The House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep Adam “Shifty” Schiff impeachment “Inquiry” concluded in a Big Nothing Burger.  Fox News contributor Gregg Jarrett has dutifully pegged it as “The Clown Show”.  That circus tent folded unceremoniously.  Rep. Jerry Nadler;’s Judicial Commmittee has to “endure” the glaring spotlight with his own circus tent…that’s right, more of the HO-HUM attempts to bring down President Trump.


So, as the sun rises on the east coast this morning, Dec. 4th, the Do Nothing Democrats continue with their Despicable Clown Show, Act II.


Following is Gregg Jarrett’s Act I Schiffty Show stumbling with his Nov.12th, 2019 article, in part:

The “Clown Show” known as an "impeachment inquiry" is getting more comical and hapless by the day.

Consider the latest remark from the circus master himself, California Rep. Adam Schiff, (think Clown Bozo, not Pennywise). The Democrat chairman of the House Intelligence Committee says he doesn’t want Republicans turning the impeachment proceedings into a “sham.” The hilarious irony is lost on no one. Schiff has already managed to accomplish it all on his own.


At first, Schiff wanted the faux “whistleblower” who triggered the impeachment farce to testify. Then, suddenly, he didn’t. What changed? In the interim, evidence emerged that Schiff and/or his staff colluded with the “whistleblower” before the complaint was ever filed and then lied about it, earning Schiff “Four Pinocchios” from The Washington Post.


The chairman now wants to conceal his own role in engineering the pretext for impeachment and his subsequent deceit. This is why he has insisted that the “whistleblower” remain anonymous, despite no such right, guarantee, privilege, or entitlement written in the law. Even though the undercover informant (reportedly working for the CIA) does not qualify for whistleblower status under the law as determined by the Department of Justice, any effort by Republicans to call him as a witness will be blocked by Schiff.


But Schiff’s machinations are more malevolent than masking the key witness. Those he will call to testify are already on record dishing up prodigious plates of multiple hearsay and rank speculation. It is obvious from the released transcripts of the heretofore “super top-secret” inquisition that none of them have any firsthand knowledge of a “quid pro quo” allegedly demanded by President Trump.


Bill Taylor, the acting ambassador to Ukraine who testified to the committee that it was his “understanding” there was a link between U.S. security assistance and an investigation of Joe and Hunter Biden through discussions with other diplomats, although there is no indication that any of these individuals had direct knowledge of anything. The chain of hearsay went something like this: the European Union Ambassador Gordon Sondland told National Security Council official Tim Morrison who, in turn, told Taylor that there was a purported "quid pro quo."


But wait. If Sondland was the original source, where did he get his information? He initially testified that in a brief phone conversation with Trump, the president explicitly told him, “I want nothing ... I want no quid pro quo.” Sondland added that he “never” thought there was a precondition on aid. Later, he revised his testimony to state, “I presumed that the aid suspension had become linked to the proposed anti-corruption statement.”


Ah, yes. He "presumed." Reliable witnesses do not assume or presume anything. If they do, it is nothing more than supposition that should be discarded like yesterday’s trash.


My favorite purveyor of assorted hearsay is another star witness for Schiff this Wednesday. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State George Kent testified that he “believed” there was a “quid pro quo” after speaking to Taylor who spoke to Morrison who heard it from Sondland who, as noted, “presumed” a precondition. This is conjecture built on triple hearsay. It is not evidence.  If this were a court of law, the presiding judge would instruct the jury to disregard such testimony and strike it from the record.


Under cross-examination, these witnesses readily admitted they had no firsthand knowledge of the president’s intent during his telephone call with Ukrainian President Zelensky. They simply propagated and repeated rumors and innuendo in their diplomatic echo chamber. But that has not stopped Schiff from pretending that they are valued witnesses. With the chairman’s encouragement and guidance, they have offered their interpretations of the Trump-Zelensky conversation. It reminds me of Schiff’s own dramatic interpretation of the phone call before Trump had released the transcript of the call which was nothing more than an unconscionable fabrication designed to smear Trump.


A transcript of the real conversation is the best evidence of what actually occurred. Indeed, it is the only relevant and material evidence. Nowhere is there a demand, condition, or pressure for a “quid pro quo” that made an investigation of the Bidens contingent on U.S. military assistance. This is corroborated by Zelensky who is on record stating that there was no blackmail involved and no pressure applied. “Nobody pushed me,” Zelensky said. “We had a great phone call,” he added. “It was normal.”


The Ukrainian government has confirmed that it was unaware that U.S. aid had been temporarily suspended until almost five weeks after the call with Trump. As noted in my previous column, it is impossible for there to be a “quid pro quo” when the recipient of the “quid” is oblivious to the existence of the "quo."


If the inquiry was equitable, both sides would be able to call their own witnesses. Yet, the House of Representatives passed its impeachment measure giving Schiff the right to veto GOP witnesses. He has already made it clear that he will do so, rejecting a request that the faux “whistleblower” testify. It is clear that other witnesses, including Schiff and/or his staff, will also be rejected.


Charlie’s Comment: Don’t expect much, probably more of the same as Act I.

According to CNN politics on Tuesday, November 19, 2019, Ranking Minority Leader Congressman Nunes remarked;

If you watched the impeachment ‘inquiry’ last week, you may have noticed a disconnect between what you actually saw and the mainstream media accounts describing it. What you saw were three diplomats, who dislike the President's Ukraine policy, discussing second-hand and third-hand conversations about their objections. Meanwhile, they admitted they had not talked to the president about these matters, and they were unable to identify any crime or impeachable offense the President committed.


But what you read in the press were accounts of shocking, damning, and explosive testimony that fully supports the Democrats' accusations.


If these accounts have a familiar ring, it's because this is the same preposterous reporting the media offered for three years on the Russia hoax. On a near-daily basis, the top news outlets in America reported breathlessly on the newest bombshell revelations showing that President Trump and everyone surrounding him are Russian agents. It really wasn't long ago that we were reading these headlines:


From CNN:"Congress investigating Russian investment fund with ties to Trump officials." That was false.


From the New York Times: "Trump Campaign aides had repeated contacts with Russian intelligence." That was false.


From Slate:"Was a Trump server communicating with Russia?" That was false.


From New York Magazine: "Will Trump be meeting with his counterpart or his handler?" That was false.


From the Guardian: "Manafort held secret talks with Assange in Ecuadorian Embassy, sources say." That was false.


And from Buzzfeed: "President Trump directed his attorney Michael Cohen to lie to Congress about the Moscow Tower project." That was false.


There was no objectivity or fairness in the media's Russia stories—just a fevered rush to tarnish and remove a president who refuses to pretend that the media are something different than what they really are—puppets of the Democratic Party.


With their biased misreporting on the Russia hoax, the media lost the confidence of millions of Americans. And because they refused to acknowledge how badly they botched the story, they've learned no lessons and simply expect Americans will believe them as they try to stoke yet another partisan frenzy.


In previous hearings, I've outlined three questions the Democrats and the media don't want asked or answered. Instead of shedding light on these crucial questions, the media are trying to smother and dismiss them. Those questions are:


First, what is the full extent of the Democrats' prior coordination with the Whistleblower and who else did the Whistleblower coordinate this effort with?

The media have fully accepted the Democrats' stunning reversal on the need for the Whistleblower to testify to this committee. When the Democrats were insisting on his testimony, the media wanted it too.


But things have changed since it became clear the Whistleblower would have to answer problematic questions, including

What was the full extent of the Whistleblower's prior coordination with Chairman Schiff, his staff, and any other people he cooperated with while preparing the complaint?


What are the Whistleblower's political biases and connections to Democratic politicians?


How does the Whistleblower explain the inaccuracies in the complaint?


What contact did the Whistleblower have with the media, which appears to be ongoing?


What are the sources of the Whistleblower's information, who else did he talk to, and was the Whistleblower prohibited by law from receiving or conveying any of that information?


The media have joined the Democrats in dismissing the importance of cross-examining this crucial witness. Now that the Whistleblower has successfully kickstarted impeachment, he has disappeared from the story—as if the Democrats put the Whistleblower in their own Witness Protection Program.


My second question: What is the full extent of Ukraine's election meddling against the Trump campaign?


In these depositions and hearings, Republicans have cited numerous indications of Ukrainians meddling in the 2016 elections to oppose the Trump campaign. Many of these instances were reported, including the posting of many primary source documents, by veteran investigative journalist John Solomon.


Since the Democrats switched from Russia to Ukraine for their impeachment crusade, Solomon's reporting on Burisma, Hunter Biden, and Ukrainian election meddling has become inconvenient for the Democratic narrative, and so the media is furiously smearing and libeling Solomon.


In fact, the publication The Hill told its staff yesterday it would conduct a review of Solomon's Ukraine reporting. Coincidentally, the decision came just three days after a Democrat on this committee told a Hill writer that she would stop speaking to The Hill because it had run Solomon's stories, and she urged the writer to relay her concerns to Hill management.


So now that Solomon's reporting is a problem for the Democrats, it's a problem for the media as well.

I'd like to submit for the record John Solomon's October 31 story titled, "Debunking some of the Ukraine scandal myths about Biden and election interference." I encourage viewers today to read this story and draw your own conclusions about the evidence Solomon has gathered.


The concerted campaign by the media to discredit and disown one of their own colleagues is shocking. And we see it again in the sudden denunciations of New York Times reporter Ken Vogel as a conspiracy theorist after he covered similar issues, including a 2017 Politico piece entitled, "Ukrainian efforts to sabotage Trump backfire."


And my third question: Why did Burisma hire Hunter Biden, what did he do for them, and did his position affect any U.S. government actions under the Obama administration?


We have now heard testimony from the Democrats' own witnesses that diplomats were concerned about a conflict of interest involving Hunter Biden. That's because he had secured a well-paid position, despite having no qualifications, on the board of a corrupt Ukrainian company while his father was Vice President charged with overseeing Ukrainian issues.


After trying out several different accusations against President Trump, the Democrats have recently settled on "bribery"—according to widespread reports, they replaced their "quid pro quo" allegation because it wasn't polling well.


But if the Democrats and the media are suddenly so deeply concerned about bribery, you'd think they would take some interest in Burisma paying Hunter Biden $83,000 a month. And you'd think they would be interested in Joe Biden threatening to withhold U.S. loan guarantees unless the Ukrainians fired a prosecutor who was investigating Burisma. That would be a textbook example of bribery.

Americans have learned to recognize fake news when they see it, and if the mainstream press won't give it to them straight, they'll go elsewhere to find it—which is exactly what the American people are doing.


Charlie’s Comments: By the way, that baloney about Trump withholding military aide without Pro Quid Pro. It was President Obama who would not deliver lethal military weaponry to the Ukrainians for defense against Russian aggression. It was President Trump who delivered the “Tank Buster” Javelins weaponry to the Ukraine with No Strings Attached (NO Pro Quid Pro).


So There! End of Story Shifty Schiff!!


P.S. Bold face words by commentator.

Over the weekend, I happened upon an interesting letter, insightful and perhaps prophetic. Below is the closing paragraph of the letter sent to the Clerk of the Court, Hall of Justice, San Francisco, California, written by a concerned citizen, my father ~


“I am really concerned about the feeling of Americans toward their government agencies and officials which each year grows steadily worse. The combination of little wrongs and big wrongs perpetrated by the governments of all levels slowly and inevitably will alienate the people to such an extent that we will destroy our country from within. Maybe you are not worried about it but I am. And I hope you will do your bit, as all of us must, to make government honest and fair. Otherwise, you folk in government will eventually destroy us.”


Lynne L. Prout
Walnut Creek California
November 9, 1974 (written 45 years ago)


Submitted by Dan Prout, Nevada City CA

From the last North Yuba Water District board meeting we know that, for the second time, members of the Yuba County Grand Jury have attended a board meeting.  The Grand Jury seems to be taking a keen interest in the water district.


We know that Crystal Martin, owner of the public relations firm Smart Marketing, was given a $40,000 budget. We know that Ms. Martin is currently working with two Yuba Water Agency directors on their re-election campaigns as County Supervisors and concurrent YWA Directors.  


We know that Ms. Martin works directly with the Yuba Water Agency staff on behalf of the water district. From Martin's email on September 16, to YWA Assistance General Manager Willie Whittlesey where she writes, "...Can you add a second POD item for discussion of the construction funding? I'd like to get everyone on the same page with timing to come back for that request."


We know that NYWD Director Gary Hawthorne has stated Ms. Martin has no conflicts of interest. 

Ms. Martin herself is controversial, including being the subject of online satire about the North Yuba Water District.  The arrival of satire ridiculing the woes of the water district are a mark of infamous distinction. Do you want your public relations person to be the subject of the satire?  No. Unfortunately, the Water District management considers this business as usual.  It is not.


We know that since NYWD Director Flohr was elected, she has been asking for district documents from General Manager Jeff Maupin.  Manager Maupin has refused to provide her these documents and thereby obstructing her ability to do her job as a director.  We know that the other four board members have gone along with this obstruction by the General Manager.  We know that Director Flohr has filed a lawsuit to remedy this obstruction of her ability to perform her duties.


We know that Director Hawthorne wants to blame others for the public relations troubles the water district is having.  What Mr. Hawthorne and his fellow board members seem not to grasp is that a competent General Manager would not be having such public relations issues.  


We know the water district has suspended meetings for November and December claiming it's too difficult to have meetings during the holidays. What we don't know is where is the Forbestown Ditch Piping Project EIR documentation?  Is the EIR documentation being obfuscated in some way?


We know that Manager Maupin has made numerous blunders and miscalculations. Could it be that the troubles troubling the North Yuba Water District are of its own making?  Could it be that a qualified and capable General Manager might solve most of the issues the water district has confounding it at the moment?  It could be indeed.


The website lists a number of documents from Public Records Act requests related to the North Yuba Water District.


Charles Sharp

North Yuba Water District Customer

Oregon House, CA.

Veterans have been honored in many way and locations. This year in Grass Valley was the most memorable for me.

 The keynote speaker was 95-year-young Stan Zabka, veteran of WW II and the Korean War who spent many decades in the entertainment, television and movie businesses.  He included his recollections by reciting Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address with great emotional depth.


 Lou Conter, one of the very few living survivors of the USS Arizona and who had been the keynote speaker on previous occasions, was there.


 Flanders Fields and The Battle Hymn of the Republic were performed flawlessly by the Grass Valley All Male Chorus with pianist.


 Our friend, Donna Mattson, sang a medley of the military branches as veterans of each service were called forth.

 Another friend, Steven Hoss, was in full “Minuteman” regalia including a “Brown Bess” flintlock musket and horse pistol.  He is a retired San Quentin Correctional Officer, member of our Marin Expatriate Breakfast Club and the Nevada Count All Veterans Honor Guard.  


 I had the privilege of chatting with numerous speakers, honorees, local officials and other attendees.  One was a Viet Nam-era Green Beret in his original dress uniform with mirror-polished combat jump boots.

 Google:  Stanley William Zabka and Louis A. Conter for more knowledge of these two remarkable local heroes.


Weldon, USNR 1955-1963,

 Rough and Ready, Ca.

It’s quite a Clown Show the Congressional Demogogues have initiated in their 3-Ring Circus-like Impeachment hearings….that’s all the preface we need!!!...Charlie’s comment.


By  Ryan Saavedra  November 13, 2019


Democrat Rep. Mike Quigley (IL) faced intense backlash on Wednesday afternoon after claiming during Democrats’ impeachment inquiry hearing that “hearsay” can be “much better evidence than direct” evidence.


In a rambling statement, Quigley said, “And, if gets to closed primer on hearsay, I think the American public needs to be reminded that countless people have been convicted on hearsay because the courts have routinely allowed and created, needed exceptions to  hearsay.”


Quigley continued, “Hearsay can be much better evidence than direct … and it’s certainly valid in this instance.”

Donald Trump Jr. immediately turned his sights on Quigley, hammering the congressman in a series of tweets.

“Can you believe this insanity? ‘Heresay can be much better evidence than DIRECT EVIDENCE’ according to Democrat Mike Quigley,” Trump tweeted. “Are you fricken kidding me? 3rd and 4th party info better than hearing it yourself?”


Trump added, “From a reliable 4th party source according to other Democrats like #FullOfSchiff the best evidence is you just make up for political gain as that appears to be what they have been doing all along.”

Trump concluded, “Sounds exactly like what someone would say when they’re desperate and have no actual evidence…”


Quigley was widely mocked online over his comments, including from Australian political commentator Rita Panahi, who wrote on Twitter, “I heard that Mike Quigley tortures puppies & then covers himself in goat poop & dances naked in the moonlight.”


Dana Loesch also weighed in, writing: “Just want to add that these lawmakers who say “hearsay can be much better evidence than direct” are the same ones who want to subject you to a due process-less red flag system. I’m sure that will just stop with guns, right? You still cool with that?”


One of the chief complaints from Republicans on House Democrats’ impeachment inquiry was the fact that the CIA whistleblower did not have any first-hand knowledge of the alleged incident and instead got all of his information from second and third-hand sources.


The Federalist reported in September that there significant changes made to the official whistleblower complaint form that allowed for hearsay to be used as evidence to submit the form. Federalist co-founder Sean Davis wrote:


Between May 2018 and August 2019, the intelligence community secretly eliminated a requirement that whistleblowers provide direct, first-hand knowledge of alleged wrongdoings. This raises questions about the intelligence community’s behavior regarding the August submission of a whistleblower complaint against President Donald Trump. The new complaint document no longer requires potential whistleblowers who wish to have their concerns expedited to Congress to have direct, first-hand knowledge of the alleged wrongdoing that they are reporting.


The brand new version of the whistleblower complaint form, which was not made public until after the transcript of Trump’s July 25 phone call with the Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky and the complaint addressed to Congress were made public, eliminates the first-hand knowledge requirement and allows employees to file whistleblower complaints even if they have zero direct knowledge of underlying evidence and only “heard about [wrongdoing] from others.”


“Whistling” atty

for impeachment

in 2017 on Twitter


By Ronn Blitzer | Fox News

Saturday, November 9, 2019


Mark Zaid, the attorney for the Ukraine call whistleblower, on Thursday, November 7th, defended a series of tweets from 2017 in which he predicted a "coup" against President Trump and promised to “get rid of him” -- saying in a statement the tweets referred to “a completely lawful process.”


Shortly after the publication of a Fox News article Wednesday, November 6th, highlighting the stream of anti-Trump tweets, Trump himself lambasted Zaid during a rally in Louisiana, calling the attorney “disgraceful.”

 “Those tweets were reflective and repeated the sentiments of millions of people,” Zaid said. “I was referring to a completely lawful process of what President Trump would likely face as a result of stepping over the line, and that particularly whatever would happen would come about as a result of lawyers.


The statement comes as Trump pointed to those 2017 statements in arguing the impeachment inquiry touched off by the whistleblower's complaint should be ended.


“Based on the information released last night about the Fake Whistleblowers attorney, the Impeachment Hoax should be ended immediately!” Trump tweeted. “There is no case, except against the other side!”


The anonymous whistleblower filed the complaint earlier this year about Trump's July 25 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, in which he asked for Zelensky to assist in the investigations of alleged Democratic activities during the 2016 election, as well as former vice president Joe Biden and his son Hunter, particularly Hunter Biden's business dealings with Ukrainian energy company Burisma Holdings. The related impeachment inquiry has focused on whether Trump tried to pressure Zelensky into taking part in the investigations, and if military aid or a White House visit were used as leverage.


Zaid has been critical of Trump since the start of the administration.


As Fox News reported Wednesday, Zaid tweeted less than two weeks into Trump’s presidency that a “#coup has started” and that “#impeachment will follow ultimately.”


On Feb. 5, 2017, still less than a month into Trump’s term, Zaid said, “Every day that goes by brings us closer to impeachment.”


The following week, in response to an accusation that Zaid had taken sides against the president, the attorney was completely transparent in his animus.


“100%. I'm not hiding anything,” he tweeted. “Anti-Trump. Worst presidential choice in modern history. Not a repub or dem issue.”


Then, in July 2017, Zaid remarked, "I predict @CNN will play a key role in @realDonaldTrump not finishing out his full term as president." Also that month, Zaid tweeted, "We will get rid of him, and this country is strong enough to survive even him and his supporters."


Fox News’ Gregg Re, David Spunt and Cody Derespina contributed to this report.

     Last summer, in the Brownsville Barber Shop, a local road contractor made a profound statement, “we are paving more Yuba County Roads this year than in the previous 30 years.”  In road distance, most of this paving was done in the Foothills. Fifth District Supervisor Randy Fletcher would be the first to admit that this accomplishment was a cooperative effort by many, but he deserves much of the credit for understanding the need to work with other agencies and individuals for the betterment of Yuba County.


     In his role as a Director on the Yuba County Water Agency, he encouraged others to vote for a cost effective loan to Yuba County to fund this summer’s road projects. Previously, his urging caused Yuba County to receive Federal “heavy winter rain money” to repair and pave several other additional mountain roads. Oregon Hill Road is just one example.  When Supervisor Fletcher visited the Oroville Dam spillway repair project, he learned that the State of California was paying for Oroville Dam related truck hauling damage to Butte County Roads. With his heads up to the Yuba County Road Department, the paving of Los Verjeles Road was completed at no cost to Yuba County.


     To many Yuba County residents and especially the majority in the Fifth District, a very important accomplishment by Randy Fletcher was the rescinding of the 99 Plant Outdoor Marijuana Growing Ordinances and replacing it with a ban on outdoor growing. This came only after working with and educating Yuba County Communities and gaining residents’ support and activism. He also convinced the other Supervisors to pass a “State of Emergency” directed at the illegal marijuana grower. These efforts have produced a cleaner and safer environment for Yuba County Residents. The illegal marijuana grower can use our newly paved roads on their way out of the County.


     Clearly Supervisor Fletcher’s support for Yuba County related emergencies cannot be ignored. During the Cascade and La Porte Fires and the Oroville Dam Spillway Emergency, Supervisor Fletcher was seen at both the Alcouff and Brownsville Evacuation Centers facilitating needed supplies and coordination with Yuba County Officials. He and the other Supervisors supported polices favorable to the replacement of burned homes. Roadside fuel clearing along County Roads is one of his priorities. One of these projects can be seen along La Porte Road in Rackerby. Did you know that, working with the Foothill Fire Department and the North Yuba Water District, he arranged for an emergency escape route for residents along New York House Road while the bridge was being constructed?


     Also heard from one long time, critical of government, local  were  words to the effect “I finally got something for my tax dollar. “ He happened to be, just one, of our residents that obtained a new EPA approved wood stove in replacement for their old inefficient polluting stove. This was through a low or no cost program from the Feather River Air Quality Management District. Randy Fletcher is one Yuba County representative on the FRAQMD Board and he went to great efforts to inform foothill residents of this program.  


     Supervisor Fletcher also works with private industry. The newly activated AT&T Cell Tower in Brownsville is a result of his efforts. He is currently working to obtain generators for Foothill area schools. The recent PG&E Power Shutdowns now make this a necessity.


     We are making progress. Thanks Randy


Buck Weckman

Brownsville, Ca.

By Richard Crist, OMD


     Our hearts went out to the mom/pop hog farmers, their employees, and local communities that were adversely affected by Trumps trade-wars. Trump immediately gave them billions in aid to help them survive and keep them loyal to him. It has now come to light that most of these hog farms are owned or rigidly controlled by giant corporations that don't hire locally, rather use illegal aliens that will work cheap, sometimes for cash, in terrible conditions, without benefits, and they keep quiet about it.


     Confined Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs), who produce 90% of meat, eggs, and dairy in the United States, are the biggest polluters in the USA and the biggest contributors to drought than any other industry.  They are in the top tier in causing Global Warming. And, next to cattle, pigs are the worst contributors.


     These CAFOs pollute the air, ground, and water locally and afar, without regulations that control their waste or smell. The excrement is dumped, untreated, like from your septic tank, into giant poop/pee lakes that can be many acres in size, and then sprayed directly on the ground.


     The stench form these CAFOs pollute the air for miles around them. The urine and poop saturates the ground rendering it useless with E-coli, antibiotics and other diseases that end up in your ground water and waterways all the way to the Gulf of Mexico. There along with other agricultural waste form a dead-zone in the water the size of New Jersey.


     Countries like China are shifting their pollution problems to the USA by buying into the US pork industry and raising their pigs here, then shipping them home, getting the "pie" and leaving the "poop." China alone  owns 1 in 4 pigs in the United States so the Chinese and giant corporations also got to share in the Trump billions, when he supposedly bailed out the mom/pop farmers.


     A hog produces 10 times the waste of a human, so a hog farm of 60,000 hogs in 40 confinement barns, can produce as much untreated waste as the city of Denver, CO. The number of hogs in CAFOs throughout the United States is 75 million and they produce more waste than twice that of all the people in USA combined, with very few regulatory measures, if any. And, cattle are worse, they're ten times that of hogs or produce over 100 times more waste than humans. A human produces about 1# of poop per day, a hog 11#, and a cow 115#.


     Exporting meat from Confined Animal Feeding Operations in United States doesn't make any sense when average Americans are left with the expense in dealing with all the waste products that all CAFOs are immune from. The averse effects on health are major and hard to quantify, the same for Global Warming, and the affects on local environments where they reside. CAFOs are a major cause of drought throughout the world, a 1/4 pound of pork sausage or beef burger takes 600 gallons of water to produce, so supporting CAFOs by eating meat should not-resonate well with Californians.


     Also, the World eats steak while you get cow-pies, and it's 10 times worse than your pig polluting problem. The poop from a herd of just 4000 produces as much untreated waste as the city of Sacramento, confined on one 8 acre farm, and what a smell. Cattle are supposed to graze on land, naturally fertilizing it; instead of being confined to a space where they can't hardly move while standing, eating, and sleeping in excrement.


     You can help save the planet, advocate against inhumane animal conditions, improve your health, fight drought, and save money by cutting your meat, egg, and dairy eating habits in half. And, this "diet for your planet is simple and easy-peasy to do.


The Washington, D.C. Swamp Watch continues to identify heretofore unknown Swamp Rats oozing out of the murky depths of slimy bureaucracies in Foggy Bottom.


The latest comes from the shadowy workings of CIA and he just happened to be posted to the White House when Donald Trump took over as President. Problem?...he had a passionate bias against Trump. For the rest of the story, the following is an article, in part, by Paul Sperry, RealClearInvestigations October 30, 2019.

For a town that leaks like a sieve, Washington has done an astonishingly effective job keeping from the American public the name of the anonymous “whistleblower" who triggered impeachment proceedings against President Trump — even though his identity is an open secret inside the Beltway.


More than two months after the official filed his complaint, pretty much all that’s known publicly about him is that he is a CIA analyst who at one point was detailed to the White House and is now back working at the CIA.

But the name of a government official fitting that description — Eric Ciaramella — has been raised privately in impeachment depositions, according to officials with direct knowledge of the proceedings, as well as in at least one open hearing held by a House committee not involved in the impeachment inquiry. Fearing their anonymous  witness could be exposed, Democrats this week blocked Republicans from asking more questions about him and intend to redact his name from all deposition transcripts.


Federal documents reveal that the 33-year-old Ciaramella, a registered Democrat held over from the Obama White House, previously worked with former Vice President Joe Biden and former CIA Director John Brennan, a vocal critic of Trump who helped initiate the Russia “collusion” investigation of the Trump campaign during the 2016 election.


Further, Ciaramella (pronounced char-a-MEL-ah) left his National Security Council posting in the White House’s West Wing in mid-2017 amid concerns about negative leaks to the media. He has since returned to CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia.


“He was accused of working against Trump and leaking against Trump,” said a former NSC official, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss intelligence matters.


Also, Ciaramella huddled for “guidance” with the staff of House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, including former colleagues also held over from the Obama era whom Schiff’s office had recently recruited from the NSC. Schiff is the lead prosecutor in the impeachment inquiry.


And Ciaramella worked with a Democratic National Committee operative who dug up dirt on the Trump campaign during the 2016 election, inviting her into the White House for meetings, former White House colleagues said. The operative, Alexandra Chalupa, a Ukrainian-American who supported Hillary Clinton, led an effort to link the Republican campaign to the Russian government. “He knows her. He had her in the White House,” said one former co-worker, who requested anonymity to discuss the sensitive matter.


Documents confirm the DNC opposition researcher attended at least one White House meeting with Ciaramella in November 2015.  She visited the White House with a number of Ukrainian officials lobbying the Obama administration for aid for Ukraine.


With Ciaramella’s name long under wraps, interest in the intelligence analyst is so high that a handful of former colleagues have compiled a roughly 40-page research dossier on him. A classified version of the document is circulating on Capitol Hill, and briefings have been conducted based on it. One briefed Republican has been planning to unmask the whistleblower in a speech on the House floor.


 “Everyone knows who he is. CNN knows. The Washington Post knows. The New York Times knows. Congress knows. The White House knows. Even the president knows who he is,” said Fred Fleitz, a former CIA analyst and national security adviser to Trump, who has fielded dozens of calls from the media.

Yet a rare hush has swept across the Potomac. The usually gossipy nation’s capital remains uncharacteristically — and curiously — mum.


 “They’re hiding him,” Fleitz asserted. “They’re hiding him because of his political bias."

A CIA officer specializing in Russia and Ukraine, Ciaramella was detailed over to the National Security Council from the agency in the summer of 2015, working under Susan Rice, President Obama’s national security adviser. He also worked closely with the former vice president Joe Biden.


Federal records show that Biden’s office invited Ciaramella to an October 2016 state luncheon the vice president hosted for Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi. Other invited guests included Brennan, as well as then-FBI Director James Comey and then-National Intelligence Director James Clapper.


Several U.S. officials told RealClearInvestigations that the invitation that was extended to Ciaramella, a relatively low-level GS-13 federal employee, was unusual and signaled he was politically connected inside the Obama White House.


Former White House officials said Ciaramella worked on Ukrainian policy issues for Biden in 2015 and 2016, when the vice president was President Obama's "point man" for Ukraine. A Yale graduate, Ciaramella is said to speak Russian and Ukrainian, as well as Arabic. He had been assigned to the NSC by John Brennan.

He was held over into the Trump administration, and headed the Ukraine desk at the NSC, eventually transitioning into the West Wing, until June 2017.


“He was moved over to the front office” to temporarily fill a vacancy, said a former White House official, where he “saw everything, read everything.


The official added that it soon became clear among NSC staff that Ciaramella opposed the new Republican president’s foreign policies.


The Whistleblower, prior to filing, had met with Schiff’s Democratic staff for “guidance." At first, the California lawmaker denied the contacts, but later admitted that his office did, in fact, meet with the whistleblower early on.


Republicans participating in the restricted inquiry hearings have been asking witnesses about Ciaramella and repeatedly injecting his name into the deposition record, angering Schiff and Democrats, who sources say are planning to scrub the references to Ciaramella from any transcripts of the hearings they may agree to release.


“Their reaction tells you something,” said one official familiar with the inquiry.

Determined to keep the whistleblower's identity secret, Schiff recently announced it may not be necessary for him to testify even in closed session.


Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan, the top Republican on the House Oversight Committee, asserted the American people have the right to know the person who is trying to bring down the president for whom 63 million voted.


Added Jordan: “The people want to know. I want to get to the truth."


Texas Rep. Louis Gohmert: Ciaramella was “supposed to be a point person on Ukraine, during the time when Ukraine was its most corrupt, and he didn’t blow any whistles on their corruption."

The casino is a detriment to Yuba County. I am against it because Sherriff  Black said at the meeting at Foothill Lions Club that it would cost about 8 million dollars a year for Yuba County Sherriff’s Department to pay police the casino. With the public services in dire straits, is the casino going to reimburse the Yuba County Sherriff’s Department? (Prop “R” on the ballot)


Also, at the Foothill Lions Club meeting, is was said that there would need to be a 6 story fire ladder and Olivehurst (OPUD) only has a 2 story fire ladder. Is the casino going to pick up the cost for the Olivehurst fire department to buy a 6 story ladder truck?


The attorney representing the casino (Hard Rock) was from Arizona and said this Measure “R” , that we worked on was for “Recreation,” not “Racing,” as we were lead to believe before the vote.


The entrance to the area is in a “vernal pool” and nothing is supposed to ruin a “vernal pool.” I had to pay $10,000 for taking out a “vernal pool” to farm my land, and it had already been farmed in the 50’s and 60’s. Politics involved; it depends on who you are.


The casino is a burden on Yuba County, if they don’t pay to cover expenses both for law enforcement and for a 6 story ladder for fire protection. (OPUD)


With all the Welfare recipients in areas of Linda and Olivehurst, I wonder, how many welfare checks will be cashed at the casino? Will this “high crime” area get worse with welfare recipients stealing to make ends meet? Thank God the school lunch and breakfast program will at least feed the children. U.S. Department of (USDA) Agriculture, SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) is already 75% of the USDA’s budget.


The tax collection should tax the casino for expenses to Yuba County, not burden other residents.


Louise Ahart

Marysville, CA

By Richard Crist, OMD


    PG&E has reduced the people of Northern California to live as if they were living in a Third World Country. Instead of using modern technological advances to create ways to monitor their power lines and equipment for faults that might cause a fire, they have chosen to use the no-technology approach of just shutting off the power when there’s any sign of high winds.


     The people in PG&E’s hierchie who thought up this antiquated idea need to be immediately fired for their lack of confronting a problem in a way that best meets the needs of the public, which PG&E is “mandated by law to serve.” These people, who were in charge, are the reason that these power lines and equipment got into this state of disrepair. That by itself should be reason for their removal. Let alone the fact that they have implemented this harebrained idea that virtually cripples mass areas of the population, causing more harm than any possible good for the people.


    Blacks Law Dictionary states “The test of a public utility is whether it has held itself out as ready, able, and willing to serve the public;” and  “To constitute a True Public Utility, their devotion to the public use must be of character that the public, which it serves, who has accepted the service, has a legal right to demand that service be indiscriminately continuous, efficient, and affordable or they will be subject to the police power of the state.”


     PG&E has not and is not fulfilling their obligation to the public. Instead they’re serving themselves and their shareholders, with this ill-thought-out and disastrous plan. It’s time for this giant, self-serving, mismanaged, bankrupt, corporation to be broken up into smaller more people oriented municipal companies. Like SMUD who has had no blackouts; the public needs a company who will honor their mandate to serve their needs, and getting rid of PG&E management and shareholders is the first step. “BREAK THEM UP”

It is deeply troubling to read in more than one news article this past week that the State Auditor is just about ready to conduct an audit of the City of Marysville’s finances based on outdated information from the City's 2016-17 Audit (source: Sacramento Bee, October 25, 2019, These 3 Northern California cities have shaky finances. Can they recover?).


For the record, in June of 2016, Marysville voters passed a 1% General Sales Tax. In less than two years, the City’s General Fund Reserve has gone from $269,729 (as of 6-30-16) to $2,456,504 (as of 6-30-18) and from total General Fund Revenues of $7,385,154 (FY16-17) to $9,252,199 (FY18-19). In Fiscal Year 2019-20, General Fund Revenues are projected to exceed $10 million. Furthermore, the City’s S&P and Moody’s bond ratings moved up for the second year in a row to ‘A/Stable’ and ‘BAA2’, respectively.


 The City is also realizing the tax benefits of two marijuana dispensaries, as well as opening its doors to allow for indoor Cannabis cultivation, lab testing, volatile extraction and edible manufacturing.


 Just a month ago, the City issued new and reissued old bonds for two burdensome liabilities - its unfunded pension liability and a Certificate of Participation for real property – the total savings to the City will be approximately $385K per year and more than $9 million over the life of both bonds. The City is also currently refinancing a sewage bond that is expected to bring additional savings to the City’s Enterprise/Sewage Fund.

 In addition, cost recovery efforts have been instituted in both the Fire and Community Development Departments, as well as realizing cost savings by changing medical insurance providers, scrutinizing and updating historic contracts and revisiting old payment plans.


The City has also developed a financial model in order to forecast revenues and expenses over a seven-year horizon, plan for the future, and prepare for future changes in the economy.


 In addition to all of these efforts, the City is also on the cusp of updating its 32-year old General Plan to develop a 20-20 vision for a revitalized Marysville that is anticipated to lead to more growth, development and economic opportunity. It’s also developing a financial strategy and plan to address its deteriorating roads and other infrastructure challenges.


 Unfortunately, the State Auditor’s damaging and outdated remarks only further hinder the renaissance of cities like Marysville by deterring already difficult to attract private investment and public-public partnerships, as well as exacerbating historic and negative stereotypes of the City.


 There are plenty of positive stories to tell about the City of Marysville, including its improved financial future. Hopefully moving forward, more media outlets will be interested in telling those stories instead of the ones that keep us living in the past. 


 Marti Brown

City Manager, City of Marysville

think about itA LARGE GROUP of REPUBLICAN CONGRESSPEOPLE are shown as they surged into the secure hearing room in the Capitol basement where infamous “secret” hearings were being held by Intelligence Committee Chairman “Shifty” Adam Schiff. Out of the large group, only about 25 Republicans were able to squeeze into the remaining space of the hearing room.






Following, in part, is the incident as reported by The Hill reporters  Mike Lillis,Rebecca Klar,Olivia Beavers and Juliegrace Brufke.


House Republicans stormed a closed-door hearing Wednesday, 10-23-19, to protest Democrats' impeachment inquiry process, breaking up the deposition of a top Defense Department official who was testifying about President Trump's dealings with Ukraine.


"They crashed the party," said Rep. Harley Rouda (D-Calif.), a member of the Oversight and Reform Committee, one of three House panels leading the impeachment probe.


Dozens of Republicans, including some members of leadership like House Minority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.), barged into the secure hearing room in the Capitol basement where Laura Cooper, the deputy assistant secretary of Defense for Russia, Ukraine and Eurasia, was set to provide private testimony. The deposition got underway after a five-hour delay.


Several lawmakers said that, in response to the Republican protest on Wednesday morning, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) left the room with Cooper and postponed her interview.


“The fact that Adam Schiff won't even let the press in — you can't even go in and see what's going on in that room," Scalise told reporters outside the hearing room. "Voting members of Congress are being denied access from being able to see what's happening behind these closed doors, where they're trying to impeach the president of the United States with a one-sided set of rules, they call the witnesses.”


GOP Reps. Andy Biggs (Ariz.), Bradley Byrne (Ala.), Matt Gaetz (Fla.), Louie Gohmert (Texas) Steve King (Iowa) and members of the conservative House Freedom Caucus also entered the room.


“When we walked in, they looked dumbfounded and the room just came to a stop," Byrne told The Hill. "And we lined up along the wall or sat in chairs expecting them to do something. And after several minutes, Adam Schiff got up and just walked out. And while he was walking out I said, 'Don't go.’” 


Republicans have repeatedly blasted Democrats for choosing to only allow members of the House Intelligence, Oversight and Foreign Affairs committees to attend the hearings and depositions, arguing the information and transcripts should be made available to all members given the gravity of the consequences of impeachment.

They have also accused Democrats of selectively leaking information from those hearings to the press.


Rep. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.) said Schiff said “nothing” after Republicans forced their way into the hearing room.

“He doesn’t have the guts to come talk to us,” Marshall said. “He left, he just got up and left. He doesn't have the guts to tell us why we can’t come in the room, why he doesn't want this to be transparent. It’s the biggest facade, biggest farce of my life.”


But Rep. Mike Waltz (R-Fla.) said Schiff postponed the hearing as he left the room. Waltz also said Schiff was “threatening” GOP members with ethics violations.


Some of the Republicans who barged into the hearing room were in possession of cellphones, a violation of the rules governing the so-called sensitive compartmented information facility, known as the SCIF, where the depositions have been taking place.


Roughly 25 Republican lawmakers occupied the room, according to Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.). "It appears that they're refusing to leave," she said at the time.


Wasserman Schultz, who said Cooper was not in the room when the Republicans entered, added that impeachment probe has "far too much fact for their comfort level, so they have to try to stop it from moving forward."


The move by House Republicans comes a day after another witness, top diplomat William Taylor, testified that Trump withheld military aid to Ukraine to pressure the country to conduct a pair of investigations — one into 2016 election hacking, the other into the family of former Vice President Joe Biden — that might have helped Trump's reelection campaign next year.


Scalise on Tuesday led more than 50 GOP members in a floor speech rally railing against impeachment efforts. The previous day, Trump called on Republicans to be more vocal in their defense of him as Democrats push forward with their impeachment efforts.


Some Democrats were outraged by GOP lawmakers bringing cellphones and cameras into a secure room.

"In short, they have compromised the security of the room. And they not only brought in their unauthorized devices, they may have brought in the Russian and Chinese with electronics in a secure space," Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) told reporters.


Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), a member of the Oversight Committee and a key Trump supporter, suggested the concerns over the cellphones were overblown.


“There's no cameras or phones in the SCIF, so I think that those phones actually went in, just because everybody went in,” Meadows told reporters. “I can tell you I actually collected phones and brought them back out. You certainly want a secure environment but at the same time I think everybody wants to hear exactly what's going on.”


Rep. Chris Stewart (R-Utah), a member of the Intelligence Committee who is allowed in the closed-door hearings, said Republicans were not trying to stop the hearing.

“We want to hear from this witness but so do the other members of Congress," he said. "This may be within House rules, that’s not the question. The question is, is it a good idea to try and impeach the president in secret hearings?”


Asked whether Republicans will attempt to enter other closed-door hearings, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) told reporters that the GOP “will continue to fight to find information because we have a responsibility to our constituents and we will not be denied that.”


Other Republicans who took part in the action included Reps. Mark Walker (N.C.), Jody Hice (Ga.), Mo Brooks (Ala.) Buddy Carter (Ga.), Doug LaMalfa (Calif.), Alex Mooney (W.Va.), Gary Palmer (Ala.) and Bill Johnson (Ohio). 

I am glad I am old as I remember what a great state California was and it was simply called the GOLDEN STATE. And everyone new which state you were talking about.  Now we are simply known as the Garbage dump. This is what the socialist Democrats have down to this once beautiful state of ours. The once jewel of the west coast SAN FRANCISCO it was also the jewel of the world now a garbage pit. What is really scary is the voters seam O.K. WITH THIS.


Donald E Lewis


The Three Amigos, House Speaker Pelosi, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and Majority Whip Steny Hoyer had an abrupt press conference after they walked out of a meeting at the White House on the Turkey-Kurd problem in the Mid-East.


Speaker Pelosi summed up the gathering as an opportunity for the president to have a “Meltdown”…and that’s the reason for leaving the meeting.


Representative Kevin McCarthy, House Minority Speaker, had a totally different story to tell on Laura Ingraham’s Fox News show that same night, November 16, 2019, in part:


INGRAHAM: The Democrats can dish it out but they can't take it. Wow. I was expecting one of them to go like the Three Stooges. All right, joining me now the other side of the story, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy. All right, Congressman you were in the meeting. Accurate description.


REP. KEVIN MCCARTHY, R-CALIF.: Not at all. You know the most interesting part. They left the meeting. Other Democrats stayed and we had the most normal meeting you could ever have. It was productive with the General, the Joint Chiefs, the Secretary of Defense and the President talking about how do we keep the homeland safe.


INGRAHAM: Tell us what happened.


MCCARTHY: The President starts out and he provides the letter that he sent to the President of Turkey Erdogan. Very strong letter not to go into this area, as he passes it around, he starts with me, we hand it to every leader. You know what Speaker Pelosi did. She doesn't read it, she turns it over flat to show in the President's face, she's not going to read his letter.


Then she starts to smile. The President calls her out, “Nancy. Why are you laughing? This is a serious item.” The General, the Joint Chief tells how he recommended to the President that he removed some of our men because they were in danger. He didn't want them to be harmed. We've got the Vice President over in Turkey trying to get a ceasefire and everything they care about is impeachment.


INGRAHAM: They were looking for a fight coming in. When I saw those three come out to the cameras. Literally,  that was like the Three Stooges.


MCCARTHY: They meet beforehand, and they say the exact same thing. When they'd ask the President a question, the Secretary of Defense goes, I had that. No, the President has to answer. And the President goes to answer - it was so amazing. I've never seen this.


INGRAHAM: But Trump has been listening to them, jaw boning about him for months and months. That's two, or three years now. I mean they’re liars. He's this. He's Russian asset. I mean these have said the most hateful horrible things about him and he's supposed to just sit there and say, how the grandkids, Nancy? How's San Francisco? How's Paul? How are they all doing?


All right Congressman, here's what your colleague Steny Hoyer, one of the three amigos said about your characterization of the meeting today.


HOYER: I worked closely with Mr. McCarthy and I tried to be constructive. I think many times he tries to be constructive, but I don't consider him an objective source of information on President Trump.

INGRAHAM: So, Americans shouldn't consider you objective, but the media should just lap up anything they say because they would never ever mischaracterize.


MCCARTHY: The idea that Schiff lied to the American public that he had proof beyond circumstantial. These people are infatuated. They're fixated on impeaching this President instead of worrying about fixing our problems. You would be appalled.


INGRAHAM: I didn't see one person on that debate stage last night and I think they know it. They've got to try to remove him from office. They know they're not going to win this election. I don't care. I'm just going to keep saying it. I think they know. And they have to come out of meeting saying, well, it was a meltdown, it was a meltdown. How many times has she said that? Back in May, they said, it was a meltdown.


MCCARTHY: This is the important part. Who is the leader? The president is the person who stayed in the room and had a discussion.




MCCARTHY: The people who left the room are the ones who can't handle it. If you're going to have an exchange of ideas, but you can't handle it, you get up and walk out.


INGRAHAM: The walkout was planned. It's like the kids who wanted a new candy machine in the cafeteria, we're going to walk out, we didn't get the candy machine. That's exactly what's going on here.


MCCARTHY: This isn't the first time she's done it. This is pattern behavior. And when she left, she made a statement that was like threatening the President. And I believe -- I took it about an impeachment --


INGRAHAM: What did she say?


MCCARTHY: She said, “You just watch what we'll do.” You could see it in her eyes. And I took that to mean that you watch what we do about impeachment.


INGRAHAM: Don't mess with granny. Don't mess with granny. She's mad.


MCCARTHY: Yes. And she's trying to make a determination without having any facts, just as she moved to impeachment inquiry without waiting 48 hours to see the letter to the Turkish President.


INGRAHAM: Was Trump mad about that vote, the Kurd vote?


MCCARTHY: Not at all. He supports it. Remember this is five things in there. The president, I'm sitting in the Oval Office, he says he supports all five. This isn't about the president. The president sent a letter to the president of Turkey and said, “Don't come in this area.” That is exactly what he said.


INGRAHAM: He said he was going to pull these troops out. Why is everyone surprised he wants to pull the troops out. He said he was going to pull the troops. He ran on it, Obama ran on it, and the American people didn't want to go into Syria. That's why Obama didn't go into Syria, they didn't want it.


MCCARTHY: You know what, I was in that same room when President Obama was president. He put a redline, and he said he was really going to --


INGRAHAM: How many of these Democrats who are complaining now complain about that? How many of them are complaining about what's going to happen to the Kurds, they're going to be in jeopardy? And no one ever talks about the poor Christians. They've been completely displaced and subjugated, and no one ever talks about the Christians.


MCCARTHY: You know why they are so shocked? They have a president now who keeps his word. The president likes to joke he kept more promises then he made. But he actually is governing exactly what he said he would do.

by Richard Crist, Nevada County


     PG&Es bogus "safety shutdown" was to protect the safety of their company and the safety of their stockholders investment from the possibility of another expensive fire due to equipment malfunction. Do they malfunction from high winds or a lack of maintenance to that equipment. Or is this shutdown just a test to gauge peoples reaction for future shutdowns, as some out-of-state news outlets reported?


     It's certainly not for the safety of the public to whom it serves, why should PG&E start thinking about that now? Either way PG&E keeps on failing the public, and has therefore violated its Trust to the public. This shutdown of power throughout Northern California is just another example of PG&Es misdeeds.


     Instead of being ready, willing, and  able to serve the people, PG&E has chosen to become self-serving putting the interests of their company and stockholders above that of the public. When a "Public Utility" shifts their duty away from the public, this public utility then loses its franchise to use public property, and all other rights including its virtual monopoly on the energy market.


     The immoral character that PG&E has displayed in indiscriminately removing power from everyone has essentially discriminated against the elderly, the sick, the poor and disenfranchised rendering them destitute without an alternative means to provide power for necessary needs for survival.


     Over the years all the people, young & old, rich & poor have accepted the services of PG&E and the people have a legal right to demand that these service be continuous, with reasonable efficiency, and with reasonable fees for those services. This shutdown was not reasonable, nor was trying to provide an alternate source of electricity reasonable.


     Having to buy a generator, buy and store fuel, is not a reasonable fee to replace electrical services that PG&E arbitrarily withdrew from the public. What if you could not afford a generator and the cost to run it. Or if you couldn't find a generator (they were all sold out), or find the fuel to run it (there were no gas stations open), For most people, they had to toughen up and do without power.


     Shutting down a large portion of California because of the possibility that PG&Es faulty infrastructure (mismanagement?) might malfunction and cause a fire is not sufficient reason to deprive millions of people the essential need of electricity; and if this was a test to see how people would react, then the management of PG&E needs to be replaced with competent and forward thinking people, to replace this group of clowns. And, if that doesn't happen then PG&E needs to nationalized. Being able to arbitrarily shut down the powers-grid is to much power for a private company to have, especially one ran by clowns.


     PG&E also has to stand accountable for all the hundreds of millions of dollars in losses that the public has incurred, and what businesses and local governments have incurred. This is a dark time for PG&E and this shutdown is saying that they haven't learned any lessons from recent misdeeds, they need to be ashamed of themselves and they need to payback $-for-$ for this atrocity that they needlessly caused.

I am writing concerning your comment about County Supervisors to blocking on Facebook. 


Our County Supervisor, Andy Vasquez, will not respond either on Facebook or his county page to any questions that my husband and I both have asked him concerning the construction on Lindhurst Ave, south of the Shell gas station. I realize that he is upset with us for not voting for him last election but he could at least respond to questions from his constituents regardless of how we vote. Mr. Vasquez is suppose to be representing us regardless of how we vote.


Another question is concerning all of his campaign signs that are still are still up around Erle Rd. southbound 70 off ramp and Simpson Lane. My understanding was all campaign signs must be within a certain time of the election.


Vonnie Sick



Editors Note: Yuba County Supervisors are above the law; so they think.

I think that we can all agree, that in our nation’s capital, there is a lot of political strife and division. The nation’s business is not going to get done, for at least one more challenging year in the US Congress.


Let me share some timeless wisdom from Paul’s letter to his fellow pastor Titus on the isle of Crete. From the King James version: Titus 3:1 &2.


“Put them in mind to be subject to principalities and powers, to obey magistrates, to be ready to every good work.


To speak evil of no man, to be no brawlers, but gentile, showing all meekness unto all men.”


So Democrats, please, let Americans decide at the ballot box, who  our President should be in 2020. For most voters have seen enough fighting over Trump’s impeachment in our Congress in 2019.


Larry Matulich

Stockton, CA

It seems former Acting Attorney General Rod Rosenstein was one of the main Swamp Rat characters in the “Take Down Trump” effort from the Git-Go…according to Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton’s October 2, 2019 missive that follows:


 (Washington, DC) Judicial Watch released 145 pages of Rod Rosenstein’s communications that include a one-line email from Rod Rosenstein to Robert Mueller stating, “The boss and his staff do not know about our discussions” and “off the record” emails with major media outlets around the date of Mueller’s appointment.


Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit after the DOJ failed to respond to a September 21, 2018, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:19-cv-00481)). Judicial Watch seeks:


Any and all e-mails, text messages, or other records of communication addressed to or received by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein between May 8, 2017, and May 22, 2017.


The time period referred to in this suit is critical. On May 9, 2017, Rosenstein wrote a memo to President Trump recommending that FBI Director James Comey be fired. That day, President Trump fired Comey. Just three days later, on May 12, Rosenstein sent an email assuring Robert Mueller that “The boss and his staff do not know about our discussions.”


In a May 16, 2017 email, sent the day before Mueller’s appointment, Rosenstein emailed former Bush administration Deputy Attorney General and current Kirkland & Ellis Partner, Mark Filip stating, “I am with Mueller. He shares my views. Duty Calls.  Sometimes the moment chooses us.”


And on May 17 Rosenstein appointed former FBI Director Robert Mueller to investigate Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election.


Also, during the same time period, between May 8 and May 17, Rosenstein met with then-acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe and other senior Justice Department FBI officials to discuss wearing a wire and invoking the 25th Amendment to remove President Trump.


The documents also show that, again during the same time period, Rod Rosenstein was in direct communication with reporters from 60 Minutes, The New York Times and The Washington Post. In an email exchange dated May 2017, Rosenstein communicated with New York Times reporter Rebecca Ruiz to provide background for this article about himself. Ruiz emailed Rosenstein a draft of the article, and he responded with off-the-record comments and clarifications.


  • In an email exchange on May 17, 2017, the day of Mueller’s appointment, Rosenstein exchanged emails with 60 Minutes producer Katherine Davis in which he answered off-the-record questions about Mueller’s scope of authority and chain of command:

Rosenstein: “Off the record: This special counsel is a DOJ employee. His status is similar to a US Attorney.”


Davis: “Good call on Mueller. Although I obviously thought you’d be great at leading the investigation too.”

  • * On May 17, 2017, in an email exchange with Washington Post journalist Sari Horwitz and the subject line “Special Counsel” Rosenstein and Horwitz exchanged:

 Rosenstein: “At some point, I owe you a long story. But this is not the right time for me to talk to anybody.”


Horwitz: “Now, I see why you couldn’t talk today! Obviously, we’re writing a big story about this. Is there any chance I could talk to you on background about your decision?”


“These astonishing emails further confirm the corruption behind Rosenstein’s appointment of Robert Mueller,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The emails also show a shockingly cozy relationship between Mr. Rosenstein and anti-Trump media reporters.”


On September 11, Judicial Watch released 14 pages of records from the Department of Justice showing officials’ efforts in responding to media inquiries about DOJ/FBI talks allegedly invoking the 25th Amendment to “remove” President Donald Trump from office and former Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein offering to wear a “wire” to record his conversations with the president.


On September 23, Judicial Watch released a two-page memo, dated May 16, 2017, by then-Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe detailing how then-Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein proposed wearing a wire into the Oval Office “to collect additional evidence on the president’s true intentions.” McCabe writes that Rosenstein said he thought it was possible because “he was not searched when he entered the White House.

Court Forces State Dept To Release Smoking Gun Clinton Email


The Clinton email scandal is far from over. A federal court ordered discovery in a major Judicial Watch lawsuit that will ultimately result in nearly 20 witnesses having to testify under oath to our attorneys. And, and thanks to the court’s orders, we’re also getting new documents proving the Clinton email cover-up. Specifically, the State Department released a previously hidden email showing that top State Department officials used and were aware of Hillary Clinton’s email account.


It appears that the State Department produced this email in 2016 in redacted form, blacking out Clinton’s personal email address and the discussion about Clinton’s wanting to keep her email address closely guarded.


We sought the email after a former top Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) State Department official testified to us about reviewing it between late 2013 and early 2014.


Despite a recent court order requiring production of the email, the DOJ and State Departments only produced it 10 days ago after we threatened to seek a court order to compel its production.


In other words, we just caught the State Department and DOJ red-handed in another email cover-up. They all knew about the Clinton email account but covered up the smoking-gun email showing this guilty knowledge for years.


Charlie’s Comments:


Oh, what a twisted web they weave.  Well, if  “equal justice under the law” is to be served, Hillary deserves not to be concerned about matching colors with her everyday apparel for awhile…not much you can do with shockingly bright orange jump suits…and a hefty fine of at least 60 to 70% of the oodles and oodles of millions of dollars the Clintons pocketed with their Pay for Play Clinton Foundation Scam.  


Put that hefty fine of millions toward Building the Border Wall she wanted to become Open Borders…that would really be a backward slap of Karma.

By Judy Mann


My name is Mary and I am getting old... please do not neglect me...


I see at times I am being ignored my streets can no longer handle today’s modern-day traffic.


My name is Mary and I am getting old... please do not neglect me...


I see my Arches Standing proudly to identify the historic district.


My name is Mary I am getting old... please do not neglect me...


There’s a grand Lake in the middle of my town and its lighted fountain showcases its beauty....


My name is Mary... I am getting old... please do not neglect me...


Let’s not forget the many memories of families gathering together in the many parks.


My name is Mary and I AM, getting old... please do not neglect me...


Let’s Rediscover the beauty! Let’s Revive the History....


My name is Mary and I am still ALIVE...please feel free to share all my stories....


My town is full of memories of long ago. There’s so much History never to be forgotten...


My name is MARY... and I AM, ALIVE, please share all my stories....


Today all I need is some Tender Care, Fresh Water, a Face Lift or Two, and then, I will be Good as New....





Water is the foundation resource on which communities are built.  In response to a question to my North Yuba Water District division representative Gary Hawthorne, "What will happen to the water the NYWD has permits for that cannot fit down the proposed 42" pipe?", the response was, "We will decide that with our Master Plan. Some ideas would be to sell it to fund future projects, build new conveyance systems that don't exist today to serve new customers or provide redundancy, build water storage tanks and conveyance systems to enhance fire protection, and so forth."


A master plan is certainly welcomed and overdue.  The water district is in the best position to lead this effort.  I would expect such an undertaking to begin by asking the water customers and communities, who are served by the water district, what they would like to see happen with this resource, the people's water.  The Directors of the NYWD are temporary custodians entrusted to manage this most valuable natural resource as the people wish it to be managed.  


Much like a general plan update, I look forward to the water district organizing town hall meetings and special master plan workshops giving the people the opportunity to ask questions, get answers, and to help shape this master plan for how the people's water will be utilized.


Charles Sharp

NYWD Customer

Oregon House, Ca