Mike Pompeo versus the Libertarians

Former CIA Director and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo will probably run for president.

People call him a “staunch conservative.”

I give him a hard time about that.

“Conservative” once meant promoting limited government.

But lately Republicans push new regulations and drive up America’s debt by spending more Pompeo surprised me by agreeing that, under Donald Trump, Republicans spent too much. He surprised me again by saying that entitlements must be cut and that we don’t need to spend more on our military. That was refreshing.

Then we talked about the border.

“Immigrants made America,” I point out.

“I’m an immigrant,” Pompeo responds. “My ancestors came through a legal process. This is the di erence.”

But today, I point out, the “legal process” for an ambitious person who wants to work is nearly impossible. “You might get in after waiting 12 years!”

“Whatever the rules ... you got to enforce it,” Pompeo responds.

“Shouldn’t we change the rules?” I ask.

“I actually think it’s time to take a break,” says Pompeo.

Today, people apply for asylum and then stay until their request is accepted or denied. When Pompeo was secretary of state, he says he told Mexican o cials, “You’re not going to have these people traveling in caravans through your country. We’re sending them back to you.”

President Joe Biden reversed that policy. “You can now see 4 million illegal immigrants in just 24 months,” says Pompeo. “This will fundamentally change the nature of our country ... drugs came across our borders. There’s not much di erence between a cartel leader and a jihad leader.”

“Why not legalize drugs?” I ask. “Then cartel leaders wouldn’t exist!”

“It’s a terrible idea,” Pompeo responds. “You see the decimation that we have from our drug culture today.”

“That’s because it’s illegal!” I push back.

“It’s not,” responds Pompeo. “There’s too much product available. Family institutions are beginning to fray in ways that are fundamentally dangerous to the United States.”

His answer makes no sense. Families fray and drugs are shipped despite our drug war. The war creates a black market that causes crime. There are no alcohol “cartels,” only because we ended Prohibition.

Guest Column

Letters to the Editor

Classified documents

EDITOR:

In a recent letter, John Garon makes the case that our government frequently overclassifies documents for reasons other than national security. I happen to agree that is often the case. Many times, I have questioned whether or not something really should have been marked “Confidential” or “Secret” since I had recently read or heard about that very subject in print or on TV. However, I believe Mr. Garon ended his letter too quickly. His observation seemed to imply that this was the norm instead of the exception.

In my 30 years of service I reviewed or was briefed on thousands of classified pieces of intelligence. The vast majority concerned information that was legitimately marked at some level of classification. Most assuredly, all that were marked “Top Secret” or “Top SecretSensitive Compartmented Information” were never frivolously labeled.

I’m well aware that the recent revelations of careless handling of classified documents by certain public figures has focused attention on the subject. Su ce it to say, it should be a matter of profound embarrassment for those involved. Whether or not it should be a criminal matter is for the courts to decide.

ROB PURDIE Cameron Park

Commission confusion

EDITOR:

Moscow and Placerville are separated by 6,000 miles, In the last week of January, however, the geographic separation was of no consequence when it came to a philosophical similarity — a coincidence, to be sure, but also a part of a larger global pattern.

On Jan. 24 the El Dorado County Board of Supervisors voted to begin dismantling the county’s Human Rights Commission. Those pushing for the commission’s demise made two conflicting points: First, it was argued that the

Human Rights Commission was too activistoriented. Then it was posited that the same entity was ine ective and unworthy of county administrative support. No one seemed to understand that both arguments could not be true.

The next day — Jan. 25 — a Russian court was not similarly confused when it voted to shut down the Moscow Helsinki Group, which has existed since 1976 with the mission of holding the Kremlin accountable to the Helsinki Human Rights Accord. The court, doing Vladimir Putin’s bidding, ordered the shutdown, as Bloomberg News put it “amid an accelerating crackdown on the remnants of civil society since … the invasion of Ukraine.”

In Moscow the motivation was clear. In the El Dorado County Board chamber, not so much. But the result was the same.

In Russia and in El Dorado County the commitment to human rights — civil rights and civil liberties — is to be eliminated or, at a minimum, short-changed. This phenomenon is occurring in Asia, Western Europe, Latin America and in the former USSR. Sadly, it is, as The Mountain Democrat stated in a headline, on the “chopping block” locally.

Why? Because it makes some leaders and would-be leaders uncomfortable. Supervisors Parlin, Turnboo and Thomas are in no way in league with Putin. They are not part of an international conspiracy. But their move against the county’s Human Rights Commission ought to cause them to ask: Who else is doing “stu ” (I prefer a stronger word) like this? And do I want to be part of a much larger and more dangerous movement? I realize that suggesting such introspection is almost certainly futile, but I just want to “keep hope alive.”

LES FRANCIS Camino