Tag Archives: news

Obama’s JCPOA vs. Trump’s Iran Deal: To Win or Not To Win

Posted on by
Reply

BREAK IT DOWN!

The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), an agreement reached by the Obama Administration in 2015, and President Donald Trump’s more recent deal or negotiating framework with Iran share a central aim: preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. In that sense, both approaches are built around deterrence, nonproliferation, and the belief that Iran’s nuclear program must be constrained in some way. Both also rely on the same broad logic of exchange—Iran accepts limits, while the United States and its partners offer some form of economic or political benefit. Yet the similarities become thinner once the structure, diplomacy, and strategic assumptions of each are examined.

The biggest difference is that the JCPOA was a detailed multilateral agreement, while Trump’s approach has been more unilateral, coercive, and politically personalized. The JCPOA was negotiated by Iran and the P5+1—China, France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States—with the European Union playing a major coordinating role. It imposed precise, technical limits on Iran’s uranium enrichment, centrifuge numbers, stockpile size, and plutonium pathway, while giving the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) a central role in monitoring and verification. 

In exchange, Iran received phased sanctions relief. By contrast, Trump withdrew from the JCPOA in 2018, arguing that it was too weak, too temporary, and too narrow because it did not permanently end enrichment, fully address ballistic missiles, or curb Iran’s regional proxy activity. His “maximum pressure” campaign relied on sanctions and leverage first, with diplomacy coming later and on terms more explicitly shaped by U.S. demands.

Another major difference lies in how each side understood the purpose of a deal. The JCPOA was designed as a managed arms-control arrangement: it did not attempt to transform Iran’s regime or eliminate every source of tension, but rather to lengthen Iran’s “breakout time” and create transparency through inspections. Trump’s preferred deal, by contrast, has typically been framed as a broader strategic reset—one that would not only stop nuclear weapons development but also produce a tougher and more durable outcome than the Obama-era agreement. 

Supporters of Trump’s view argue that the JCPOA’s sunset clauses and narrow scope made it insufficient. Critics respond that any realistic new deal often ends up looking similar to the JCPOA because inspections, enrichment limits, and sanctions relief remain the basic building blocks of any workable bargain.

Still, there are important continuities. Both frameworks assume Iran will not simply abandon its nuclear capacity without reciprocal incentives. Both depend, at least in principle, on outside verification and on some negotiated balance between pressure and compromise. And both reflect the same long-standing American dilemma: whether the better path is an imperfect diplomatic agreement or a riskier strategy built on escalation and possible military confrontation.

The JCPOA and Trump’s Iran deal are similar in objective but different in method, tone, and ambition. The JCPOA emphasized multilateral diplomacy, technical limits, and inspection-based confidence building. Trump’s approach emphasized pressure, tougher bargaining, and a promise of a “better” agreement that would go beyond the original deal. Whether the newer framework proves genuinely different in substance or simply a rebranded version of earlier diplomacy remains the key question. 

It will take time to know with certitude just how to distinguish between the two plans. However, there are visible, measurable, and fundamentally distinct items to consider as you reach your ultimate judgment.

As of this moment in time, The Trump administration does not have a plan. It has a framework for a plan. The principals have agreed in principle to take the next 60 days to work on devising a plan. What a neat trick. Happy Birthday Mr. President. 

As noted above, Trump pulled the U.S. out of the JCPOA in 2018, during his prior term in office. So, after 109 days of planning to plan for a plan, the Trump administration proposes to take two more months to come up with said plan…that it has been saying for weeks, if not months is already done. Or will be done soon. Or in the next few days. Or the next few weeks. Or…at any time now.

it’s important to reflect on the fact the JCPOA was an actual plan, complete with multiple nation-state participants. The agreement, which took 20 months to negotiate, created mechanisms to measure Iran’s compliance. According to not just the United States, but also to the other nations involved in the agreement (China, France, Germany, Russia, and the United Kingdom), along with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Iran was complying; the agreement was working. This plan was crafted, formalized, adopted, and executed through diplomacy.

That last note makes it imperative to reflect on several points. In the lead up to the coming plan, Mr. Trump, allegedly based on the advice and counsel of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, launched, along with Israel, a joint preemptive strike against Iran, known as Operation Epic Fury. In some spaces, that strike has come to be known as Trump’s War of Choice. We are told that with choices, come consequences. One immediate, likely unintended consequence of the attack was that most of Iran’s political leadership was killed. Their demise, by most accounts, eliminated the most moderate faction of Iranian leadership. That results in any ongoing negotiations being dependent upon working with more hard-core extremists, including Mojtaba Khamenei, the son of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who was killed in the strike. Reports say Mojtaba, the new Supreme Leader, was also seriously injured during the attack. One can imagine his negotiating mind set.

Several specific delineated consequences to consider include:

The war

The loss of American blood and treasure, aka lives and military equipment

Fostering military attacks on our allies and assets in the region

Facilitating, if not expediting, Iran’s move to block or hold the Strait of Hormuz hostage

The mining of the Strait of Hormuz

Emboldening Israel to escalate attacks in the region under the cover of U.S. protection 

Providing the blueprint for future blockading of the Strait of Hormuz/de facto Iranian control

Dwarfing the pallets of money from the JCPOA that Trump & friends obsessed over. Oh my! 

Consider, if you will, “Obama’s JCPOA vs. Trump’s Iran Deal: To Win or Not To Win!”

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.com. Find a new post each Wednesday.

To subscribe, click on Follow in the bottom right-hand corner of my Home Page at http://thesphinxofcharlotte.com; enter your e-mail address in the designated space, and click on “Sign me up.”

Subsequent editions of “Break It Down” will be mailed to your in-box. For more detailed information on a variety of aspects related to this post, consult search engines for more information on the subject.

Obama’s JCPOA vs. Trump’s Iran Deal: To Win or Not To Win

This post was augmented by the use of AI.

It’s Time to Talk Straight on Hormuz

Posted on by
Reply

BREAK IT DOWN! 

The conundrum of the Strait of Hormuz lies in the fact that the world depends on a waterway that is both indispensable and persistently vulnerable. This narrow passage between Iran and Oman connects the Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea. 

Yet despite its modest width, it carries an enormous share of the world’s energy trade. Recent estimates indicate that around 20 million barrels of oil and oil products move through the strait each day, along with a substantial portion of global liquefied natural gas exports, when the Strait is open and operable. 

For major Gulf producers such as Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Kuwait, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates, the strait remains the main route to international markets. That makes it not just a regional corridor, but a global economic pressure point.

The core problem is strategic as much as geographic. The Strait of Hormuz is a classic chokepoint: narrow enough to be threatened, but important enough that even a brief disruption can unsettle world markets. Iran’s position on the northern side of the strait gives it leverage. It has long viewed that leverage as part of a broader deterrence strategy against regional rivals and outside powers, especially the United States. 

At the same time, the United States and its partners see freedom of navigation through the strait as essential to global commerce and regional stability. This creates a recurring security dilemma. Measures taken by one side to deter conflict, such as military patrols, naval escorts, missile deployments, or maritime warnings, are often interpreted by the other side as preparation for confrontation. As a result, actions intended to stabilize the strait can actually promote a more tense environment.

The economic stakes intensify the puzzle. There are some alternatives to Hormuz, including pipelines that can bypass part of the route, but they do not fully replace the volume that normally passes through the strait. That means markets react sharply even to partial disruptions, insurance spikes, or shipping delays. Asian economies are especially exposed because a large share of the oil transiting Hormuz is destined for countries such as China, India, Japan, and South Korea. 

In that sense, the conundrum is global: a local conflict or miscalculation can trigger inflation, supply shocks, and financial volatility far beyond the Gulf. Even when the strait is not formally closed, the mere perception of danger can alter shipping patterns and raise costs.

Ultimately, the Strait of Hormuz illustrates a larger geopolitical paradox: the more vital a route becomes, the more attractive it is as a source of leverage, and the harder it is to secure without escalating tensions. No major actor truly benefits from a prolonged closure, including Iran, because disruption would also damage regional economies and global demand. Yet the threat of disruption remains powerful precisely because the world has not found a reliable substitute for the strait. That is why Hormuz remains a conundrum rather than merely a shipping lane. It is a place where geography, energy dependence, military signaling, and global finance converge, making stability essential, but never guaranteed.

All of the above reflects the theoretical framework of what makes the Strait of Hormuz critical to both U.S. and global interests. Then, the United States and Israel initiated coordinated strikes against Iran on February 28, 2026. In retaliation, Iran enforced the effective closure of the Strait by attacking and threatening vessels attempting to navigate the crucial waterway and by boobytrapping said waterway with mines. That’s when, for lack of a better adjective, things got…interesting.

The President of the United States aligned with Israel in an effort to cow Iran into submission. Quickly. Interestingly, while Iran was always capable of launching such a blockage, which this administration frequently mentions, it’s simply essential to note, for the record, that it had never done so. Not under Clinton, not under Obama, not under Biden, not even in Trump’s first term. 

Let’s be clear, it did not happen until Trump was deluded into launching a strike to preclude Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. The rub here, and there is one, is that Mr. Trump boasted loud, long, and often, that he had launched an assault that obliterated Iran’s nuclear capacity, Moreover, he contended it would take years, not a year, but years to reassemble the apparatus necessary to become a nuclear nation. And yet, here we are a few months later without even a hint of “I was wrong,” claiming it was necessary to initiate a preemptive strike to solve a problem he previously claimed to have definitively solved. Talk about Fake News.   

Mr. Netanyahu allegedly persuaded the American Stable Genius that a collective U.S.-Israeli show of force would render Iran feckless and defeated in short order. Since March 1, Mr. Trump has assured Americans that Iran would fold, in a matter of days, then in a matter of weeks. Claims he has reiterated, with a straight face and a faux confident tone. Over, and over, and over again…38 times and counting.

I am not prepared to say, we are engaged in the next forever war. I absolutely pray we are not. But if there is one thing that is true, and readily visible to even those of us who possess what jokesters often refer to as lying eyes, it is that Trump “may not” have lied…but he sure as hades was wrong. We are engaged in a new war, and no amount of fanciful wordsmithing, and contorting the language can transpose this into another imaginary war ended by the MAGA-in-Chief. “It’s Time to Talk Straight on Hormuz!”

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.com. Find a new post each Wednesday.

To subscribe, click on Follow in the bottom right-hand corner of my Home Page at http://thesphinxofcharlotte.com; enter your e-mail address in the designated space, and click on “Sign me up.”

Subsequent editions of “Break It Down” will be mailed to your in-box. For more detailed information on a variety of aspects related to this post, consult search engines for more information on the subject.

It’s Time to Talk Straight on Hormuz

This post was augmented by the use of AI.

If It’s Not In Writing, Is It Really A Deal?

Posted on by
Reply

“BREAK IT DOWN!”

A couple of weeks ago, I penned a post entitled, “It’s A Great Deal…If You Can Get It”(https://thesphinxofcharlotte.com/2026/05/20/its-a-great-deal-if-you-can-get-it/). Yesterday, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche made an announcement that suggests it may not be possible to get it. At least, not all of it.

The decision to abandon the Justice Department’s proposed “anti-weaponization” fund while preserving the separate ban on audits of President Donald Trump’s past tax returns underscores a familiar pattern in Washington: when a controversial package becomes politically toxic, officials often jettison the most visible liability while trying to preserve the quieter but more consequential benefit. Recent reporting indicates that Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche told lawmakers the administration would no longer proceed with the roughly $1.776 billion fund after backlash from Republican senators as well as broader criticism that it could become a vehicle for politically sympathetic claimants, including people tied to January 6. At the same time, Blanche said the agreement shielding Trump and his family from future audits of previously filed returns would stay in place.

That split matters. The fund was always the easier target because it was public, expensive, and symbolically explosive. The Department of Justice had framed it as a mechanism to compensate victims of alleged government “lawfare,” but critics across the political spectrum saw it as a slush fund in waiting. The strongest objections were not just legal but political: lawmakers worried about taxpayer money being used to reward allies of the president or individuals who would become instant symbols of partisan grievance.

Once that perception hardened, the fund became a burden on the administration’s broader agenda, especially as Republican legislators signaled it could complicate unrelated negotiations over immigration and spending. In short, the fund generated immediate heat and limited upside. Dropping it was a way to defuse the loudest controversy.

The audit ban, however, appears to be the provision the administration most wanted to preserve. Unlike the fund, it does not require creating a new bureaucracy, distributing money, or defending visible payouts. Yet it may be far more significant in practical terms. Reporting on the settlement indicates that the IRS is barred from auditing returns filed before May 18, 2026, covering Trump, certain family members, trusts, and businesses. 

Legal and tax experts have described that kind of prospective immunity from examination as extraordinary and difficult to reverse. Because the provision is embedded in a settlement agreement rather than a headline-grabbing public program, its political profile is lower—even though its long-term implications may be greater. It diminishes scrutiny, if not controversy.

Seen that way, dropping the anti-weaponization fund while keeping the tax-audit shield is less a retreat than a recalibration. The administration appears to have concluded that it could sacrifice the most combustible piece of the arrangement while retaining the part that most directly benefits Trump and his family. Politically, that may blunt some immediate criticism, because the discarded provision was easier to explain in one shocking number: nearly $1.8 billion. But substantively, the surviving clause may prove more important, because it narrows the government’s ability to examine past tax matters involving the sitting president. If the fund was the flashpoint, the audit ban is the legacy provision. And that is why the real story is not only what was dropped, but what remains. But not so fast. Mr. Blanche was asked whether he would provide a written memo detailing the decision to forego the nearly $2 billion settlement? He declined. No disrespect to the Acting AG, but this non-legal scholar’s inquiring mind wonders, “If It’s Not In Writing, Is It Really A Deal?”

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.com. Find a new post each Wednesday.

To subscribe, click on Follow in the bottom right-hand corner of my Home Page at http://thesphinxofcharlotte.com; enter your e-mail address in the designated space, and click on “Sign me up.”

Subsequent editions of “Break It Down” will be mailed to your in-box. For more detailed information on a variety of aspects related to this post, consult search engines for more information on the subject.

If It’s Not In Writing, Is It Really A Deal?

This post was augmented by the use of AI.

It’s A Great Deal…If You Can Get It

Posted on by
1

BREAK IT DOWN!

This has been another eventful week for government in the United States…and it’s only Wednesday. Another GOP Congressman targeted by DJ Trump lost his re-election bid. Down goes Thomas Massie. The Kentucky solon, who lost last night, joined the five Indiana Senators who lost a couple of weeks ago, after also having been targeted by Trump. 

As an aside, Senator John Cornyn of Texas saw Trump throw his endorsement to his opponent, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton. Most observers now cede next week’s runoff to Paxton, aided by Trump’s backing. While Paxton may win, his candidacy is not without concerns. He has previously overcome several controversies, including, impeachment, felony securities fraud allegations, which he ultimately settled, election integrity (attempt to overturn the 2020 Election) issues, and a marital/divorce scandal. These issues are not expected to derail his GOP runoff chances.  

Believe it or not, actual election matters are not the top line. Earlier this week, it was reported that Trump was dropping his $10 billion, that’s billion with a b, suit against his own Department of Justice. Instead of $10B, a $1.776 billion dollar settlement was reached, which will provide payouts to Trump allies, and others who have been impacted by “so-called” Biden law fare. 

Todd Blanche, Trump’s former personal criminal attorney, and current Acting Attorney General negotiated the settlement, and will select a 5-person panel to oversee the “1776 Fund.” While it remains unclear who will get money from what some are referring to as a self-dealing slush fund, Neither Trump, JD Vance, nor Blanche have ruled out the prospect that individuals who committed violent acts against law enforcement at the Capitol on January 6, 2021, and who on January 20, 2025 were granted a blanket pardon for their actions by Trump on the first day of his second term, will receive money from the settlement. 

That sounded like the top line. But then this happened. The Justice Department added an  addendum to its settlement with President Donald Trump. It immediately ignited controversy because it reportedly says the government is “forever barred and precluded” from pursuing certain tax examinations or claims against Donald Trump, his family, and his companies, involving returns filed before the settlement’s effective date. 

According to recent reporting by ABC News, CBS News, and NBC News, the addendum expands a broader agreement resolving Trump’s lawsuit against the IRS over the leak of his confidential tax information. That reporting suggests the deal reaches far beyond an ordinary settlement term because it appears to shut down not just currently pending matters, but also any claims that could have been raised concerning older Trump tax returns. Even with the Justice Department later saying the addendum applies only to existing audits and not future ones, the language has landed like a political and legal earthquake, especially because it concerns the sitting president and a tax agency meant to apply the law uniformly.

The backstory matters. Trump sued after an IRS contractor, Charles Littlejohn, admitted leaking tax return information belonging to Trump and other wealthy Americans to the press. It should be noted that Littlejohn is current serving a jail sentence related to the matter.

That breach created a serious privacy and accountability issue for the government. But critics argue that redressing an unlawful leak is not the same thing as granting a president sweeping protection from tax scrutiny. The question is not whether Trump had grounds to complain about the disclosure of his returns; plainly he did. The question is whether a settlement negotiated by a Justice Department led by his own administration can lawfully or appropriately insulate him, his family, and associated businesses from tax enforcement on prior filings. That is where the matter becomes far more significant than a simple damages dispute.

This is the nexus where both the broader settlement, and especially the addendum appears to earn the label self-dealing. The benefits do not inure just to Trump, but also to his family members and businesses. As one analyst noted, he sued himself, settled with himself, and is now paying himself. Trump supporters are quick to counter; Trump is not getting any of the money. 

Seriously? Stop playing! The addendum itself is undoubtedly worth millions. Think of all the past returns that will now not be reviewed. Don’t be ridiculous. Trump’s taxes have long drawn attention and at least one long-running audit could have carried a very substantial financial consequence. In that light, the addendum is not a symbolic gesture. It could amount to a durable shield against significant liability, which is why opponents see it as a direct challenge to principles of equal treatment under the law. “It’s A Great Deal…If You Can Get It!”

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.com. Find a new post each Wednesday.

To subscribe, click on Follow in the bottom right-hand corner of my Home Page at http://thesphinxofcharlotte.com; enter your e-mail address in the designated space, and click on “Sign me up.”

Subsequent editions of “Break It Down” will be mailed to your in-box. For more detailed information on a variety of aspects related to this post, consult search engines for more information on the subject.

It’s A Great Deal…If You Can Get It

This post was augmented by the use of AI.

James Earl Carter, Jr.: Centenarian

Posted on by
Reply

It’s time to Break It Down!

Jimmy Carter, the 39th president of the United States, set a record yesterday, October 1, when he observed his birthday, and became the first American president to reach triple digits.

It’s a milestone more and more Americans will reach in the years to come – and frankly, it’s something for which our national social safety net is unprepared.

Carter left office in 1981 after Ronald Reagan defeated him in his reelection bid. He was 56, at the time, too young for Social Security and Medicare.

A very long, incredible retirement

Carter opted not to follow the traditional post presidential path of dedicating himself to sitting on corporate boards and raking in speaking fees.

Instead, Carter got his hands dirty building houses, took on peace missions to Cuba and the Middle East, negotiated the release of hostages, lived in his hometown, taught Sunday school and college classes, wrote books, and won Grammys.

His has been, indisputably, the longest, most righteous and most productive post-presidency in history, although John Quincy Adams’ post-presidential, anti-slavery efforts in Congress get honorable mention.

In the nearly 44 years since leaving office, Carter helped essentially eradicate Guinea worm, a parasite that infected around 3.5 million people in the mid-’80s and just 14 in 2023, according to The Carter Center.

It’s been 22 years since he won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2002, just as the US was preparing for war in Iraq. Carter also paid a landmark visit to Cuba that year.

It has been nine years since Carter announced at a news conference that he had been diagnosed with brain cancer and might not have long to live.

CNN’s Stephen Collinson wrote at the time:

“I have had a wonderful life,” Carter said with the same unsparing honesty and meticulous detail that marked his presidency. “I’m ready for anything and I’m looking forward to new adventure,” Carter said, in the 40-minute appearance before the cameras, in which he frequently beamed his huge smile and never fell prey to emotion. “It is in the hands of God, whom I worship.”

Carter had more to do

By December 2015, Carter announced that after treatment, the cancer was gone. A timeline of his life maintained by CNN’s research library has many more notable entries.

It’s been nine years since Carter published an autobiography, “A Full Life: Reflections at Ninety.” He won a Grammy Award– his second – for the audiobook. He would win a third a few years later.

It’s been seven years since he was hospitalized for dehydration in Winnipeg, Canada, where he was outdoors – still working! – for Habitat for Humanity, the organization with which he had a long association.

It’s been five years since he won that third Grammy in 2019, broke his hip and joked that there should be an age limit on the presidency since he couldn’t have done the job at 80. He also turned 95 that year, and became the longest-living American president, surpassing George H.W. Bush.

It’s been nearly two years since Carter entered hospice care and almost a year since his wife, Rosalynn, died. They were married in 1946.

More people will turn 100

As remarkable as Carter made his years since American voters retired him from the White House, there’s also something increasingly normal about people living to 100.

Former presidents, all well-to-do and protected by a generous pension, aren’t a representative sample of society, but it’s notable that the four oldest former presidents – Carter, Bush, Gerald Ford and Ronald Reagan – all lived in the 21st century.

Overall, US life expectancy dropped during the Covid-19 pandemic. It has not yet returned to pre-pandemic levels, and it lags behind other developed countries, according to an analysis by KFF. As of 2022, the life expectancy for US males was 74.8 and for US females was 80.2.

But the population of 100-year-olds is expected to quadruple in the coming decades, according to PewResearch Center. It estimated in January that the current number of centenarians was around 101,000 and that the figure would increase to about 422,000 within 30 years, a small but growing portion of the US population as the average age increases and the birth rate declines. Today, celebrate “James Earl Carter, Jr.: Centenarian!”

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.com. Find a new post each Wednesday.

To subscribe, click on Follow in the bottom right-hand corner of my Home Page at http://thesphinxofcharlotte.com; enter your e-mail address in the designated space, and click on “Sign me up.” Subsequent editions of “Break It Down” will be mailed to your in-box.

For more detailed information on a variety of aspects relating to this post, consult the links below:

https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/30/politics/jimmy-carter-presidents-what-matters/index.html

https://www.axios.com/2024/10/01/jimmy-carter-100-birthday-president-record

James Earl Carter, Jr.: Centenarian

Mark Robinson is No Donald Trump: Just Stating the Obvious

Posted on by
1

It’s time to Break It Down!

Mark Robinson, the ever controversial, recently embattled GOP candidate for North Carolina Governor is quickly discovering what many politicians, especially Republicans who’ve endeavored to mimic Trump’s obnoxious, reckless, devil-may-care attitude and behavior. To paraphrase Lloyd Bentsen’s soberingly soul-snatching put down of Dan Quayle, Lt. Governor, you’re no Donald Trump. 

Trump, who fervently endorsed, and repeatedly boosted Robinson’s candidacy, has appeared to cool on the Maverick from Greensboro, since a CNN story last Thursday linked Robinson to a pornography website, where among other things, he allegedly characterized himself as a Black Nazi, expressed support for slavery…even indicating he would like to own a few himself, and made an array of lewd and sexually explicit remarks. For his part, Robinson has vehemently denied the report, calling it false lies, and salacious tabloid trash. He added, “You’d better understand I am coming after CNN full throttle.” 

Since then, Trump visited North Carolina but declined to include Robinson in his coterie of influential state pols. In fact, at least 10 Republicans and conservative groups have canceled events with Mr. Robinson, rescinded endorsements, and/or erased their digital footprints to distance themselves from their fellow GOP candidate in the upcoming General Election, to be held in just under 6 weeks. It’s fair to say, Mark Robinson is officially, politically toxic.

Prior to last week’s explosive revelations, Robinson was already a controversial figure, well-known for making sexist, racist, Islamophobic, homophobic and otherwise vile comments. And, for quite some time, he appeared to float above the chaos that would seem destined to result from such bellicosity. Not unlike a certain other public figure, Robinson may have gone out of his way to craft a public political persona with the express intent of owning the libs.

America writ large, if not the world, is well aware that for nearly a decade, Trump has flouted virtually every known political protocol, and more often than not, still managed to thrive. Liable for sexual assault and an $83 million settlement, no problem. Convicted of 34 felonies, no problem. A classified documents case, no problem. Election racketeering, no problem. Election obstruction, no problem. Trump University $25 million settlement, no problem. Civil fraud case, $354.9 million settlement, no problem. Assert that he could shoot people on 5th Avenue, and not lose any votes, no problem. Propose a Muslim ban, no problem. Commentary ignited an insurrection at the Capitol, no problem. And those infringements on decency don’t include such gems as the Charlottesville saga, the housing discrimination case, of the newspaper ads seeking the death penalty for the Central Park 5, all of whom were exonerated.

Suffice it to say, a much more extensive list would be required to complete a Greatest Hits Summary for either of these men. But hopefully, you get the point. Robinson, who pointedly refused to abandon his Gubernatorial bid, has been jettisoned from the GOP Inner Circle. While there is still a chance he might secure the Governor’s Office if Trump wins North Carolina, it was already substantially less than a sure bet, and now looks flat out unlikely. Conversely, Donald Trump is in the thick of the race to return to the Presidency, in a contest that 6 weeks out, appears too close to call. He leads in most of the Sunbelt swing states, though within the margin of error, and trails in most of the Midwest Blue Wall states, though also within the margin of error. Current assessments, 1,500 GOP lawyers, and a host of new GOP-inspired state laws make it a foregone conclusion the outcome of the race will not be known by the end of Election Day. Oh yeah, did I say, the majority of Republicans, especially office holders and candidates are sticking closer to Trump than a straight razor shave? “Mark Robinson is No Donald Trump: Just Stating the Obvious!”

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.com. Find a new post each Wednesday.

To subscribe, click on Follow in the bottom right-hand corner of my Home Page at http://thesphinxofcharlotte.com; enter your e-mail address in the designated space, and click on “Sign me up.” Subsequent editions of “Break It Down” will be mailed to your in-box.

For more detailed information on a variety of aspects relating to this post, consult the link below:

Mark Robinson is No Donald Trump: Just Stating the Obvious

In Black & White: Racism or Just My Imagination

Posted on by
4

It’s time to Break It Down!

Just a quick note about a subject that merits much more discourse than I am going to give it today. Yesterday, Hunter Elward, a former Mississippi sheriff’s deputy who was a member of a group that described itself as the “Goon Squad,” was sentenced to 241 months in prison for his role in torturing two Black men last year, after the two men were reported for staying in a home with a White woman. Jeffrey Middleton was sentenced to 17.5 years.

U.S. Judge Tom Lee, who sentenced Hunter Elward, and Jeffrey Middleton, two of the six “Goon Squad” members, is also set to sentence the other four renegade former lawmen who admitted subjecting Michael Corey Jenkins and Eddie Terrell Parker to various and sundry acts of racist torture. It is commonplace for White people in America to object to being called racist. In that light, I will not even deign to assert that these former officers were racist. However, due to the Court’s charges, and the defendants’ subsequent admissions, their behavior met the criteria. I’ll leave it at that. You may decide for yourself.

Prior to sentencing, Judge Lee characterized Elward’s and Middleton’s crime as egregious and despicable,” and opined a “sentence at the top of the guideline range is justified – is more than justified. It’s what the defendants deserve. It’s what the community and the defendants’ victims deserve.”

The terror unfolded on January 24, 2023, with a racist call for extrajudicial violence. A White person called Rankin County Deputy Brett McAlpin to register a complaint that two Black men were staying with a White woman at a house in Braxton, Mississippi. McAlpin told Deputy Christian (ironically named, apparently) Dedmon, who in turn texted a group of White Deputies so willing to use excessive force, they called themselves “The Goon Squad.”

This led to the group of six, five Deputies, and a police officer, bursting into the home, with no warrant in hand, and assaulting Jenkins and Parker with stun guns, a sex toy, and other objects. Elward, by his own admission, shoved a gun into Jenkins’ mouth and fired it, in a “mock execution” that went awry.

The “Goon Squad” handcuffed Jenkins and Parker and poured milk, alcohol, and chocolate syrup over their faces. They forced them to strip naked and shower together to conceal the resulting disarrayed clutter. They hurled racial slurs at the victims and shocked them with stun guns.

After the mock execution went left, they attempted to execute a coverup that including planting drugs and a gun. The false charges associated with that ruse stood for months.

Not surprisingly, the victims, Jenkins and Parker called for the “stiffest of sentences” at a news conference Monday.

Jenkins noted, “It’s been very hard for me, for us. We are hoping for the best and preparing for the worst.”

Jenkins, who was shot in the mouth, endured a lacerated tongue and a broken jaw. He still experiences difficulty speaking and eating.

Attorney Malik Shabazz, an attorney for both victims, said the results of the sentencing hearings could have national implications.

He went on to say, “Michael Jenkins and Eddie Parker continue to suffer emotionally and physically since this horrific and bloody attack by Rankin County Deputies. A message must be sent to police in Mississippi and all over America, that level of criminal conduct will be met with the harshest of consequences.”

An investigation by The Associated Press, prior to charges being filed, linked some of the deputies to at least four violent encounters with Black men since 2019, that left two dead and another with long term injuries.

In addition to Mr. Elward, and Mr.. Middleton, the other former officers charged include McAlpin, Dedmon, and Daniel Opdyke of the Rankin County Sheriff’s Department, and Joshua Hartfield, a Richland police officer. They pleaded guilty to charges including conspiracy against rights, obstruction of justice, deprivation of rights under color of law, discharge of a firearm under a crime of violence, and conspiracy to obstruct justice. Court papers identified Hunter Elward as one of the “Goon Squad” members. The others identified as part of the “Squad” were Middleton and Opdyke.

Elward faced a maximum federal sentence of 120 years, plus life in prison and $2.75 million in fines, as does Dedmon. Hartfield faces a possible sentence of 80 years and $1.5 million. McAlpin faces 90 years and $1.75 million, Middleton faces 80 years and $1.5 million, and Opdyke could be sentenced to 100 years with a $2 million fine.

All the former officers agreed to prosecutor-recommended sentences ranging from five to 30 years in state court, but time served for separate convictions at the state level will run concurrently with the potentially longer federal sentences.

Interestingly, Ranking County, which is majority-white, is just east of the state capital, Jackson, home to one of the highest percentages of Black residents in any major U.S. city. The officers warned Jenkins and Parker to “stay out of Rankin County and go back to Jackson, or ‘their side’ of the Pearl River,” according to court documents, referring to an area with a higher concentration of Black residents.

These crimes, committed by men charged with, and authorized to, enforce the law, hearkened back to Mississippi’s dark history, including the 1964 killing of three civil rights workers after a Deputy handed them off to the Ku Klux Klan. People like to pretend such acts are relegated to the past, which brings to mind Faulkner’s sage observance: “The past is never dead. It’s not even past.”

Bryan Bailey is the Sheriff of Rankin County. He supervised the five Deputies who, along with a Richland police officer, committed the crimes. For months, Sheriff Bailey said little about the episode. After his officers pleaded guilty in August, he said the officers had gone rogue, and promised to change the department. Jenkins and Parker have called for his resignation, and they have filed a $400 million civil suit against the department. “In Black & White: Racism or Just My Imagination!”

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.com. Find a new post each Wednesday.

To subscribe, click on Follow in the bottom right-hand corner of my Home Page at http://thesphinxofcharlotte.com; enter your e-mail address in the designated space, and click on “Sign me up.” Subsequent editions of “Break It Down” will be mailed to your in-box.

For more detailed information on a variety of aspects related to this post, consult the links below:

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/mississippi-goon-squad-ex-deputy-gets-20-year-sentence-racist-torture-rcna144104

In Black & White: Racism or Just My Imagination

Biden-Trump 2.0: It’s On

Posted on by
Reply

It’s time to Break It Down!

Yesterday, like last Tuesday, Super Tuesday, several U.S. states conducted Primary Elections. Nikki Haley bowed out of the GOP Nomination process a week ago today. At that point, technically, there was no remaining mystery related to who would represent the Grand Old Party in the 2024 Presidential Election. The reality is, we’ve known for some time who would be the two principal candidates. 

But, as is often said, the job is not done until the paperwork is complete. Wrapping up the job requires a candidate on each side to reach the required numerical threshold. For Biden, the number of delegates required to clench the Democratic Nomination is 1,968. Biden exceeded that number early last night, almost as soon as the polls closed at 7:00 p.m. in Georgia (ironically), and news agencies projected Biden’s win in the Peach State. Within 10 minutes of the polls closing at 11:00 p.m., in Washington State, Trump, who needs 1,215 delegates, was declared the winner, and simultaneously, cited as having earned his party’s nomination. States voting yesterday included primaries in Georgia, Mississippi, and Washington, and Caucuses in Hawaii.

So far in the pre-electoral process, Trump has won every state, but Vermont, while Biden has lost only the Territory of American Samoa. This is one of the earliest points in history when the finalists have been determined for both parties. There are 236 days remaining until Election Day. That means many things, perhaps none more important than for the next 33 weeks, we will be locked in one continuous 2024 Election Day news cycle. Oh yeah, it is vital to know and note, both candidates have to go to their respective Conventions and be officially voted in as the Nominee.

We have been warned about the intrusion of AI into our election process. The candidates and their surrogates will be endeavoring to paint their opponent with the least flattering of brushes. Meanwhile, The GOP House will try to impeach President Biden. Team Trump will be working to delay, and or pursue judicial elimination of court cases in New York, Washington, DC, Georgia, and Florida, on one hand, while, on the other, appealing massive (literally, hundreds of millions of dollars worth) court ordered payouts.    

Lest we forget, last week, President Biden delivered the State of the Union (SOTU) Address. Republicans leaned head over heels into painting Biden as an old, addled, dementia-suffering frail being, who may not live to next week. Frankly, it sounded as though they didn’t think he’d even make it through the SOTU last Thursday. Not surprisingly, after the GOP lowered the bar of expectations to just North of ground level, Biden easily cleared the hurdle, so much so, until they were forced to change their attack line from Biden’s inescapable feebleness to, Biden was, instead of low energy and lost, he was too loud, and overly political. Side note: let’s not gloss over the fierce and loud suggestion of Biden’s mortality, as I have previously advised in other posts, is primarily about the intense fear that in the event Biden were to die while in office, he would, horror of horrors, be succeeded by Vice President Kamala Harris. The fear (and in may instances disdain) of a Black woman President is real, and palpable. Even Nikki Haley argued, when she was an active candidate, “There will be a woman President. The choice is whether it will be me or Kamala Harris.”

The beauty of being entrenched in opposition to Biden is, when one idea or position fizzles, or is demonstrated to be untenable, the GOP just secures another attack line and rides the wave until it’s necessary to reboot and find another rhetorical brick to hurl into the debate. Yesterday’s brick was the testimony of Special Counsel Robert Hur, who wrote a report describing Biden as “old, forgetful, and sympathetic.” However, despite those notable negative traits, the one that most ignited Republicans was “Unlikely to be convicted by a jury.”

During questioning, Hur likely left both Democrats and Republicans dissatisfied. He insisted on noting the word exonerated did not appear in his report. That frustrated some Dems. And, while he defended his decision to characterize Biden as he did, he added he did not say Biden was senile. GOP House members were visibly and audibly disappointed. Upon direct questioning, Hur said Biden didn’t hide documents, or refuse to cooperate/testify, or direct his lawyer to lie, or ask aids to move classified material to keep them hidden or deny access to any of his homes. There was more, but you get the point.

I understand you may be tired of hearing about the coming Election. I apologize. Regardless of whether I write about how our nation’s political dynamics are playing out, you will find them at every turn, and in every nook and cranny. We are there. “Biden-Trump 2.0: It’s On!”

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.com. Find a new post each Wednesday.

To subscribe, click on Follow in the bottom right-hand corner of my Home Page at http://thesphinxofcharlotte.com; enter your e-mail address in the designated space, and click on “Sign me up.” Subsequent editions of “Break It Down” will be mailed to your in-box.

For more detailed information on a variety of aspects related to this post, consult the links below:

Biden-Trump 2.0: It’s On

The GOP’s Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day

Posted on by
Reply

It’s time to Break It Down!

Allow me to illuminate:

The Terrible – An Appeals Court rules there is no such thing as Trump Immunity

The Horrible – Republican efforts to impeach Alejandro Mayorkas failed

The No Good – The Party’s standalone Israel aid bill fell in the House

The Very Bad Day – Trump’s denial of endorsing Langford was exposed as untrue

All things considered, in the future, 75%, or. 3 out of four of those items could be reversed. And quite frankly, GOP voters have established that the fourth, simply does not matter…to them.

In a 57-page unanimous opinion, a 3-Judge panel of DC Circuit judges wroth that our justice system allows a former president to be held accountable for his actions while in office, because the public interest in holding a potentially criminal president answerable outweighs any potentially “chilling effect” on the presidency.

Trump has promised to appeal. He appointed 3 of the nine Justices, and 6 of the 9 are conservative/Republican.

The House is nearly evenly divided, but Republicans hold a slight numerical edge. Yesterday, they thought they could only lose three votes. Then, when an unexpected Democrat showed up and voted, suddenly the magic number was 2. They lost 3, which resulted in a tie. In a last-minute bit of parliamentary legerdemain, one supporter changed his vote to nay, widening the defeat, but giving the GOP the opportunity to bring the measure up again, later. 

Almost certainly, when it resurfaces, Republicans will have the requisite numbers.

The Israel aid bill came about because many House Republicans want to demonstrate support for Israel. However, the Freedom Caucus split from the majority, leaving Republicans needing to employ a procedural maneuver that requires two-thirds majority for approval. The arithmetic of that ploy left Republicans needing Democrats to bail them out, for the measure to pass. 

Democrats, however, want to secure funding, not just for Israel, but also for Ukraine, for Taiwan, and for border security. Dems passed; the bill failed.

In an interview with conservative radio host Dan Bongino, Trump claimed, never to have endorsed Senator Langford, a conservative Oklahoma Senator who led the GOP negotiations in the Senate that produced a bi-partisan bill to resolve a host of border security issues, while also providing aid to Israel, Ukraine, and Taiwan. While the bill is bipartisan, it is pretty much all things the GOP wants on the border, and nothing preferred by Democrats. It been labeled by most knowledgeable observers as the most conservative leaning border legislation ever. While the bill includes things the GOP would normally salivate over, Trump has asked Republicans not to sign off on it, because he wants to run on the border. Back to the question of Trump having endorsed Langford. Trump told Bongino:

“Just to correct the record, I did not endorse Sen. Lankford. I didn’t do it. He ran, and I did not endorse him.”  So, I’m sure your person will be happy to hear that.” He later added, “I like James. I did not endorse James, but I like James.”

Trump’s claim is untrue. Trump said in the September 27, 2022, endorsement statement: 

“James was strongly committed to America First, and everything it stood for, and likewise strongly committed to me, as President. Sometimes we didn’t exactly agree on everything, but we do now. He is a very good man with a fabulous wife and family, loves the great State of Oklahoma, and is working very hard on trying to Save our Country from the disaster that it is in.”

Trump categorically and repeatedly declared, with no caveats, that he had not endorsed Lankford at all. In a word, untrue.

The one is irrevocable. But history has shown, Trump being untruthful is not a deal-breaker for MAGA-voters. So, in conclusion, though it may not stick, yesterday was “The GOP’s Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day!”

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.com. Find a new post each Wednesday.

To subscribe, click on Follow in the bottom right-hand corner of my Home Page at http://thesphinxofcharlotte.com; enter your e-mail address in the designated space, and click on “Sign me up.”

Subsequent editions of “Break It Down” will be mailed to your in-box. For more detailed information on a variety of aspects related to this post, consult the links below:

https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/06/politics/takeaways-donald-trump-immunity-appeals-court/index.html

https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/06/politics/house-vote-mayorkas-impeachment/index.html

https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/06/politics/house-vote-israel-aid-package/index.html

https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/05/politics/fact-check-trump-james-lankford-endorsement/index.html

The GOP’s Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day