Tag: Donald Trump

Megyn Kelly’s Career Killing Interview with Alex Jones: Karen Handel and many other Republicans win easily

It was even worse than I thought, the Megyn Kelly interview with Alex Jones for her new NBC Sunday night show—which is not performing as expected. In a lot of ways, you could tell the results of the special elections held on June 20th 2017 based on the NBC broadcast by Megyn Kelly. It wasn’t even close in the 6th District Georgia race where Karen Handel easily beat the Democrat Hollywood money, and over in South Carolina Ralph Norman took his seat for the Republicans making it a 4-0 run in these special elections since Donald Trump took over at the White House. And if you listened carefully, the NBC execs behind Megyn Kelly’s new show were screaming in frustration at this strange new mysterious world where they had very little control over the mass population—and that people have instead put their efforts behind people like Alex Jones instead of traditional figures like Tom Brokaw and the new-comer Megyn Kelly. They are lost and simply don’t understand what’s going on.

Megyn Kelly’s Jones interview was technically a ratings disaster and resonated with the many Hollywood productions that are losing money this year because they don’t represent the masses in the fly over states. As the election results came in for the 6th District in Georgia I received the information that the two directors of the new Han Solo movie have left the production over “creative differences.” I liked those guys but they started filming in London on that picture in February, the same time that I was there and they were very enamored with all the anti-Trump rhetoric coming out of all the liberal precincts—and in London that gives the impression of a majority in the world. I thought then as I do now that they were too close to all that anti-Trump radicalism and surely those elements would end up in the Han Solo movie—which wouldn’t be good. Without question Disney has been watching all these events and while it’s too early to tell, I would bet money that those boys decided they couldn’t deal with changing up elements of the Han Solo film to reflect the political realities of the world as of now. It’s a much different place than it was last year when the script was written and if Disney wants a good picture in the spring of 2018, then they better get with the program. Everybody better—because all these witch hunts against Trump are going to amount to nothing—in the end he’s going to be one of the greatest presidents we’ve ever had in the United States—Republicans are going to increase their House and Senate seats and like it or not, more people can relate to Alex Jones than they do Megyn Kelly.

Megyn’s mission was to make Alex Jones look stupid, and he knew that—so he scooped her and beat NBC to the punch by secretly recording her then releasing the tapes over the weekend ahead of the big Father’s Day show. And after listening to her promise Jones that she wasn’t doing a hit piece, then watching how NBC cut up the interview—it was clearly everything she promised it wouldn’t be and Jones came out looking even better. NBC hates that there is competition out there like Alex Jones. Megyn tried to take shots at the Infowars method of reporting—which was essentially a bunch of internet reports that come out of cyberspace and is talked about on Infowars in a very laissez-faire manner—as opposed to the way it’s done at NBC and the other networks where an editor—(usually someone who gives a lot of money to Democratic political causes) validates a story given by a reporter and shapes it to the network’s position—calling it truth. Alex Jones at Infowars wants everything fast and loose and thus can cover a lot more ground than some giant bureaucratic organization like NBC who uses sex to essentially sell their Democratic ideas then uses traditional anchors like Tom Brokaw to reflect back to a time when nobody questioned their news reporting to validate their authority.

The frustration and even exasperation of NBC for this new kind of news which Alex Jones represents with millions of fans gathered up from the internet doesn’t begin to come close to understanding what happened. Essentially, thirty years ago the primary networks of NBC, ABC, and CBS had a stronghold on the media and they controlled the narrative. Back then the conservatives had Reagan in the White House and most of their movie stars like Tom Selleck and Mel Gibson were openly conservative, Bruce Willis, Clint Eastwood, and many other male actors were open members of the Republican Party so everyone lived in a kind of careful balance with everyone else. But the leftists plotted and schemed behind our backs and we ended up with the Clintons in the White House in the 90s. Our movie stars become noticeably less conservative. Television began to push an openly progressive agenda—such as when Ellen was kissed on network television by Laura Dern—and Madonna was showing us that reckless sex was something we should all be thinking about. In reaction to all these leftist incursions, talk radio rose to prominence and eventually as the internet increased in usability the conservative message went to cyberspace—since it was shoved out of Hollywood and New York media productions.

Alex Jones was one of those upstarts and now just twenty years later he has millions of daily viewers and his monthly hits on his website far exceed that of NBC. That has left all these media organizations exasperated with plots to stop the bleeding by shaming people into changing their behavior. But it hasn’t worked and instead more people have went the other way. They have tried every trick available to them, including fixing the polling numbers as they did in Georgia and with Trump—yet Republicans keep winning. That is because as a media group they arrogantly thought that if they controlled the mainstream outlets like Hollywood and New York broadcasting—that they’d control the message—but instead people have found other ways to get their message—with or without the traditional media. If the question were truly what comes first the chicken or the egg—clearly it was the egg—the roots of conservative values in America. You could still cut the head off the chicken—(the media) but the egg still came first. The media was there to reflect American culture—not to shape it. The media forgot their role and life moved on without them. They tried to take away the conservative influences and what they ended up with were declining ratings and people they had far less control of. With Mel Gibson and Clint Eastwood—at least those guys lived a little hard and fast which the Democrats could understand. People like Alex Jones they can’t understand at all. Alex is like that crazy canoe tour operator in the mountains of Tennessee who is all country, all guns, and all red-blooded testosterone driven maleness—and because the media overplayed their hand—one of those guys ended up with an audience of millions putting out stories by the hour where NBC spends days reviewing stories suitable for the political spin approved by the Bilderberg meetings—just to make sure that Mr. Soros isn’t upset by the slant because those network chiefs want to sit by him at the next charity event and they want his advertising money—indirectly of course. By the time all that happens Alex Jones will have produced 10 headline stories and discussed them for hours on end. That is why NBC has been losing.

It’s not Alex Jones’ fault that he has such high ratings and it’s not the human races’ fault because people don’t like the kind of news that NBC wants to produce. It’s not Donald Trump’s fault that he’s a ratings magnet—because people want to hear what he has to say and how he says it. It has always been NBC and the other mainstream networks who have decided that they wanted to work against the current of American lifestyles to change it into something they thought was more to their liking. And just like they thought they could spin the Georgia election into a close race, and that they could somehow shame Alex Jones into stopping what he’s been doing at Infowars—all it really comes down to is a bunch of losers complaining that the world does not like what they are offering and their feelings are hurt. Everything from the obstruction of justice investigations into Trump’s White House down to his Tweets, people like Megyn Kelly who have played the game to become a part of that losing world now have to face it that the reason Donald Trump listens to Alex Jones and now he’s the president—and Jones has so many millions of followers, is that there is a market need for these people—because they more accurately reflect the America that we are all living in. And that is a reality all these people on the other side have to face. They can trick themselves into believing falls polls, and emotional stories like Sandy Hook—but in reality, a majority of the American people like what they like. And they like Alex Jones, and they like Donald Trump. They don’t necessarily like Megyn Kelly which is obvious by the ratings. And more and more, they don’t like Democrats. They are losing everywhere and the longer Trump is president, the harder time Democrats will have to win anything. Trump is much more popular than the phony polls will indicate. These are the facts and so long as the MSM refuses to see those facts and look toward people like Alex Jones and declare them the problem—they’ll never learn the lessons they need to improve themselves.

I think that was the dagger that will kill Megyn Kelly’s career. After the interview, there were rumors she was in negotiations to return to Fox, but she’s burnt too many bridges there and she has upped her profile to such a level that she will have a hard time just being a correspondent. She had positioned herself to be the next Barbra Walters—but clearly, that is not her skill set. She might have pulled it off if not for this Alex Jones interview—she hoped that a little sex appeal and flirting would entice enough to do a hit piece on Jones—take him down and make all her NBC bosses happy—but instead she exposed herself embarrassingly on tape which was played by Jones who knew what was going on, and now that’s all anybody will remember about her. But the fault really isn’t hers, it was NBC who set the stage to begin with, and let her believe that these tactics would work in the modern competitive news market. We are living in the days of the Drudge Report—where the narrative is set dynamically leaving the crusty old news sources to crawl crippled along an unknown landscape. Even if they did manage to take Alex Jones out, there are plenty of people who would take his place—because the demand is there. And that is a reality that NBC better learn fast. Maybe Disney is finally learning it—but not fast enough. The entire old world of the media should have known better—but they didn’t.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here:  http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707  Use my name to get added benefits.

cropped-img_0202.jpg

Puerto Rico Votes to Become a State: How Donald Trump could have several new states join the union under his administration

Context is everything and my reasons for supporting Donald Trump for president even after all the outrageous claims against him are that I have it–context.  Over the past couple of months I have stood in four of the places where great international events have taken place. I stood precisely where an Islamic lunatic plunged a knife at police in front of Notre Dame in Paris.  I was at the bridge near Parliament in London where another Islamic terrorist ran people down killing them for no reason at all—but to support a radical religious theory.  I was also on the same streets and locations as the London Bridge attack just a few weeks ago.  Additionally, I was at the Ecuadorian Embassy where Wikileaks is doing the good work of unleashing material our American media and intelligence agencies can’t be trusted to control.  So I’ve touched the face of history a lot this year and I was in those places before these big events occurred because I identified them as hot spots I wanted to see because of the currents in the world that are moving fast in dangerous directions.  So when I say that Puerto Rico should be the 51st state it is because of that same deductive reasoning.  Donald Trump is a great president that is unlocking much of what these global terrorists are set against—and fear.  Yet the net result will be a love of freedom that will expand under the Trump presidency which is really what these terrorists and liberal assassins in the American media fear.  Nobody does it like Trump, watch his speech from Miami, Florida where he undid the disaster that Obama had created in regards to Cuban relations.

To watch in that clip Luis Haza play the Star Spangled Banner on a violin after hearing the story of how he first came to do it as a young child is precisely what America means to people all around the world.  It is what the terrorists are trying to avoid by stopping the spread of capitalist sentiment.  It is why extreme leftists have sought to move Middle Eastern Marxists into Europe—to maintain their stranglehold on those economies globally with the last resort of religion to hide the evil behind the mask of eternity.  But it’s not working and with Trump, that spread will increase dramatically, including adding the 51st state in America to his list of achievements—yes, in case you haven’t yet heard dear reader, Puerto Rico has voted to become the 51st state in The United States.  They are ready and willing to officially become part of our country and that is a wonderful thing.  They want it for many of the same reasons that Cuba wants it—and as I write this I think Cuba will become the 52nd state and that might happen by the time Mike Pence is in the White House.

http://money.cnn.com/2017/06/12/news/economy/puerto-rico-june-11-statehood-vote/index.html

http://www.puertoricoreport.com/natural-resources-of-puerto-rico/#.WUZqa-vyuM8

The terrorists in the world—and I’d classify the American political left in that category based on their violent reactions to the Trump presidency—want to sell the joy that American capitalism unleashes around the world by calling it “imperialism” lumping it into the same heap as the British Empire was—or the Roman.  The biggest difference is that America isn’t exactly going out of its way to acquire new territory; new territory wants to join the team.  As things stand now that little 100 mile wide island down in the Caribbean, closer to Jamaica than Florida filed for bankruptcy protection in May.  They have no way out of their financial troubles unless something dramatically changes for them and as it stands now, they are like a state—they have American citizenship—but they aren’t technically a state which has crippled them as far as corporate investments. So they are in a current no man’s land economically.  Their legacy costs far exceed their GDP which is so small; it’s not even worth talking about.  But Puerto Rico is a very nice place and it could easily become a booming economy with a GDP similar to Florida which is about a trillion dollars a year.  Hawaii produces only about $87 billion but it brings much more than that to the entire Pacific in value, and of course Alaska only produces $50 billion.  But Puerto Rico with its gateway access to the Caribbean and the Atlantic shipping lanes has tremendous potential that could and should be utilized to advance industry and economic expansion in that region by taking away the haze of indifferent statehood from the decision-making process.  Once companies know that Puerto Rico is an American state–they could unleash their investments.

That brings us to Cuba—in the 1950s it was a country headed in the direction of American statehood and that’s what should have happened until the Castro regime attacked and took over with communism as the national offering.  People seem to forget or ignore that all those little countries south of The United States have their share of communism, Marxism and socialism in their equations somewhere—and that’s why they are all poor countries.   Most of Mexico’s problems come from the fact that they founded their current country on concepts of Marxism and that has turned them into a disaster currently being run by drug cartels.  So I wouldn’t be against Mexico becoming the 53rd state maybe letting it divide itself up into three more states.  Then of course Guatemala, Honduras and Panama—if they voted for statehood, then I’d be all for letting them become part of the United States.  Their lives would improve dramatically because even the very poor in The United States live better than most of the middle class in Mexico and throughout South America do.  Most of the poor in the United States live better than the rich do in all of Africa–so becoming states in America would be a great thing for everyone.  The big thing they’d gain from statehood would be creating stable governments that businesses could then invest in.  Nobody in their right mind is going to invest much money in Mexico and Cuba as far as business because they do not have stable political climates.  Only tremendously wealthy companies now can afford to do anything in Mexico because the labor exchange is that much more advantageous.  But part of the reason there isn’t any major industry south of the American border is because of the lack of political stability.  Once that occurred everything would improve for everyone.

Under the Trump presidency I would love to see America add at least two more American states—starting with Puerto Rico.  If they want to be in our tent then I’m all for it.  I might even buy a place there as a real estate investment. I wouldn’t dare do it now, because the country is bankrupt, but if it became a state with opportunities to become a satellite of the great state of Florida—I’d be all for it.  Of course the political left would be against such a thing just as open terrorists would because they don’t want to see the spread of capitalism to these regions—they want Marxism in America.  They certainly don’t want America to spread its influence around the world more than it already has.  But if the people in those places want to sign up to become Americans—no matter where they come from—why not?  They’d be better off, and so would the current 50 states.  There would be more taxable revenue and at least we’d all be working with the same founding documents.  And if it were voluntary it wouldn’t be like America ran around the world conquering everyone with a superior military.  All we’d be doing is saying yes. So why the hell not? Republicans will likely increase their numbers in the House and Senate so the timing is about as good as it will get.  It’s all about context isn’t it?  Do we really want to help people become better off under a capitalist system and contributing to our current $18 trillion-dollar a year GDP.  Or do we want to let terrorists both foreign and domestic use illegal aliens from impoverished areas to collapse our system in America with overwhelming force and changing voting patterns.  Or do we control the impact with harmless Electoral votes while increasing our taxable income and expansion of business opportunity?  The situation is pretty clear to me.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here:  http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707  Use my name to get added benefits.

cropped-img_0202.jpg

Melania Trump is the key to Trusting the President: Jeff Sessions and a new kind of Washington operative

As Jeff Sessions testified before the senate on 6/13/2017 it was clear that politically we have certainly turned a corner in America.  And it didn’t begin with the Sessions testimony—that was simply a reflection of a political shift that was noticeable to anyone looking—it started with the Comey testimony of the previous week, which turned out to be a huge belly flop for the political insurgents against the incoming Trump administration.  Now looking back over the last five days I am quite proud of the CNN piece that I was a part of after the Comey testimony.  (CLICK HERE TO REVIEW)  We got it right while the rest of the nation was still working through what they had heard and that is directly reflective to our perspective at the front of the train.  Trump didn’t slow down through the media surge against him hoping that Comey would reveal something damaging to the new president—and by Monday he had what CNN called the weirdest Cabinet meeting ever, where Trump’s picks were in the same room at the same time for the first time since he took office.

 

The statists of the old political structure—those who have made a swamp out of Washington D.C. hated the Trump Cabinet press conference.  Trump broke all the rules by stating the accomplishments of his administration thus far, then allowing his Cabinet to speak one by one going around the big table in the White House.  Obviously most of his picks were unique in that they were like a dream team of political movers and shakers.  In the past most of those appointments would have been political hacks given jobs because of campaign contributions and favors otherwise owed.  But not this one—with the exception of Mitch McConnel’s wife—these were professionals, experts in their particular fields who were bringing a competency to Washington D.C. that just hasn’t been seen before.  Trump had outlasted the hardest part of the storm his political rivals could throw at him in just five months and the sun was starting to peak out. 

 

Supposedly Trump and Jeff Sessions have been at each other’s throats and the new Attorney General was about to be terminated.  But after the Cabinet meeting where Sessions spoke and Trump was engaged with his members individually, then after watching the Sessions testimony, it is obvious that we are dealing with a new caliber of political activity that radiates competency in ways previously undefined.  It won’t take long for this administration to simply outpace the Washington swamp creatures and rise about the murky waters for which all these lackluster political activists have made expensive livings for themselves at being entirely average.  No longer, and that’s where things are culminating in the Sessions testimony—an event he easily breezed through—are average results going to be tolerated. 

 

That returns my mind to the night of that CNN piece that a group of southern Ohio Trump supporters—myself included—provided.  I took a lot of notes on the Comey testimony and I felt I had a bead on what was happening, but my opinions were dramatically different than the story CNN was trying to frame.  I knew when I gave my statements that it provoked outrage from the political left because they had been hoping that the Comey testimony would put the last nail in the coffin of the Trump presidency.  But that’s not what happened.  Instead, Comey showed himself to be less reliable than we were led to believe and there were aspects to his testimony that pointed toward very evil actions—evil in the sense that Comey was deceiving himself of the boundaries of right and wrong.  That much was clear when he revealed himself as one of the intelligence leakers we’ve all been hearing so much about.  Once that happened the obstruction of justice criteria that leftist political insurgents were trying to establish now turned back toward the Hillary Clinton and Lorretta Lynch case explored and dismissed in 2016.  Now there was all kinds of fresh news to add—if these anti-Trump people held the same standard they were imposing on Donald Trump to Lorretta Lynch and Clinton—then there were major problems for those two, and for Comey.  They had wrecked their own case.

 

My soundbite given to CNN played all weekend and into the events leading up to the Sessions testimony, and as I look back on it, I am proud to have been so far out in front of the story with my gut instinct.  It’s not easy to go against the grain with something like that and to say things that might be used against you later.  The general feeling is that Trump is a liar and that Comey is Boy Scout honest when in fact the opposite is true.  Trump is reckless with his Twitter and his statements not because he’s a liar, but is innocently honest the way a young person might be who hasn’t yet been burned into extreme caution.  Comey on the other hand was calculated, manipulative and even deceitful and hiding all this behind a façade of goodness.  CNN wanted to find something wrong with Trump so they took what Comey said at face value when they shouldn’t have.  They obviously thought me and the other Trump supporters with me were lunatics who supported Trump blindly. After all, how could anybody say that Trump isn’t a liar given all the accusations leveled against him. 

 

The key to trusting Trump is in his business record of success, and his marriage to Melania.  If he were so inclined to deceitful practices, I am convinced that she would pressure him into a correction which makes her marriage to him vitally important and a major difference between the Donald Trump of old, and this new one who is president.  Melania is Trump’s hobby and he obviously loves her very much.  And she keeps him honest because she doesn’t put up with much of anything.  She is a good person and good people just don’t put up with bad people in their lives unless they allow themselves to be broken—and Melania is not a broken person in any fashion. Trump wouldn’t lie about the Russian investigation because she wouldn’t put up with it.  But Comey is a collectivist—he’s a person who obviously doesn’t care about merit, but about preserving the swamp—and he would do anything to protect it—including lying.  I don’t know his sweet little wife—the person he said he regretted not having dinner with that night he was invited to the White House to dine with Trump—but she obviously doesn’t hold Comey to the same kind of authenticity as Melania does Trump.  So I have no problem looking at Comey and considering that he lied—because I think he did.  Sessions on the other hand wanted to clear the air and willingly testified, and guilty people don’t tend to rush toward the truth, or the acquisition of it.  And if Trump was “guilty” of all these things, he wouldn’t be Tweeting and creating a written record of the exchanges.  Yes, this is truly new territory—we have not been here as a nation—ever.

After watching Jeff Sessions in his senate testimony and comparing it to Eric Holder and Lorretta Lynch it is obvious that we are dealing with a better caliber of people coming from this new White House.  Then watching how the political left acted when Jeff Sessions and many others in Trump’s Cabinet showed so much respect and passion as members of the Trump team we are seeing something very different—and I think the real credit goes back to Melania Trump.  I think it is she who makes the President a better man—better than he ever has been before.  And at this stage in his life I think he is extraordinarily trustworthy—and his fearless actions show it.  Trust worthy people trust other people—which Trump trusted Sessions to do a good job at the senate so he left for Wisconsin to do his job as president—which says a lot about how Trump operates as a manager.  With Melania she is not only a beautiful woman—physically, but she’s got it on the inside too—and that has the President’s heart.  So as CNN asked me, do you think Comey lied, or do I think Trump lied—I of course believe Trump and not Comey.  Why—because Melania is married to Trump and Comey is sketchy.  Therefore, Trump is the guy I trust and it’s obvious that I’m not alone.  Finally that administration is turning the corner and the left is losing ground—and now we’ll get to see something truly good coming from Washington D.C.  And it couldn’t have arrived a moment too soon. 

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here:  http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707  Use my name to get added benefits.

cropped-img_0202.jpg

Theory H Utilization: Thinking correctly about Trump’s “workplace development” week

Since this has been “workplace development” week for the Donald Trump White House it would be proper for me to contribute a few cents to the value of this discussion.  As our economy functions from ever-increasing unemployment numbers—which is a wonderful thing—many people out there in the position to hire workers get stressed out in how to acquire new talent.  Just a few months ago when discussing supply chain challenges downstream from me, I suggested that by opening up a second and third shift that they could dramatically increase their productive output.  So the question came back to me–how would we go about doing that?  I looked at them for a moment mystified that they really didn’t comprehend how to do something so simple—and the more I speak to people all across America, they are really lost as to how to acquire new talent and how to get proper productive output out of all 24 hours of a day. It just happens that this is another one of my specialties and given this week’s White House emphasis, I’ll share a few things to help those most in need given the urgency created by such a booming economy such as what we now have—thanks to President Trump.

I get each week dozens and dozens of offers from job recruiters who offer to help solve a company’s recruiting needs—because honestly this is one of those things that most companies are terrible at.  It’s hard to know what kind of people to hire and how to build teams out of those people once you’ve hired them.  As I’ve stated before, some of the past occupational fields that I’ve been inclined to besides archaeology—which is a study of human cultures, so it’s related to these modern enterprises, was psychiatry.  I’ve always been interested in what makes human beings tick, so when it comes to interviewing and recruiting the right people for the right job-it’s always been something that comes naturally for me.  Then team building with those individuals brings another level of challenge because people often resent being placed together in ways that are not authentic to their experiences—so given all those dynamics, most employers just throw up their hands and hope that other people can be hired to handle those problems for them—the way an attorney might handle all the legal issues.  However, I would say that recruiting is the most important thing a company does aside from figuring out what their product is and how to deliver it to the marketplace.

There are a lot of these “Theory X” people out there who have been taught for two generations that the best way to work with people is with this kind of authoritarian relationship where essentially workforces are communist camps full of Marxists and whatever the “superior” says is what the mass collective must do for the health of the company.  I have sat stunned in many meetings where people who call themselves conservatives politically have this archaic relationship with their workers who actually believe that people should give up their individual rights for the good of the company they work for—and that this is somehow productive for the end use intentions of the organization.  Not at all.  Theory X motivations get a rebellious work force that will tell you one thing to your face, but they’ll do everything they can to drag ass something without constant cattle prodding and discipline to evoke productive results.  People who are obsessed with Theory X are terrible at managing multi-shift production needs.

Theory X

Theory X is based on pessimistic assumptions of the average worker. This management style supposes that the average employee has little to no ambition, shies away from work or responsibilities, and is individual-goal oriented. Generally, Theory X style managers believe their employees are less intelligent than the managers are, lazier than the managers are, or work solely for a sustainable income. Due to these assumptions, Theory X concludes the average workforce is more efficient under “hands-on” approach to management.[1] The ‘Theory X’ manager believes that all actions should be traced and the responsible individual given a direct reward or a reprimand according to the action’s outcomes. This managerial style is more effective when used in a workforce that is not intrinsically motivated to perform. It is usually exercised in professions where promotion is infrequent, unlikely or even impossible and where workers perform repetitive tasks.[2]

According to Douglas McGregor, there are two opposing approaches to implementing Theory X: the “hard” approach and the “soft” approach. The hard approach depends on close supervision, intimidation, and imminent punishment. This approach can potentially yield a hostile, minimally cooperative work force that could harbor resentment towards management. The soft approach is the literal opposite, characterized by leniency and less strictly regulated rules in hopes for high workplace morale and therefore cooperative employees. Implementing a system that is too soft could result in an entitled, low-output workforce. McGregor believes both ends of the spectrum are too extreme for efficient real world application.[3] Instead, McGregor feels that somewhere between the two approaches would be the most effective implementation of Theory X.

Overall, Theory X generally proves to be most effective in terms of consistency of work. Although managers and supervisors are in almost complete control of the work, this produces a more systematic and uniform product or work flow. Theory X can also benefit a work place that is more suited towards an assembly line or manual labor type of occupation.[4] Utilizing theory X in these types of work conditions allow the employee to specialize in a particular area allowing the company to mass produce more quantity and higher quality work, which in turns brings more profit.

Theory Y

“Theory Y is almost in complete contrast to that of Theory X”. Theory Y managers make assumptions that people in the work force are internally motivated, enjoy their labor in the company, and work to better themselves without a direct “reward” in return.[5] Theory Y employees are considered to be one of the most valuable assets to the company, and truly drive the internal workings of the corporation.[6] Also, Theory Y states that these particular employees thrive on challenges that they may face, and relish on bettering their personal performance.[2] Workers additionally tend to take full responsibility for their work and do not require the need of constant supervision in order to create a quality and higher standard product.[4]

Because of the drastic change compared to the “Theory X” way of directing, “Theory Y” managers gravitate towards relating to the worker on a more personal level, as opposed to a more conductive and teaching based relationship.[5] As a result, Theory Y followers may have a better relationship with their higher-ups, as well as potentially having a healthier atmosphere in the work place. Managers in this theory tend to use a democratic type of leadership because workers will be working in a way that does not need supervision the most.[4]

In comparison to “Theory X”, “Theory Y” adds more of a democratic and free feel in the work force allowing the employee to design, construct, and publish their works in a timely manner in co-ordinance to their work load and projects. A study was done to analyze different management styles over professors at a Turkish University. This study found that the highly supervised Theory X management affected the research performance of the academics negatively. In general, the study suggests that the professional setting and research based work that professors perform are best-managed with Theory Y styles.[5]

While “Theory Y” may seem optimal, it does have some drawbacks. While there is a more personal and individualistic feel, this does leave room for error in terms of consistency and uniformity.[3] The workplace lacks unvarying rules and practices, and this can result in an inconsistent product which could potentially be detrimental to the quality standards and strict guidelines of a given company.[1]

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_X_and_Theory_Y

I’m not particularly in love with Theory Y either, because of the last paragraph of the explanation above, but it is far superior in the modern marketplace—especially in this climate where unemployment is low and workers have a lot of options to work with.  So new inventions are needed and that’s what I spend most of my time working on professionally, such as what we might call a Theory H, for “Hoffman.”  Employees take on a job for many reasons, primarily so that they can make a living—they exchange their time for money—which they naturally resent at an instinctual level.  But, an opportunity to do a job that has structure and purpose bring with it a currency that often isn’t acknowledged in economic measuring patterns.  So I would suggest that while hiring, hire the best people by determining in the interview if they are working just for a paycheck, or if that is just one aspect of their desire for a job.  If there are other elements to their job seeking desires, such as “getting out of the house to have their own thing,” or they are hungry to build a life for themselves as a young person, if you can see a light on behind their eyes there is usually something you can work with if you are willing to coach them along.  I wouldn’t say that a democratic process is the optimal one because as everyone who reads me knows, the collective is not superior to the individual, but you can’t have a bunch of individuals running around doing whatever they want either.  So you have to get individuals to bring their magic to the table without killing their ambition with too many collective considerations.  As a manager you have to pick and choose what you’re points of emphasis will be, unlike the Theory X person who acts like a communist dictator and tries to make a job into a work camp in Siberia.  Once you’ve defined your critical path points the individuals you’ve hired will go to great measures to help you get where you want to go—because all people like to be a part of something successful.  So let them share in that success and most of your employment needs will be solved.  It’s not always about money with most people, often it’s about having the opportunity to feel pride in the work they do and not have that pride robbed from them by a Theory X tyrant.

It is one of the great privileges in life to be able to offer a job to someone.  They get a chance to do well for their families and you get contributors to a vision that is the engine to productivity in the nation’s GDP.  Each employee should be treated as an asset with life potential with whatever company they happen to work for. Team building comes naturally out of setting the proper objectives for a workforce so that they can be a part of a winning opportunity.  Once they see that they will often do great things to achieve a victory and be a part of a winning team.  It is not enough to ask them to be a part of a team and to sacrifice their individuality to the group enterprise.  They must want to win for their own selfish desires.  When they do that the team does win, so when recruiting, hire people hungry to win at life.  Then, and only then can productive exploits on second, third and weekend shifts be properly explored with all the new opportunities coming forth from this new Trump White House—the hiring process is only scary to the Theory X people.  They need to retrain themselves to think properly in this modern economy.  The recruiters out there exist essentially to help all the out-of-date Theory X types—but that’s not necessary if you understand who you are bringing in and give them the opportunity to be successful.  If give that chance—most people will thrive if they still have that glimmer in their eye left over from childhood that still has hope that they can be a part of something that’s great so they can sleep well at night knowing that they aren’t just on a job—but are a part of something really magnificent.  It doesn’t matter if the product is just making straws for Burger King or if you are making spaceships for commercial flight—greatness is in doing extraordinary things with everyday events and once you establish that, everything else takes care of itself.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here:  http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707  Use my name to get added benefits.

cropped-img_0202.jpg

Trump is Not Guilty of Obstruction of Justice: The case as to how Comey broke the law and is the real villian

Before anyone says that the legal opinions provided here are not valid, because I’m not a practicing lawyer, let me just say this.  It is not good to be overly specialized in one particular field of endeavor. Every person should make themselves well versed in many aspects of human society and its inventions—and law is one of those inventions.  It is just as good to know the basics of the legal profession as it is to know how to change the oil in your car.  The declaration that one should not have a legal position because they aren’t playing golf with county judges on Saturdays doesn’t mean that opinions of great merit cannot be made.  But in my case I do have quite a lot of legal experience in law even to the point of representing myself in court because I deemed legal counsel ill-equipped intellectually to do so on my behalf.  And I have always been successful in these endeavors even when the other side threw in a lot of resources hoping to tip the scales of justice.  In that context I can say with certainty that Donald J. Trump absolutely can never be prosecuted, impeached, or in any way penalized for obstruction of justice in the White House over the James Comey termination.  Trump is free of guilt 100%–unequivocally.  Here’s why.

Clearly from the testimony I heard James Comey give Trump fired the former FBI director based on merit—meaning Comey had failed at his job.  When Comey started his testimony rehashing his work experience using the many times that President Trump had told him he was doing a good job, he was seeking to cover-up the later opinions which led to the termination with feel good language designed to illicit a cover-story—which is typical of most government employees who find it difficult to live within the parameters of reality.  Government work tends not to be merit based, but viewed more as an entitlement—so Comey’s testimony was geared to support that false reality.

Putting Comey’s account into direct comparison with Donald Trump’s—if I were the judge sitting in a chamber debating the legal positions put forth I would have to conclude that Comey was insecure with his job performance during the fall of 2016 and his new boss was a merit based individual which was terrifying enough to the FBI Director.  So Comey hoped to keep his head low and avoid any confrontations with Trump.  To secure his job he let it float that he was going to conduct an investigation into the Russian connection to ensure that Trump would never fire him for fear that the optics would look terrible.  This is why Comey agreed to help the Obama administration spy on Trump’s transition team hoping to gather up some evidence to use in case the new president decided to pull the plug on Comey’s remaining six year’s appointment as director of the FBI.

Upon meeting Trump, Comey realized that dealing with the star of The Apprentice for 14 seasons was going to be a lot tougher than the former community activist, Barack Obama was.  Obama had to completely rely on other people to make value judgments making Comey much more important in discussing matters of intelligence gathering.  Trump on the other hand had his own opinions about things—and knew how to read people and make value judgments completely free of other people’s opinions.  This really worried Director Comey because as a person—he was functioning from deep insecurities regarding his masculinity—likely cultivated through his years working closely with other Washington D.C. types in that bubble of the Beltway where rules were known and unconsciously followed.  Trump was a departure of that thinking and had earned his way through life on his own merit which made Comey very uncomfortable due to his own lack of such experiences.

This is why Comey felt he could clear the room in a December meeting for a one on one discussion with the new President—because the FBI director had the institution of the FBI at his back and felt he could trust it to protect him from someone like Trump. But with each subsequent meeting thereafter Comey realized that Trump was reading him too well.  The dinner invites and other discussions on the phone and elsewhere revealed that the now President Trump had doubts about the Obama appointee.  Making matters even worse, likely, Comey had been listening to the Trump people at Trump Tower in New York and knew Trump’s true opinion of the FBI Director.  Trump, like he would anybody in business, was sizing up Comey to decide if he wanted to continue having his FBI led by such a guy—because he wanted to make his own mark and put his own kind of person in place.  So when Trump shook Comey’s hand where Trump would say—“you’re doing a good job,” Comey suspected otherwise either by direct evidence from spying on Trump, or from his own knowledge that this new president had the skills to sniff him out in a crowd for being not very effective in his job.

Trump appears to have been vetting Comey from the start.  He was willing to give the FBI Director a fair shake because some of the timing of the Comey comments on the Hillary Clinton email scandal did help Trump in the election.  But Comey obviously was not a Trump supporter and the way the big man avoided eye contact and shook hands concerned Trump.  Comey was too sneaky to be trusted so Trump’s many personal meetings with Comey were like the boardroom on The Apprentice—to assess the merit of the FBI Director to decide what to do with him.  The assurances that Comey had been doing a good job were to put his mind at ease so that Trump could really get to know the man on a basic competency level.  Through those meetings Trump learned that most of what Comey was had been purely show and that competency at the level of his job heading the FBI just wasn’t there.  Obama might have liked Comey—but what did he know?  Trump wasn’t a fan and by February was leaning away from keeping the Director on as an appointee to the President.

When Trump asked the room to clear in the Oval Office to speak directly to Director Comey just days after Trump had to fire General Flynn, at one level the President was seeking relief for his friend—who had been through enough of a witch hunt from the press over the whole Russian thing.  Yes, Flynn had lied to get the job, but Trump being a loyal guy wanted to let the General recover in peace from further scrutiny.  Plus Trump didn’t want dark clouds to interrupt all the optimistic things he wanted to do as president.  But more than anything, Trump wanted to strip away the various institutions that people like Comey rely on to hide their lack of competency and he wanted to speak to the man one on one knowing that many of the leaks that had been coming out of the various intelligence agencies were pointing directly to Comey. So having all that stripped away, Trump wanted to be sure that the man standing in front of him was really a sleaze ball who was still very sympathetic to the Obama administration and had botched the case with Hillary Clinton to make his Beltway friends happy with him during cocktail hour with back slaps and future dinner invites.  Comey knew enough about people to know that the president could see through the careful façade he had constructed over his many years of public service—so he was naturally uncomfortable.

After the meeting Trump made up his mind—he just needed to find the right time. Trump and Comey never spoke together again after April 11th.  And it was after the Comey testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee on May 3rd that Trump had heard enough.  During that testimony Comey admitted that it made him “mildly nauseous” to think that the FBI had affected the 2016 election and that he failed to prosecute Hillary Clinton because of pressure he had received from Loretta Lynch.  Comey’s testimony showed a FBI Director who made bad decisions based on political pressure and that was all Trump needed to terminate Comey’s employment which occurred on May 9th—a few days after the Senate testimony.  Trump had given Comey a shot and the news just kept getting worse the more the President had dug—really leaving no other choice.

Thus, the termination of James Comey from the FBI had nothing to do with the Russian case.  By Comey’s own testimony to the Senate on June 8th 2017, he stated that his termination would have no impact on the Russian case—that the FBI work would still be done with or without him.  That means that the termination could never have been about the investigation, but was always about the merit of the work Comey had done as director.  If the termination had no impact by the admission of the person who had been removed, and his own testimony revealed that Trump had never asked to have the Russian investigation terminated—then there was never anything close to obstruction of justice.  Trump had simply rooted out a drain in the swamp that once he pulled it, a lot of things hidden were suddenly visible.  Comey was one of those drains holding back a lot of swampy water and once removed, the slimy water of the Beltway went down the drain exposing a lot of crazy critters who needed concealment to survive.  And now they didn’t have it. They screamed “obstruction of justice” to regain those hiding places, but nobody was biting and now they all have a lot of trouble.  So with all that said, only five months into a new presidency full of contention and conflict from the other political side, Trump successfully found the drain on the swamp—and he pulled it—and James Comey turned out to be a big part of what was wrong.  It didn’t take the new president very long to figure it out—just as James Comey had feared after the first direct meeting he had with President-elect Trump in December.

Trump is innocent of obstruction of justice, and Comey is guilty of leaking classified information with access to the highest office and placing it in the hands of a Columbia college professor to leak to The New York Times.  If Comey thought his termination was a bad day—he hasn’t seen anything yet.  There are many more bad days coming because the person who broke the law wasn’t Trump—it was Comey and his swamp who have now been exposed like never before—and it is an ugly sight indeed.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/a-james-comey-timeline/

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here:  http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707  Use my name to get added benefits.

cropped-img_0202.jpg

CNN in Butler County, Ohio at Rick’s Tavern: From Eliot Ness to Ian Flemming–Comey is in trouble

IMG_4642Of course when CNN came to Butler County to do a piece on the James Comey hearings seeking the reaction of Trump supporters I wasn’t going to pass up on the opportunity.  CNN has been hostile to Trump and they were coming to my turf—and I got an invite.  So I spent the day with several other Trump troops from southern Ohio at Rick’s Tavern in Fairfield watching the Comey hearings which CNN set up as a kind of watch party and we stuck around to give our live reaction on Anderson Cooper’s show later that night.  The CNN people were very professional and accommodating so the event went off without any contention.  We originally were supposed to be on the Anderson Cooper show for two 15 minute segments, but because of the busy news day that was whittled down to a 4 minute piece at 9:35 PM.   So we had a problem, we had nine Trump people at Rick’s Tavern to do live television and we all had a few pages of notes that we had taken from the testimony to fill a half hour of air time.  But somehow we had to narrow all that down into a 20 second statement.  So when the camera turned to me I wasn’t sure what I was going to say or even where to start about my various thoughts–I said this.

I’ll get more into the details of the Comey hearing itself in the days to come but for this occasion, I’ll share my notes for future reference and focus on the positive experience we had with CNN at Rick’s Tavern as Americans.

Comey Notes taken on 6/8/2017:

  • Mark Warner made a dangerous assertion with the resolute conclusion of the Russian investigation as his foundation argument. How would he know that?

  • In a world where international cooperation and compromise are praised, it is interesting that working with the Russians is even something that would cause suspicion in the first place.

  • Comey says that the impression of the FBI was not in dismay, which is a purely emotional response. Saying something doesn’t make it true.

  • Russian cyber intrusion by the Russians according to Comey, started in 2015 under Obama.

  • Comey said that Trump lied about him and the FBI. That perspective comes from a guy who was in charge at the time and is now an ex-employee speaking from hurt feelings.

  • Judgment of Trump’s character was that Trump might lie about him—based again purely on feelings.

  • Comey assumes that the Trump dinner was a way to get something on the FBI director to use his job as a bargaining chip to control Comey’s investigations. Again, this was purely emotionally based.   Comey made a lot of assumptions.

  • Don’t remember that Comey specifically said “chose to defame me.”

  • How did Comey know he needed to write down everything—the premise was rooted in mistrust from the beginning? The interesting thing is that Comey did not have the same level of conviction when Attorney General Loretta Lynch told him to handle the Hillary Clinton case as a “matter.”  Lynch was clearly trying to shape the FBI case, yet Comey did not respond with indignation the way he did with Trump.  He obviously had made up his mind about Trump before the president took office.

  • Comey said he was uncomfortable with Trump after the meeting with him on January 6th.

    https://twitter.com/overmanwarrior/status/873295786834108417

  • Trump and Comey never spoke after April 11th.

  • Comey said he’d be “honestly loyal,” to Trump.

  • Comey didn’t do his duty because of the pressure from Lynch. Shows a history of bad decisions by over thinking things.

  • FBI leadership team didn’t want to speak with Jeff Sessions.

  • “Gut feel of the nature of the person I was interacting with.” This is how Comey referred to Trump.

  • Comey asked a friend that is a professor at Columbia school of journalism to leak his personal notes to the press hoping to invoke a special investigation.

  • Comey says that Russia actively participated in American elections with a great level of sophistication. But that’s nothing new, the United States does the same.  The problem is with the DNC letting themselves become victims with loose information.

  • Why would the president kick everyone out of the room—because business guys know from experience that it’s a good way to communicate and size people up—not letting them hide behind other people.

  • What is the difference in speaking one on one in a private setting and speaking on the phone with someone. This is something that Roy Blunt brought up—why would Comey feel different in person than on a phone call?

  • Comey leaked info to a friend—guilty of activism—seeking a special counsel to do what he didn’t have the courage to do himself. While he showed caution in not having a special investigation occur with Hillary Clinton, but had no problem letting one happen to President Trump.

  • Comey established a pattern of very weak behavior which likely has more to do with his firing than anything otherwise contemplated.

  • Likely, notes leaked to The New York Times are still in the possession of Comey’s friend. Seriously bad judgment.

  • Case is on obstruction of justice only if the intent was to cover up the Russian investigation. It assumes that job performance was not a factor.

  • Comey referred to himself as “captain courageous.”

As we went on the air many other Trump supporters showed up to fill in the background of the bar—specifically the Biker’s for Trump guys—so there was an ambiance of positivity that was distinctly patriotic.  The news coverage all day long had been very negative for Trump, but I didn’t see things that way, which is why I answered my question the way I did.  Clearly Comey wasn’t an honest Boy Scout as he had been playing.  He was in fact one of the big Washington Beltway leakers and he was doing it from a very high level.

He was in trouble—serious trouble and that wasn’t lost to me during the testimony.  When Comey had said he leaked his memo to a friend who then leaked it to the press, I made eye contact with the CNN producer Stephen Samaniego and he knew it too.  This wasn’t a partisan issue or a group of Ohio Trump supporters living in the bubble of regional conservatism.  Comey had admitted to something that was very serious and Trump had nailed him to the wall with Comey’s own show boating.  Once the smoke cleared from the day’s events, to the time we went on live with Anderson Cooper—that was the story.

As I watched the CNN guys and the live show on the monitor as we were finally set-up for our official shots it was clear to me that this was all part of making America Great Again.  The epic showdown on Capital Hill with Comey–flushing him out as a leaker, getting him to reveal what Loretta Lynch had revealed about the Hillary Clinton case—which we all suspected—was all part of this new Trump approach to things.  Now we had proof—testimony anyway—it all occurred because of the way Trump does things. None of this would have happened with any other president.  The Iran Contra hearings nearly destroyed all the good things that Reagan did—and here was Trump plowing through everything relentlessly and the political left was making major mistakes under the pressure of Trump.  And here was CNN honestly soul-searching for an understanding of how people think from the heartland of the Trump voter—Butler Country, Ohio with some of the leaders of the ground game there to talk.

They were truly curious whether or not we’d still be with him and they picked Rick’s Tavern with its big America flag hanging out front to understand why. They asked good questions and we answered them the best we could in 20 seconds.  When it came to me I said what I did, Comey portrayed himself as an honest Eliot Ness FBI agent from the Untouchables.  But what he ended up being was just a 6’8” cowering bureaucrat who knew how to talk a good game, but when the rubber hit the road, he was lost.  Trump was exposing that month by month making it so that Comey couldn’t hide it any more.  Barack Obama had no idea what competency was but here was a real businessman who knew value in people and Comey knew he was in trouble. So he decided to become the villain of a spy novel and go about passive aggressively leaking information about Trump to take down the new president—and Trump sniffed him out.  That’s when Comey made the biggest mistake of his life—he leaked his notes to a Columbia professor friend to leak the story to The New York Times.  That’s how I came up with the Ian Flemming reference—because Comey was far more interested with images and storylines than substance and facts.

I think there were around 5 million people watching CNN at that time slot so I was very proud of the opportunity to defend President Trump in the trenches, even if it was only 20 seconds—the comments did what they were supposed to do.  And for those who read here everyday, they know that there is a lot more where that came from.  I’d do it again in a second.  Trump is doing a great job, and I appreciate it, and will fight for him all day long so that he can keep doing that job.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here:  http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707  Use my name to get added benefits.

cropped-img_0202.jpg

The Butler County Connection to the Comey Testimony: CNN comes to town to put Trump supporters on the spot–but come up empty

I almost felt sorry for them, the team at CNN who came to Butler County, Ohio to gloat over the Comey testimony ended their day rattled to their basic foundations.  If there is a place in the United States harder core Trump—I can’t think of where that might be except out in the fringes of the cityscapes to the east of Ohio and West Virginia.  Butler County is special because it’s a strong hold of Republicanism.  It’s the home town of John Boehner—had been a huge supporter of John Kasich for governor and eventual presidential candidate.  But most recently it was responsible for helping Trump stamp out a 9 to 10 point edge over Hillary Clinton during the last election.  Given that CNN had spent so much political capital on a smoking gun emerging during the Comey testimony they invited a lot of those Trump supporters down to Rick’s Tavern in Fairfield to witness the public execution which was later filtered out on the Anderson Cooper show later the same day. Their assertion at CNN was that there was smoke and that Trump was guilty of something.  But all that smoke ended up being where smoke grenades thrown by them and others in the media to make it look like there was some fire.  Even though I’m not big fans of the people at CNN, it was embarrassing to see them up close when they came to realize it on live television.

Comey wasn’t fired to hide an investigation into Russian hacking.  He was fired because he went on just a few days prior to give senate testimony and admitted he was a befuddled, insecure person who didn’t know how to proceed and he had lost the confidence of the FBI as an institution due to his show boating during the Hillary Clinton events of 2016.  Here was a guy whose claim to fame was putting Martha Stewart in jail, who made himself into a national sensation for trying to withdraw a wire tapping order while John Ashcroft was in the hospital but was beat to the punch by the Bush White House.  Comey had a history of working against the White House when Obama nominated him to lead the FBI four years ago and obviously thereafter the same standard of prosecution did not apply.  If you put Martha Stewart and Hillary Clinton side by side, case by case-Hillary Clinton should have had the death penalty thrown at her compared to Stewart.  Here was a woman in Clinton who really committed crimes at the highest level, shared classified secrets and destroyed evidence—and she was running for president.  Comey fumbled the case and sought to cover up his tracks with a lot of legal talk which nobody understood to hide his incompetence.  And he got caught. He let the Democrats nominate a criminal for the White House and when they lost the election, it has all but destroyed their party.  So Trump’s loyalty comment was in that line of thought.

https://www.usnews.com/news/newsgram/articles/2013/05/30/james-comey-fbi-pick-took-on-martha-stewart-and-dick-cheney

The entire day all CNN wanted to do was point to the loyalty question as if it indicated guilt over Russian collusion—and that this story was bigger than Watergate.  Only there was no collusion.  Trump isn’t the kind of guy to share the spotlight with anyone—especially Russia, and as a business executive, he wants his own people to be around him—not some Obama holdover in the FBI.  But Trump knew he had to give the guy a chance—because it would look bad to come into office and fire all of Obama’s people.  That left Trump to do what a lot of head hunters who slip into executive slots as head of corporations do—you watch and listen to who does what.  Then you replace the weak links with your own people as you learn the ropes.  Comey admitted to the senate that he made judgment errors when he indicated he was “mildly nauseous” that he might have swayed the 2016 Election.  After that comment from my own vantage point I knew he had lost the hard line officers at the FBI as they were surely eye rolling the Comey statements and if I had to guess, that was the moment Trump decided to fire the FBI director and make him a “former.”

I don’t think Comey is a villain in this case—he was just over his head.  The character he made himself out to be—an Eliot Ness type of FBI agent—couldn’t hold up when the media no longer liked him.  He was fine so long as the people he was going after were the Bush White House and Martha Stewart—but when the villain was Hillary Clinton whom the entire Washington D.C. establishment supported—he found him stuck between a rock and a hard place—and he didn’t handle the pressure well.  When he shouldn’t have, he went on the air and gave extensive press conferences and spoke too freely which exacerbated the situation beyond redemption essentially forcing Trump to fire him.

Comey’s comments about feeling anxious to be alone with Trump are classic emotions when a guilty incompetent person is left defensively with a superior boss.  When other people are in the room it takes the edge off—but when you know you are guilty of not doing a very good job and you are alone with someone who can see through you—of course it would make a person like Comey nervous.  CNN wanted to make that story into one where Comey thought Trump was corrupt and the purity of his nature wouldn’t allow him to deal with the president one on one.  That is pure fantasy—in reality, Comey knew he was guilty of screwing up the Clinton case and he hoped to stay out of trouble long enough to keep his 10 year appointment by Obama.  He knew that Trump would soon learn that Comey wasn’t the best man for the job, so he had no desire to spend time alone with the president. That caused Comey to do  two more stupid things; give a public speech about how everyone was stuck with Comey for another 6 years hoping to put pressure on Trump to keep the FBI director on for fear of political backlash.  Then he gave his senate testimony mentioned above where he gave a number of statements that were just embarrassing.  Trump did the right thing and fired Comey—then he stood by his decision without a lot of politicking.  He simply said that Comey was a showboat—which was true, and that he hadn’t done a very good job.  End of story.

It’s one thing to watch these stories from afar, but to see CNN up close trying to wring out a nothing story was absolutely fascinating.  But they came to my town, to my community to catch Trump supporters live on the air with what they hoped would be administration ending testimony—and they didn’t come close to getting it.  I didn’t feel sorry for them because they were after all part of the insurgency against traditional America.  But they were people, and however wrong they were philosophically, they were still human beings suffering under a false premise that had not carried the day.  They were part of a losing, and declining effort in America and they knew it.  They took one last shot in the dark hoping to score a hit in Trump Country, and all they got were a bunch of supporters like me and several others who defended Trump valiantly.  And it wasn’t hard.  The truth has a way of showing its own majestic presence, and the CNN people were trying to make something out of nothing.  The world is literally on a precipice, given the elections in England today, the terrorist attacks in Europe, the events of the Middle East—the strange chess game in the east—the world is changing dramatically.  But for CNN, the pivot point was with the Comey story and they went all in on it—and they came up with nothing.  And they chose to do it in Butler County, Ohio—which was a mistake for them.  I enjoyed being a part of it, and I enjoyed watching them lose. But as people I know it was painful.  However in war—who cares.  Move on and prosper.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here:  http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707  Use my name to get added benefits.

cropped-img_0202.jpg