Press "Enter" to skip to content

Posts published in August 2023

Day in, day out

August 8, 2023

The national media is a damned-site more interested in the "Trump-news-of-the-day" than we are at our house. I'd guess the same is true for the majority of Americans who regularly try to stay up-to-date on news-of-the-day.

National broadcast news has Trump leading almost every 'cast. The same's true for national print and online editions.

"Trump." "Trump." "Trump."

Not everything about Trump - which is being force-fed - is worth reporting. Not every little legal movement-of-the day is worth the lead or "top-of-the-fold" reporting everywhere.

At a Republican Party dinner Friday night in Alabama, Trump repeated his claims that the latest criminal case he faces is an "outrageous criminalization of political speech." He claimed his "enemies" were trying to stop him and his political movement with "an army of rabid, left-wing lawyers, corrupt and really corrupt Marxist prosecutors."

He also railed about "deranged government agents" and "rogue intelligence officers." He called the indictment "an act of desperation by a failed and disgraced, crooked Joe Biden and his radical left thugs to preserve their grip on power."
I'll give you the fact that -to our everlasting shame - the guy is a former - FORMER - President. Yes, he probably was a crook while sitting in the Oval Office. Yes, on paper, he may be a billionaire. And, he may not. And, yes, he may have been a local "personality" in New York City before he crept into the national spotlight.

But, he's now under more than 40 federal criminal - not civil - indictments to be sorted out in various courts. He's under active criminal investigation in several jurisdictions. And, recently discovered CC-TV tapes of his henchmen moving federally classified documents around his Florida home doesn't look good.

That's because Trump - and several of his legal types - have sworn there were no documents there - classified or otherwise -belonging to the feds. Which those closed circuit images reveal 'tain't true!

As state and federal jurisdictions close in, only his blind, mostly Fox-fed and Newsmax-fed supporters will continue to believe him.

But now, he's trying to go on offense. His "If-you're-coming-after-me, I'm-coming-after-you" threat of recent days is an apparent first effort. It's not likely federal folk involved are truly concerned about life-and-limb. But, it's also likely some protective actions are taking place in New York and Washington D.C.. And possibly Florida.

Here, in our little Northwest neighborhood, the non-stop, massive over-coverage of all things Trump seems media overkill. But, whatever your source of daily events, you may also feel at arm's-length from such regular media mayhem. The story may be important but we still go about our daily lives. And, there are other, sometimes equally important, events happening.

While wishing we could go about those activities without the constant "Trump beat," the fact is -innocent or guilty - it'll be years of coverage. There'll be trials, appeals, re-appeals and more trials on other charges waiting in the wings. Many of us won't live to see the end of Trump and other courtrooms scenarios. He may not, either.

Seems the best we can do is watch less - listen less - read less - and go about our business "above-the-fray." There really are other stories and other news being reported.

As for me and mine, we're down to one source. And, that's just fine.

 

The dreaded one-subject rule

August 7, 2023

Believe me, the last thing I want to do is drive readers to distraction by delving into an obscure and frequently ignored provision of Idaho’s Constitution. Article 3, section 16 of that revered document says that every legislative act “shall embrace but one subject and matters properly connected therewith.” The one-subject rule also applies to initiatives proposed by the people. It means you can’t combine two or more separate subjects into the same proposal. For example, it would clearly violate the one-subject rule for a bill to set both speed limits and property tax rules.

The Legislature does not always pay attention to the one-subject rule but, so long as nobody challenges their failure to comply in court, they get away with it. And violations can be either inadvertent, where nobody gives any thought to the rule, or deliberate, where someone places an unpopular provision in a bill that has broad support. Since every bill can be amended, the deliberate maneuver does not always work so well.

An example of a bill that could either have been inadvertent or deliberate is House Bill 782 in the 2022 session. It tied a stingy pay raise for judges under Title 59 of the Idaho Code to drastic changes in the method of selecting trial and appellate judges under Title 1 of the Code. Lawyers and judges were fearful that the changes would politicize the selection process. Unless those changes were made, the judges would be the only state employees not getting a 7% cost-of-living pay increase. The bill passed but, seeing the havoc it would create for judicial appointments, Governor Little vetoed it.

I apologize for bringing up this arcane and generally boring provision of the law, but Attorney General Labrador made me do it. Mr. Labrador has made it a central part of his strategy to oppose the Open Primaries Initiative. Like most other political observers, he must be aware that his only route to the Governor’s office is to keep the closed Republican primary in place. It gives a substantial edge to the most extreme candidate, as demonstrated in 2018 when Janice McGeachin won the GOP primary for Lt. Governor over four other more reasonable and pragmatic candidates. Under the plan in the Open Primary Initiative, she and three other candidates would have been on the general election ballot, resulting in the election of a more responsible Lt. Governor.

The 2022 legislative races are also illustrative. Since Republicans win about 80% of legislative races in Idaho, the winner in the Republican primary is usually the general election winner.  Dan Foreman won the Senate seat in the GOP primary in District 6  with 2,792 votes, just 8.8% of the registered primary voters. Chris Trakel took the Senate seat from Greg Chaney in District 11 with 1,908 votes from just 9.4% of the registered voters. Brian Lenney took the Senate seat from Jeff Agenbroad in District 13 with 3,162 votes cast by 12.7% of the registered voters. With the Open Primaries Initiative, Senators Jim Woodward, Carl Crabtree, Greg Chaney, Jeff Agenbroad and Jim Patrick and Reps. Paul Amador, Jim Addis and Scott Syme would likely have retained their seats. They were replaced by extremist GOP candidates.

Despite the fact that the Open Primaries Initiative is wholly consistent with the Idaho Constitution, Labrador has raised a number of specious constitutional arguments against it, including the one-subject rule. Labrador has shown a distaste for reasonably and correctly interpreting the law and has already made it clear that he will distort the law to serve his political ambitions. He is dead wrong on the one-subject rule because the initiative deals with just one subject–elections. Based on his argument, a peanut butter and jelly sandwich would be a two-subject sandwich.

Idahoans need to be conversant with the one-subject rule because Mr. Labrador and other Republicans in the extremist branch of the GOP will be blasting away at the Open Primaries Initiative based on this and other flimsy constitutional grounds. Their sole purpose is to mislead and confuse voters into voting no. If voters arm themselves with the truth, the misinformation campaign will fail.

 

Political speech goes how far?

August 6, 2023

When performance politics goes to court, seldom do we get many helpful answers, and no one wins, in a practical sense.

Unless you consider a $1 award to be a win.

The recently settled legal squabble between state Sen. Brian Boquist, I-Dalles, and the state Senate leadership was an opportunity for a federal court to set useful guidelines about what is and isn’t acceptable political speech. But that didn’t happen.

No one got much out of the lawsuit that has bounced around courtrooms for four years, reaching what may have been a final decision on July 17.

The core of it stems from a couple of viral quotes from Boquist, spawned from an incident that resembled performance politics: During a walkout of Republican senators in 2019, Boquist warned then-Senate President Peter Courtney not to try to arrest absent lawmakers: “Mr. President, and if you send that state police to get me, Hell’s coming to visit you personally.”

Soon after that he told a reporter: “This is what I told the (state police) superintendent: ‘Send bachelors and come heavily armed. I’m not going to be a political prisoner in the state of Oregon. It’s just that simple.’”

Eventually, he and the other senators returned, but before he did a Senate committee on conduct said it would require him to give 12 hours notice before he showed up at the statehouse, on grounds that … he was dangerous? That seemed to be the implication.

Boquist sued Senate Democratic leaders over the requirement, arguing accurately that it impinged on his ability to do his work in the Senate. The legal wrangling lasted three years.

U.S. District Court Judge Michael McShane on Jan. 20, 2020 dismissed Boquist’s suit, saying “while both sides can point fingers and complain that the other is overreacting to a political situation, (Boquist’s) chosen words on the Senate floor were those of a bully on the playground. As such, they are unprotected fighting words.” Quoting a 1942 New Hampshire case, he said such words “by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace.”

And he added, “remarkably, (Boquist) argues that his statement to defendant Courtney – ‘if you send the state police to get me, Hell’s going to visit you personally’ – was a statement of religious expression.” The Senate, he said, did not violate Boquist’s speech rights.

In April 2022 the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated the case, however, saying Boquist had “adequately alleged that he, in fact, had engaged in constitutionally protected speech and was subject to a retaliatory adverse action on account of that speech. The Senate majority members, however, will have an opportunity to raise affirmative defenses, including that their actions were motivated by legitimate security concerns.”

The case went back to McShane, who ruled under the terms of the higher court’s decision in Boquist’s favor, but awarded him just one dollar.

In all, this river of court activity seems to have reached a nebulous conclusion.

The courts could have gone further and should have.

“Political speech” has been stretched in recent years to sometimes absurd points. The violent Jan. 6, 2021 riot at the U.S. Capitol, for example, has been described by the national Republican Party as “legitimate political discourse.”

Political speech traditionally has been given more judicial leeway than most other forms, but how does our current overheated political speech fit into that framework? What are unprotected fighting words or panic words in today’s environment? A serious answer coming from the courts would be useful.

But courts have placed limits on speech in the past. Famously, Justice Oliver Windell Holmes in 1919, writing for a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court, said, “The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic… The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent.”

Fighting words and direct threats have been limited, too.

This becomes salient in a day when emotions can get out of hand in political situations. Decisions in cases like the Boquist suit could help in drawing the lines between what we should find acceptable and what we shouldn’t.

That said, our best approach would be to cool ourselves down instead of letting it get that far.

Here’s something pointing to a positive answer. In an email to with the Capital Chronicle in April 2022, just after the appellate court reversal, Boquist said, “I will ask if Peter Courtney wants to sit down to mediate with the goal of setting in place a method to ensure this never happens again. That was my original goal.”

Maybe they should have taken him up on it.

This column first appeared in the Oregon Capital Chronicle.

 

DeSantis and the Idaho campaign

August 4, 2023

National pundits are largely unified around the idea that former President Donald Trump is so far ahead in support for the Republican nomination for his previous office that none of the other contenders stand much chance of catching him. I won’t argue that as of now, indictments notwithstanding, that seems an accurate assessment.

If the current trajectory holds, the Republican nomination could be a done deal by the time any Idaho Republicans get to vote on it, whether in primary or caucus.

But that doesn’t mean Idaho and the Republican battle for the presidential nomination are unconnected, at least this year. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis has been on the air this year with radio spots in Idaho, and his campaign would have reasons.

He does have cheerleaders in Idaho. One of them may be the Idaho Freedom Foundation, which in January delivered an opinion piece on university spending in Florida - referencing DeSantis’ policy there - and concluding, “So, bravo to DeSantis and company for showing bold leadership in the Sunshine State. Let’s hope we will see some of that here in Idaho soon.” The group has offered other laudatory comments (making the case that DeSantis is a better governor than Idaho’s Brad Little) as well.

This can be taken as an indication that significant portions of Idaho’s state Republican Party leadership may be (or may have been) drawn toward DeSantis, given how close many of them (and many legislators as well)  are to the Foundation. There’s also a personal Idaho link to the DeSantis campaign: former Idaho Deputy Attorney General David Dewhirst this spring left to work for DeSantis.

From the national perspective, a DeSantis strategist logically might look at which states Trump lost in his nomination battle in 2016 (effectively unopposed in 2020, he won them all then). Eight years ago, Idaho was one of the holdouts: Texas Senator Ted Cruz romped in the Gem State, and it wasn’t close (45.4 percent to 28.1 percent for Trump, with Marco Rubio running third at 15.9 percent).

What’s also notable about the results is that the dozen counties Trump won were in the lightly-populated, low-growth central-mountainous part of the state. The state’s urban centers, from the Sandpoint and Coeur d’Alene areas to Moscow and Lewiston, and to the south in Ada, Canyon, Twin Falls, Pocatello, Idaho Falls and Rexburg, all went for Cruz over Trump. Might DeSantis campaign planners see opportunity there?

I suspect they do, and the nature of that radio advertising suggests one angle for it.

What he said in the ad is, “The members of Congress will never vote to limit their own power. That’s why we need states to step up and take action. Idaho could be the next state to pass a resolution calling for an Article V term limits convention — giving state legislators a way to make term limits on Congress a reality.”

It was a call for a constitutional convention - a “convention of states” - an action never taken in the nation’s history. The reason is that such a convention might do almost anything, including throwing out the current constitution and replacing it (which is how we got this one). The eerie potential of that concerns people on both sides of the spectrum; on the right, Twin Falls radio show host Bill Colley wrote against it out of concern of what left learners might do to, say, the second amendment. Whether you come from the left or right, there’s plenty to be worried about should such a convention be called.

But the convention idea in recent years has generated traction among organization Idaho Republicans, and there have been attempts in the Idaho Legislature to call for a convention. It’s easy to see the current Republican leadership seizing on the idea, and DeSantis forces trying to leverage that for support in Idaho.

Idaho may be some distance from the core action in the Republican nomination battle - that would be in Florida - but in national politics these days, you can run but you can’t hide.

(image)

Risch breaks with Trump on Ukraine

Risch breaks with Trump on Ukraine

August 2, 2023

Don’t get Idaho Sen. Jim Risch started on Ukraine.

On second thought, do. That is, if you want to see energy, passion and a dose of common sense. Risch, the ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, turned a breakout session of the recent Aspen Security Forum into quite a show, and received some generous applause from global leaders in the audience.

Democratic Sen. Chris Coons of Delaware, who shared the stage with Risch, needled the Idaho senator for displaying “low energy and limited passion” with Risch’s remarks about Ukraine. The animosity between Republicans and Democrats, that we keep hearing about, was not on full display on this day. Risch and Coons have been friends and colleagues for a long time, and they happen to agree that the U.S. should support Ukraine’s fight against Putin and Russia.

For those who may be scoring at home, Risch made the boldest statement of the session.

“The war is over as far as who’s lost,” he said. “Russia has lost. The Ukranians haven’t won, but Russia has lost. Their objective was to occupy that country. They are never going to occupy that country. (The Ukranians) will fight with sticks and stones in the streets, which Putin has now figured out and the rest of the world has figured out.”

Wow! Political leaders in the U.S. know something about lost causes – the withdrawal of troops in Vietnam during the ‘70s … leaving Iraq almost 20 years after President George W. Bush proclaimed that the mission was accomplished … and the embarrassing retreat from Afghanistan. Risch, for one, doesn’t want to add Ukraine to the Hall of Shame, and he offers a nice reality check to the situation.

There is some bipartisan resistance to continuing support for Ukraine. Even some Republicans in the presidential race, including former President Trump and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, have raised doubts about continuing support for Ukraine. Trump says he will pull U.S. support for Ukraine if he wins the presidency, which puts Risch in an awkward position. Risch avoided public disagreements with Trump during his four years in office – and the Idaho senator’s stance on Ukraine is clearly at odds with the Republican frontrunner.

For the moment, Risch and Coons – as voices of reason -- are telling their colleagues that now is not the time to pull away.

“We have not only a moral obligation to do this, we’ve got a legal obligation to do this,” Risch said. “One of the most important reasons is if you think Xi (China’s leader) isn’t watching every single thing that goes on as far as our commitment to the see this though, you’re badly mistaken. He is watching this – and I have reason to believe that for a fact – very, very closely, and watching every utterance that comes out of the United States Congress, out of the administration, and out of the American people as to what kind of a stomach we’ve got to see this thing through.”

Risch says give Ukranians cluster bombs and all the ammunition they need, short of nuclear weapons.

“I’m tired of hearing about escalation,” he said. “If you don’t escalate, you’re going to lose. I want Putin to wake up in the morning worried about what he’s going to do that’s going to cause us to escalate, instead of us wringing our hands and saying ‘we can’t do that.’”

As Risch sees it, the U.S. should do everything in its power to stop Putin. When it’s over, he says, the Russians should pay.

“It’s easy to say ‘oh, this is Putin’s war.’ I have no doubt that when Putin’s gone, Russia’s going to say that this was his war, it was a terrible mistake, we had nothing to do with it,” Risch said. “The Ukranians are not going to buy that. They’re going to insist that the Russian people pay the price for this.”

First, Putin will have to admit defeat – which is a tall order. It’s safe to say that the Russian dictator won’t be reading memos from Risch anytime soon.

Chuck Malloy is a long-time Idaho journalist and columnist. He may be reached at ctmalloy@outlook.com

(image/Office of the President of Ukraine)

How time flies

August 1, 2023

I never thought about being a docent.

While I've visited my share of museums around the country, the idea of being a docent in one just never crossed my mind.

But, after a few classes, some book work and a long, written test, here I am: a docent. In the Evergreen Air and Space Museum in McMinnville, OR. A retired pilot surrounded by some of the most unique and interesting aircraft ever to leave the ground. Or water.

The uniform is simple. Tan slacks, blue cotton shirt and a green vest festooned with patches and pins representing my years of USAF service. There are about 90 of us to cover a seven-day week, in two very, very large buildings with shifts of eight hours.

There are three buildings filled with aircraft, missiles and various spacecraft including a Mars lander. Some are from foreign countries and some hang precariously from the very high ceilings. But the centerpiece of the collection is Howard Hughes "Spruce Goose" in a large, permanent, indoor cradle. It's huge!

Actually, there's nothing "spruce" about the "Goose." It's a mammoth flying boat, actually made of laminated birch covered with a boring, solid grey material. Most of what very little metal there is used is in the eight engines. It flew once. In the bay at Long Beach, CA. A distance of about half a mile at a height of 70 feet or so.

There are a lot of stories - and misconceptions - about the "Goose." But, here's the straight scoop.

Howard Hughes had a background in aviation. Henry Kaiser owned a large ship-building company. In 1941, the Nazis were sinking a lot of Kaiser's ships. The two formed Hughes-Kaiser Corporation and went to Congress with the proposal to build a huge aircraft to safely get the military and its equipment to Europe during World War II. Congress eventually authorized $18-million for three aircraft to be built in two-years.

After four years, Kaiser pulled out of the deal in 1944. Our military finally got control of the North Atlantic shipping lanes so we were losing far fewer ships.

Hughes poured another $8-million of his own into the doomed project, changed its designation to H-4 Hercules and continued. Finally, in 1947 - two-years after the war - he had one aircraft. The "Goose."

His government contract called for a taxing test. But, the man who conceived the "Goose" knew it would fly. November 2, 1947, was the day the "Goose" flew in Long Beach harbor. About a half mile at a height of 70-feet. And never flew again. Hughes had fulfilled his repeated promise to Congress that what he designed - and build - would fly or he'd leave the country. And it did. One time.

Eventually, Hughes died and the "Goose" had no home. A California aero club finally took possession of the "Goose" nobody else seemed to want. Off and on, it was put on public display at Long Beach until it was sold to Evergreen Aviation in Oregon, in 2001, to be used as the center piece of a large educational exhibit. Which it now is.

It was cut into sections, placed on barges and shipped to within seven-miles of it's current resting place. Far from the ocean. Far from water of any kind. Took two-years to restore and refurbish.

You can visit the "Goose" anytime. You can even get an inside tour of the flight deck and the cargo areas - for a slight additional charge. If you haven't already, come see the "Goose," you should. The size of it - the overwhelming size - is something to experience.

While its location is somewhat off the beaten path, we get visitors from all over the world. In just a month, I've talked to folks from Tibet, from China, from Germany, Italy, England, Ireland and cities all across the good ol US of A. Thanks to the museum website, they come to see the "Goose." Even after all these years, it's still drawing the curious. As I said, even from Tibet.

After a government investment of $18-million, another $8-million from Hughes and millions more of private funding to relocate and restore - twice - one of the largest aircraft ever built is "home" and welcoming visitors.

Being a docent at my age has been quite an experience. There are days I'd just as soon skip the shift. Hours walking on concrete floors can really torture an old spine. Some days, it's really bad.

But, the people you meet - from all over the world - is something you can't find just anyplace. The interactions are unique. Their questions and stories are interesting. Most days, I'm occupied with people I'd never meet without this volunteer experience.

Like the Viet Nam vet I met as he stood by the open door of a "Huey" helicopter on display. He had tears on his face as he told me the last time he saw a "Huey" was when one pulled his wounded body out of a rice paddy 59 years ago.

Check us out on the web. Evergreen Air and Space Museum. It's quite a place.