By John Semmens — Semi-News — A Satirical Look at Recent News

The saga of ailing toddler Alfie Evans has thoroughly discredited the United Kingdom’s National Health Service. According to the NHS, Alfie’s death “would be best for all concerned.” His parents’ efforts to prevent this outcome with the assistance of humanitarians outside of the NHS have been thwarted with the connivance of the UK’s courts.

It’s not a question of the parents insisting that the NHS provide care that the NHS considers inappropriate and futile. The parents haven’t asked for anything more than to take their son out of the Alder Hey Hospital and take advantage of Bambino Gesu Hospital’s offer to treat the boy at no expense to the NHS. Nonetheless, the hospital has gone to court and received a judgment that awards it custody of the child. Pursuant to this judgment, the hospital pulled the plug on Alfie. The expected demise of the lad failed to transpire.

One would think that now little Alfie could be allowed to leave the hospital with his parents. “Not so fast,” says Justice Anthony Hayden. “A lot of people protesting what we are doing are confused. If we release Alfie to his parents we lose control over the ‘end of life’ procedure that all the NHS doctors assure me is the only appropriate course. The issue is bigger than the life of one boy. Our society has decided to grant the NHS complete authority over all health-related matters. The NHS has ruled that it is in Alfie’s best interest to die. As long as the boy remains in their hands we can be certain that this outcome will be achieved. Letting him loose endangers this outcome.”

“Opponents of the NHS put sympathy for this one child ahead of the collective interests of society,” Hayden explained. “Let’s suppose that we did let the parents take charge. What’s the risk? Well, if by some miracle Alfie were to survive outside the NHS system citizens’ faith in the NHS could be negatively impacted. Pressures could arise for others to try to opt out of the NHS. This is the path toward anarchic individualism—a social philosophy that UK voters have soundly rejected in numerous elections. Avoidance of such a catastrophe is paramount. If the price of avoiding the chaos this would bring is the death of one boy and the suffering of his parents I’d say it is worth paying. I’m confident that my more insightful countrymen will come to the same conclusion.”

Meanwhile, Merseyside Police Chief Inspector Chris Gibson has announced that “we are monitoring social media and will prosecute any malicious communications that besmirch the doctors, hospital, or courts for the decisions made in the Alfie Evans matter. Their decisions are final. No useful social purpose can be served by needlessly criticizing something that cannot be changed. Loyal British subjects need to know their place and to respect and obey their betters.”

Planned Parenthood Sues to Stop Onerous Regulations

On behalf of Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky, the ACLU has filed a lawsuit contesting these states imposition of unwanted regulations. ACLU spokesperson Bertram Petty described these states’ oversight as “onerous, intrusive, and crippling. It is a blatant attempt to drive Planned Parenthood out of the medical marketplace.”

The onerous regulations include requirements that “facilities must meet minimum sanitation standards. The staff must be qualified to perform the procedures used, including how to handle emergency equipment. Patients must be monitored after anesthesia. Follow-up care for complications and infection control must be in place. Informed consent must be obtained and documented.” To enforce these regulations, “clinics are required to undergo an annual safety inspection by the Department of Health.”

Petty objected that “making continued state funding contingent on meeting arbitrary and meddlesome bureaucratic make-work rules violates civilized norms. In 1973 the US Supreme Court granted women the right to abort their unwanted offspring. States have no authority to interfere with this right. That they would do so under the pretense of protecting public health is reprehensible.”

Dems Insist Social Media Not Mistreating Conservatives

Despite the appearance of numerous witnesses and statistics indicating that FaceBook, Google, and Twitter use algorithms that have diverted traffic away from conservative voices, Democrats at the House Judiciary Committee hearing examining the “Filtering Practices of Social Media Platforms” asserted that it’s a “hoax” and that “it is a legitimate business practice to prevent unauthorized use of the media for politically unacceptable purposes.”

Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) argued that “hiding the posts and texts of persons expressing incorrect views is not censorship. The posts are still in the system. Conservatives have not been blocked from having their say. For Republicans to raise this non-issue is a hoax to distract from the very real crimes committed by Donald Trump—first to collude with Russia to seize power from the eminently more qualified Democratic candidate and second, his refusal to resign after his nefarious scheme was exposed by the heroic actions of FBI Director James Comey, Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, and now special counsel Robert Mueller.”

Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif) called the Republican complaints “stupid and ridiculous. The First Amendment guarantees these media outlets the right to censor the content as they see fit. The government has no legitimate cause to pry into why or how they do this. In fact, even publicly raising the issue, as is being done in this hearing, is an attempt at intimidation. Exposing this completely legal censorship to open scrutiny could reduce traffic on these sites and cut into their profits. That is an abuse that should not be tolerated.”

Rep. Hank Johnson (D-GA) mocked witnesses “Diamond” and “Silk,” two pro-Trump posters, for “your gall in saying you’ve been treated unfair. Before social media existed no one ever would have heard of you two nobodies. Now, just because FaceBook tried to limit your abuse of their platform you’ve got a beef? You say that Black Lives Matter gets a better deal. Well, maybe they have a message that needs to be heard. Trump’s a billionaire, why don’t you get him to pay you to push his agenda?”

Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn), herself a victim of Twitter blocking her pro-life campaign tweet last year, challenged the notion that “censorship of one side of political debates is okay. These businesses advertise themselves as a way for all people to communicate. For them to subsequently, and often covertly, impede access for views the corporate honchos dislike is a deceptive business practice. The hypocrisy of my Democratic colleagues who have no qualms about having the government forcibly take money from taxpayers in order to fund abortions they oppose for moral and religious reasons as a defense of these deceptive businesses is stunning.”

In related news, Breitbart News reporter Warner Todd Huston had his Twitter account suspended after he tweeted his opinion that transgender people suffer from mental illness. Jack Dorsey, co-founder and CEO of Twitter, explained “not all opinions are worthy of being heard. As the inventor and owner of Twitter it is my prerogative to decide which opinions will be permitted on my platform. If people like Mr. Huston think they can defy me with impunity they are the ones suffering from mental illness.”

Mayor Blames Street Violence on Businesses

Baltimore Mayor Catherine Pugh blamed the City’s surging murder rate on local businesses. “First of all, most of this City’s retail businesses are open too late,” she lamented. “Keeping your doors open after dark is asking for trouble. This is a time when people should be at home with their families and not be forced to go out to buy things.”

“Second, their prices are too high,” she continued. “If merchandise didn’t cost so much people wouldn’t be forced to commit crimes just to be able to afford groceries and liquor. It shouldn’t surprise us that people would use the cover of darkness to rob the businesses or kill customers who come out late to shop.”

“In an ideal world all property would be collectively produced and owned,” the Pugh envisioned. “Then there would be such a surplus of goods and services that stealing would no longer be necessary to survive. Most people wouldn’t have to work and could pick up whatever they needed from government distribution centers during daylight hours.”

The mayor regretted that “I don’t have an answer yet on how we get from here to that ideal world. I did hear that California is experimenting with the decriminalization of theft. Maybe if just taking whatever you want from whoever has it is legal then there would be a fairer distribution and less fighting over it.”

In related news, Marquette University Professor Jodi Melamed delivered a lecture at St. Olaf College where she argued that individual liberties are the cause of social violence. “The only ethically sound social system is communism,” she contended. “Under communism all property belongs to the collective and everyone is free to meet their needs by drawing on this communal wealth. It is the resistance of those under the delusion that they are individuals that leads to trouble when they selfishly hoard more than they need. Naturally, those seeking a more equitable distribution are forced to wrest the hoarded wealth from their oppressors. If blood has to be shed for them to get what they deserve it is not their fault.”

A Satirical Look at Recent News

John Semmens is a retired economist who has written a weekly political satire for The Arizona Conservative since 2005. He says working on his satires is one of the ways he tries to honor the liberties our Founding Fathers tried to protect.

Please do us a favor. If you use material created by The Arizona Conservative, give us credit and DO NOT change the context. Thank you.

By John Semmens — Semi-News — A Satirical Look at Recent News

Fired for “lack of candor,” former deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe is set to sue the Trump administration for “wrongful termination.” Michael Bromwich, McCabe’s lawyer, cited former FBI Director James Comey’s book—A Hired Loyalty—as confirmation that “my client getting fired for lying contradicts the Agency’s ethical standards so clearly laid out by Mr. Comey.”

In his book and interviews since its publication, Comey has admitted “lying when circumstances require it. Everyone in the DOJ has lied when necessary to nail a criminal for which we lacked the evidence to prosecute or to protect confidential sources. Take current Special Counsel Bob Mueller, for example. There was a time in his career when he found it necessary to convict four innocent men to prevent informant Whitey Bulger’s identity from being outed. That was a strategically designed sacrifice in the pursuit of a higher justice. It didn’t make Mueller a bad person. Likewise, the lies I have told in my efforts to try to block a man who is morally unfit to be this nation’s president don’t make me a bad person.”

“Mr. Trump’s characterization of my client as a ‘leaker’ and a ‘liar’ are defamatory,” Bromwich argued. “It is a blatant attempt to use instances of normal FBI procedures to smear Mr. McCabe’s reputation and, thereby, deny him the millions of dollars in pension benefits to which his years of service entitle him.”

McCabe himself laughed off Inspector General Horowitz’s criminal referral, saying “FBI deputies don’t go to jail. We send other people to jail. This is how it’s always been since the days of J. Edgar and will continue to be for as long as the Agency exists.” Well, maybe not. Former FBI agent Terry Albury is headed to prison for leaking classified information on the Agency’s racially discriminatory hiring practices to the media last year.

Dems Sue Trump for “Wrongful Election Victory”

Unsatisfied with the lack of results from Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s year-long investigation of Trump-Russia collusion to steal the 2016 presidential election from Hillary Clinton, the Democratic National Committee filed a lawsuit demanding billions of dollars in damages and a “rectification” of the election results. In addition to Trump, the suit also named Russia and Wikileaks as co-conspirators in what DNC Chairman Tom Perez called “an act of unimaginable treachery.”

While not part of the suit, per se, Perez expressed “our profound disappointment with the actions of our government. We counted on them to prevent the election of Trump as president. Yes, the FBI stifled any criminal inquiry into Secretary Clinton’s mishandling of her email system. Yet, they didn’t stifle news of her aides erasing files and smashing cell phones. FBI Director Comey’s attempt to sell this behavior as merely careless lacked credibility and served to critically damage her campaign.”

“The Wikileaks publication of confidential correspondence disclosing how the DNC rigged the primary against Sen. Sanders was a vital cog in the machinery working to deny the election of the most qualified person to ever seek the presidency,” Perez contended. “Given the vast resources and opportunity to neutralize the evil genius hiding in the Ecuadorean Embassy in London, we are mystified that this one man wasn’t eliminated either before he could do his dirty work, or afterward as an example to others. Now, we are hoping our suit will bankrupt this disruptive entity.”

“The key remedy we are seeking is for the court to reverse the outcome of the 2016 election and invalidate all of the legislation and executive actions taken by the wrongfully seated Trump.” Perez said. “Skeptics say this remedy is unprecedented. Even if that were true, justice would still demand it. But there is precedent for vacating a victory and awarding it to the second-place finisher in collegiate athletics when it is shown that the on-the-field winner cheated. So, it shouldn’t be viewed as such a stretch to apply that remedy in our case.”

As for co-conspirator Russia, Perez predicted “that will take care of itself once a President Clinton replaces Trump in the Oval Office. She has had a lot of experience punishing those who have done her wrong. If the full powers of the presidency are put at her disposal I wouldn’t want to be in Putin’s shoes. We’re confident she’ll get more than the customary ‘pound of flesh’ out of him and the country he rules.”

In related news, Comey said if he could go back in time and change anything he would have “prevented Anthony Weiner from being born. Despite my best efforts, this sex pervert undermined my extraordinary actions aimed at smoothing the transition from the Obama Presidency to the Clinton Presidency. His very existence changed history in a very negative way.”

NY Guv Has Identity Crisis

Nervous that left-wing loon and former “Sex and the City” star Cynthia Nixon will oust him in the Democratic primary this coming September, Gov. Andrew Cuomo is trying to convince voters that he is all things to all people. In saner eras, the standard Democratic ploy was to promise an array of government-funded goodies to constituents. Now, though, Cuomo seems determined to persuade the gullible that he is “a Muslim, a Jew, a gay, a woman, a transgender, a criminal, an undocumented immigrant—I am every person, except a straight white male, and am the most perfect candidate to represent this great state as its governor.”

In a bid to prove he is “not all talk and no action,” Cuomo unilaterally granted 35,000 convicted felons the right to vote after the state legislature declined to change existing state law that bars felons from voting. “Sometimes a law is just plain wrong,” the Governor asserted. “I’m not the kind of guy who will sit around and wait for the legislative process to work if it’s not getting the job done.”

The mechanism the Governor has settled on is to grant every parolee a pardon as soon as he is released from prison. Richard Azzopardi, a spokesman for the governor, called the move “limited in scope. We’re not totally restoring all their civil rights. We’re only restoring their right to vote.”

Nixon wondered “why should Democratic voters accept such a poseur? My opponent is none of the identities he is trying to claim. I am actually both gay and a woman. I do find it telling that the only concrete action he IS taking is not on behalf of oppressed law-abiding minorities, but usurping legislative authority to reward persons who have been convicted of preying upon innocent victims.”

Numerous undocumented immigrants in the state also expressed outrage at the Governor’s claims. One of them asking not to be identified by name said “his parents weren’t immigrants, his family wasn’t poor, and he has no idea what it’s like to be undocumented. He will not be getting my vote.”

Tech Rivals Tout Surveillance Visions

Facebook Deputy Chief Privacy Officer Rob Sherman boasted that his firm “will force users to accept being tracked everywhere they go. That’s just the way it is. This decision was not made in the interest of the users of Facebook, but explicitly to ensure maximum profits for the company. Our business model is based on inducing our users to freely provide us detailed personal information, which we then sell to the highest bidders. It’s a virtual license to print money. Why should we stop?”

Sherman dismissed the possibility that customers would be turned off by FaceBook’s pervasive invasion of privacy. “Privacy is an antisocial concept,” he maintained. “It may have had its uses in an earlier era, but today everyone wants to be someone. Putting all their personal data on the web is a convenient and inexpensive way to to that. The lure of being a social media celebrity is too tempting for the modern generation to resist. The fact that we have over two billion active FaceBook users proves that.”

Not to be outdone, Microsoft’s Bill Gates touted his EarthNow initiative as a more powerful surveillance tool by pointing out “unlike FaceBook, it doesn’t require anyone to opt in before we can begin tracking them. Our network of orbiting satellites can track anyone anywhere on the planet. We will know where you are. Who you’re with. We can track your movements 24/7. No one will escape our scrutiny.”

“I see a day when society can monitor the globe to instantaneously identify unacceptable behaviors, words, and attitudes and dispatch intervention teams to rescue people from deviancy,” Gates envisioned. “People could be treated, therapies and medications administered as needed to prevent social isolation and nonconformity. Loneliness would become one of the afflictions that could finally be cured.”

Brown Vows Revenge on Anti-Sanctuary Cities

Now that the second largest county in California has joined a growing list of cities opposing the state’s sanctuary policies, an irate Gov. Jerry Brown (D) has vowed “to take vengeance on these lowlifes.” The spark provoking this promise came when the San Diego County Board of Supervisors voted to direct the county attorney to file a friend-of-the-court brief supporting the Trump Administration’s lawsuit against the state’s attempt to flout federal immigration laws.

“If these people thought they’ve had it tough before paying for the medical, education, and welfare needs of our undocumented immigrants, I want them to know that it will get much worse if their elected officials continue to defy me,” Brown threatened. “I’ve already ordered 400 National Guard troops to go to the border and make sure it stays open. We will import the voters needed to ensure that pliable boards and city councils replace recalcitrant GOP-led obstructionists. Resistance is futile. All will be absorbed or exterminated. The choice is theirs. I urge them to choose wisely.”

A sign that Brown may have overestimated his mandate to convert California into Norte Mexico came from a most unlikely source this week. The University of California Berkeley’s Haas Institute for a Fair and Inclusive Society’s poll of California voters found 59% in favor of increased deportations of illegal immigrants—a finding that the Governor characterized as “a transient majority that is already on its way to being overturned.”

In other California news, Fresno State University President Joseph Castro has awarded Professor Lars Maischak a paid vacation for advocating that President Trump “be hanged to save American democracy.” Castro explained that “while Dr. Maischak’s words may seem harsh to the ill-educated constituency that supports Trump, he was only voicing what we all believe to be true. Right-wing rabble rousers are demanding he be punished, but I am convinced that would be unwarranted. Our compromise solution was to put him on paid leave for the remainder of the semester. That way he is out of the classroom, but does not have to suffer any financial setbacks. We stopped short of giving him the raise and promotion that the majority of the faculty would have preferred.”

A Satirical Look at Recent News

John Semmens is a retired economist who has written a weekly political satire for The Arizona Conservative since 2005. He says working on his satires is one of the ways he tries to honor the liberties our Founding Fathers tried to protect.

Please do us a favor. If you use material created by The Arizona Conservative, give us credit and DO NOT change the context. Thank you.

By John Semmens — Semi-News — A Satirical Look at Recent News

The “tell all” book written by James Comey, the FBI Director fired by Trump on the advice of FBI Deputy Director Rod Rosenstein in May of 2017, was released to reviewers this week and will be released to the general public next week. In sum, the book tries to make the case that Trump is “unfit to govern.”

“What most people don’t realize is that Trump is much shorter than me,” the Ex-FBI Director wrote. “I’m 6′ 8” and he is only 6′ 3”. That’s a whole five inches shorter. And that’s not his only five-inch shortage. I peeked in the men’s room and by my reckoning Trump’s schlong is at least five inches shorter than mine. If voters had known this prior to his election I don’t think they would’ve pulled the lever for such a woefully undermanned candidate.”

Other startling revelations from Comey’s book included his observation that “up close, the President appears to be unpleasantly fat and disturbingly orange. These are not the attributes of a leader of the free world. The regrettable ascension of Trump to this nation’s highest office is a big step down from the impeccably dressed and impressively svelte Barack Obama who so gracefully occupied this august position for an incredibly fulfilling and amazing eight years, racking up triumph after triumph in the eyes of the world.”

Comey contrasted what he called “Trump’s unethical and untethered to the truth values” with “President Obama’s scandal-free reign. Trump is at odds with the values and beliefs of everyone who has been a member of the elite that has governed this country for generations. It is fortunate that embedded members of this elite, including myself until I was fired, have been able to leak details of this man’s disturbing deviation from accepted norms since his wrongful electoral seizure of power. We can only hope that the continued resistance of these patriots will be enough to undo the mistake voters made by electing Trump.”

Interestingly, Comey admitted that he made the decision to exonerate Hillary Clinton for her illegal use of an unsecure off-site email system aimed at hiding her illicit monetization of her power as the US Secretary of State “so as not to taint her presidency. All the polls showed that she would win handily. I felt it would be bad for the country if her illegal activities were permitted to cloud her inevitable administration. Once the unthinkable happened and Trump won, I did whatever I could to try to rectify this catastrophe.”

President Trump said he was “surprised that Comey would so eagerly boast that he illegally leaked classified information, derailed an FBI investigation into Hillary’s crimes, and used an unverified political hit piece to dupe the FISA Court to approve spying on my campaign. Usually criminals try to hide their crimes. That he would be so brazen and that the fake news media would be so excessive in their praise of these criminal acts is an outrage.”

In related news, the Yale Law School announced the creation of a fund honoring the legacy of 1973 graduate Hillary Clinton. The announcement was hailed by former classmate Guy Swindel who said “I think starting a fund to accumulate money in Clinton’s name would be a fitting tribute to someone who has been amazingly successful in enriching herself from the generosity of supporters and her skillful wielding of the various public offices she has held. No one else, to my knowledge, has done as much with as little personal effort or integrity.”

FaceBook CEO Testifies, Apologizes to Congress

FaceBook CEO Mark Zuckerberg underwent two days of interrogation before members of the House and Senate looking into his firm’s invasion of privacy and political misuse of personal information. The tech wiz apologized for “allowing this information to fall into the wrong hands” and vowed to “introduce procedures to prevent any recurrence of the tragic event that befell the nation on November 8th 2016.”

In an effort to persuade members of Congress that “we are on the case,” Zuckerberg cited a couple of recent measures he said “will hopefully purge dangerous content from using FaceBook to promote antisocial attitudes and policies.” The first example, he cited was “banning the posting of a crucifix on the FaceBook page of the Franciscan University of Steubenville. This image of what can only be adequately described as ‘torture porn’ is the type of abuse of our platform that we will work very hard to eliminate going forward.”

The second example Zuckerberg offered up “was our ban of the unsafe posts put on FaceBook by Diamond and Silk. I know that these fans of Donald Trump believe they are exercising their freedom of speech, but I want to assure Congress that this alleged freedom doesn’t extend to hate speech that makes other users of our platform feel uncomfortable. Not only was there the potential of psychological harm, there was also the possibility of physical harm if those offended by the posts took to the streets to vandalize buildings, beat up political opponents, or confront police. At FaceBook we don’t remain passive under a delusion that we should remain neutral when improper ideas are voiced. We take a proactive approach to nip them in the bud. My biggest regret is that we didn’t take this strong stance prior to the 2016 election.”

Zuckerberg brushed aside criticism that FaceBook’s censoring of the two minority women might be construed as “racist,” saying that “race is not just a skin color. It also embodies an internal attitude and an external pattern of behavior that either is or isn’t authentic. Clearly, no authentic black person would be a political supporter of Trump. Diamond and Silk are obviously suffering from a false consciousness. By blocking their political delusions we are actually trying to help them get back on track with the vast majority of their racial peers.”

In related news, fellow tech tycoon Jack Dorsey, CEO of Twitter, gave a “thumbs up” to an article calling for Republicans to be wiped out in a new “Civil War.” According to the article written by Peter Leyden, “the Republican party is now so morally indefensible on every level that it is equivalent to the Confederacy of 1861. It deserves to be pounded into submission or oblivion just like Jefferson Davis and Robert E. Lee and their r4edneck minions were.”

Economy Continues to Be Battered by Tax Cut Law

News that US corporations expect the recently completed first quarter of 2018 to be the “best ever” has reignited Democrat promises to repeal the tax cut enacted late last year.

Vermont Socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders called the news “supremely depressing. To think that a democratically elected legislature could take such a heartless action to endorse the heightened expropriation of the surplus value of labor that Marx demonstrated is owed to the working class is shameful. It is essential that voters elect a socialist majority this Fall so Congress can repeal this abomination.”

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif) pledged “to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with my good friend Bernie in the fight for social justice. It’s bad enough that corporations are gorging on the money that rightfully belongs to the working class. Worse, the tax cut has pushed even more Americans into the workforce against their will. The Department of Labor has just reported that the number of people receiving unemployment benefits is at a 44-year low. In November, voters will have a stark and clear cut choice between the Republican scheme to put everyone into wage slavery for the profit of big business or the Democratic promise of freedom from toil. It’s as simple as that.”

Well, maybe it isn’t as simple as Pelosi imagines. The Congressional Budget Office just released an updated budget forecast admitting that previous analyses had underestimated the positive impact of the tax cuts on economic growth and prosperity. “At this juncture it looks like the tax cuts may well pay for themselves with the extra income coming from expanded economic activity throughout the economy. This means that taxpayers may enjoy more money in their pockets without the government suffering from a larger deficit.”

In related news, Jesse Jackson denounced Kroger’s closing of unprofitable stores in minority neighborhoods as “rascist. We must no longer tolerate businesses using the excuse that insufficient sales justifies shutting down operations. It’s past time that we move beyond the capitalistic notion that profit is necessary if a business is to survive. If stores in certain neighborhoods have too few customers the appropriate response is for the government to step in and either subsidize those stores or take them over and run them for people, not profit.”

ACLU Praises Breach of “Attorney Client Privilege”

This week in an unprecedented move, Special Counsel Robert Mueller engineered a raid on President Trump’s long-time lawyer Michael Cohen that seized all of his files and documents. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) lauded this piercing of the President’s and Cohen Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and denial of due process, calling them “warranted exceptions.”

As ACLU spokesman Bertram Petty explained “the Bill of Rights is intended to protect innocent people from tyrannical abuses. In this case, everyone agrees that Trump and his associates are ‘bad hombres’ and as such, not entitled to any rights that might impede prosecution for their misdeeds.”

“When a knowledgeable person like former FBI Director James Comey characterizes Trump as akin to a ‘mob boss’ that is all the ‘probable cause’ needed to justify the seizure of any and all evidence that might prove his or his goons’ guilt,” Petty contended. “The early leaks of the content of some of the documents seized indicates that Cohen has acted on numerous occasions to payoff persons blackmailing his clients. For example, Cohen negotiated a payment of $1.6 million to a former Playboy model who who claimed she was impregnated by Republican National Committee deputy finance chairman Elliott Broidy. While paying off blackmailers is not per se illegal we think that this information has political value and that denying the general public and the Democratic Party access to such information is unfair and potentially a violation of campaign finance statutes.”

Petty argued that “the FBI’s assurance that the violation of the Fourth Amendment is for good cause and its promise that the Agency will adhere to its own procedural standards before leaking any of the information extracted from Mr. Cohen’s confidential files ought to be sufficient justification for this unusual and extraordinary action. We must be flexible in our interpretation of the Constitution. Rigid conformity to a simplistic principle ought not to block the pursuit of a broader concept of justice.”

In related news, FBI Deputy Director Rod Rosenstein explained the Agency’s forecast that it would be at least three years before it releases the anti-Thump communications between agent Peter Strzok and FBI lawyer Lisa Page because “we need to be sure that the statute of limitations for all the criminal acts of these two employees have expired. This is the Agency’s normal procedure for guarding FBI staff from legal liability that could affect their pensions and/or their freedom.”

Planned Parenthood Calls Legislation Racist

Planned Parenthood complained that two new laws enacted in Tennessee to deny tax payer funding for abortions “hurt women of color.” Sarah Wallet, the medical director for Planned Parenthood of Greater Memphis, asserted “this legislation is racist. Women of color are especially dependent on government funding for their abortions. To deny them access to public monies for this purpose does them irreparable harm.”

Though the legislation does not block abortions financed by organizations or individuals using non-government sources of funding, Wallet was still adamant in her objections. “The original mission of Planned Parenthood as envisioned by founder Margaret Sanger was to provide an inexpensive means for reducing the population of eugenically inferior stock,” Wallet pointed out. “Obviously, people of color are disproportionately represented in this undesirable contingent of humanity. Government funding is vital to ensuring the widest measure of success for her vision.”

Critics of abortion have pointed out that the procedure has been responsible for more black deaths than any other human action since 1973. Wallet, however, rejected this line of argument, saying that “in our view, the termination of a pregnancy is not a death, but a mere extraction of unwanted fetal tissue. To deny black women the benefit of government aid in the procurement of an abortion clearly puts them at a disadvantage compared to white women. This violates the ‘created equal’ clause of the Constitution that we are confident the courts will reaffirm when we sue to block this new law.”

A Satirical Look at Recent News

John Semmens is a retired economist who has written a weekly political satire for The Arizona Conservative since 2005. He says working on his satires is one of the ways he tries to honor the liberties our Founding Fathers tried to protect.

Please do us a favor. If you use material created by The Arizona Conservative, give us credit and DO NOT change the context. Thank you.

By John Semmens — Semi-News — A Satirical Look at Recent News

Irked at the prospect that President Trump may send US troops to guard the border against illegal immigration, the Mexican Senate unanimously passed a resolution that would end the bilateral cooperation between US and Mexican law enforcement agencies against the violent drug cartels that have run rampant along the border.

President of the Senate, Pablo Escudero Mora defended the seemingly irrational move as “totally justified given the long history of US aggression toward our country. First they seized Texas. Then they invaded Mexico and forced us to cede California, and what are now Arizona and New Mexico to them. Now, in an unwarranted effort to prevent migrants who merely seek to settle in what were once Mexican lands, Trump wants to militarize the border. We say enough is enough.”

Escudero acknowledged that “these gangs are hurting many Mexicans, but they are also helping to smuggle immigrants across the border. In addition they are bringing in cash from drugs they sell to rich Americans. This helps our economy, which is more than Trump has done for us. While we wish these cartels wouldn’t murder so many of our citizens, these gangs are the lesser evil compared to the Devil that is the United States.”

“An amusing irony of this whole situation is that policies of the previous US Administration actually augmented the armament of these gangs.” Escudero chuckled. “A lot of their weapons were supplied by US covert operatives in the hope that it would spark voter demands for more gun control regulations. So, any atrocities that are committed on Americans by these gangs will be partially self-inflicted. That’s got to bring a smile to the face of every Mexican patriot.”

In related news, the State of California has issued more than a million driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants. The licenses may be used to allow these immigrants to cast ballots in state and local elections. State Attorney General Xavier Becerra hailed the milestone, calling it “a historic step toward California’s eventual independence or reunification with Mexico. We will break free of the chains imposed by the backward regime of Donald Trump and forge a new destiny for the people of our state.”

Dems Split on Tax Cut Repeal

Democrat Party leadership is not united in its plans for the recently passed tax cut. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif) pledged to repeal the cuts, saying that “the crumbs that Trump and the GOP selfishly tried to withhold from the government will be taken back and amalgamated into a large pool of resources to fund vitally needed government programs.”

Among the programs mentioned by Pelosi were “an expansion of regulations to more effectively monitor behavior so government can guide private individuals toward a more socially conscious lifestyle” and “a long overdue increase in salaries for government employees, who are the crucial actors in transforming the country into the progressive society promised by President Obama.”

Democratic National Committee Vice Chairman, Rep. Keith Ellison (Minn) disagreed, saying that “I don’t think it would be wise for us to overtly campaign in favor of repealing the tax cuts. Those of us on the inside know that the government can make better use of that money than private individuals can. But I think baldly telling people this like House Minority Leader Pelosi wants to do is foolish. There is a principle in my faith called taqiya that urges dissimulation in the face of one’s enemies. We need to convey a more sympathetic attitude toward taxpayers during the campaign. After we win we can start to talk about how we can wrest that money out of their hands.”

In related news, the socialist paradise of Venezuela, where food shortages have enabled citizens to achieve weight losses averaging 24 lbs. per person during the last year, saw Minister of Education Elías Jaua chastise “the enemies of the revolution who are over eating. Everywhere you look you see empty supermarket shelves. How can the government ensure a ready supply of food if people keep eating it? Unlike capitalist countries, our laws entitle our people to have access to food. However, too many anti-social traitors are abusing this right by consuming more than they need.”

FaceBook Admits “Invasion of Privacy”

Facebook’s chief operating officer, Sheryl Sandberg, publicly admitted that “our company’s invasion of our clients’ privacy probably rates a score of 10 out of 10 for being as complete a betrayal as possible.” Despite this colossal failure, Sandberg insisted that CEO Mark “Zuckerberg’s public apology ought to be penance enough. Look, we’re with the good guys. We allowed President Obama to use our massive data to get reelected in 2012. Obviously, in hindsight, the Cambridge Analytica deal was a mistake.”

“In our defense, the amount of data we sold to Cambridge Analytica was tiny compared to what we freely gave to Obama,” Sandberg explained. “With all the polls showing Hillary with a commanding lead we thought we could make a buck without damaging her election chances. It turned out we were wrong, but we weren’t the only ones. Everybody was sure she would win in a landslide. It isn’t fair to make us the scapegoat for the unforeseen outcome of the 2016 election.”

Sandberg insisted “we are going the extra mile to try to make up for the damage. We already scan the contents of every user’s posts and messages looking for anti-social attitudes. For example, we already flag any user posts of articles from Breitbart as ‘intentionally misleading.’ And we’re developing new algorithms that we believe will do a better job of excluding socially unacceptable content from being promulgated through our platform. So far, we’ve achieved a modicum of success. Pro-Trump messages have been reduced by nearly 50%. But we’re not going to say we’re satisfied. I think we can get a lot closer to 100% if we keep up our effort.”

In the wake of this scandal, a new policy FaceBook is implementing is to charge a fee to subscribers who want to opt out of the company’s data-driven exploitation of users’ personal information. Sandberg likened this to “the kind of distinction you see in cable and satellite TV. If you don’t want to be hounded by advertisers who know your weaknesses you’re going to have to pay for that privilege like you would for HBO or Showtime.”

As a prelude to his upcoming Congressional testimony, Zuckerberg has been assiduously deleting his FaceBook files. Unlike other users of the FaceBook platform, Zuckerberg is able to delete copies of those files that appear on any other FaceBook user’s page. The CEO said he was “confident I’ll be able to do a more complete job than Secretary Clinton was able to do with her emails. Unlike her, I am not technologically inept. I don’t think I’ll have to resort to busting up any devices with a hammer.”

Hillary Claims Credit for #MeToo Movement

This week, former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton claimed credit for accelerating the #MeToo Movement. “If I hadn’t lost the election none of this awakening to the the widespread sexual harassment that has plagued women in this country would have come to light,” she asserted.

“Harvey Weinstein—case zero—in the exposure of the sexual harassment epidemic was a great supporter of me and donor to the Democratic Party,” Clinton pointed out. “As president, in order to repay his loyalty and generosity to the Party, I would have protected him from the assault on his character launched by the former victims of his lewd behavior, just like I tried to protect Bill from the allegations made by his victims. So, in a way, it could be said that my defeat removed the possibility that I could use the power of the presidency to impede the exposure of Harvey’s unsavory history. It’s unfair that I don’t get proper credit for my role in the movement to attain sexual justice.”

Putin Complains about Demonization of Stalin

Russian President Vladimir Putin denounced what he labeled “the excessive demonization of former Soviet dictator Josef Stalin. His methods may have been harsh by Western standards, but few can quibble with the results.” These “results” included the deaths of 15 million to 30 million Soviet citizens through executions, labor camps, avoidable famines and making the treaty with Germany that unleashed WW II.

“Few critics take into account the poverty and backwardness of the country Stalin inherited,” Putin contended. “Bringing the Soviet Union into the modern era required sacrifices. The millions who died in the Gulag would have died eventually, regardless. Their labors helped make the Soviet Union into a superpower. We should not discount that accomplishment.”

Putin even defended Stalin’s infamous non-aggression pact with Hitler by pointing out that “the Western powers were trying to get a pact with Germany, but refused to acquiesce to the partition of Poland. Stalin was less squeamish. As a result we got the alliance and it refocused the Nazi’s toward attacking France and England rather than attacking Russia, as Hitler vowed to do in Mein Kampf. This likely saved millions of Soviet lives and also netted us additional territories after the war was over.”

While a recent poll showed only 25% of Russians consider Stalin’s repressions justified, Putin pointed out that “this level of support is higher than most Westerners would have expected” and predicted that “as knowledge of Stalin’s crimes fades, popular support for his achievements will inevitably grow—like the respect for Islam has now that most have forgotten the massacres carried out in the jihad to spread the faith so many centuries ago.”

In related news, Putin claims that the recovery of ex-Russian spy Sergei Skripal “proves we are innocent. When we poison an enemy he does not recover. Remember Litvinenko? That’s what happens when those who know what they are doing are involved.”

A Satirical Look at Recent News

John Semmens is a retired economist who has written a weekly political satire for The Arizona Conservative since 2005. He says working on his satires is one of the ways he tries to honor the liberties our Founding Fathers tried to protect.

Please do us a favor. If you use material created by The Arizona Conservative, give us credit and DO NOT change the context. Thank you.

By John Semmens — Semi-News — A Satirical Look at Recent News

As proof that Trump’s policies are bad for the dynamic sectors of the economy that prospered under Obama, former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton cited her drastically reduced speaking fees. In a speech at Rutgers University in New Jersey this week her honorarium was only $25,000–$7,000 less than reality TV star Nicole “Snooki” Polizzi from the show Jersey Shore received from Rutgers for a 2011 appearance and $175,000 less than Clinton’s typical asking price before the 2016 election.

“The few thousand dollars in crumbs being awarded to middle class workers as a result of the tax cut legislation are dwarfed by the severe hardships inflicted on those of us who have to rely on speaking fees just to keep putting food on the table,” Clinton complained. “My ‘wage’ has been cut by nearly 90%. An economy that treats its best and brightest so shabbily is a discredit to the nation.”

The pay cut coming after what Clinton described as “my traumatic loss to the least qualified person to ever win a presidential race adds injury to insult. I’m hoping that voters will remember what I’ve had to suffer through and punish the Republicans at the ballot box. If we all work hard we can turn back from the unbridled selfish individualism that the GOP wants to force down our throats and renew the commitment to the progressive values of collectivism that President Obama tried to establish during his all-too-brief reign.”

Congresswoman Blames Lack of Training for Harassment

Rep. Elizabeth Esty (D-Conn) apologized for failing to protect female staff members from harassment by her former chief of staff Tony Baker and blamed “lack of proper training” for the abuses, which included allegations of “punching” and “death threats.”

“Much to my dismay, I discovered that punching and threatening staff members is not explicitly addressed in any legislation,” Esty said. “I will attempt to correct this, but can’t promise anything since Republicans control both houses of congress.

Meanwhile, of my own accord I will be requiring all my employees to complete training in harassment. Hopefully, this will move punching and threatening out of its current ‘gray area’ status and substantially reduce its frequency in my office. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to be as aggressive as I am in combating this problem.”

An unmentioned element of Esty’s “aggressive” handling of the problem was to recommend Baker for a job at Sandy Hook Promise, a nonprofit organization that was started after the deadly 2012 mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. Esty’s current chief of staff Timothy Daly explained that “the job recommendation and nondisclosure agreement were aimed at getting Baker out as quickly as possible with a minimum of negative publicity. If the Congresswoman had merely fired him who knows what kind of impact that would’ve had on her credibility and reelection chances.”

Retired Judge Calls for Repeal of 2nd Amendment

Former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens penned an op ed for the New York Times in which he argued that the Constitutional Amendment protecting a citizen’s right to bear firearms should be repealed.

“When we examine the circumstances under which the 2nd Amendment was adopted it seems clear to me that it was unnecessary on the day it was adopted,” Stevens wrote. “At the time, the United States was less than a decade removed from a desperate battle for independence from a government that oppressed those living in what were then British colonies. One of the tactics the British government used was to strictly control and sometimes confiscate firearms. In fact, the battles at Concord and Lexington in 1975 were sparked by fears that British troops were about to confiscate the colonists’ guns.”

“By 1789, the British overlords had been defeated and expelled,” Stevens continued. “It was replaced by a government by, of, and for the people. Those running this new government were elected by the people. Consequently, there were no longer any grounds for fearing a tyrannical foreign power would oppress them. The need for every man to be armed was no longer present. It seems likely that even in the absence of the 2nd Amendment that people’s government would have permitted those who needed firearms to hunt or fend off hostile Indians to possess them.”

“Today, the vast majority of Americans live urban lives,” Stevens went on. “The need to hunt to obtain food is nonexistent and the Indians no longer pose a mortal threat. Meanwhile, the widespread ownership of personal firearms complicates the government’s ability to police society. If the 2nd Amendment were repealed the government would be liberated from this archaic infringement on its authority.

Under our democracy, the government is the people. There is no risk of oppression and every need for the government to set sensible limits on who has access to guns.”
President Trump branded Stevens’ op ed as “foolish and poorly conceived.

Individuals’ bearing arms serves as a check on the power of government to do them ill. In countries where the citizens don’t have this right the government can ride roughshod over them, like Hitler did. You’d think that the Democrats who frequently compare me to Hitler would be wary of removing citizens’ ability to deter government tyranny. Luckily, the people of America are too smart to surrender this right. The 2nd Amendment will never be repealed.”

In related news, Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn) and Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D-Fla) have introduced legislation to restrict access to ammunition. “Our bill will require that firearms users file a form requesting permission each time they want to reload their weapons,” Wasserman-Schultz said. “While this wouldn’t totally prevent victims from getting shot it will reduce the number of people that could be shot by each gun. If our bill had been in effect prior to Nikolas Cruz’s rampage it would have been limited the number of bullets he could’ve fired to a single clip. He wouldn’t have been able to kill 17 people.”

DNC Deputy Touts Minimum Income Idea

Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn), deputy chairman of the Democratic National Committee, endorsed the concept of government paying a minimum income to all citizens regardless of whether they work or not.

“A lot of things that people do don’t have a market value,” Ellison argued. “For example, as a Muslim, I am obligated to pray five times a day, go on a pilgrimage to Mecca, and wage jihad to spread the faith. As a member of Congress I have a generous salary and a small commitment of time I have to put in to earn this salary. Others aren’t so fortunate.”

“What we need to ask ourselves is whether we, as a society, should force a person to try to support himself by taking a low skilled job if it would interfere with his other higher priority obligations,” the Congressman posited. “Wouldn’t our lives be more meaningful if more of us were freed of the drudgery of wage slavery so we would be able to pursue these higher priorities?”

“A guaranteed minimum income might also assuage the justifiable anger many feel at the inequitable distribution of wealth in our country,” Ellison added. “Ideally, everything ought to be put into a common pot and divvied out based on need. But we’re not there yet intellectually or politically. The minimum income idea is a baby step toward that ideal.”

Dershowitz Criticizes Mueller Probe

Liberal Democrat lawyer Alan Dershowitz likened the Mueller probe into the Trump presidency to the type of legal tactics of the Soviet Union. “First off, ‘collusion’ is not a crime defined in statute,” he observed. “On top of this, the mandate given to Robert Mueller by Rod Rosenstein is unconstrained. Essentially, Mueller has been granted an unlimited budget and an unlimited amount of time to harass Trump in search of something to charge him with. This isn’t the way we want our justice system to work. It’s the way Stalin’s ‘justice’ system worked.”

Dershowitz maintains that “after a year on the job without finding evidence of any criminal activity by Trump the prosecution ought to drop the case. Signs that Mueller is now seeking to investigate Trump’s finances and sexual liaisons from long before the 2016 election are clearly what judges would label a ‘fishing expedition.’ Not only are the statutes of limitations long expired on any alleged infractions, we’re now into the ‘manufactured crimes’ of obstructing investigations for which there is no warrant for being undertaken.”

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif) disagreed with Dershowitz, contending that “sometimes existing law doesn’t adequately anticipate the crimes persons may commit. If we know a person is a bad actor we shouldn’t automatically preclude even the methods that may have been used by a regime that has been repeatedly sullied as a dictatorship. Remember, that ‘dictatorship’ was instrumental in defeating Hitler. So, clearly, that dictatorship was capable of doing the right thing even if its methods didn’t match America’s normal standards of justice.”

Chicago Mayor Rejects Poll

A recent poll indicating widespread disappointment with Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s performance was rebuffed by the Mayor who vowed to “fight to the bitter end to transform this city and make it worthy of the vision of a great and progressive society espoused by former President Obama.”

Among the polls findings was that only 18% of respondents said they would vote to reelect him vs. 34% saying they would vote to replace him and 36% saying they would consider voting for someone else. Sixty-nine percent said lack of “an honest or trustworthy city government” was a major problem with the Emanuel Administration. Eighty percent said they felt less safe than they did two years ago.

Emanuel’s campaign spokesman Peter Giangreco dismissed the poll. “It’s from the same pollster the Mayor sent a dead fish to a few years ago,” he reminded. “The people of this city know that the Mayor will do whatever it takes to stay on top. He is a master at exploiting crises for political advantage. Those who challenge him do so at their own risk.”

Madison Councilwoman Objects to Armed Bank Guards

After one of her constituents was killed while attempting to rob a bank, Madison, Wisconsin city councilwoman Amanda Hall called the shooting “unnecessary” and demanded “an alternate approach. What this looks like to me is we have a young man, who didn’t have the community support and the community opportunity to make a different choice with what he was going to do with his Thursday. And now he’s dead.”

“Allowing banks to deploy armed guards is a desperation measure that comes too late to achieve the best results,” Hall contended. “It foments an arms race between those who have money and those who need it. We could go into the question of whether any business has a moral right to use deadly force to impede the redistribution of wealth this country so urgently needs. For now, though, I’m saying that as a practical matter it would be better to ban this practice and replace it with a more humane approach.”

This “more humane” approach, according to Hall, “would entail educating and politically activating both the general public and young people to use their efforts to redistribute wealth via the political process. The fact that the bank involved in this shooting has been repeatedly robbed shouldn’t be used as an excuse to arm itself. It should be taken as a sign that there are inequities in the way that those who have can callously withhold from those who have not.”

The Councilwoman says she hopes that “we can use this tragedy to enlist voters to opt for social justice at the polls. If the have-nots of our society can have confidence that the government will seize the assets being hoarded by the haves and redistribute them more fairly they won’t have to take the individual initiative to rob banks themselves. With the law on their side the whole process would be more peaceful and just.”

An indication that Hall’s message is in tune with wider social trends is the Millennial generation’s lack of saving for retirement. Only a third have expressed any interest or intent to provide for their post-work years. As one young man explained, “capitalism will be gone by the time I’m old enough to retire. The government will control all the money. They will decide who lives and who dies. I’m just trying to have a good time while I can.” Surveys show that half of Millenials spend more on nights out than they do on rent and devote the majority of their income on impulse purchases based on social media fads. And why not? In New York City, the deBlasio administration has budgeted more than a billion dollars to house the homeless in hotels.

Census Plan Assailed by Democrats

The U.S. Census Bureau’s plan to include a citizenship question on the 2020 census spurred an outpouring of deranged rhetoric from assorted Democrats and their allies.

Tom Perez, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, incorrectly portrayed the plan as an attempt to “only count citizens” and contended it is a “voter suppression” strategy. “Combined with the Republican insistence that voters show IDs before they can cast a ballot, the citizenship question strikes at the very heart of the democratic ideal that every person—citizen or not—have a say in who rules over him.”

New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman vowed to lead a multi-state lawsuit aimed at stopping the added question. “Why does the federal government need to know who is or isn’t a citizen?” he asked. “Since a person doesn’t have to be a citizen to get a driver’s license, to get medical care, to go to school, or receive welfare benefits the answer to such a question serves no legitimate public purpose.”

California Attorney General Xavier Becerra called the question “an attack on our state’s right to grant sanctuary to those in the country without permission. Once word gets around that citizenship will be questioned the undocumented immigrants will avoid census takers and not be counted. The state and the urban areas where most of the immigrants live will get fewer congressional districts and Democrats will lose votes in the House of Representatives. This both illegal and unconstitutional.”

In related news, Utah senatorial candidate Mitt Romney kicked off his campaign with the assertion that he is tougher on immigration than President Trump. “Trump is totally focused on keeping illegal immigrants out,” Romney observed. “Well, we can’t win if we only play defense. If elected I will push for legislation to award grants for Americans to illegally enter Mexico and create the same kind of mayhem there that many of those who’ve illegally crossed into the U.S. have caused here.”

A Satirical Look at Recent News

John Semmens is a retired economist who has written a weekly political satire for The Arizona Conservative since 2005. He says working on his satires is one of the ways he tries to honor the liberties our Founding Fathers tried to protect.

Please do us a favor. If you use material created by The Arizona Conservative, give us credit and DO NOT change the context. Thank you.