Significance, Not Substance

Why was there no substance to the US and North Korean Summit in Singapore?


The Summit of Significance, Not Substance

Apparently there thousands of people around the world who could have met with the North Korean Leader and accomplished more. At least, that’s what they say on Social Media. Perhaps they should lead this Country, right? Perhaps they can solve world hunger, cancer and every other disease or status that plague’s the world; I won’t hold my breath for that to happen, either. The Summit’s significance weighed more than the substance – and that should show that it was effective.

Compromise is not always easy…especially when you consider the road that has been traveled over the last year. At one point, both leaders were threatening each other with Nuclear War. Today, however, they decided to take a different tone and path towards shelving those harsh feelings for the sake of the world’s safety. No matter how I feel about North Korea or Donald Trump: That is SIGNIFICANT.

I find that many people and journalists are unrealistic. They want answers now, with little or no regard to the sensitive nature of such a meeting. As citizens of the United States (subsequently a country that is within reach of North Korea’s missiles) we should be willing to look for the GOOD in the meeting between Trump and Kim Jong Un and not necessarily in what we are “giving up.”

The Resolution:

  1. “The United States and the DPRK commit to establish new U.S.-DPRK relations in accordance with the desire of the peoples of the two countries for peace and prosperity.”
  2. “The United States and the DPRK will join their efforts to build a lasting and stable peace regime on the Korean peninsula.”
  3. “Reaffirming the April 27, 2018 Panmunjom Declaration, the DPRK commits to work toward complete denuclearization of the Korean peninsula.”
  4. “The United States and the DPRK commit to recovering POW/MIA remains, including the immediate repatriation of those already identified.”


What Are We Giving Up?

It has to beg the question of what exactly are we giving up by meeting with North Korea? Certainly, we cannot be so arrogant to think that we can show up to the summit and get everything we want without any compromise…can we? It sounds like the only thing we are really conceding on is the Joint Military Drills that take place annually in South Korea – for now. Seems like a reasonable “give” in order to receive a promise for verifiable denuclearization on the Korean peninsula.

If we, as American’s and citizens of this world would take a step back and look at things without bias, we might find that this is far better than previously thought. While I do agree that it comes at an interesting time, there is no better time than the present to begin the walk towards peace.

Iran is Hating

Hater’s are going to hate. The question is: Why are we negotiating with North Korea when we just cancelled the agreement with Iran? I think it’s safe to assume that there is a lot that the general public does not know. The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action that was agreed to with Iran is pretty complex, and had a time limit. Essentially, once the time limit expired, Iran could essentially begin the enrichment process for weapons grade Uranium once again. There was something significant about the revocation of this #Obama era agreement – I just don’t know what that significance is.

Click Here to Read the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA)


In closing, we have to understand that this is the BEGINNING of talks with North Korea. There is no “deal”, there is no “agreement” and there is no “compromise” for long term peace. It is a starting point. Think of it as a door knob that is turned and the door is still closed.

Rome was not built in a day, folks.

#POTUS #DPRK #TheSummit #NorthKorea #Iran #Denuclearization #Politics #Haters #JCPOA #Resolution

Personal Foul: Political Interference

June 7, 2018

Pinyon Pines Murder Investigation

It started with the court opening up to go “On Record” regarding the evidence that the jury was requesting to review. The jury consisted of ten men, and two women. They had been deliberating for more than nine days in the Pinyon Pines Triple Murder Trial of two men: Robert Lars Pape and Cristin Conrad Smith. Both men have been in custody since June of 2016.

Interestingly enough, this was the second time they had been arrested and charged in the gruesome murders that took place in 2006. The first time, they spent seven months behind bars and were released in October of 2014 with all charges dropped by the Riverside County District Attorney. This is largely because they did not have solid evidence to convict the two men, and they knew it. All of the evidence that they had was circumstantial and the DA’s office knew that the defense would make Swiss-cheese of the evidence to garner an acquittal.

Around 3 PM in the afternoon on June 7, 2018 – the word came in that a verdict had been reached. This was a tense moment for both the victims family and the two defendants. Tensions were high. Prayers were audible on both sides. One side was begging for closure and a conviction to finally put this twelve-year case behind them. The other, was begging for the two men to be acquitted and released. Even the District Attorney was pacing back and forth – as if they knew that this case could really go in either direction. Shooting for a conviction was going to be a Hail-Mary.

Anyone who took the time to read the Grand Jury Indictment from the first round of charges being filed would realize that this was a long-shot. Evidence pointed towards the two men, but left a significant amount of reasonable doubt – which is likely why the DA’s office dropped the original charges. More than eighteen months passed while the DA did their “due diligence” investigation before the two men were re-arrested on June 10, 2016. The DA’s office cited ‘new evidence’ as the cause for the new charges being filed. So, the long journey of court proceedings began.

Perhaps the most interesting part of the new evidence is Jeremy Witt: a scruffy, neurotic character that came forward saying that Cristin Conrad Smith had said something to him regarding the murders. Despite Jeremy Witt’s behavior and current active court cases – one of which for impersonating a peace officer, his testimony was read in court. Because Witt asserted his fifth amendment right (because of his own run-in with the law) – his testimony could be read in court but could not be rebutted by the defense. Certainly, this is somewhat of an unfair advantage to the prosecutors.

Finally, the other key piece of evidence is the cellular phone data. The evidence indicated that Pape and Smith both went up into the Pinyon Pines area – but the data was inconclusive and was more than likely not what caused the conviction. What caused the conviction? Emotion. Twelve people that had been in a deliberating room for ten days, requesting transcripts and data – attempting to draw a conclusion. It is always easy from the outside looking in to draw a conclusion. Judging by the extended deliberations, it leads me to believe that at least one, if not multiple people, believed in the innocence of these two men.

There was a common denominator, though. Javier Garcia. Javier was a key-witness in the murder trial, but was also the son of one of the District Attorney Investigators in 2006. When charges were filed the first time around, Garcia was given immunity from charges, despite the fact that he was the one that seemed to know everything about what happened on that mountain in September 2006. He was the one that called Pape and Smith – he was the one that alluded to their guilt – and yet, Javier was the one that was not ever looked at because of his relationship with investigators at the time.

I can almost guarantee that this is not over. While there may be a guilty verdict at this time, it seems reasonable to believe that the Court of Appeals will have the final say in this Conviction. Personally, having followed the entire case, it seems apparent that there is more to this story – and that the Riverside County District Attorney’s Office sought nothing more than to consider this “Case Closed.”

The only difference between the first round of charges and the last round was the “key witness” Jeremy Witt who asserted his Fifth-Amendment rights in court. This should have been a red-flag to jurors – and certainly should have brought Witt’s written-testimony into question. Only time will tell now.

#PinyonPines #TripleMurder #Conviction #Appeal #Politics #Immunity