Title].’ Be sure to indicate your email address and your name.

==========

R Frederick Riddle is the Editor of TR Writing Services providing help to struggling and/or new authors to write and publish their books. He is also an author of Historical, Speculative, and Mystery fiction, plus co-founder and Vice President of T&R Independent Books. To reply to any blog you can comment on a blog and/or send an email to marketing@tr-indbkstore.com. His Facebook page is at RFrederickRiddlesWorld.

Posted on Leave a comment

The 1st 100 Days

The Riddle Report 01 16 2021

News Item #1

Although the evidence of voter fraud was overwhelming and extensive it didn’t matter. The media called it unsubstantiated evidence, but in reality, it was ignored evidence and never got presented in a legal setting.

So, unless things change, it looks like Joe Biden will be President of the United States. As such, both he and our nation need prayer – which is always true no matter who is President. In his case there is the case of suspected dementia plus the ever-present Kamala Harris, Vice President of the United States.

Therefore, I have consulted my crystal ball and arrived at certain conclusions regarding President Biden’s first, and possibly last, 100 days. As a reminder Trump is the only president in recent memory to actually implement or try to implement his campaign promises.

Here is my list:

  1. $1,400 Stimulus package (when combined with previous $600 amounts to $2,000)
  2. Downsizing of Air Force, Army, Navy, and Space Force
  3. An Apology tour reminiscent of President Obama’s apology tour shortly after taking office
  4. Establishing new restrictive environmental laws
  5. Stopping or tearing down the WALL
  6. Shutting down the economy and beginning his pride and joy 2009 Economic Recovery that both he and others have applauded (though it resulted in a lackluster recovery based primarily on low-income jobs)
  7. New Green Deal

Traditionally, Congress gives a new President most of what he wants in the first 100 days or Honeymoon. So, I expect him to press forward. I did not mention the impeachment of who will be former President Donald Trump because the impetus for that is coming from Congress.

His attempt to increase employment will probably raise us up to the dizzying heights of a stagnant economy, such as he accomplished under Obama.

It probably depends upon how aggressive he is as to whether factory jobs depart during this Honeymoon or afterward. But if he presses forward on his massive recovery act, as I think he will, then businesses will have to rethink whether they stay in America or leave.

News Item #2

Another item that it increasingly looks like we will be seeing is the impeachment of former President Trump. Such an action appears to fly in the face of the Constitution, but Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi is not deterred by such technicalities.

Aside from the cost of such a trial, no matter the length, this would be disastrous for the nation and, eventually, the Democrats. The latest figures are that some 74% of the voters are against it. Right now, the Democrats feel that they can do no wrong, and may step into this mudpie.

News Item #3

Big Tech and Big Social Media have begun what some are calling ‘censorship’ and ‘rein of terror’ by becoming the arbiters of what is free speech and what is not. In launching their attack upon supporters of President Trump they have assumed that they have both the might and the right to censor speech. However, the American people have reacted to this and these Social Media types have lost billions of dollars in the stock market.

Only time will tell how this will turn out.

Tighten your belt folks. We may have a bumpy ride ahead.

Get free Guide to Writing at marketing@tr-indbkstore.com.

Subscribe to Author Alerts (click and submit signup form)

For information about us (“we edit, proof, and publish the book within you”) contact us at marketing@tr-indbkstore.com and get our Free Brochure which tells you about our services.

AUTHOR’S PAGE: amazon.com/author/rfrederickriddle.

ARE YOU A BOOK REVIEWER? Want to review our books? Contact me at marketing@tr-indbkstore.com with the subject line indicating that desire. Such as, ‘Seek to review [book Title].’ Be sure to indicate your email address and your name.

==========

R Frederick Riddle is the Editor of TR Writing Services providing help to struggling and/or new authors to write and publish their books. He is also an author of Historical, Speculative, and Mystery fiction, plus co-founder and Vice President of T&R Independent Books. To reply to any blog you can comment on a blog and/or send an email to marketing@tr-indbkstore.com. His Facebook page is at RFrederickRiddlesWorld and his Parler page is authorriddle.

Posted on Leave a comment

Stimulus Checks

The Riddle Report 12 28 2020

President Trump signed the Stimulus package.

Yea!

So, how do I feel about it?

  1. I’m against the stimulus checks
  2. I’m for the stimulus checks.

Do I sound confused?

Hear me out.

  1. I am against the stimulus checks because of its negative impact on the economy. The entire bill is loaded with pork and pushes our country into being a debtor nation. Experts say that it will take a long time, years or decades, to pay the debt down. Every time we pass legislation like this it adds to our national debt.
  2. I’m for the stimulus checks because people are suffering from this panic driven economic malaise. People are out of work, companies are closed or severely restricted, lockdowns are resulting in depression, sickness, and suicides. It is a terrible situation. Even $600 can make a difference! I know I could use it and I’m not as bad off as a lot of folks are. Plus, the $600 will stimulate the economy.

There is another way of looking at it. Caregivers are often told to take care of themselves so that they can take care of the people they are responsible for. This is not only good advice for care givers, it is good advice for working people throughout the nation. And the United States is a caregiver.

If we are going to take care of other nations, then we first need to take care of ourselves. The United States is acting like a caregiver and therefore should follow the above advice. The world needs a strong, viable United States and that only happens if we maintain our military, political, and economic health.

Still another reason for being in favor of the stimulus package is that when it gets to us, the people, we take it and pay bills. Then the person who gets paid, pays their bills, and so forth. Its impact multiplies and injects a stimulating shot of adrenaline into our economy.

So, this shot of adrenaline to the economy makes it worthwhile?

Yes. Principles are good things to have, but sometimes you have to ask what is the greater good. Besides, if Trump is reelected it is relatively safe to expect a reviving economy. Of course, a Biden/Harris Presidency means all bets are off.

What about the Recount?

It is going pretty much the way anticipated. The lawyers knew that the state courts would probably reject their suits. They also knew these courts wouldn’t even look at the evidence.

The evidence, which the news media says doesn’t exist, is constantly growing. There are hundreds, perhaps thousands, of affidavits plus videos pointing to fraud. The lawsuits, and the evidence, is now in the federal system where they are likely to receive greater scrutiny. It is unfortunate and sad that liberal judges are so agenda focused rather than evidence focused or at least constitutionally focused, but it wasn’t unexpected.

A Constitutional Solution

Another interesting factor is that come January 6th when Congress convenes to tabulate the electoral votes, the President of the Senate, i.e., the Vice President, has the power to determine which slates of electors will represent the different states. This constitutional power has been used at least once, as President of Senate then Vice President Jefferson used the power, and thereby became President. It might well cause an uproar, but it worked then, why not now.

The Constitution in Article II, Section 1 and in the XII Amendment provides that the Vice President as President of the Senate shall ‘open all the certificates’.

Another Constitutional solution is going on right now. This is the act that the state legislatures are the only body, including courts, with the Constitutional power to determine who their state electors will be. That power exceeds the power of the governor, secretary of state, and even the state supreme court. Several state legislatures have already begun movement in that direction.

So, we get the Stimulus plus Trump is Reelected?

Yes, and maybe. Yes, we will get the stimulus. It has been passed by both houses of Congress and signed by the President. And since the previous stimulus caused the distribution machinery to be set up, it should be either this week or next that we get the money.

Maybe Trump is Reelected. The above information is valuable and in some regards is already being pursued. But there are no guarantees.

Get free Guide to Writing at marketing@tr-indbkstore.com.

Subscribe to Author Alerts (click and submit signup form)

For information about us (“we edit, proof, and publish the book within you”) contact us at marketing@tr-indbkstore.com and get our Free Brochure which tells you about our services.

AUTHOR’S PAGE: amazon.com/author/rfrederickriddle.

ARE YOU A BOOK REVIEWER? Want to review our books? Contact me at marketing@tr-indbkstore.com with the subject line indicating that desire. Such as, ‘Seek to review [book Title].’ Be sure to indicate your email address and your name.

==========

R Frederick Riddle is the Editor of TR Writing Services providing help to struggling and/or new authors to write and publish their books. He is also an author of Historical, Speculative, and Mystery fiction, plus co-founder and Vice President of T&R Independent Books. To reply to any blog you can comment on a blog and/or send an email to marketing@tr-indbkstore.com. His Facebook page is at RFrederickRiddlesWorld.

Posted on Leave a comment

Confirmed?

The Riddle Report 12 15 2020

We live in an era when the news media thinks it is the arbiter of facts, truth, and the American Way. But the news media has continually abused our founding fathers’ belief that they should inform Americans honestly and without prejudice. But the news media has long left the honest reporting of news. The latest example, because the Electoral College voted for Biden over Trump, they claim it is over and Biden is President-Elect.

No, it isn’t!

No, he isn’t!

The facts keep getting in the way of these statements.

Fact: There are multiple lawsuits in the federal court system working their way to the Supreme Court.

Fact: The United States Constitution gave the power to determine electoral votes to the state legislatures, not the governor nor the secretary of state.

Fact: The only date that is considered hard is January 20th and that has flexibility.

These are all facts. Denying them doesn’t change them. Let’s take a look.

Lawsuits

The Texas filing failed because it was determined they had no standing and could not prove they would be harmed by the election outcome. That is the only reason the Supreme Court rejected the filing.

But now there are multiple lawsuits filed within battleground states that do have standing and could be harmed by the outcome. These lawsuits have been filed and are in the federal system. One way or another these have to be dealt with.

But there are other lawsuits also in the system. These have been filed by Sidney Powell and must also be dealt with. Powell is a former federal prosecutor and knows a thing or two about the law. She has been investigating the criminal side of the election and has already filed several lawsuits. Again, these must be dealt with.

On the basis of the lawsuits themselves the case of election fraud continues. By the way, the media keeps saying no evidence seen. But that is because they are not looking. All of these cases are supported by evidence.

Another point. I am not a lawyer, but I believe it is improper to put your evidence out in the public. It belongs in court where it can be examined by lawyers and judges.

State Legislatures

Each state shall appoint, in such manner as the legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors…

U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 1

That clearly gives state legislatures the sole power to determine electors. No state, not even the state legislature, can take that responsibility away. Can they delegate? It would seem so, but they are still responsible.

Can state or federal courts overturn it? No. It is in the Constitution.

So, what does that mean?

It means they still have the power. Since the electors were verified by the governor or secretary of state, it is my understanding that the state legislature can still invalidate the votes. And at least some of the state legislatures are investigating and may take action.

January 20th

The Congress may determine the time of choosing the electors, and the day on which they shall give their votes; which day shall be the same throughout the United States. U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 1

All the other dates are determined by law. However, even January 20th is not stated in the Constitution. There are several contingencies affecting that date. The Constitution has determined that the term of office for President and Vice President is four years. That means President Donald Trump’s current term expires on January 20th, thus establishing that date as the final date.

But remember those contingencies? If there is no winner by this date then the contingencies will be activated, which could end up with the Speaker of the House or the President Pro Tempore of the Senate becoming Acting President.

The mass media and Social Media monopolies like Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube ignore the above facts and may even deny them. But if we are a nation of laws centered upon the U.S. Constitution then the above is pertinent.

Want to fact check this article? Get out your copy of the Constitution or go to the local library and get a copy. Check out Article II, Section 1 plus Amendment XII and XV.

==========

R Frederick Riddle is the Editor of TR Writing Services providing help to struggling and/or new authors to write and publish their books. He is also an author of Historical, Speculative, and Mystery fiction, plus co-founder and Vice President of T&R Independent Books. To reply to any blog you can comment on a blog and/or send an email to marketing@tr-indbkstore.com. His Facebook page is at RFrederickRiddlesWorld.

Posted on Leave a comment

Senator Cruz to Represent Case before SCOTUS

The Riddle Report 12 08 2020

The following blog is based on an article by Janita Kan in the Epoch Times. I have used excerpts from the article and enclosed them in ‘’.

I subscribe to the Epoch Times which carries timely news that impacts the United States. In this morning’s news (12/8/20) an article by Janita Kan caught my attention. Currently there is a case regarding the election before the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS). That case concerns an ‘appeal seeking to block the state from taking further action to certify their election results.’

According to this article Senator Ted Cruz (R – Texas) is willing to make oral arguments before the Supreme Court on behalf of the appeal. I regard this as a heavy weight decision since the Senator has previously argued cases before the court. That is a fact that speaks to his standing before the court and his experience.

‘The appeal is currently pending before the Supreme Court after Pennsylvania Republicans filed a request to block the finalizing of certification citing constitutional challenges.

In the instance where the certification has been finalized, Republicans asked the court to restore the “status quo” by compelling Pennsylvania officials to nullify its actions until an order from the court.

The Republicans also asked the court to treat the request as a petition of certiorari, asking the court to review the lawfulness of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s decision.’

For those of you who did not know what certiorari is, I looked it up. It means, ‘a writ or order by which a higher court reviews a decision of a lower court.’

‘Cruz said that he was asked whether he would be willing to argue the case before the nation’s top court if the justices grant certiorari. The former Texas solicitor general said that he had agreed and that he would “stand ready to present oral arguments.”’

Folks, it is one thing for well-known lawyers to file lawsuits and argue before the courts, it is altogether different when a man of Sen. Cruz’ reputation and intellect agrees to do so. Yes, he has been a lawyer, but not every lawyer can argue a case before SCOTUS as he did 9 times between 2003 and 2008, plus he wrote 80 legal briefs. But it is more than that.

Senator Cruz is articulate, experienced, and has a solid reputation as a conservative and as a lawyer. I might remind you that he was a strong opponent to Donald Trump in the 2016 election. And he has been a strong backer of Trump in the Senate.

‘“Because of the importance of the legal issues presented, I’ve publicly urged SCOTUS to hear the case brought by Congressman Mike Kelly, congressional candidate Sean Parnell & state rep. candidate Wanda Logan challenging the constitutionality of the POTUS election results in PA,” Cruz wrote in his statement.

As I said last week, the bitter division and acrimony we see across the Nation needs resolution. I believe SCOTUS has a responsibility to the American People to ensure, within its powers, that we are following the law and following the Constitution.”’

‘In the case at hand, Pennsylvania Republicans escalated the case to the nation’s top court after their state Supreme Court overturned a lower court order blocking election officials from certifying the results of the 2020 election. The Pennsylvania justices also dismissed the case.

In an unsigned opinion, the state’s top court ruled to reverse Commonwealth Judge Patricia McCullough’s temporary injunction that would have prevented the state from taking further steps to complete the certification of the presidential race.’

While it is frustrating to be turned down by the state courts this was expected since they are primarily liberal justices, which are historically not strict constitutionalists. This has been an education for me as it probably has been for you.

If you would like to read the entire article click here to go to Epoch Times article.

==========

R Frederick Riddle is the Editor of TR Writing Services providing help to struggling and/or new authors to write and publish their books. He is also an author of Historical, Speculative, and Mystery fiction, plus co-founder and Vice President of T&R Independent Books. To reply to any blog you can comment on a blog and/or send an email to marketing@tr-indbkstore.com. His Facebook page is at RFrederickRiddlesWorld.

Posted on Leave a comment

Confusing COVID-19 Data

The Riddle Report 12 04 2020

Covid-19 Cases Up!

Covid-19 Hospitalizations Up!

Covid-19 Deaths Up!

Covid-19 Death Rate Down!

How can that be?

Perhaps this strikes me more than you since I’ve worked with numbers most of my life. But logic tells me that if Cases, Hospitalizations, and Deaths are up then so should the Death Rate.

What is the Death Rate?

The Death Rate is simple division. You take the Total Numbers of Deaths-to-Date and divide that number by the Total Number of Cases-to-Date. For Example, today’s published deaths for this year-to-date are 275,550 while the published cases for this year-to-date are 14,086,016. When you divide the Cases into the Deaths you get 0.01956 or 1.96% which is lower than last March’s high of 2.04%.

Now, even if you compensate for the lag time, generally considered 2 weeks although it could be longer, you still get a plunging death rate.

The Numbers Don’t Add UP

It makes one suspicious when such discrepancies occur. If all three (cases, hospitalizations, and deaths) are up then it stands to reason that the death rate would also be up. Anyone can figure out the death rate, but we are dependent upon CDC and others (including the news media) to keep us informed.

So, What is Happening?

It looks to me like someone is not being honest. Like I said, the numbers aren’t adding up. We know for a fact that the cases are up in certain areas of the country. We also know that hospitalizations are up in certain areas of the country. And it is possible that deaths are up in certain parts of the country.

What I suspect is that these ‘certain areas’ are not all the same. For example, cases are up in Findlay Ohio? Are hospitalizations and deaths? For Hancock County (where Findlay is located) the deaths are 46 year-to-date and cases are 2845 year-to-date for a death rate 1.62%. However, the week-to-week increase was more around 15% for deaths. And that may explain the differences.

The News Media Reports Week to Week

When you do that you make things seem far worse than they are. The only true gauge, in my opinion, is month to month or, better, year-to-date. Year-to-date takes into account lag time between cases and related deaths. It doesn’t focus on spikes but on overall trends.

Isn’t This A Second Wave?

That is what they tell us. But getting back to Hancock, Ohio the chart (not shown here) shows very little in the way of cases and deaths until just recently. And the report I looked at today shows a sudden drop off to 0 cases for the last two days. To me this means it is still the First Wave which hadn’t really hit the area earlier. But it sounds more alarming when you call it a second wave instead of a spike.

Again, a longer time span is more instructive than a short one. And a large area is also more instructive. This is great for us trying to understand the trends, but for individuals and families with Covid-19 they are in the now and trends don’t mean much.

So, Why the Difference?

In my opinion, it is because it serves the news media’s agenda to publish the more alarming data. And it justifies the liberal politicians’ pursuit of total lockdowns and mask mandates.

Are We Going to have Mask Mandates?

It looks like it in some communities. I, personally, am not opposed to wearing masks and social distancing. Of the two, I believe social distancing is more effective. Both together may be even more effective. But extreme measures are not warranted and so far, if you look at the states with stringent rules, it doesn’t work.

I believe that President Trump hit the nail on the head when he said, repeatedly, ‘you cannot have the cure worse than the disease’.

Common Sense is in Short Supply.

Common sense tells you that taking precautions such as wearing a mask and social distancing may help friends, neighbors, and relatives. These should not be mandated. Period. I am glad that the Supreme Court stepped in and by all appearances gave a unanimous decision striking down California’s war on churches. The state was willing to throw the rights of the people and the rights of churches under the bus, but the court said, ‘No’.

Liberal politicians are using ‘panic’ to further their political agendas. And that is wrong. Don’t believe me. The Democratic controlled House of Representatives waited until after the election to compromise on the Relief Bill. They could have done so before the election, but they waited until it appeared that Biden won.

Did Biden Win?

That’s another subject but the evidence that the news media says doesn’t exist is so overwhelming that there is serious doubt about a Biden win. Now that the lawsuits are moving into the federal court system and away from the state courts (primarily controlled by Democrats) the issues and the evidence are being taken seriously.

Will We Ever Know the Truth About Covid-19 and the Election?

Those are two different issues. It is possible there are connections, but I am treating them as separate. The truth about Covid-19 will take time. There is ample evidence the virus while deadly is not nearly as deadly as the media reports. How deadly is a matter of looking back over time. But yes, I think we will eventually know the truth.

As for the Election, the answer to that will come much faster. You have courts and state legislatures (who are the only ones with the final say according to the U.S. Constitution) that are already investigating. And don’t forget we have a Senate runoff election coming up in Georgia. That is already stirring up legal scrutiny.

But they must decide these things soon to determine who leads our country for the next four years. My own opinion is that President Trump will emerge as having won the election. But only God knows the truth right now.

R Frederick Riddle is the Editor of TR Writing Services providing help to struggling and/or new authors to write and publish their books. He is also an author of Historical, Speculative, and Mystery fiction, plus co-founder and Vice President of T&R Independent Books. To reply to any blog you can comment on a blog and/or send an email to marketing@tr-indbkstore.com. His Facebook page is at RFrederickRiddlesWorld.

Posted on Leave a comment

Sidney Powell

The Riddle Report 11 23 2020

Did Trump Campaign cut ties with Sidney Powell?

NO! That’s what the media wants you to believe. The statement by Giuliani was issued to clarify things.

Clarify What?

What the statement did was clarify that she was not a part of the Trump Campaign Legal Team. The former prosecutor is still there and still in take-no prisoners mode as she continues to pursue illicit voter fraud. What they did was simply state the existing relationship as her being independent of the Legal Team.

Why?

I can thing of at least two reasons.

The first reason is to clear up any misunderstandings people may have. Some apparently thought she was part of the Legal Team rather than a lawyer acting in conjunction with but not part of the team.

Secondly, there is the matter of fundraising. I got the impression that she has her own fundraising site, and they are simply making sure the lines are clear.

A third reason may be that she wants to remain independent. Her focus is on voter fraud while the Legal Team could be broader. This is just a guess on my part, but it makes sense.

Do They Still Stand with Her?

I will let you decide.

Other than the clarification, there has been no disavowal of any of her charges or statements. In fact, the Federal Election Commission chairman seams to be echoing them. The fact that he and others are supporting the challenges is a testament to the seriousness of the charges and the confidence they have in the evidence. My personal opinion is that yes, they still stand with her.

What happens Next?

So far, everything seems to be going as expected. I’m not a lawyer, but it seems logical to think that there needs to be a legal trail to the Supreme Court where I think this will all end up. So, it was necessary to go through the lower courts (state courts) which are generally liberal. The Trump Team knew that these courts would take a liberal stand and their expectations were verified.

It looks to me like these cases will soon be in the lower Federal courts and begin working their way upward to the Supreme Court where the majority take a serious view of the U.S. Constitution and will likely take the case. Because of the seriousness and limited time, the Court would also need to prioritize the case.

Meanwhile there are still other opportunities for President Trump to win.

Opportunities

According to Alan Dershowitz, a Harvard Law professor emeritus, there are at least three avenues that the President can get re-elected by. These are:

  1. In Pennsylvania, the courts changed what the state legislature, which the U.S. constitution has given ultimate authority regarding Presidential elections, can do about counting ballots. He thinks this is a winning issue before the Supreme Court.
  2. The second path or argument is called the ‘equal protection’ of voters. In this case, some Pennsylvania counties allowed flawed ballots to be cured where others did not.
  3. The third path has already been mentioned and that is the computers and/or software, either fraudulently or by glitches, literally changed thousands of votes.

Without legal expertise I can only guess, but in my opinion, it is possible that the path is not limited to just one. It appears to me that all three paths could be used.

There is still a way to go, but that covers the existing paths as far as I know. Meanwhile the news media continue to confuse the public by calling Joe Biden the President-Elect. The truth is there is no President-Elect until the government makes that determination. It is never the news media; their declaration is just informative and not official.

This means that President Trump is under no obligation to concede to Biden nor is Biden in any way a legal representative of the government. This also means Joe Biden is not eligible to receive transition money. If he is ever officially called the winner, then he can receive the money.

In compiling this report I have used outside sources and not just my opinion.

R Frederick Riddle is the Editor of TR Writing Services providing help to struggling and/or new authors to write and publish their books. He is also an author of Historical, Speculative, and Mystery fiction, plus co-founder and Vice President of T&R Independent Books. To reply to any blog you can comment on a blog and/or send an email to marketing@tr-indbkstore.com. His Facebook page is at RFrederickRiddlesWorld.

Posted on Leave a comment

Riddle News: The Problem With Science

11 12 2020

Welcome to Riddle News.

Joe Biden has said that if he is elected, he will on the first day of his Presidency follow science and shutdown the economy; completely. Dr. Michael Osterholm, an advisor to Biden, says that a total shutdown of four to six weeks would bring the cases down to manageable levels. In the same breath he says that the government could borrow the money to pay for lost wages for individuals, for losses to small companies, to medium-sized companies, or city, state, or county governments.

Let’s forget for the moment that the death rate is still down around 2.30%. Let’s also forget that this is happening although the latest surge has been longer than a couple of weeks. In addition, let’s forget that the economy while still down is recovering and unemployment rate is down. Then there is the fact that a vaccine is already in the approval process and probably will be available for First Responders this year and the general public possibly before Biden takes office (if elected).

Let’s forget all that and focus on the merits or lack thereof of Dr. Osterholm’s theory.

Shutting Down Businesses

Shutting down businesses and paying people for lost wages for four to six weeks could help keep the coronavirus pandemic in check and get the economy on track until a vaccine is approved and distributed.

All of this is based on his understanding of science.

The problem with Science

The problem with elevating science to the dominating position that many people, including Biden/Harris, have done is that science is not absolute. It is constantly changing. Usually that change is for the better and we have a better life than our parents and grandparents because of science. But science is sometimes wrong.

History is covered with scientific wrong thinking:

George Washington, after retiring from the Presidency, got sick. The science of the day preached bloodletting. That is the practice of surgically removing blood from the patient because they thought that would heal him. But instead it weakened him, and he died.

They followed science, but science was wrong.

Abortion. There was a time when science said that life doesn’t begin until after a baby is born. Thus, it was alright to abort. And now we have an abortion industry and politicians who want to expand it. But science was wrong. Today science believes that life begins at fertilization. (There are arguments about when this takes place, but they generally agree that human life begins at or shortly after fertilization.)

Unfortunately, abortionists still operate on the notion that life doesn’t begin until ‘birth’. This old science was wrong.

Covid-19. Dr. Fauci, Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, has been shifting his stance ever since the virus came to America. But we shouldn’t blame him, blame science. In the first quarter of 2020 science pointed to a quick solution and recovery and he followed science and passed his views to President Trump. But the science was wrong.

Now science says that a vaccine is imminent. It is already being tested and distribution is being set up. There are other vaccines also nearing availability. Where once science said vaccines were up to 2 years away, now it is only weeks and months away.

The truth is that science has been changing. As new studies occur, and the results are learned science has had to adjust. What they thought they knew in January and what they think they know now are worlds apart.

But while science has adjusted, the liberal media and liberals in general stuck with the worst-case scenario that they created. Thus, the criticism of the Trump Administration.

Trump Administration. At this time, we don’t know who won the election (all media claims aside), but we do know that the administration followed science, at least at first. Advised by Dr. Fauci and others, the administration banned flights to and from China, then later from Europe and Britain. Here the science appears to have been correct as far as hindering the spread of the virus.

But it soon became apparent that science was having to adjust to the changing profile of the virus. Suddenly science had to develop new tools and strategies. And both were untested. The Trump Administration was faced with fully trusting theories put forth as facts or charting a course that incorporated the theories mixed with commonsense solutions.

I believe the Administration took the correct route and pulled back from full belief in science. Working with governors to shut down the nation saved approximately 2 million lives and reopening the nation saved our economy. The President was constantly juggling decisions based on input from both the changing medical science and from the changing business climate. These were difficult decisions, but the choices worked.

Has Trump’s Handling of Virus Been Good?

Yes, definitely! Although cases are still happening and people are still dying, the death rate has plunged and is still down. Plus, the economy is picking up and promises to be stronger in the fourth quarter and in January (although there are naysayers). Operation Warp Speed has brought hope to millions of people with the announcements regarding potential vaccines.

Assuming President Trump is re-elected (an increasing probability) then we can expect the virus to be brought under control, vaccine distribution to the general public, and a rebounding economy. It is not so rosy if Joe Biden or as I say Biden/Harris is elected. Shutting down the economy a second time would be devastating.

Especially since they are talking total shutdown. Talking about borrowing money to take care of lost wages and revenue ignores the fact that the House of Representatives has an agenda to help out Democratic states that were already in financial trouble prior to Covid-19. Our economy would be crippled trying to take care of them plus take care of Covid-19 issues. Businesses would close, some permanently, and people would go back to unemployment status. And does Dr. Osterholm really believe that the turnaround would only take 4 to 6 weeks?

I think somebody’s science is wrong.

If Trump Wins Then What?

As mentioned earlier there is at least one vaccine on warp speed. Already the National Guards throughout the nation are being prepared to distribute the vaccine first to First Responders and then to the public. By January 20th, the virus may be under control and our economy revving up.

We have had the right man at the helm during this crisis. I am praying that the recounts and court cases will give us 4 more years of Donald Trump.

As for science, it should never be considered the absolute authority. It is an important resource, but we need men and women who can lead even if it means turning aside from science.

Get free Guide to Writing at marketing@tr-indbkstore.com.

Subscribe to Author Alerts (click and submit signup form)

For information about us (“we edit, proof, and publish the book within you”)  contact us at marketing@tr-indbkstore.com and get our Free Brochure which tells you about our services.

AUTHOR’S PAGE: amazon.com/author/rfrederickriddle.

ARE YOU A BOOK REVIEWER? Want to review our books? Contact me at marketing@tr-indbkstore.com with the subject line indicating that desire. Such as, ‘Seek to review [book Title].’ Be sure to indicate your email address and your name.

 – – – – – – –

R Frederick Riddle is the Editor of TR Writing Services providing help to struggling and/or new authors to write and publish their books. He is also an author of Historical, Speculative, and Mystery fiction, plus co-founder and Vice President of T&R Independent Books. To reply to any blog you can comment on a blog and/or send an email to marketing@tr-indbkstore.com. His Facebook page is at RFrederickRiddlesWorld.