By: Chris Hanrahan

Monday March 18, 2019

WASHINGTON STATE – Trump’s name will not appear on 2020 Ballot until he “releases his taxes”. The erratic and irresponsible policies of WA have struck again, and have the support of 80% of WA constituents who want to “save the country” through the policies of the left. The state majority (Jay Inslee + Washington State Legislature) have just overstepped in a major & unprecedented way on the States Rights issue of who is on the 2020 Ballot for President of The United States.

The new Washington State law would make it impossible for President Donald Trump to be listed amongst the presidential candidates.

My opinion on this policy move, which would put the “Climate Concerned Inslee” on the ballot” but not the “America Saving Trump”, is that it represents an extreme overreach and speaks to larger problems of authority. In the State of WA, where this author was born and raised, I have seen risks forming in politics for quite some time. It is insightful to walk down any street in Seattle, and witness how the policy choices being made (drinking straw bans, the deployment of heroin safe injection sites) are responsible for the self-serving Democrat leaders of the state. But not all who call the Sanctuary City are benefitted by the way the climate and drug challenges are being met.

Part of the challenge is, the State of Washington is addicted to identity politics. Senator Patty Murray (D) infamously voted for Infanticide this year – a choice which will not catch up with her in full until her term is up, in 2024. At that time the voters will either re-elect her (saying keep it up, Patty – this is what we wanted – to become modeled ever more closely to the Communist Chinese for instance), or they will vote someone else in.

Is the populous of Washington State involved in any of this discussion? By eliminating President Trump from the ballot, what statement is being made? They want to see Donald Trump’s taxes. There is a countdown begun now, because at a certain point Hillary Clinton’s Foundation is bound to be the subject of dire concern for States. At that time, I hope to see Red States keep all Dem candidates of the ballot. Why wouldn’t that be a fair response? READ HERE:

We live in an era where parts of history are talked about only in partial. And to those who say “oh you want to see Trump’s Taxes? What about the ones the Clinton Foundation hasn’t totally disclosed to the public?” Much of the public is so misinformed that they can’t help but analyze this topic completely. If fairness is to be brought to the issue of Tax Disclosures, shouldn’t it be a uniform disclosure process? What we have now is a scenario where some candidates are able to disclose very little, and some candidates (indeed some Presidents) are subject to public group-think demands of total disclosure.

Do we want Trump to disclose 100% of his tax documents so that they can be scrutinized line-by-line? If that were to transpire, what else would need to be put into place? Are we at the point in history of our Country where a new paradigm (equal disclosure laws) is to be made?

If it is true that we are at the point in time in America where all candidates need to be scrutinized to a bigger degree (I assume to protect the public), then let’s get to the point and do it. But in my opinion, the Sitting President of The United States ought to be the last politician to fully disclose his taxes.

If we see that there are indeed violators of the law, and if the public believes that there should be impeachments/investigations on the topic of tax, then we ought to see the Oversight Committee rule in that way, and create law not aimed solely at President Trump. What we see now is about as far from fairness, as you can perhaps imagine & conceptualize. Yet maybe much of the audience cannot. We consistently hear partisan points from the left inculcating to the public that as far as the Clintons are concerned, there exists [no evidence] of [any offense]. Many are convinced, and many who are skilled at changing the idioms of the public, are doing the convincing.

And while a small minority of concerned individuals do want justice for all, the majority of Americans want just one – justice for Trump, or justice for Clinton. So what do you want?

So why is the Clinton Foundation in the state that it’s in now? And why isn’t Hillary running again? If her inner thoughts are true and just, regarding her virtuous career as Bill Clinton’s wife, then why has she managed to be so slippery in the eyes of the oversight laws she seems to depend upon, for differentiation? Did the Clinton Foundation fail to properly register (FARA) as a Foreign Agent? Has all the evidence of these crimes been examined by the public? Should it ever be true that because “no evidence exists”, the entire inquiry on the Clintons should be scoffed away and dismissed by the Democrats? The worst outcome many of them can imagine is that the Clintons get scrutinized under a new law. The best outcome they are hoping to achieve for the interests of their own party is that Trump might get scrutinized under a law that would be purpose-built to seize his position as President.

Thank you for being part of the ESPTribe Experiment. Grab the popcorn & use your voice, because you can decide the future and many do not want you to think critically on this issue. As we approach the 2020 election, the message will get more and more dire (on both sides). Is the sky falling? Maybe.

By R

Founder - ESPTribe Experiment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *