Why is the Trump Administration Refusing to Release Jeffery Epstein’s Client List?

History is full of “what ifs” and other assorted murder mysteries like what happened to the bodies of Cleopatra and Marc Anthony, Alexander the Great, and of course, where is Jimmy Hoffa? Did Hitler survive death in the bunker and escape? Who actually ordered the killings of Martin Luther King Jr, John Kennedy or his brother, Robert F. Kennedy? What became of Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid? 

It appears that another mystery will be added to that long list for future historians and conspiracy buffs to ponder---who was actually responsible of the death of Jeffery Epstein and what of his unredacted list of clients? Even the famous “Hollywood madam”, Heidi Fleiss, allegedly kept a private black book full of clients and notes, so why wouldn’t someone like Epstein?  It’s good insurance.

Well, apparently not if Attorney General Pam Bondi if she has her way. She originally denied the existence of any list but now admits it does exist but won’t be released. Given that the names of some very wealthy and powerful people are supposedly on the list, it’s easy to see why some very powerful people want it buried along with Epstein.

President Trump agrees with his AG, having said that he doesn’t understand the public’s interest in the list, calling it “sordid” and “fake news”. Given Epstein’s reputation, it’s not hard to understand actually. The public wants to know who participated in the assorted escapades on Epstein’s island getaway, especially if the stories of alleged prostitution, drug use, and pedophilia are true (the locals called his private plane the “Lolita Express” for all the underage girls it carried).    

A former top Colombo mobster, Michael Franzese, who at one time was held for seven months in the same cell as Epstein in New York City’s Metropolitan Corrections Center said that with all the security, suicide would be “impossible” (especially given that Epstein was supposedly on “suicide watch” to begin with).  

Then there is the fact that all the security camaras malfunctioned at once (including two which were aimed directly into his cell resulting in missing footage) or that the two security guards sitting 15 feet from Epstein’s cell whose job was to constantly monitor the prisoner, admitted to have “fallen asleep”, spent time shopping online, and going for walks instead of checking on Epstein every 30 minutes as required (they later admitted to doctoring the log book but didn’t face any charges as part of a plea deal) seems a little odd too.  

Other guards who regularly patrol the halls also failed to notice anything out of the ordinary at the same time certainly stretches the credibility of a suicide claim. It’s also worth mentioning that the Metropolitan Correctional Center where both Jeffery Epstein and Michael Franzese were imprisoned is now closed and stripped of all security cameras, etc. 

In addition, Franzese pointed out that the cell was specifically designed to prevent successful suicide attempts (hence being in the suicide watch section of the jail). It seems that to many things simply don’t add up.  So, what’s the official timeline of events leading up to Epstein's death and do they make any more sense?

According to official records, Jeffery Epstein had been arrested on July 6, 2019 on charges of having sex with minors and running a pedophile sex ring operation. The following day he was moved from general population to a Special Housing Unit and placed on observation on July 9^th.

On July 18^th, U.S. District Judge Richard M. Berman denied bail, citing Epstein as a “flight risk” and a “danger to the community” despite having not committed or charged with any violent crimes. And no longer possessed a passport. It bears mentioning that just a few weeks before his death, Epstein had met with a prison psychologist and stated (apparently convincingly) that he wasn’t suicidal and that he had a “pretty wonderful life”… thus far.

Then on July 23^rd, he was found unconscious with a bed sheet around his neck in an apparent suicide attempt, after which he was placed on suicide watch. Curiously, I’ve been unable to find any statements from Epstein or prison authorities about the incident. More oddly, at the end of July, Epstein was removed from suicide watch by Bureau of Prison psychologists. Why? 

On August 9^th, some 2000 documents were unveiled about his alleged pedophile ring activities. Nevertheless, it wasn’t going to be a slam dunk for the Feds and they knew it. Then, his cellmate was suddenly transferred out and strangely, no new cellmate was assigned, thus leaving Epstein, a supposed suicide risk, strangely alone.  The following morning, Epstein was found dead, having allegedly hung himself.

A review of Jeffery Epstein’s autopsy report appeared to show that he most likely died from a frontal strangulation and claimed that there were signs of a struggled according to some forensic experts, including three neck fractures, a broken hyoid in the neck not normally found in an intentional self-inflicted hanging. There were also ligature marks in the center of his neck, which are more common with strangulation and there was no blood on the noose. 

Dr. Michael Biden, a noted forensic pathologist hired by Jeffery Epstein’s brother, agreed and said that the findings were consistent with strangulation by a wire or cord than by hanging with a bed sheet. He added that in reviewing thousands of suicide and jail hanging photos over the last "40 or 50 years", none had similar injuries as Jeffery Epstein's.  

Dr. Biden was the chief medical examiner for New York City from 1978 to 1979 and hosted “Autopsy” on HBO. He additionally served as the chairman of the House Select Committee on Assassination’s Forensic Panel. He was involved in a number of high profile cases including that of Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown, Phil Spector, Michael Brown, and George Floyd.

Epstein knew that if convicted on all charges (which was unlikely), he could potentially spend up to 45 years in prison. Certainly, there was no guarantee the FBI could prove all the charges. There was also the likelihood he could get sentenced to one of those minimum federal “resort” facilities like the kind politicians get sent to. Epstein did, after all, have money and connections, the two main ingredients needed to grease the legal system.

But perhaps that one thing which could hurt him the most is the fear by some that he would talk to save himself. Organized crime is littered with bodies of individuals who were silenced for the same reason. Why should this, if the allegations were true,  be any different? I think Epstein knew and understood that.

If so, where they responsible for Epstein’s death or did Epstein actually hang himself to protect his clients or out of fear of prison? What about the failure of the security cameras or the guards mysteriously disappearing just at the right time? Why would Epstein be denied bail? Why was he left alone in his cell? Was his death an unfortunate nexus of incompetence, apathy, personnel shortages, and budget cuts or just a pure coincidence?

According to a CNN/SSRS poll, 50% of Americans believe there is more to the story regarding Epstein’s death than we’ve been told. 17% said they’re unsure and need to hear more. Meanwhile, just a mere 3% are satisfied with the government’s explanation.

Along political lines, 52% of Independents, the nation’s largest political demographic, are unsatisfied with the government’s take on Epstein’s death.  56% of Democrats agree that there is more to the story. 40% of Republicans agree. Just 3% of Democrats and Independents believe the government’s explanation of events along with just 4% of Republicans.

When it came to the amount of information thus far released by the attorney general’s office, 66% of liberals want more information to be made available. 48% of moderates and 42% of conservatives agree. However, 18% of liberals said that it didn’t matter one way or the other. 32% of conservatives and moderates agreed.

In another survey published by the Miami Herald,  67% of respondents believed the government was engaged in a coverup when it came to Epstein. 69% of Independents said they thought that the government was intentionally withholding information. 82% of Democrats agreed as did half of the Republicans surveyed.

The same poll indicated that 79% of respondents want the Trump Administration to keep its campaign promise to release all of the information regarding Epstein (including his client list). 17% said they were unsure and 5% were satisfied with things as they are. When broken down along partisan lines, 85% of Democrats said that everything needed to be made public. 76% of Independents agreed. So did 75% of the Republicans surveyed.

Another poll, this one released by Quinnipiac University, showed that 63% of Americans disapprove of Trump’s handling of the Epstein files while 20% had no opinion and 17% was satisfied with Trump’s handling of the matter. 40% of Republicans approved, however, 36%  didn’t. Among Democrats, 83% disapproved of the lack of transparency by the White House along with 71% of Independents.

So, what do you think? Did Jeffery Epstein hang himself? Is there an actual list of clients or some other “black book”, perhaps containing some very personal information? Supposedly Epstein's close associate, Ghislaine Maxwell, has a little black book of her own containing over 2000 names of alleged clients; a book which by the way has been sealed by the court while she sits in prison. Why? Was it to protect to those mentioned in the book? Did the guards disable the security cameras and take a walk in order to enable Epstein to hang himself or was there something more? 

 Attorney General Pam Bondi’s recent action to deny and then admit but withhold further information only adds credence to the so-called “conspiracy theory” of a massive coverup. It also potentially hurts President Trump who promised government transparency, but bear in mind too that this has also moved from a simple judicial or political matter into a intelligence coup for government intelligence agencies. There's a lot of very powerful names in those books that can be leveraged. 

For those who say, “who cares?”, I have to respond that we all should. This was allegedly a huge, perhaps global, sex ring involving some of the world’s richest and most powerful men and women, including those in government, finance, military, and business. To say that it’s unimportant or their "personal business" is to say that pedophilia and sex with minors is acceptable.  

It is also to say that government coverup of such crimes are also acceptable. It is not. We are tired of coverups and the corruption with accompanies them. We are just as tired of the two tier justice system, one for the wealthy and powerful and another for us. We’d like some honesty and transparency for a change, regardless of whether a client list or black book exists or not. To borrow from the title of a John Lennon song,  how about giving us some truth for a change?

Thank you for reading "Another Opinion", the Op/Ed blog page for the "militant middle".  Here at "A/O" we truly value our readers. At A/O we seek the facts as they exist, not partisan talking points.  We hope you find our articles informative and engaging. Comments are welcome, provided they are not vulgar, insulting or demeaning.  Another Opinion is offered without charge and is directed toward all independent and free-thinking individuals. We ask, however, that you "like" us on whatever platform you found us on in order to keep our articles available for free to others. Lastly, in order to keep costs down, we depend on passive marketing, and therefore, depend on our readers to please forward our posts along. Below you will find links to the sources we used in writing this article. Thank you. 

 

Jeffery Epstein died by suicide and there’s no ‘client list’,Justice Department says

Epstein didn’t kill himself

Trump says US attorney general should release any ‘credible’information on Epstein

Trump acknowledges receiving briefing on Jeffery Epsteincase from AG Pam Bondi

 

Jeffery Epsteins Death: A Timeline of His final Weeks

Just 3% satisfied with amount of Epstein informationreleased: Survey

Is Trump administration covering up Epstein evidence? WhatAmericans say in poll

63% Of Voters Disapprove of Trump Administration’s Handingof the Jeffery Epstein Files….

Jeffery Epstein client list

How Jeffery Epstein Got Paid

Jeffery Epstein

 

Did We Do Right By Bombing Iran?

What’s your opinion about the United States bombing three nuclear sites in Iran? Did we have a national security or moral obligation to destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities and try to disrupt its potential nuclear bomb making capabilities? Was there an ulterior underlining motive? To address those, and other questions, we need to take a brief look back at the history of Iran and its relationship with the United States.

In 1953, the Prime Minister of Iran, Mohammad Mosaddegh, was overthrown via a CIA orchestrated coup (with the help of British Intelligence, MI6), under the direction of Kermit Roosevelt Jr, a intelligence officer with the CIA's Office of Policy Coordination, and grandson of President Theodore Roosevelt.   

Roosevelt had previously helped orchestrate the 1952 coup in Egypt with the Free Officers Movement to topple King Farouk. The movement was led by a small cadre of Egyptian and Sudanese officers and was led by Abdel Moneim Abdel Raouf, and included such future notables Gamal Abdul Nasser (who became close friends with Kermit Roosevelt), Salah Nasr, and Abdel Hakim Amer.

Mohammad Mosaddegh had been appointed prime minister by the democratically elected Iranian Parliament (the “Majlis”). He had also co- founded the National Front, a Left leaning pro-democracy, secular, and Iranian nationalistic political party. They also implemented a number of land and tax reforms aimed at helping the lower class.

Amid a period of political unrest, assassination, and emerging religious extremism, Mossadegh sought to maintain power and improve Iran’s economic stability by nationalizing its burgeoning oil and gas industry, beginning with the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company.

Eventually, following a series of constitutional crisis events, which included the Shah fleeing to Italy out of concerns for his safety, Mossadegh was forced to align himself with pro-Soviet factions (despite strongly disliking the Communists). This was all the CIA and MI6 needed. The result was an overthrow of his government (and future suppression of the National Front) under “Operation Ajax”.

The result was the installation of a much more pro-Western government under the direction of  CIA recommended General Fazlullah Zahedi as the new Prime Minister. Among the many changes implemented by Zahedi was ending nationalized oil and gas production and returning control to British, French, and American oil companies.

The CIA also organized guerrilla groups to disrupt pro-Communist groups. In addition, the CIA also directed Major General Norman Schwarzkopf Sr. (father of “Stormin Norman” of Gulf War fame) to Italy and “encourage” the Shah to return to Iran. He also helped organize and train Iran’s new security service, SAVAK, in order to help the Shah maintain power (in time the SAVAK would develop a reputation similar to Stalin’s NKVD which eventually became the KGB).   

All went well between the West and Iran until 1979 when Shah Reza Mohammed Pahlavi was overthrown by a small group of religious extremists led by the exiled cleric, Ruhollah Khomeini (incidentally, who was also named Time magazine’s “Man of the Year” in 1979) and was described as the “face of Shia Islam”.  He was later to be named the supreme leader in Iran and given the title of “Ayatollah ”, an honorific title of the “Twelver” Shia sect which was to become Iran’s official state religion (95% of the world’s Muslim population is Sunni, however, Iran is 95% Shia). He was also credited with labeling the U.S. as the “Great Satan” and Israel as the “Little Satan”.

Although the U.S. wasn’t happy that their man had been thrown out of power and forced to flee the country (he was given asylum in the U.S. for health reasons), what really irked the U.S. government was the seizure of 66 Americans, which included diplomats, civilian personnel, and a small security detail U.S. Marines, along with the U.S. Embassy itself in a series of assaults by the Muslim Student Followers of  the Iman’s Line, not to mention instigating hostilities with the CIA’s man in Iraq, Saddam Hussein which ultimately led to the Iran-Iraqi War.

The Iranian Hostage Crisis lasted from November 4, 1979 until January 18, 1981. During that time, then President Jimmy Carter made numerous unsuccessful attempts to resolve the situation. In October 1980, Carter authorized a rescue operation (euphemistically named “Operation Eagle Claw”) which was an all-around disaster and national embarrassment, representing a political, military, and intelligence blunder. Eight servicemen were killed and four were injured amid several mechanic failures and crashes.  

Largely forgotten today, there was also an attempted attack on the U.S. embassy in Pakistan by over 1000 pro-Iranians protestors and an aborted attempt to seize the Soviet Union’s embassy for its “Marxist and anti-god beliefs”.  Some U.S. embassy personnel were able to evade capture and hide in a Canadian embassy before being able to escape through an ingenious CIA ruse popularly called “The Canadian Caper” (a 2012 movie entitled “Argo” details this secret rescue operation).

Meanwhile, the Iranians made numerous threats about the imminent execution of the hostages unless the U.S. agreed to a number of demands (essentially blackmail), including the return of the Shah to face trial and probable execution (which was refused). The Iranians ransacked the American embassy, revealing great many political, diplomatic, and intelligence secrets. Finally, after 444 days, and the election of Ronald Reagan, the hostages were released (this was seen as a calculated insult directed at Carter for the attempted rescue operation).

Ever since, The U.S. military and intelligence community has been looking for a way to overthrow Iran’s theocratic regime. Accordingly, Iran has been ostracized, boycotted, and even had billions of its dollars held in U.S. bank accounts frozen, The result had little effect on Iran’s ruling elite although, as usual, the average Iranian felt the brunt of the embargos. Much of the money was ultimately returned. President Obama approved releasing $400 million in August 2016 and President Joe Biden released $6 million in September 2023 for "humanitarian purposes".

 Meanwhile the Iranian government helped organized, train, and finance numerous terrorist organizations whose sole intent was the destabilization of the West (especially the U.S. and Israel) as well as specific Asian nations by any means possible with the ultimate goals being creation of a global caliphate under their version of extreme Islam.

Key among these groups was Hamas, responsible for the October 7^th attack on Israel which resulted in the butcher of over 1,139 men, women, and children. as well as seizing 251 hostages. They are also responsible for keeping the Gazans living in a state of terror. Hezbollah is another such group, which routinely launches missiles into Israel from Southern Lebanon.

 Boko Haram, who are known for their raids on African villages to capture women and girls to sell as slaves and butchering non-Muslims. The Houthi, who operate in Yemen, regularly launches missiles into Israel and is active in destabilizing the region. Of course, there is also ISIS, Al Qaeda, and Talban, who received support from the Iranians.

It’s believed that Iran has sponsored establishing sleeper terrorist cells in Europe, Canada, South America, and the United States, and is responsible for the hoard of immigrants into Europe (conquest through numbers?).  It’s been often noted that many of these so-called “migrants” are very fit, aggressive military age males, which isn’t typical of the average refugee (also notable is the lack of women, children and seniors accompanying them).

It should be mentioned that starting with the Ayatollah Khomeini, they have repeatedly promised to “wipe Israel off the map” by every means available, including the use of nuclear weapons, even if it meant their own total destruction. They have been responsible, directly or indirectly for attacks in Paris, Berlin, Tel Aviv,  and “lone wolf” operations in the United States and elsewhere as well as dozens of so-called “self-radicalizations” terrorists.

However, resistance has been growing, especially in Iran where women, long denied basic rights to education, employment, choice of marriage, physical mutilation of their genitalia, political suffrage, have been becoming more militant to their suppression, even to the point of risking death. It’s common for resisters to be blinded in one eye, tortured, suffer broken bones, face mutilation such has having their tongue, nose or ears cut off, or have acid thrown in their faces, and so forth. As an aside, this is, in part, those who back the Iranian regime or radical Islam are supporting.

Despite U.S. and Israeli warnings, Iran has been engaged in the development of a nuclear infrastructure, which they claim is for "energy purposes" only (and yet they sit on some of the world’s richest oil and gas reserves). Taking Iran’s threats seriously, Israel has done everything it could to deter Iran’s efforts overtly and covertly (I’m particularly impressed with the massive computer virus and the exploding cell phones of Iranian nuclear scientists. Bravo Israel! Very clever).

However, despite their best efforts not to provoke an all out war, Israel had little realistic options remaining except to go after Iran’s reactors. It’s noteworthy at how many countries, including those inside the United States, who turned on the Israeli government following the barbaric attack by Hamas on Israel or Hamas’s use of private homes, schools and hospitals to launch their missiles, store weapons, and hide some of the hostages it taken on October 7^th (including a tunnel system under a EU hospital!).  

 Hamas has repeatedly attacked or hijacked relief columns of food, fresh water, and medicine, often selling it on the black market for either more weapons or to fund expensive vacations for Hamas leadership. Europe, especially Germany, long been an allies of Israel, now accuse the IDF of doing what Hamas is guilty of. Turkey, an EU and NATO member, even hinted at a possible direct intervention in Gaza. How would that affect NATO's mutual defense clause? Would that plunge NATO into war? 

Finally, this brings us to the bombing of Iranian nuclear facilities by U.S. bombers. Did we have a moral or political obligation to attack those sites? Every U.S. military intervention in the Middle East, from Lebanon, Kuwait, Syria, Afghanistan, and Iraq, regardless of the officially stated reason, has had the secondary goal of bringing us a little closer to Iran.  Was this then just an opportunity to strike Iran after all these years or was it, as President Trump said, an opportunity to make the world a little safer?

According to polls, most Americans opposed the bombings. A poll by The Hill showed that 56% of Americans in general disapproved of the bombings although 82% of Republicans were in favor. However, 60% of Independents (America’s political majority) weren’t happy with the bombings along with 88% of Democrats. 78% of Americans were concerned we will get drawn into a war with Iran.

Additionally, 71% of Democrats said they didn’t trust Trump to make the right decisions on behalf of the United States when it came to Iran.  62% of Independents said they had little or no confidence in Trump's decision ability. On the other hand, 51% of Republicans confirmed that they had a great deal of faith in Trump while 37% said they had a moderate amount of confidence in the president.

 It bears mentioning that prior to the current ceasefire, 59% of Americans in general thought that our attack on Iran actually made it more of a threat to the U.S. and the world. Many were concerned that our attacks might provoke Iran to launch more attacks on Israel either directly or through its many surrogates as well as possibly activate imbedded terrorist cells in Europe, Canada, or the United States.

Finally, there’s Israel itself. Aside from being the only democracy in the Middle East, it is also an important trading partner and a vital source of intelligence information in the region. It also provides a key strategic position for U.S. and allied operations in the Middle East and Africa. Iran has made it crystal clear that it intends to wipe Israel off the map even at its own destruction and there's no reason not to take them at their word. 

Such a fallout would trigger a dire humanitarian crisis regionally as well as globally. Israel’s beef with Iran is direct and personal. The outcome of Iran’s boast would have a severe impact on the rest of the world, not to mention on Humanity as well, which Iran and its cohorts abhor. A nuclear Iran is not just a threat of the survival of Israel. It’s a threat to the survival of Mankind too.

 

Thank you for reading "Another Opinion", the Op/Ed blog page for the "militant middle".  Here at "A/O" we truly value our readers. At A/O we seek the facts as they exist, not partisan talking points.  We hope you find our articles informative and engaging. Comments are welcome, provided they are not vulgar, insulting or demeaning.  Another Opinion is offered without charge and is directed toward all independent and free-thinking individuals. We ask, however, that you "like" us on whatever platform you found us on in order to keep our articles available for free to others. Lastly, in order to keep costs down, we depend on passive marketing, and therefore, depend on our readers to please forward our posts along. Below you will find links to the sources we used in writing this article. Thank you. 

 Free Officers movement (Egypt)

Kermit Roosevelt Jr.

Iran hostage crisis

October 7 Attacks

The Canadian Caper

56 percent disapprove of U.S. strike on Iran: Survey

Voters 51 – 42 Percent Oppose U.S. Joining Israel inMilitary Strike…

Islam in Iran

Nuclear facilities in Iran

Where Does Religion Fit in Today’s Politics?

 

What do you think about religion? Does it have a place in everyday society? What about in public education or in politics? In 1962, the Supreme Court ruled in Engel vs. Vitale (370 U.S. 421), to remove mandatory prayer in public schools. On November 17, 1980, the Supreme Court ruled in Stone vs Graham that a Kentucky Statute requiring the Ten Commandments be posted in every school was a violation of the 1^st Amendment.

So, here we are, having seemingly completed some cosmic cycle. Again, we’re addressing the issue religion in not just society, but in our schools and as a part of our politics. The political Far Right (aka "Christian Right" or "Christian Fundamentalists") routinely call for voting their faith, provided that faith is Christian of course. After all, they argue, America was founded as a Christian nation while others are permitted to practice their faiths out of Christian kindness.

The Left, however, have a very different opinion. They argue that religion---any religion---does not belong in the public domain, especially our school system and in particular politics. Schools should be secular. If a parents wants their child to have religion inserted in their education, there’s plenty of private and religious based schools available.

As for  politics, candidates should be chosen not on their faith, but on their actions as it pertains to the overall public good. Religion in politics runs the risk of creating a fascist theocracy little different from Iran’s.  After all, doesn’t the Constitution call for a separation of church and state? Besides, if the Founding Fathers want a national religion, wouldn’t they have made it official?

Well, to address the first things first, no, the Constitution doesn’t call for a separation of church and state. That’s a misconception. The separation between church and state, while never specifically stated in the Constitution, is implied according to a Supreme Court ruling in 1868.

The court argued that the 14^th amendment (which pertains to citizenship) also requires states to guarantee fundamental rights such as the First Amendment’s against the establishment of religion. In other words, neither the federal government nor states “may make no law respecting the establishment of religion” (aka “the establishment clause”).  

In 1947, the Supreme Court again addressed the issue when Justice Hugo Black wrote on behalf of the court in the matter of Everson vs Board of Education of the Township of Ewing (330 U.S. 1:1947), “Neither a state or the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can it pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another…In the words of Thomas Jefferson, the clause against the establishment of religion by law was intended to erect a ‘wall of separation between Church and State”.

While many of the Founding Fathers where “Christian” in the broad understanding of the term, their personal religious beliefs differed from person to person, and indeed, varied greatly over their lifetime. However, the main reason was that the monarchies of Europe tended to have a formal church which, while not necessarily adhered to, must still be financial supported.

 England had the Church of England (Anglian Church). France, Poland, and Italy had the Catholic Church as did the Austro-Hungarian Empire and Bavaria in Germany while most of Northern Europe had Lutheranism. Czarist Russia was Orthodox as was much of Eastern and Southeastern Europe.

Everyone, whether a member or the official church or not, was required to pay homage since, after all, the ruling monarch was the head of the church and/or ordained by “God” under the concept of “Divine Right” or “God’s mandation” to rule.

This political and religious doctrine established the legitimacy of a kingship and asserted that a monarch was not subject to any earthly authority. In the case of Catholics, since the pope was seen as God’s vicar on earth, monarchs were subject to his dictates on religious matters (though these were occasionally ignored).  

The Founding Fathers wanted to make their new experiment in democracy a nation open to all faiths. This meant that citizens weren’t required to acknowledge any religion but theirs. It meant that under the law, all religious persuasions were equal. It didn’t forbid, for instance, religious symbols in public property. It simply meant that all religions beliefs had the same access to public property. It meant too that no particular religious dogma held priority over any other.

There have been many instances throughout our history where there was a serious concern that one or another religious sect was going to try and assert dominance over the government. For instance, the Puritans and Pilgrims, who settled in the 1600’s, intended on establishing a religious community along their particular interpretations of the bible including that of premillennialism.  William Penn acquired large tracts of land in what’s now Pennsylvania for groups like the Quakers and Mennonites to practice their faith unimpeded.   

There was the First Great Awakening of the swept through the colonies in the 1730’s and 1740’s.  It was an early forerunner of today’s fundamentalists. The Second Great Awakening (approx. 1790 – 1840), which began in Kentucky and Tennessee, expanded the concept of “revivalism”.

A Third Great Awakening, running from around 1855 to 1930, fueled the belief in a postmillennial or pretribulation world and an imminent “Second Coming”. This was a new intensity in revivalism known as “Social Gospel” which applied biblical interpretation of societal issues such as poverty, establishing orphanages, education, ending slavery, prohibition, and to so forth.

Many pietistic movements also started backing the Republican party because of its adoption of an abolitionist platform. Certain  individuals came to prominence  like Dwight Moody who started his Moody Bible Institute or William Booth who established the Salvation Army or Carrie Nation’s Temperance Movement.

 Individuals like Martin Luther King Jr., Billy Graham, Pope John Paul II, the emergence “megachurches” and televangelists like Jerry Farwell and Pat Robertson are seen as early leaders of  what some call a  “Fourth Great Awakening”.

President Ronald Reagan is credited with firmly aligning Christian fundamentalism within the Republican Party which incorporates a conservative social conformity by merging issues like pro-Life, prayer in school, home schooling, patriotism or opposition teaching a LGBQT/transgender/gay agenda in school and what they identify as "socialism" into political action and ultimately legislation.  

President Trump’s election has rekindled the fervor in the fundamentalist movement which had faded under Clinton, Obama, and Biden, which brings us to the question about what Americans in general think about mixing religion and politics. Do the two belong in the same pew?

According to a March 19, 2024 Pew Poll, 80% of Americans said that organized religion was losing its influence on society. 82% of Protestants  and Catholics agreed as did 76% of Black Protestants and 74% of Hispanic Protestants. Also in agreement were 76% of Jews  who were polled.

When asked if their religious beliefs made them feel as if they were part of a minority, only Jews and Muslims said yes with 83% and 55% respectively. However, 48% of those surveyed said their religious beliefs put them in conflict with America’s current culture. This was especially true among white evangelicals (78%) and Jews (59%).

Politically, 84% of registered Republicans and those who identified as conservative said that religion’s influence was in decline. Democrats and liberals weren’t far behind with 78% agreeing that organized religion was in decline. In looking at age groups, those 18 to 60+ years of age were all in agreement with an average of 81%.

When addressing politics and public education, 49% of adults in general didn’t think any religious group was trying to impose their religious beliefs on society. This opinion was held by 65% of Protestants and peaked with 79% of white evangelicals and 71% of Hispanic Protestants. 39% of Black Protestants disagreed.

Among Catholics, 54% also thought no particular religious group was trying to impose their faith on them. However, 76% of Jews disagreed as did 72% of the religiously unaffiliated. 85% of agnostics also said religious groups were trying to impose their beliefs on them.

When we turn to politics again, 75% of Republicans and those leaning conservative thought that other conservative Christians weren’t trying to influence them. But 72% of Democrats and those who are liberal leaning said conservative Christians were trying to impose their beliefs on them.

That opinion was also held by those 18 to 49 years of age with a clear majority believing that they were being negatively impacted by conservative Christians. It was almost the exact opposite for those 50 and up with about 55% saying no.  

So, where does that leave us? In a 2022 poll by Pew, 73% of Americans said they wanted to keep religion away from politics. However, while the Constitution prohibits using religion as a criteria to run for or hold public office, there is nothing to prevent voters from using their own religious standards in determining who to vote for or what issues to support.

Therefore, our political landscape could very well be determined based not on one’s personal religion (or lack thereof) but on that of the voters. The more religiously conservative voters who show up at the polls the more like minded individuals will likely get elected.

For some, that idea is nothing short of terror, while for others its couldn’t come soon enough. The notion itself represents just one of the many growing divides facing America. The question is whether, in this no-compromise environment, can a compromise be reached before it’s too late?

 

Thank you for reading "Another Opinion", the Op/Ed blog page for the "militant middle".  Here at "A/O" we truly value our readers. At A/O we seek the facts as they exist, not partisan talking points.  We hope you find our articles informative and engaging. Comments are welcome, provided they are not vulgar, insulting or demeaning.  Another Opinion is offered without charge and is directed toward all independent and free-thinking individuals. We ask, however, that you "like" us on whatever platform you found us on in order to keep our articles available for free to others. Lastly, in order to keep costs down, we depend on passive marketing, and therefore, depend on our readers to please forward our posts along. Below you will find links to the sources we used in writing this article. Thank you. 

 

What is Separation of Church and State?

BRIA 13 4 a separating Church and State

Everson v. Board of Education

Justia: Everson v. Board of Education, 330 U.S. 1 (1947)

Divine right of kings

Americans Have Positive Views About Religions Role inSociety But Want It Out of Politics

First Great Awakening

Religions Role in Public Life

Christian Right

Religion in Politics

 

 

Federal Employees Play “DOGE” ball with Elon Musk's Cuts as President Trump Fulfils His Campaign Promises

As we close in on Trump’s first 100 days, he’s has cut through the Washington quagmire like General Sherman's march through Georgia. With Elon Musk leading the charge through “DOGE” (Department of Government Efficiency), over 200,000 federal employees in 18 agencies have had their employment come to an end, not to mention 75,000 who have accepted buyouts.

 That number includes 2,400 Veterans Administration employees, 1,700 workers from the consumer watchdog agency, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau,  2,000 from the Department of Energy, and 2000 from the Department of the Interior, including 800 from the Bureau of Land management.

The IRS has seen 6,000 employees terminated and 5,400 probationary workers from the Department of Defense with an estimated 70,000 who may be let go by the time it’s over. 700 workers at the Centers for Disease Control have fired along 388 employees from the Environmental Protection Agency.  

The Department of Homeland Security has seen a reduction of 400 individuals, of which half were from FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management Agency. The Small Business Administration has seen a reduction of 20% of its workforce.

 Lastly, 10,000 individuals from the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) have been placed on indefinite leave. The move is estimated to reduce government “bloat” and save billions in taxpayers dollars.

Meanwhile, some 530,000 immigrants have seen their temporary legal status revoked while some 27,000 illegal immigrants have been deported back to their country of origin as the Pentagon has announced the deployment of some 10,000 active duty and National Guard personnel to our southern border while so-called “sanctuary cities” are facing the possible loss of the  federal funding which keeps them afloat.

So, what do Americans think of the Trump-Musk blitz on the Status Quo? Are all the cuts and reductions justified or is this another example of government going too far? 48% of Americans surveyed by a Pew poll see illegal immigration as problem, so there’s presumably happy with President Trump’s handling of the problem.

As for the mass layoffs, 57% of those polled though the budget deficit was a serious issue, so the reduction in the federal work force would presumably be a good thing. While the layoffs have little or nothing to do with the corruption, 72% believe money in politics is problem. Perhaps Trump can take steps to reduce the control Wall Street has on Washington, such as overturing Citizens United, term limits, and honest to goodness campaign finance reform.

But for that to happen, we’d have to have a level of bipartisan cooperation that we haven’t seen in decades. The divisiveness in today’s politics borders on political turmoil or even a possible civil war. Maybe that’s why 56% of respondents are concerned about the failure of the two corporate owned parties to work together. 48% are worried about the failure of our political system itself and why not?

Afterall, given our “winner-take-all” system, the majority of voters have no representation. Only those whose side wins have any form of representation, while the losing side is out of luck, and when you consider that the largest percentage of voters are Independents, that means that no more than 28% or 29%  of voters (the respective size of the two parties by registration) can claim to have a voice in politics. Of course, when we consider that Washington serves Wall Street and gives Main Street lip service at best, a pretty good argument can be made that voters have little real representation at all.

One issue which has come to the forefront lately is the Trump-Musk duumvirate cutting social services like Welfare, food stamps, Social Security, and  Veteran’s benefits. Supposedly, these cuts will affect just the administrative staff of these agencies and have little impact on benefits. 47% of those polled said they were concerned about the financial solvency of the Social Security and Medicare while 67% are worried about the cost of healthcare.

Of course, cutting back the staff will certainly impact wait times. As anyone who’s applied for Social Security or Veteran benefits already knows, it can sometimes take weeks or months before they receive benefits, which can seem like an eternity when you’re needing the money.

Nevertheless, the reductions are designed to improved the financial stability of safety net programs like Medicare and Medicaid, so that they’ll be available for future generations. One change which will likely occur is changing the minimum age requirement to receive benefits to 70, which makes sense.  For instance, when Social Security was introduced by President Roosevelt in 1933, an applicant had to be at least 65 years of age. That was ten years beyond the average male life expectancy. Today the average life expectancy is 78 years old.

Another possible change is allowing individuals the option of allowing future recipients to invest a portion of their SSN payments themselves into something like an IRA account. Currently the federal government handles all that. Some people may prefer a more aggressive strategy. Of course, should their investments not live up to their expectations,  they could end up receiving a smaller social security check at an age when they need the money most and then what?

In a related area,  63% of those surveyed are concerned about the impact of inflation. It seems that every time we go out to eat or go to the grocery store, food prices have skyrocketed. From 2020 through 2024, food prices have jumped 24%. Egg prices are up 37.5%. thanks in large part to another round of Bird Flu. The average price for a dozen regular size eggs is $5.90. Drought and feed prices has resulted in a reduction of cattle for consumption to the lowest level in 70 years, resulting in 5% increase in the price of beef. Chicken has seen comparable increases in price.  

The price of coffee has increased 1.9%. Orange juice and other frozen juices have spiked 17.2%. The reason is primarily because of weather conditions. Brazil, which is responsible for 30% of our orange juice, has just face one of the worse harvest its had in decades thanks to flooding (due to hurricanes) in some regions and drought in others, as well as a citrus greening disease.  Analysts, reflecting the opinions of 41% of those polled, said climate change may be the culprit.  As a result, don’t expect to see prices go down anytime soon.

Rising prices and taxes coupled with stagnant or declining wages are fostering concerns about the poverty rate. 53% of those polled were worried about the declining middle class and the growing number of individuals slipping into poverty.  As of 2023, 11.5% or 37.9 million Americans were living at or below the national poverty level.

44% of those polled admitted being concerned about natural disasters, which are usually handled by FEMA.   Last year, in 2024, there were 27 weather or climate related disasters in the United States according to the National Centers for Environmental Information, with each exceeding $1 billion dollars in damage and a total of 588 deaths.

In 2024, there were 90 declared “major disasters” according to FEMA. That’s roughly a declared disaster every four days. 41% or 137 million individuals lived in an area affected by a natural disaster. Also in 2024, there was 64,897 wildfires reported. That’s up from 56,580 in 2023. 8,924,884 acres were destroyed compared to 2,693,910 acres in 2023.

California by far experienced the most damage, followed by Alaska, Mew Mexico, Texas, and Oregon (together, they accounted for 46% of all fires).  The cost in terms of private property and economic impact to the affected areas was between $ 250 and $275 billion dollars.

Aside from natural disasters, crime and violence is another area where America’s are concerned. 48% said they were worried about gun violence while 47% were the rise in violent crime. The District of Columbia, New Mexico, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama had the highest number of gun related deaths.

The Department of Homeland Security reports that gang related violence is on the rise thanks to the expansion of ultra-violent gangs from South and Central America and the growth of the fentanyl market.

 Most of the violence is occurring in inner cities, which is sparking fear among city leaders that their city will turn into gang controlled “narco-cities”.  51% of respondents said the drug problem is our biggest concern. 50% said declining morals and values are a contributing factor.

Will Trump’s crusade help ease the concerns of Americans or will it backfire? According to an NBC News Poll conducted in March by the Hart Research Associates/Public Opinion Strategies, 46% of those surveyed thought DOGE was a good idea. 40% didn’t while 14% had no opinion. However, the numbers flipped when asked about Trump appointee, Elon Musk, who is leading DOGE. 51% disapproved the billionaire tech president. While just 39% actually approved.

However, in another poll conducted by Quinnipiac, 54% of their respondents said the DOGE was actually hurting the country. 60% disapproved of how DOGE dealt with federal employees while just 36% approved. The poll also indicated that 50% of those polled did not approved of how Trump handled the termination of the federal employees. 82% of Republicans thought Trump was doing a good job when it came to DOGE. 94% of Democrats disagreed.  

The polling results shouldn’t come as a great surprise. They go to show the extent of our divide. It’s also another case of “NIBY” or “Not in my back yard”. Many Americans appear to want to cut the size and scope of the federal government, but not if it adversely affects them.  

We’ve become too dependent on the government. It’s a sense of entitlement. We’ve come to expect it as normal. We want everything but we don’t want to pay for it. Unfortunately, life doesn’t work that way. There’s a cost to everything. President Trump campaigned on what large numbers of Americans said they wanted, and in keeping with his promises, he is acting on them. But, as the American People are coming to realize, the consequences of having often doesn't match the anticipation wanting.

 

Thank you for reading "Another Opinion", the Op/Ed blog page for the "militant middle".  Here at "A/O" we truly value our readers. At A/O we seek the facts as they exist, not partisan talking points.  We hope you find our articles informative and engaging. Comments are welcome, provided they are not vulgar, insulting or demeaning.  Another Opinion is offered without charge and is directed toward all independent and free-thinking individuals. We ask, however, that you "like" us on whatever platform you found us on in order to keep our articles available for free to others. Lastly, in order to keep costs down, we depend on passive marketing, and therefore, depend on our readers to please forward our posts along. Below you will find links to the sources we used in writing this article. Thank you. 

 

Americans Continue to View Several Economic Issues as TopNational Problems

Here are all the federal agencies where workers are beingfired

NCEI: Billion Dollar Weather and Climate Disasters  

As Trump Works to cut FEMA, data shows there was a major disaster every four days in 2024

National Poverty In America Awareness Month: January 2025

Food Prices are on the rise again. What’s behind theincrease

Trump’s early immigration enforcement record, by the numbers

Poll: Voters like the idea of DOGE, but Elon Musk and hisearly results raise red flags

 

Voters frustrated with Elon Musk ‘s DOGE cuts, new pollfinds

How the Trump Administration Could Leave Families Hungary: Potential Cuts to SNAP in 2025 and Beyond

Trump’s First 50 Days: How is He Doing?

 

With just over 50 days into office, Donald Trump’s approval rating stands at 47% as of March 11, 2025, a slight drop of 2% from his first 30 days, while his disapproval rating is currently 45%, which is up 4% from January according to an Emerson College Polling Survey. Compare that to President Obama’s job approval rating 50 days into his second term which stood at 41%. His disapproval rating was 53%.

Just for the record, incoming President John F. Kennedy had the highest approval rating with 72% (1961) followed by President Jimmy Carter in 1977 with 71%.  Dwight “Ike” Eisenhower, who had 67% in 1953. The worse approval rating for an incoming president was Donald Trump in 2017 with a 40% approval rating. These are all, of course, first terms.

Additionally, 40% of those polled thought that President Trump was doing a better job than expected thus far in his second term, with over 70 signed executive orders, more than any president in their first 100 days in 40 years. 35%  of those surveyed said he was actually doing worse than they originally thought he would and 25% thought he was doing as they thought he would. Overall, 51% of the population is giving Trump an overall thumbs up. Nevertheless, 49% disagree. So, it would appear that all in all, “The Donald” is off to a good start, or is he?

When it comes to the economy, public support isn’t where it should be with just 35% approving of Trump’s handling of the economy. 48% said they disapprove of how the economy is going under Trump. For reference purposes, Obama’s disapproval rating of the economy was 65% at the point in his second term.

53% of those polled said that tariffs are going to hurt the economy. 46% believe that Trump’s economy policies in general are hurting the economy while only 28% actually approve of his handling of the economy and 26% are either unsure at this point or don’t  think his policies will have a serious immediate impact.

However, 48% are happy with his handling of illegal immigration while 40% oppose his rounding up and ouster of illegal residents and tighter immigration standards. According to a Gallup Poll taken two weeks earlier, 46% was happy with Trump’s handling of the illegal immigration issue.

With respect to the economy, his approval rating was 42% two weeks ago according to Gallup. Foreign trade, which takes into consideration the tariffs Trump has imposed, has a disapproval rating of 53% with 5% unsure. 

When it came to foreign affairs, the Gallup poll reported that Trump’s handling of the situation in the Middle East between Israel and Hamas (as well as the Palestinians) polled a 51% disapproval rating with 9% not sure. As for the ongoing war between Ukraine and Russia, his approval percentage stood at 40% with a whooping 14% “unsure”, which statistically is a rather large number given that his disapproval rating was just 6 percentage points higher.

On a slightly unrelated matter, the same Gallup poll said that 93% of Republicans approved of Trump’s job performance thus far. On the other hand, only 4% of Democrats were happy with President Trump. Among the nation’s largest voting bloc, Independents, Trump had an approval rating of 37%. 

It bears mentioning that the 89% gap between Republican and Democrat approval rating is the largest Gallup has ever recorded for any president at any time. That dear readers is history making.

On single issues alone, Republican approval was 92% on immigration. Foreign affairs and the economy was 90% each. President Trump’s Foreign trade policies scored 89% with 80% of Republicans gave Trump a thumb’s up on his handling of the Ukraine/Russian War and the situation in the Middle East involving Israel.

On the same issues, Democrats gave the president an approval rating of 6% on immigration and foreign trade (tariffs being the biggest concern). When it came to foreign affairs, just 4% of Democrats approved of Trump’s policies while 5% like his handling of the economy (again, tariffs are a major factor). Trump polled the highest on his dealings with Ukraine/Russia and with the Middle East with a respective approval rating of 9% and 8%.

When the nation’s largest voting bloc, Independents, were asked, President Trump did a much better. With a 37% overall approval rate, Trump had a 40% positive rating on his handling of the illegal immigration issue. 37% like his handling of foreign affairs. However, when it came to foreign trade, the Middle East, and the Ukraine/Russian war, Trump managed only 33% each. His worse poll number was the economy with 31%.

As an aside, the Gallup Poll had some encouraging news for Congress. The approval rating for the “Millionaire’s Club” went from a pathetic 13% in May 2024 to a dismal 29% at the end of February 2025. Way to go folks! You need another raise.

A CNN Poll conducted on March 5^th,  just after President Trump’s tariffs against China, Canada, and Mexico went into effect resulted in a drop of 1300 points in the Dow Jones Industrial Average. The S&P 500 fell 1.2% while the Nasdaq  saw a drop of  0.35% as the markets braced for the inevitable retaliatory response from America’s biggest importers.

Tariffs of 25% were imposed on imports from Canada and Mexico while an additional 10% tariff was added onto China’s already 10% tariff bringing the total tariffs on Chinese imports to 20%.

President Trump’s first address to Congress (which ran a record setting one hour and 40 minutes) was received well according to a poll conducted by a CBS poll. According to the results, 69% of viewers approved of the speech. A YouGov poll put the approval numbers higher at 76%. 

According to the CBS poll, the majority of the 37 million who watched Trump’s speech were Republicans, 51%, while 27% were Independents and 20% were Democrats. 74% thought Trump’s presentation was “presidential” as well as “entertaining” while 71% said they were “inspired” by the speech.

 63% of those surveyed said Trump focused on topics that mattered the most to them, especially eliminating government waste and cutting back on unnecessary spending (77%) which is being led by Elon Musk’s “DOGE” or Department of Government Efficiency program. Equally, 77% approved of President Trump’s plans for reducing illegal immigration and reforming our immigration system. Imposing tariffs on China, Canada, and Mexico as well as his comments regarding the Ukraine/Russian war also received strong approval numbers.

Meanwhile, Congressional Democrats received a wave of negative backlash to their “protest” of the president’s speech, most notably Trump’s introduction of 13 year old cancer survivor Devarjay “DJ” Danie (“DJ” has been fighting brain cancer). The most common response about the Democrat’s refusal to acknowledge the young man was “heartless” and “cruel”. It certainly wasn’t their best moment. In addition to be honored by the president, “DJ” was made an honorary Secret Service agent by Steve Curran, the new director of the Secret Service.

Rep. Al Green (D-Texas) heckling of the president got him booted from the chamber and censured by House leadership as other Democratic lawmakers sat in silence, played video games on their Smart phones, held signs on ping pong paddles, while others walked out at key moments of the speech. All in all, the strategy by Democratic leadership greatly backfired.  

Finally, where is President Trump falling down? According to a new CNN poll released March 12^th, healthcare is really hurting the president. Just 48% of Americans approve of the president’s policies toward updating healthcare, which may mean reducing benefits (especially for seniors), higher premiums to offset promises of lower prescription costs on certain medications.

The poll also shows Trump’s tariff measures are increasingly unpopular with a 61% disapproval as was his management of government with just a 48% approval rating. In fact, out of eight key issues, the new poll showed Trump has positive numbers on just one---his handling of illegal immigration.

With every incoming administration there is a so-called “honeymoon” period, also known as the “100 days”. Few presidents anymore get the 100 days of their predecessors, and as for “The Donald”, it looks like the honeymoon period, if there really ever was one, is over and we’re headed for a rocky marriage at best.

So, where does that leave us?  Most of the mainstream media, with laughable façade of  “impartiality”, has long ago accused and indicted Trump while excusing the sins and treason of others, so don’t expect any objectivity. The partisan divide in America is perhaps too wide and too deep for Donald Trump, or any future president for that matter, to overcome.

The demonized conservative Right will in all likelihood laud his actions, no matter how austere, until they hit home while the ideological exhausted Left has already lit his effigy on the pyre of political wokeness. I suspect the only thing which can save the nation is some outside threat, which may explain America’s penchant for overthrowing governments and antagonizing nations.

 War has long been our more profitable export. It’s unaffected by tariffs or quotas.  It artificially stimulates the economy and rids us of “excess” human capital, reducing official unemployment numbers, while ensuring the empire expands. But is that what we really need or want?

What America needs is a strong leader who can redirect the economy to industrial and technological expansion, but that often means leaving people at the lowest rung of the ladder aside. That’s where trade and technical schools can help. A college education is not for everyone. However, equal opportunities doesn't always mean equal outcomes. Success comes with a lot of hard work and setbacks. Creating a level global playing field is another. Fair and balanced competition is good for all participants.

President Donald Trump is a “for profit” businessman attempting to manage a non-profit governmental system. The last “for profit” businessman to occupy the White House was “Silent” Cal Coolidge during the 1920’s. His famous maxim was “the business of America is business”, yet his policies in the long run helped set the stage for the Great Depression under Hoover’s watch. That led to FDR's "New Deal" and ultimately WWII. These are no less dangerous times for America.  There’s an old expression, made popular in 1929, “when America sneezes the rest of the world catches a cold” and there’s a strong cold wind blowing.

 

Thank you for reading "Another Opinion", the Op/Ed blog page for the "militant middle".  Here at "A/O" we truly value our readers. At A/O we seek the facts as they exist, not partisan talking points.  We hope you find our articles informative and engaging. Comments are welcome, provided they are not vulgar, insulting or demeaning.  Another Opinion is offered without charge and is directed toward all independent and free-thinking individuals. We ask, however, that you "like" us on whatever platform you found us on in order to keep our articles available for free to others. Lastly, in order to keep costs down, we depend on passive marketing, and therefore, depend on our readers to please forward our posts along. Below you will find links to the sources we used in writing this article. Thank you. 

 

Trump’s approval dips amid concerns over the economy: Poll

Dow Drops 1300 Points in Two Days Amid Trump’s Trade War

DJ Daniel, 13 year old cancer survivor, honored by Trump,has plenty to say about Al Green, Elon Musk, Rachel Maddow

New CNN poll: Americans are negative on Trump’s handling ofeconomy

Donald Trump Approval Rating: March 12 Update as Unease OverEconomy Grows

50 Wins In 50 Days: President Trump Delivers for the Americans