Below, you’ll find the Reasoning & Rationale to what we call a Bill-Request. Once certain milestones are met, as defined HERE, lawyers will be called upon to draft what will then become a Bill-Demand to Congress and the President.
Published in 2015. Then updated last in March 2017.
There are quite a few set-pieces to this discourse, but they’ll all lead to a conclusion that many will find disturbing to the mind and rattling to the nerve. Like it or not, we intend to tell you here why presidents before and after Barack Obama, and including Barack Obama, have had to deviate so much from what they promised as candidates, and what they in fact did after they assumed the presidency — again, these deviations are not for the reasons most everyone thinks … you have be president to find the real and singular reason out for yourself … or you have to delve deeply into presidential decisions going back from the present, all the way back to the bilateral decisions made by John F Kennedy and Robert F Kennedy, and their tumultuous consequences … or you can try to get to the very top of the intelligence community, and find the answer quick.
We will begin with why President-Elect Trump and then President Trump has deviated, and sharply deviated at that. Trump is perhaps the most fresh in our conscience now. So let’s take off with him on our launch pad first, towards what we believe will be — to most of you out there — an unnerving unknown…
In the Dec 2016 article by Politico, entitled “Trump ‘originals’ say they’re getting frozen out” — and subtitled “Early Trump campaign operatives angst … as the Republican establishment muscles its way in”, Politico writers Isenstadt and Vogel painted a picture of disillusionment among Trump’s loyalists — the faithful who’d either been with the candidate from the beginning, or who’d stuck their necks out for the candidate to the end. The picture was painted upon a canvas of frustration in Trump loyalists feeling forgotten and left behind. Their telephone calls and texts to the President-Elect’s new ‘team’ had gone unanswered. Their hopes for plum jobs in the new administration had been dashed.
Trump friend, supporter, and one-time insider, Roger Stone, would be quoted for observing, at Trump Tower, “an armada of re-treads from the old Republican Party, [from] both the congressional wing of the party and the Romney-McCain-Bush [campaigns] … burnouts who were trying to board this ship … I saw people and heard about people whose names I haven’t heard in 25 to 30 years … These are people who did nothing whatsoever to elect Donald Trump…”
Trump fund-raiser Ed Rollins, who was National Campaign Director for Ronald Reagan’s spellbinding 1984 campaign, a presidential race in which Reagan won 49 out of 50 states, would — in this interview with Lou Dobbs in Dec 2016 — be seen bemoaning the plight of Trump’s highest profile and fiercest of loyalists, Newt Gingrich and Rudy Giuliani, being sidelined out of the incoming Trump Administration.
President-elect Trump’s acceptance of, and reconciliation with, Establishment fave Mitt Romney bewildered if not shocked Trump’s hardline fans. Trump’s serenade of Romney over an almost intimate dinner made all of them want to scream: “WTF!”
Then Hannity, Drudge, and the likeminded, got to shake their heads to hearing the President-elect trying to put a lid on chants of “lock her up” from a Michigan crowd, there to celebrate Trump’s win at a Dec 9 stop by Trump on his ‘Thank You’ tour. “No, forget it,” Trump interrupted the folks of Grand Rapids. “That plays great before the election. Nah, we don’t care.” Hillary Clinton, Trump insisted, had “suffered greatly.” Hannity, Drudge, and the likeminded, must’ve wondered: How had she suffered greatly? Because she’d lost? In a loss she wasn’t even willing to concede. She’d ripped candidate Trump up every chance she got throughout the campaign, and, as the new Administration got underway, her machinations to derail the Trump presidency began in earnest.
Candidate Trump talked tough on trade with nearly every breath he took. President Trump, however, was run-over in no time, on everything from the border tax idea to renegotiating NAFTA. By March 2017, head of the White House Trade Council, Peter Navarro, a tough on trade guy, had been shoved into the Old Executive Office Building outside the White House, with a dwindling staff rendered increasingly insignificant. Meantime, former Goldman Sachs president Gary Cohn, an avid and (some would say) rabid Hillary supporter, got appointed chief of Trump’s National Economic Council, and got gifted the unbridled freedom to augment his staff at will. In stark contrast to Navarro’s eviction from the White House, Cohn got to move INSIDE THE RESIDENCE OCCUPIED BY THE PRESIDENT HIMSELF!
From that most enviable perch, Cohn next took to advancing the Wall Street/K Street establishment agenda for international trade, the way only bankers would want international trade to be — which is to keep intact all existing free trade agreements, expand into new ones, and bail out any bank left holding the bag if a free trade partner country, that the bank over-lent to, begins to default on its loans. (NAFTA gave Citibank the cover to over-lend to Mexico — the more Citi lent, the more income Citi made — and when Mexico had trouble paying back its loans to Citi, the American taxpayer was called in to “bail out Mexico”, or so we were told, when in fact the bailout was of Citi, with Mexico the backdoor, so that Citi’s faltering debts could be made whole.)
In no time, Gary Cohn took to talking to the leaders of Mexico, the EU, and everyone else of any trading relevance to Wall Street, assuring them that there was no need to worry about candidate Trump’s protectionist rhetoric, because it was just stuff Trump had to say to beat the mother of deals like NAFTA, i.e. Hillary. To prove his point, ‘globalist’ Cohn hauled in fellow ‘globalists’ like Andrew Quinn, making Quinn the Special Assistant to the President for International Trade. Quinn was … get this! … a senior negotiator for the Trans Pacific Partnership under President Obama.
Like we said elsewhere on this site:
By March 2017, both the Treasury Secretary and the Deputy Treasury Secretary were from Goldman Sachs.
By March 2017, Goldman Sachs stock accounted for about one-fifth of the appreciation of the Dow Jones since Trump’s election — Goldman stock had skyrocketed from about $181 to a 52-week high of $252, a staggering gain of almost 40% since his election.
By March 2017, megabank stocks became the biggest beneficiary, by far, in the Trump-bump to the equity markets. As the month progressed, the market capitalization of the four biggest U.S. banks by assets — namely JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, and Citigroup — topped $1 Trillion for the first time ever. Trump had bumped them up by an astounding 30% since his election.
A recent statement by an Economic Party liaison to Main Street Gov is warranted here. Transcribed, it went something like this:
“In order to evade the listening and seeing devices of the NSA and CIA, members of the German parliament have taken to leaving their cell phones and other mobile instruments in a metal box in a separate room under the music of composer Edvard Grieg played at full blast. If government officials in Germany are doing that, so should all government officials in America.
“Why, should be obvious to any fool: Say you’re an honest judge, an honest prosecutor, an honest regulator, or an honest legislator with an axe to grind with the Establishment … the Status Quo … and you said a bad joke at a private party, and yeah they grimaced before they guffawed because it was crude, vulgar, and extremely offensive to women. But you were with your buddies, getting drunk together and being idiots, so where’s the problem, is what you’re thinking, right? Problem is, there were iPhones and Samsung’s turned on in the room at the time. Means you just got recorded by the NSA and the CIA, saying something that would probably end your career, if it got out. Mess with the Status Quo, and it would get out.
“So you do what you’re told to do by that Deep State, from that day on till the day you die.
“Surveil the electronic gadgets of 535 Members of Congress, 9 Justices on the Supreme Court, all power-brokers in the Executive, and every pain-in-the-ass that’s been trying to stick it to Wall Street, and surveil them at home, at work, at play, and the surveillance operator is gonna dig up dirt on everybody — a bathroom tryst with a secretary, a homosexual encounter in a back alley, a stick of marijuana bought on the street and smoked with a hooker in a hotel while waiting for the Viagra to kick in, or simply something as innocuous as a jest in poor taste.
“Surveil and Record the dirt, and you’ve got all 3 Branches of the United States Government exactly where agents of malice would want them: hostage to blackmail.
“Need a bailout, but got a holdout — then simply hang his or her laundry out to dry.
“Need anything at all, but someone’s putting up resistance — then put his or her stains up on display.
“David Petraeus would watch his Paula-Broadwell-stained undies go high-up on a clothesline that way.
“There’s every reason to think that the surveillance “Operator” has got the A-to-Z on everything private citizen Trump, and businessman Trump, has said and done throughout the last 15 years of his life. There’s every reason to expect that the Operator’s got every second of it on tape. If Trump said anything racist around any electronic device, it’s on tape. If he demanded a blow-job from an undocumented maid, and then paid her to shut up, that too is on tape. The Operator’s got the inside scoop on Trump’s tax returns, his businesses’ property write-offs, his businesses’ actual (vs stated) net asset values.
“Given the extent of personal financial guarantees that are often demanded in stride with the extension of commercial real estate loans, commercial real estate developers, like Trump, can be banker-controlled more than any other professional class, and megabankers especially work hand-in-glove with the uppermost echelons of the I.C. (Intelligence Community).”
“If President Trump ends up breaking just about every promise he made to his base, or gets pushed around by the guys from Goldman, or by the generals with access to the I.C., it’s fair to assume they’ve got something on him that could engulf his presidency.
“Don’t forget: on January 20 2017, General John F Kelly was appointed Secretary of Homeland Security. That’s I.C.”
“I was the guy in 2000 who campaigned for ‘change’. I campaigned for ‘change’ when I ran for governor of Texas. The only time I really didn’t campaign for ‘change’ is when I was running for re-election … Every candidate has got to say ‘change’. That’s what the American people expect,” said George W Bush.
After that bushy orgasm of change — that gave us everything from war to bailouts — came the self-anointed Messiah of Change, and in fact “Change You Can Believe In” i.e. Barack Obama, who, by changing very little of what mattered — like Wall Street — and making some things abjectly worse, like poverty — had (we thought) permanently eradicated not just the word, but the very concept of ‘change’, from any political campaign for the foreseeable future, and perhaps for the entirety of this century. In no time, of course, we’d be proven wrong. For along came Donald Trump, instilling the promise of change — once again — in the psyche of tens of millions of wannabe believers.
So, without further ado, let’s now get to why “the more things change, the more they stay the same” with:
The Commanders & The Commander-in-Chief
It is alleged, but never been verified, that President Obama was once asked (by persons very close to him) why he’d reneged on so many of the promises he made to the American people, promises he made as a candidate on the campaign trail in 2007-2008, because it was (according to those persons very close to him) so out-of-character of him to break a pledge, based on the Barack Obama they knew. And, again, it is alleged but never been verified, that a visibly tense, then irritated, and finally angry Mr. Obama brought up an American leader who’d been assassinated in a reply so terse, he left all his confidantes (at his table) dazed and dumbstruck.
Under a separate bill-request, we wrote:
The national security surveillance matrix, we all know, began long ago under the Clinton Administration. Post 9/11, under the Bush Administration, it expanded to a supermatrix. Under the Obama Administration, it fattened up, then bloated and distended itself into a hypermatrix, and a susceptible and vulnerable one at that, as 29 year old Ed Snowden illustrated with ease.
The distention under Mr. Obama is notable considering the admission by Michael Hayden, National Security Agency Director 1999–2005, that Barack Obama the President “expanded” the very surveillance that Barack Obama the Senator protested against in 2006, when the then junior Senator from Illinois and aspiring Leader of the Free World voted against Hayden’s appointment to become Director of Central Intelligence, precisely because (drumroll, please) Hayden was spying on Americans in the 6 years before, under both Clinton and Bush. (Notice, Hayden crossed seamlessly from Clinton to Bush, for reasons we’ll get into later.)
Obama, a Senate freshman at the time, knew Hayden had the aye votes in the Senate to cruise to confirmation, but the Obama (that America first got a glance at) still cast his nay, in symbolic defiance. Admirable, had it lasted, to when it mattered most. Admirable, had the original act not been theatrical… but, while that is the prevailing judgment of Barack Obama in the blogosphere, Main Street Gov has an entirely different take on all this — that, like all Presidents before him, President Barack Obama had no choice on the matter; that, like all Presidents before him, he had to do as the Intelligence community demanded of him, or else.
Another statement by the Economic Party liaison to Main Street Gov is warranted here. Transcribed it went something like this:
“To call a President of the United States “Commander-in-Chief” is a misnomer.
“When it came to certain things, it would not matter what pledges a presidential candidate made to get elected, because, in the end, he/she would have to defer to the Intelligence Community on everything it considered its exclusive turf, from specifics like drones, torture, and extraordinary rendition, to generalities like Wall Street relations — yes, bankers and agents of the Intelligence Community have been in cahoots for decades, in international collaborative acts especially.
“Consider the terabytes and someday zettabytes of data being collected by the NSA and CIA. The Economic Party has reason to believe embargoed info in that data is being subverted for private gain. If, as Director of National Intelligence Lt. Gen. James Clapper has insinuated, the NSA’s apparatus is there to also serve as an “Early Warning System” to protect and, by inference, enrich Wall Street, then perhaps at this revolving door Information is Money.
“The multiple early releases of sensitive embargo’ed data from numerous quarters, private and public – that we’ve seen happening over and over again in recent years – is telling. The Eye in the Sky is known to have monetized things in the past. Old habits, lucrative ones especially, die hard.
“Sure, the Intelligence Community would give the newly elected Mr. Obama leeway on his pet projects, on stuff not terribly important to it, like Obamacare, but on matters of defining enemies, and if necessary redefining them, on matters of black-ops or spec-ops, proxy-led battles or a wider war — or expansion of an existing war — there’d be no leeway given.
“On matters of making all that fit into the narrative fed to the American people by the mainstream media — whose leaders, by the way, also live in fear of defying the Intelligence Community — there’d be no leeway either.
“Anyone seeking to not abide by those rules of exclusivity — that is, anyone that dares trespass upon the Intelligence Community’s exclusive turf — would find every sordid detail of his or her life, captured by the mass surveillance, exposed — for his or her family, friends, and even dog to see.”
As President Barack Obama began to backtrack, and then go full-throttle-reverse on the pledges he made on the campaign trail in 2007-2008, and some began to see him a shell of the man they’d so endearingly voted for, we identified a crystal clear trend, as to which pledges he was honoring versus those he was breaking.
Hark back with us, if you will, to one of the debates of 2008, pitting Barack Obama against John McCain. There, we found Democratic Party candidate Obama rail against the Republican Party candidate McCain (and, by extension, the GOP) for its stance on regulation of Wall Street, with Mr. Obama saying something to the effect of: You think there’s too much regulation of Wall Street, and I think there’s not enough.
If not for McCain being a neocon on steroids, and almost always on the warpath (with especially his nemesis, Vladimir Putin), McCain should have known enough to remind Mr. Obama that it was in fact the Democratic Administration of William Jefferson Clinton that set off the Wall Street de-reg wave with the passage of (1) The Financial Services Modernization Act and (2) The The Commodity Futures Modernization Act, and that George Walker Bush merely carried on the tradition that was passed onto him. But here’s where things get interesting: After Barack Obama won the election, he nominated George W Bush’s chief Wall Street regulatory officer from Nov 2003 through Jan 2009, i.e. Timothy Geithner, head of the New York Fed, to become U.S. Secretary of the Treasury, an incredible promotion given Geithner’s unmitigated F-minus grade as a banking regulator.
Per the New York Fed’s own website, under What We Do, the following appears:
The Federal Reserve Bank of New York … together with the Board of Governors in Washington DC … is responsible for supervising and regulating depository institutions
And, by depository institutions, the NY Fed means banks — and super-sized banks, in particular. And there was Mr. Obama hiring the president of the New York Fed during much of the Bush Administration and its Chief Bailout Officer (i.e. Tim Geithner) to run the entire nation’s finances, next.
But it didn’t stop there. For another guy elevated to the top-most post in the Federal Reserve by Bush, that being Ben Bernanke, got (for all practical purposes) promoted as well. And before you run to Bernanke’s defense, we remind you of the following… Just days before President Bush nominated Bernanke to become the next chairman of the Federal Reserve, and just weeks before the Housing Bubble got pricked by a pin the size of a missile, you would find this headline in the news:
Bernanke [says]: There’s No Housing Bubble to Go Bust — The Washington Post, Oct 27 2005
Bernanke, we remind you, was on the (Wall Street regulating) Board of Governors of the Fed, 2002 through 2005, before Bush gave him the topmost job the Fed had to offer, that Bernanke assumed the year after. And there was Mr. Obama re-nominating another unmitigated disaster of a Wall Street regulator to a second 4 year term.
As for those of you who insist that Bernanke got the job because he saved the global economy from Depression, may we politely suggest you wait till 2018/2019 to arrive at that conclusion, for we can assure you that all he did was delay the inevitable, instead of resolving it, because the banks he saved (to save us all, he says) are still under-capitalized or non-capitalized, just as they were then. Don’t believe us? — then go here and here and see if you believe us then.
But, for Barack Obama, it didn’t stop with promoting Ben Bernanke, either. The President-elect would hire the biggest Wall Street de-regulator of all time — ever — that being Larry Summers, to be the President’s chief economic adviser, as well.
Given Obama’s contention at the 2008 debate with McCain, that Wall Street required more regulation, not less, you’d think he’d know better than to hire Messrs. Geithner, Bernanke, and Summers, to head up his entire economic team. But, you see, presidents only nominate as a matter of ceremony. Who decides who gets nominated — to head up the Federal Reserve, to head up the Treasury, to head up the National Security Agency, the CIA — is not the
puppet, but the puppeteer.
And where might that puppeteer reside? Try looking first inside the Council On Foreign Relations, because it’s somewhat more accessible than the alternative. If that fails, and you want not to give up, try getting inside one of Bilderberg’s annual shindigs.
Under A Word of Vigilance — where we referenced individuals and entities such as General Keith Alexander, Michael Chertoff, Patrick Dowd, IronNet CyberSecurity Inc , and the Securities Industry & Financial Markets Association, or SIFMA — we talked about the rise (to the surface of norm and acceptability) of the nation’s most repulsive revolving door. For decades, it was hidden. It is no more. This door is especially pernicious because it has not just two doorways, but three, allowing compliant public officials and extremely well-equipped spies and deep-pocketed bankers to collude and collaborate on anything they please. Their triumvirate is an extremely dangerous coagulate for the citizens at large, as you might imagine.
In short, nothing really changes, no matter who we elect from the two political parties we have now. Even if we elected a Mother Teresa as our next president, if she comes from either the Democratic Party or the Republican Party, both of which are controlled from behind the scenes by a shadow government, she’d be forced into compliance by the intelligence agents in place. Need her to sign off on an act of belligerence or bailout? No problem — there’s her signature, authorizing it.
Only a top-to-bottom new Party can unseat this shadow government.
The Economic Party — referred to hereafter as the “Party” — intends to win the White House and Congress on November 3 2020.
The Party believes that:
- Contrary to what Establishment politicians (and ‘globalists’ like Cohn) might wish, America should not be like the rest of the world, where — more often than not — the rulers get rich at the expense of the ruled, but that America should be an example to the world, that the most powerful in the world, be they elected by us, or appointed by us, shall be creators of treasure and NOT hunters of it.
The Party also believes that:
- In response to a centralized government, representing Wall Street & K Street, seated in Washington DC, there must be a decentralized government, representing Main Street, seated everywhere in America, so that “government of the People, by the People, for the People, shall not perish from the earth” — Abraham Lincoln — and, in that regard, welcome to this place we call Main Street Gov.
As we all know, the two-party duopoly of Republicans and Democrats, the Bankers’ Party and the Bankers’ Other Party, have built a permanent ruling class of persons who cross back and forth across blurred party lines, in harmony on the things that matter most to them, like:
- ‘Free Trade’ deals, so long as they are good for American banks, even if bad for American jobs.
Never ever re-instating the central tenets of Glass-Steagall, because they’d much rather turn “Just Big” banks into “Too Big To Fail” banks (as they did in 1999), and then turn “Too Big To Fail” banks into “Way Too Big To Fail” banks (as they did in 2008) — after all, the bigger the bank, the juicier things get from an executive compensation perspective, and the murkier things get from an accounting and regulatory perspective.
- Mass surveillance of everyone and all, to also know who might be plotting against their perpetual stay in power.
- And, last but not least, making sure money in politics never ends but only grows, every election, so that it is not the better man or woman who wins, but the better funded one. (Warning to those who live by that now-dying hope: Speaker John Boehner’s buddy and Wall Street darling, Majority Leader Eric Cantor was defeated by Dave Brat, despite a 40:1 campaign spending advantage on Cantor’s side.)
Yeah, sure, Republicans and Democrats fuss about social issues to swear they are different, but, when it comes down to super-critical issues, they are ‘birds of a feather who flock together’, bowing to Wall Street & K Street at every turn — and if you think we’re exaggerating about that, read the legislation they pass with “bipartisan support”, the bills they enact by “reaching across the aisle”, if you dare to.
Hence, just the thought of sharing power with a Third Party, an outsider, would be anathema to them. As for being relegated to the sidelines, they’d rather be dragged kicking and screaming into the night, than accept of the prospect of political insignificance.
The Economic Party is the antithesis of what the Establishment Status Quo wants in the White House or on Capitol Hill. The Federal Reserve, the Treasury, every arm of government there is, will undergo a catharsis — a deep tissue cleansing in its wake.
Knowing they cannot defeat this challenger in a head-to-head contest with the electorate, they may resort to other means, the shifting of goalposts being a distinct possibility. But before we tell you what we mean by the ‘shifting of goalposts’, let us veer off a bit and segue into a gentleman named Martin Armstrong at this juncture. A good way to start would be to watch this 2 minute trailer for the German documentary about him, entitled “The Forecaster” HERE on Vimeo.
Mr. Armstrong has written:
The cycle of political change is 309.6 years. [Then] we reach a crisis in government. This has been resolved, unfortunately, with violence — for whoever is in power, never goes quietly into the night.
Mr. Armstrong’s track record is impeccable — for more than 30 years, he’s been on the mark with every prediction he’s made. We have our own reasons to believe he’ll be spot-on with this prediction, as well.
As for the current 309.6 cycle, we are at its near-end.
Confidence in government has been on the wane for years, but you may notice it’s been waning faster with the years. By the end of the third quarter of 2015, Gallup’s annual governance poll, conducted Sep 9–13, showed a majority believing that most members of Congress are “corrupt”. More than a year earlier, a survey by AP/NORC discovered a majority that could no longer regard their President as “honest”. And, about the same time, the two parties’ mainstream media protectors also came under the spotlight of public derision, with a 107-nation poll by Transparency International, a corruption monitor, finding Americans more likely than Italians to say that the media in their country were all “corrupt or extremely corrupt.” Italians invented corrupt. So it was quite a revelation, even for us, who tune into the mainstream media only to entertain ourselves with what kind of nonsense they might be spewing that day.
We’ve long been of the opinion that acute political chaos, to upend the Establishment, begins Midterm Election Day 2018 and ends General Election Day 2020, with a new political movement tossing the entire SYSTEM out — that timeline is increasingly looking about right.
For the “crisis in government” Mr. Armstrong has predicted: “The worst is between 2015.75 and 2020.05” translating to between Oct 1 2015 and Jan 19 2020.
Mr. Armstrong is forecasting turbulent times for 2015.75 out to 2020.05. While our forecasts have more to do with a meltdown in high finance structures, accompanied by a mass-exodus of capital out of sovereign bonds across the globe, with the eurozone (first) and Japan (next) in the crosshairs, with catastrophic consequences for emerging markets, and extremely dire implications for developed markets, the United States included, Mr. Armstrong’s forecasts center around a precipitous loss of faith in the Political Order.
History teaches us that when economies implode, so do the governments in whose custody and care those economies reside.
True, failed governments rarely go “quietly into the night.” They tend to fight tooth and nail to at least impede if not reverse the implosion, by erecting around themselves a buffer, a barrier, that steadily transforms a nation into a police or militarized state.
If you’ve followed our entries in order and read the Crisis bill-request on our homepage, and read The Reason To Be on our About page, then you know of our call for an excruciating banking crisis in the interface between 2018/2019 that we’ve estimated will make the banking crisis of 2008 look like a walk in the park. And if you read the aforementioned links, you’ll also know that we based that forecast/projection on accounting realities on the balance sheets of banks, on political realities in the eurozone, on the way specific credit default swaps are behaving in the European Union, and other parameters, and NOT on clairvoyance or some claimed extrasensory perception into a crystal ball.
Recall just the following excerpt from our “Crisis” entry:
Referencing the fear over defaults that was gripping the bond market for months in 2015, on Aug 25 2015 Damian McBride, the former chief of communications for the British treasury, and special adviser to former British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, would in relation to the next financial crisis predict: “We were close enough [to those defaults] in 2008, but what’s coming is 20 times that scale.”
A financial crisis of such magnitude can serve as an excuse for the Establishment to change an election date, i.e. shift goalposts, if it thinks it’s going to lose control of the government on that date.
So that there shall never be the malevolence of suppression, repression, and extrajudicial persecution of an honest and dynamic challenge to any Establishment Status Quo on this sacred soil — for it will most surely fail, in spectacular fashion, upon those who try — consider this a design to preserve the sanctity and immutability of General Election Day 2020:
To ensure that peaceful law-abiding candidates of a new political Party are never disenfranchised of their fundamental right to run for high public office, this Bill-Request asks it be affirmed that the next Presidential Election, scheduled for November 3 2020, shall not be postponed by any duration whatsoever past that date, due to extreme political strife or severe systemic stress, no matter how adverse its depiction of chaos or hardship by the authorities, under any pretext or guise, including Constitutional Authority, Executive Order, Presidential Directive, Emergency Power, or Martial Law.
In voting for this Bill-Request, you are affirming that elections on time are a mainstay of any viable democracy.
In voting for this Bill-Request, you are stating that the country needs a chance at an alternative, that a new party needs an opportunity to present its case to the American people, that the Status Quo needs to be confronted for its abject failures.
In voting for this Bill-Request, you are also saying that:
“Exchanging status-quo serving Presidents of the Democratic Party, for status-quo serving Presidents of the Republican Party — or vice versa — is the equivalent of switching one bad hand for another, except with higher bet.”
And going back to where this all started, in voting for this Bill-Request you are finally demanding that the surveillance state dismantle/disband that subset of its electronic eavesdropping machinery, deployed as artillery, directed at ‘non-compliant’ government officials, to coerce them into submission and compliance. Unless a crime or an act of terror is in planning or process, there should be no spying on our citizenry.
You’ve just read the full description to the reasoning & rationale for this Bill-Request. If that’s enough for you to vote in support of it, please do. If you still require more to make up your mind, see if you can find that in Our Origins and The Reason To Be.