I Could Be Wrong.

Posts

Recent posts

Is it a violation of their oath of office if a president is a racist? I don’t think that would be a good thing, but the short answer would be no. Even if you believed that Trump is the most racist President since before the Civil War, being a racist is not a crime, and it is not a violation of the Constitution. Courts don’t rule on “oath violations” anyway. That is the job of the voters and of Congress. The court decides whether a specific executive action violates a constitutional provision or a valid statute. When a court finds an executive action unconstitutional or unlawful, that action could be interpreted as a violation of the executive's oath. The oath requires loyalty to the constitutional and statutory limits. In my opinion, when historians analyze many of the Trump-era actions that the courts have found to be unconstitutional or unlawful, future generations will ask why he was ever elected. Probably most presidents had unconstitutional rulings that could be interprete...

Every elected official swears an oath to defend the Constitution. Not a party. Not a President, nor any individual. Not a social media following. They swear an oath to the Constitution. They take these oaths of their own free will. No one pointed a gun at their head to seek the office that requires obedience not to a leader but to a document that is our Constitution. What I wonder all the time is how someone can take that oath and then so easily break it. The saddest thing is that it is just all too common. So common that many people don’t notice, and so common that many people don’t care. Here are some very common things that elected officials have done that are actually a violation of their oath. Trying to overturn an election. Pressuring state officials to change election results. Voting to throw out certified votes without evidence. Lying to the public about things they know are not true and using their office to help themselves instead of the country. You don’t need a law de...

It is really a simple concept: the people who enforce the law must follow the law. I believe that most Americans feel that way. The principle is not controversial. It is not partisan. It is the very foundation of public trust. When an officer pulls someone over, knocks on a door, or makes an arrest, the legitimacy of that action depends on the belief that the officer is acting within the law and not above it. In recent years, a troubling pattern has emerged involving Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Across the country, journalists, civil rights groups, and even federal judges have documented cases in which ICE agents have violated constitutional rights, ignored established procedures, or used force in ways that raise serious legal questions. These incidents are not just isolated to Minnesota. They are happening all over the country, and the pattern demands investigation. I don’t argue against immigration enforcement. Most favor immigration enforcement. The basic issue is acco...

I remember growing up in a time when one of the most important things a person could do was to tell the truth. If we did something wrong, we could expect to be punished. If we did something wrong and then lied about it, we were punished more severely. We were constantly being told that “honesty is the best policy”. That was 70 years ago. What in the hell is happening today? Most Americans, left, right, or independent, want leaders who shoot straight, tell the truth, and don’t play games with our lives. We don’t want the perfect truth. We don’t want every detail. What we want is honesty when the stakes are high. What I see as one of the problems is that not all lies are the same. Some are just small political exaggerations. Some are mistakes. Some are spin. Some are so big that they change the course of history. A major problem is that, in many cases, the press seems to lump them all into the same category, which, in itself, is just another lie. Let's look at Biden first. Joe Bi...

Every once in a while, a question hits so hard that it refuses to leave. For many Americans — especially those who grew up in Christian churches — one of those questions is this: How can any church that claims to follow Jesus support the harshest actions of ICE, including the recent shootings in Minnesota? You don’t need a degree in theology to feel the contradiction. You only need common sense, and common sense tells us something is deeply off when the teachings of Jesus — a man who spent His life defending the vulnerable — are used to justify policies that break families apart and, in recent cases, end in fatal shootings. Let’s walk through this plainly, without spin. The Minnesota shootings exposed the moral contradiction in real time. On January 7, 2026, ICE officers fatally shot Renee Nicole Good in Minneapolis. The shooting sparked immediate outrage, protests, and national scrutiny. The situation escalated further when protesters disrupted a church service in St. Paul ...

If We Want to Beat China, We Need a Smarter Plan Than Just Tariffs . A lot of Americans are frustrated with China — and for good reason. I am frustrated with China. They cheat on trade, steal technology, and undercut American workers. People want a president who stands up for the United States and doesn’t let China push us around. That instinct is right. But the way we fight back matters. Tariffs sound tough. They feel like we’re finally punching back. But here’s the truth most politicians won’t say out loud: Tariffs don’t make China pay. They make us pay. And they make China stronger in the long run. Here lies a major problem: our government is not being honest with us. If we want to beat China — really beat them — we need a strategy that actually helps American workers instead of accidentally or intentionally helping Beijing. Let’s break it down in plain English. Tariffs Are Basically a Tax on Americans . When the U.S. puts a tariff on something coming from China, th...

I was reading on social media that France and Ukraine had supplied the Trump Administration with some secret intelligence, and that information was leaked to the Russian Government. It stated the United States could no longer be trusted with secret intelligence. Now I don’t get my news from social media because too much of it is not true or very misleading, just like I don’t get my news from cable news or CBS. After all, too much of that is not true or misleading. In fact, I get most of my news by reading. I always research information like that, and what I found was that there was no reputable information showing the Trump administration had leaked French and Ukrainian intelligence. It did state that there are credible reports and a lot of confusion being mixed with older scandals. What would give merit to a story like that? Maybe because back in 2017, Trump did disclose highly classified information in an Oval Office meeting with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak and Russian Fo...

I went in search to see if any national election, Presidential or Congressional had ever been canceled. Ever since 1788, every Presidential and Congressional election has been held on time. We have had the Civil War, World Wars, and pandemics, and every federal election has proceeded on schedule. Why? I would want to think America has always embraced the vision of Representative Government that our Founding Fathers believed in and fought for. They wrote and confirmed our Constitution, showing the entire world their vision of democracy. We have had historical stress tests on why continuing our elections even during a national election matters. In 1864, our country was literally at war with itself in the Great Civil War. Lincoln insisted the election proceed, arguing that cancelling it would be a victory for disunion. Voters cast their ballots even from the battlefields, showing that during times of stress, we had to adapt so people could vote. During the Great Depression in 1932...

I watched the video. I have watched the video multiple times. On January 7 th, a woman in Minneapolis, Renne Good, was shot and killed. Was she a terrorist? Was she even a protester? The answer to both those questions was “no”. What was she then? She was a woman who had dropped her child off at school and was trying to go home. She lived in the neighborhood. No evidence links her to the protest whatsoever. There is no evidence that she was interfering with ICE at all. She was just trying to go home. In my opinion, a woman was shot and killed and would be alive and home today if ICE had followed procedure. The fact is, this is a woman who should be alive today. What did the Trump administration do right after the shooting? They branded her as a violent extremist. Claimed the agent acted in self-defense. Try to use the incident to justify broader crackdowns on dissent. The entire administration has tried to discredit critics and control the narrative. I have watched the videos. ...