The Cherokee Courthouse Shootout 1872

Dear Friends,

Folks are led to believe that the shootout at the OK Corral was the worst shootout ever to occur in the Old West. In reality, the gunfight that took place in a vacant lot near the OK Corral was not even close to the worst.

One shootout that was a lot worse than what took place in Tombstone, Arizona, was the Cherokee Courthouse Shootout that took place during a trial in the Cherokee court system on April 15th, 1872, in the Goingsnake District of the Cherokee Nation. Where three men died in the 30-second shootout in Tombstone, Arizona, 11 men were killed in the Cherokee Courthouse Shootout. And yes, later the melee would also be known as the Going Snake Tragedy and the Going Snake Massacre

It started when Ezekial "Zeke" Proctor was being tried for killing Polly Beck and wounding Jim Kesterson in a shooting incident between what some say were family members. And yes, tensions were high due to the strong family ties of the accused and victims. And of course, there was the dispute over court jurisdiction. Some wanted Proctor tried in the Cherokee Nation, others wanted him tried in a federal court.

How did it start?

Ezekiel "Zeke" Proctor, a Cherokee from Georgia, fought for the Union Army during the Civil War. He was known as a local "outlaw" and "hombre" with a bad temper, especially when he was drinking. All of the Beck family, who were also Cherokee, fought for the Confederate Army. As expected, after the war, the Becks and the Proctors did not get along. 

Zeke Proctor's romantic interest in Polly Beck didn't help things. Proctor was also a member of the Keetoowah Nighthawk Society which was a group created to preserve tribal traditional ways and fight "white encroachment". The term Keetoowah supposedly means "full-blood," or "old-time Cherokee," or something similar to that.

So yes, Proctor disapproved of Cherokee women being involved romantically with white men. And since he was romantically in Cherokee woman Polly Beck, he made it known that she should not be in any sort of relationship with a white man. That white man is Jim Kesterson.

Proctor's hypocrisy regarding this must have given a few people something to talk about since both his and Polly Beck's fathers were white men.

Polly Beck was said to have been an attractive woman. Her father was white, and her mother was Cherokee. It's said that at a young age, she was married to a white man, Steve Hilderbrand. He had been killed during the Civil War.

She then married Jim Kesterson, who was a white man. Some say he was either her fourth or fifth husband, but I can't verify that. As for siblings, she had one brother. Of course, two of her first cousins were Deputy US Marshals.

First, Zeke Proctor murders Polly Beck and wounds Jim Kesterson.

Why did he kill Polly Beck? Well, from what I gather, most of it is all conjecture because I don't think anyone really knows for sure. That is, of course, other than the fact that Proctor didn't like the fact that a Cherokee woman who he was interested in was already married to a white man.

Some say Jim Kesterson had previously been involved with Proctor's sister, Susan, and had left her for Polly, leaving Susan and the children destitute. Others say that never happened and that there were no children, or that the children were not Kesterson's. Another story is that Kesterson caught Proctor stealing cattle and wanted to prosecute. And yes, there's ever a story that claims Proctor had been previously involved romantically with Polly, who was supposedly promiscuous. And yes, he was supposedly still in love with her. But frankly, that's all hearsay.

We do know that Zeke Proctor confronted Polly and Jim at her late husband's mill in the Oklahoma Territory on February 27th. They met at the so-called Hildebrand Mill, in what is now Delaware County, Oklahoma, on Flint Creek, just a little west of Siloam Springs, Arkansas. Polly was the widow of Steve Hildebrand, who had owned a share in the mill. After Hildebrand was killed in the Civil War, Polly ran the mill with Jim Kesterson,

Once all three were there, tempers flared and an argument erupted. From there, Proctor attempted to kill Jim Kesterson and did in fact kill Polly Beck. Fact is, Zeke Proctor used a rifle to shoot Jim Kesterson in the head. But believe it or not, he only wounded him. After shooting her husband, Proctor then turned to Polly and shot her dead. 

Later, Proctor would say that he had murdered Polly accidentally. And supposedly, Proctor surrendered himself after the murder of Polly to the sheriff of the Goingsnake District of the Cherokee Nation. The Cherokee court took jurisdiction.

The Trial

Though the Becks were also Cherokee, they were afraid of the Keetoowah Society’s influence. They wanted the federal court in Fort Smith to intervene on grounds that Kesterson was white. The other thing they saw was a rigged court.

And yes, for very good reason because Zeke Proctor was related to just about everybody including Lewis Downing who was the tribal chief. Proctors's mother had been a Downing. And if that wasn't bad enough, they couldn't find a prosecutor who was unrelated to the Proctors. And also, the regular judge, Jim Walker, was also related to the Proctors, and Judge T.B. Wolfe was also. 

Cherokee Chief Downing appointed Blackhaw Sixkiller as judge. Judge Sixkiller set the trial for March of 1872. The first short session ended in recess when Beck's lawyer, J.A. Scales, asked the chief to remove Sixkiller on an assortment of charges. 

Chief Downing temporarily suspended Sixkiller, then called an emergency meeting of the tribal council. The council quickly decided that the charges against Sixkiller were without merit, and the trial set for April 15th.

Believing that Proctor would not be convicted in a Cherokee court, his case is appealed to the local federal court. Yes, including asking that an arrest warrant be issued to ensure that Proctor received a trial in a non-Cherokee court in front of Judge Isaac Parker in Fort Smith, Arkansas. 

The trial was held in the Whitmire schoolhouse, rather than the Going Snake Courthouse. The school building, near what is now Christie, Oklahoma, was farther away from Beck country than the court was. 

The school was built like a bunker. It was built of logs, had only one door on its west side, and had only a couple of windows. So yes, the trial was moved there for a reason. It was see as easier to defend in case of trouble. 

Because the Proctor family was large and well connected, and because Zeke Proctor was a prominent Keetoowah, the Beck family was not sure that their notion of proper justice would be done at the Whitmire schoolhouse. And so on April 11th, a wounded Jim Kesterson and members of the Beck family rode into Fort Smith to hedge their bets. 

There, they swore out a federal warrant for Zeke Proctor's arrest. They also got warrants for seven other men, including two Walkingsticks, a couple of Sixkillers and the entire jury. Imagine how that went over.

Most accounts say that the Beck's did in fact get federal warrants for Proctor's defense counsel and Judge Sixkiller. And yes, in spite of the treaty, the U.S. Commissioner in Fort Smith issued the warrants based on the proposition that the United States had jurisdiction over offenses against white people. And while Kesterson was adopted as a Cherokee, he was white.

The warrants were given to Deputy U.S. Marshals Jacob Owens and Joseph Peavey. They were instructed to arrest everybody named in the warrants only if Zeke Proctor were acquitted. In case of conviction, they were not to serve the warrants at all. It was a recipe for trouble.

And so, there came the day of trial. The makeshift courthouse was jammed with people, many of them Proctor friends and family armed to the teeth. Yes, that included the defendant himself, who was armed. And outside, a crowd of Cherokee eager to hear the proceedings had gathered. Although most agree that they were there to be available in case of trouble. 

Among them were a number of Beck's friends and family. They were also armed and wearing twigs of wild plum blossoms in their hats as a sort of badge. Yes, for identification when the shooting starts.

In the make-shift court, Judge Sixkiller sat at a little wooden table facing the single door. Just to his left was Joe Starr, the court clerk, and Proctor’s lawyer, Mose Alberty, sat on Judge Sixkiller’s right. An armed Zeke Proctor sat next to his attorney. Tom Walkingstick was one of his guards, and he stood near Proctor.

As for the actual massacre?

At about 11 a.m., not long after proceedings had begun and prosecutor Johnson Spake was arguing some procedural matter, the federal posse arrived. Out in front were Deputy U.S. Marshals J.G. Peavy and J.G. Owens, both well respected and well liked in Indian Territory. 

Marshal Owens had ordered his posse to stay out of the schoolhouse and to remain outside until the verdict was reached. The posse dismounted and formed a rough column of twos. They soon started through the crowd toward the door. In the meantime, a few armed Beck supporters joined them from the crowd waiting outside. 

Supposedly, in the lead was White Sut Beck cradling his double-barreled shotgun. Some say he started the melee, but in the confusion that's just hearsay. Actually once inside the schoolhouse, juror George Blackwood saw the grim-faced federal posse and Beck family members coming in the door.

Supposedly, Blackwood shouted, "Look out! Look out! They're coming to get Zeke Proctor!"

No one really knows who fired the first shot, or what made some shoot at all, but soon someone fired a shot and then all hell broke loose. And depending on what Cherokee faction one talks with, Proctor versus Beck, the story of who is responsible for starting the massacre shifts. Some say it was a Beck and others say it was a Proctor who over reacted, either way in the confusion that's just hearsay.

According to some White Sut Beck drew down on Zeke Proctor with his shotgun, but Johnson Proctor, his brother, supposedly grabbed White Sut’s weapon and then took one barrel full in the chest. Believe it or not, Johnson already mortally wounded still hung on to the shotgun, forcing the second shot down toward the floor. 

Zeke Proctor was hit in the foot by a couple of buckshot. Mose Alberty never had a chance. He was sitting at the clerk’s table or judge’s desk, apparently reading some document, when he was hit with two shotgun rounds. He was killed instantly.

As gunfire roared, men began to drop on both sides. It's said that Zeke Proctor produced a revolver from somewhere, but who knows. And as for the stories of him killing everyone in sight, in reality he is said to had taken cover in a chimney corner where he wouldn't get hit.

As the smoke cleared, the floor of that schoolhouse was littered with bodies both dead and wounded. Four dead lay just inside the schoolhouse door. Three more bodies lay just outside. A few paces away was another corpse, a badly wounded man lay moaning behind the building. And still, they say another lay dying in a nearby clump of bushes.

Judge Sixkiller took two buckshot in the wrist, and lawyer Alberty lay dead near Johnson Proctor. One juror had a hole in his shoulder, and several others also had wounds, most of them minor. Close by, in Mrs. Whitmire’s house, Deputy U.S. Marshal Owens was dying.

Widow Whitmire had her teenage sons hitch the family mule to a wagon and gather up the dead and the dying. The bodies of those killed were conveniently arranged on the Whitmire front porch so that their families could tend to them. The wounded were carried inside to be cared for by Mrs. Whitmire and others.

The next day the jury reconvened at Captain Arch Scraper's house. The jury deliberated less than 10 minutes and acquitted Zeke Proctor of murder. And yes, it is said that the jury then departed in some haste after hearing that Fort Smith will send more Deputy U.S. Marshals along with more Becks.

James Huckleberry, the U.S. marshal, sent a second posse down to Going Snake. In command was Deputy U.S. Marshal Charles F. Robinson, he and 20 others including two doctors, Julian Fields and C.F. Pierce there to help the wounded. All toll, 11 men were beyond help.

As for the massacre, the bottom line is that a federal posse consisting of two Deputy US Marshals, two of their regular posse members, six white men from Fort Smith, and five Cherokee who were all relatives of Polly Beck, was sent to Cherokee Judge Blackhawk Sixkiller's court to attend the trial. They were also there to arrest Proctor on federal charges if he was acquitted.

Treaties with the federal government said that Cherokee Nation courts would have jurisdiction over Cherokee people, so the involvement of non-tribal law officers was seen as a threat to tribal sovereignty.

Remember, the federal court dispatched a ten-member posse led by two Deputy US Marshals to secure the arrest of Proctor at the courthouse in Tahlequah. And yes, five members of the Beck clan traveled with that federal posse.

It's said there were more guns than people in Sixkiller's courtroom. The Cherokee gathered several members of the tribe to protect Proctor and their treaty rights. The Cherokee court's trial of Proctor was moved to the schoolhouse, since it was seen as being easier to defend than the courthouse. 

Some Cherokee, those aligned with the Proctors, say that without warning, the Deputy US Marshals and other members of their posse attacked the schoolhouse. But really, according to others, no one really knows who started the shooting.

Fact is, shooting broke out in the crowded make-shift courtroom during the proceedings. Eight of the Marshals posse and three Cherokee citizens were shot to death. It is said that nine Cherokee, including Zeke Proctor and Judge Sixkillers, were wounded.

As for the United States Marshals Posse members who were killed? They were Deputy U.S. Marshal Jacob Owens who died the following day of wounds, and posse members William Beck also died the following day of wounds, Black Sut Beck, Sam Beck, William Hicks, George Selvidge, Jim Ward, and Riley Woods.

Of the United States Marshals Posse members who were wounded? They were Deputy U.S. Marshal Joseph Peavey, and posse members Paul Jones, George McLaughlin, and White Sut Beck.

As for the Cherokee who were killed? They were Johnson Proctor, brother to suspect Zeke Proctor, William Alberty who was Proctor's attorney, and Andrew Palone who was a Cherokee and Civil War veteran.

The Cherokee wounded, Zeke Proctor, Judge Blackhawk Sixkiller, John Proctor, Isaac Vann, Ellis Foreman, and Joe Chaney.

After the shooting, Cherokee authorities moved the trial to another location and acquitted Proctor. District Attorney James Huckleberry in Fort Smith, actually dispatched a large posse under the command of Deputy US Marshal Charles Robinson. 

The second posse arrested several men believed to have been involved in the killing of the Deputy U.S. Marshals. And no, no resistance was made against the second federal posse. One of those arrested was the jury foreman Arch Scaper, who was identified as one of the Cherokee shooters. All of those arrested were taken to Fort Smith, Arkansas, for trial, but all were eventually released due to lack of evidence or because witnesses were not willing to testify.

All in all, a federal grand jury in Fort Smith indicted twenty Cherokees present at the trial, as well as all the tribal court officers. The Cherokee Nation issued warrants for several Cherokee citizens, as well. The federal government later dismissed all indictments. 

As for Zeke Proctor, the man who got away with murder? 

He fled by the time the second posse arrived. Not surprisingly, he fled to Mexico for a little over four years. But by the 1880s, Proctor was back and supposedly had a small ranch. In 1877, believe it or not, he was elected as a Cherokee Senator. 

And as for more irony, believe it or not, in 1894, he was elected sheriff of the Flint District of the Cherokee Nation. Some say, if there was anyone who should have never worn a badge, he was that man.

Tom Correa 

Isaac Charles Parker -- The Hanging Judge

Dear Friends,

Many of us who are into Old West history and Western movies have heard of Judge Isaac Parker, the "Hanging Judge." And since a reader wrote to ask why he was called the "Hanging Judge," I decided to share my research on him.

I also wanted to ask the question if his being called the "Hanging Judge" was justified or not? After reading this, ask yourself if the moniker that was pinned on him was justified for the period and the length of time he said on the bench?

Isaac Charles Parker was born on October 15th, 1838. He was a judge and a politician. He actually served as the United States Congressman for Missouri's 7th congressional district for two terms, and presided over the United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas for 21 years.

Parker was born the youngest son of Joseph Parker and his wife Jane Shannon. He was raised on the family farm near Barnesville, Ohio. He attended Breeze Hill Primary School, followed by the Barnesville Classical Institute which was a private school.

He actually taught school in a county primary school to pay for his secondary education. And believe it or not, at the young age of 17, he started in an apprenticeship in law and then passed the Ohio bar exam in 1859 at the age of 21.

Parker moved to St. Joseph, Missouri between 1859 and 1861 and worked at his maternal uncle's law firm of Shannon and Branch. While there, he met and married Mary O'Toole, with whom he had sons Charles and James. By 1862, Parker had his own law firm and was also working in the country courts.

In April of 1861, Parker ran as a Democrat for the St. Joseph part-time position of city attorney. He served three one-year terms from April 1861 to 1863. Of course the Civil War broke out in 1861 just four days after Parker took office. 

He decided to enlist in a pro-Union the 61st Missouri Emergency Regiment which was a home guard unit. While I would have thought that he would have been an officer because of his being an attorney, he was an enlisted man and reached the rank of Corporal by the end of the war.

During the early 1860s, all through the Civil War, Parker continued both his legal and political careers. Then in 1864, he formally split from the Democratic Party over conflicting opinions on slavery. We should remember that Democrats started the Civil War after efforts of keeping slavery legally failed.  

So now as a Republican, he ran for county prosecutor of the Ninth Missouri Judicial District. By the fall of 1864, he was serving as a member of the Electoral College and voted for the re-election of Abraham Lincoln.

In 1868, Parker won a six-year term as judge of the Twelfth Missouri Circuit. And just two years later in 1870, Judge Parker was nominated for Missouri's 7th Congressional District. Backed by those who were called the "radical faction" of the Republican party, "radical" because they wanted to give Civil Rights to black Americans, he then resigned his judgeship to campaign. He won the election after his opponent withdrew two weeks prior to the vote.

The first session of the Forty-second Congress convened on March 4th, 1871. During his first term, Parker helped to secure pensions for veterans in his district and campaigned for a new federal building to be built in St. Joseph. He sponsored a failed Republican bill designed to give women equal rights. 

The Democrats did not only fight to preserve slavery during the Civil War, they also fought the Civil Rights Act of 1871, which was an Act of the United States Congress which empowered the President to suspend the writ of habeas corpus to combat the Ku Klux Klan (KKK) and other Democrat militia organizations.

The act was passed by the 42nd United States Congress and signed into law by President Ulysses S. Grant on April 20, 1871. The act was the last of three Enforcement Acts passed by the United States Congress from 1870 to 1871 during the Reconstruction Era to combat attacks on the rights of black Americans.

The Democrats at the time vehemently opposed women's rights or to allow them to hold public office. Parker fought them and also sponsored legislation to organize the Indian Territory, modern day Oklahoma, under a territorial government.

Parker was again elected to Missouri's 7th district in the forty-third Congress. It was during this time that he fought for the passing of the Civil Rights Act of 1875. Though fought against by Democrats, Republicans passed it so that black Americans would be guaranteed equal treatment in public accommodations, public transportation, and to prohibit exclusion from jury service. Yes, 80 years before Rosa Parks refused to move from a seat on a bus, Republicans were fighting Democrats so that black Americans weren't discriminated against.  

As for Isaac Parker's conduct in Congress, a local paper wrote of him, "Missouri had no more trusted or influential representative in ... Congress during the past two years". 

In his second term, besides Civil Rights issues, Parker concentrated on Indian policy, including the fair treatment of the tribes residing in the Indian Territory. It's said that his speeches in support of the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the fair treatment of the tribes gained national attention.

In 1874, Parker was the caucus nominee of the Republican Party for a Missouri Senate seat. But, Missouri was going Democrat at the time so it seemed very unlikely that he'd be elected to the Senate. Knowing this, he sought a presidential appointment as judge for the Western District of Arkansas.

On May 26th, 1874, Republican President Ulysses S. Grant nominated Isaac Charles Parker as Chief Justice of the Utah Territory. He was to replace James B. McKean. But after requesting that President Grant instead nominate him for the United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas to replace William Story who was facing impeachment proceedings due to allegations of corruption, Isaac Charles Parker go the job.

Judge Parker arrived in Fort Smith on May 4th, 1875, without his family. His appointment at 36 years of age made him the youngest Federal Judge in the West. And yes, without wasting any time, he got right to work with his first session as the district judge was on May 10th, 1875.

As a side note, the court prosecutor was W. H. H. Clayton. He remained the United States Attorney for the Western District of Arkansas for 14 of Judge Parker's 21 years on the court.

On May 10th, 1875, his first day on the job, Judge Parker tried 18 men. That was during his first session of court, and all were there charged with murder. All toll 15 of them were convicted in jury trials. Parker sentenced eight of them to a mandatory death penalty. He ordered six of the men to be executed at the same time on September 3rd, 1875. And yes, one of those sentenced to death was killed trying to escape. He commuted another's sentence to life in prison due to his youth.

That first group of prisoners to hang as a result of going in front of Judge Parker, were three white men, two Indians, and one black man all of whom had been convicted of murder.

On September 3rd, 1875, the prisoners were seated together on a bench along the back of the gallows and had their death warrants read to them. Each was asked if he had any last words. They were then lined up on the traps. Then George Maledon, the man who was known as the "Prince of Hangman," adjusted the nooses around their necks and drew the black hoods over their heads.

At the signal from Judge Parker, Maledon pulled the lever to release the trap through which they fell. Maledon was said to take great care to get it done right. His prisoners usually died of a broken neck rather than by strangulation. Maledon also carried out another six man hanging later in his career.

Judge Parker's first hanging attracted huge media coverage for its day. Reporters came from Little Rock, St. Louis and Kansas City. Many of the large Eastern and Northern daily newspapers also sent reporters to cover the event. More than 5,000 people had turned out to watch the prisoners march from the jail to the gallows.

His court had final jurisdiction over the Indian Territory from 1875 until 1889. And no, there was no court available for appeals. Because of this, the governments of the Five Civilized Tribes, along with other tribes in the Indian Territory, actually had a legal system that covered their own citizens.

At the time, federal law applied to non-Indian United States citizens in the territory. And yes, Parker's court sat six days a week in order to ensure that he would be able to try cases. He is said to have thoroughly believed that citizens had the right to a speedy trial. And frankly, he gave a speedy trial to as many cases as possible each term. He often kept court going up to ten hours each day. 

And while in 1883, Congress attempted to reduced the caseload on the district courts by reducing the jurisdiction of the court and reassigning parts of the Indian Territory to federal courts in Texas and Kansas, the increase of settlers moving into the Indian Territories actually increased Parker's caseload.

In his time on the court, Parker presided over a number of high-profile cases, including the trial of Crawford Goldsby, alias Cherokee Bill, and the "Oklahoma Boomer" case involving David L. Payne who illegally settled on lands in the Indian Territory.

In 1895, Parker heard two cases involving Crawford Goldsby. The first time it involved Goldsby killing a bystander during a general-store robbery in 1894. He was convicted in that case which lasted from February 26th to June 25th, 1895. Parker sentenced him to death. 

But while awaiting execution, Goldsby attempted to escape prison. During his attempted escape, he killed a prison guard. Because of that, he was again brought before Parker who promptly gave him a second death sentence on December 2nd, 1895. Goldsby was eventually hanged on March 17th, 1896.

As for Parker's clashes with the Supreme Court? It is said that he did so on a number of occasions. In 1894, Parker gained national attention in a dispute with the Supreme Court over the case of Lafayette Hudson who was convicted of assault with intent to kill. Parker sentenced him to four years imprisonment.

Hudson appealed to the Supreme Court and was granted bail. Parker refused to release Hudson on the grounds that statute law did not provide the Supreme Court with the authority to demand Hudson's release. Imagine that.

And of the 44 cases which Parker imposed the death penalty which were appealed to the Supreme Court, 30 of them were overturned and ordered to be re-tried.

In 1895, Congress passed a new Courts Act which removed the remaining Indian Territory jurisdiction of the Western District. So effective September 1st, 1896, the federal court for the Western District of Arkansas was closed. 

Parker's health deteriorated in the 1890s just as the jurisdiction and power of his court were reduced by Congress. Then in September of 1896, Congress effectively closed the District Court for the Western District of Arkansas by removing its jurisdiction.

A month early in August of 1896, Judge Parker was at home when the term began. He was already too sick to preside over the court. It is said that even thought that was the case, reporters wanted to interview him about his career but had to talk to him at his bedside.

Judge Parker died on November 17th, 1896, of a number of health conditions which included heart disease and Bright's disease which is a disease involving chronic inflammation of the kidneys.

His funeral in Fort Smith had the highest number of attenders up to that point. He is buried at the Fort Smith National Cemetery.

During his time, Judge Isaac Charles Parker became known as the "Hanging Judge" due to the large number of convicts that he sentenced to death. But frankly, I don't know if he really deserved that moniker.

Fact is, in 21 years on the federal bench, Judge Parker tried 13,490 cases. In more than 8,500 of those cases, the defendant either pleaded guilty or was convicted at trial. And out of those more than 8,500 cases, Judge Parker sentenced 160 people to death. Out of those, 79 of them were actually executed. Of the others on "death row" awaiting the hangman, they either died while incarcerated or were acquitted, pardoned, or their sentences were commuted to life.

Now, if my math is right, I figure that over his 21 years on the bench, with 160 sentenced to death, he actually sentenced 8 men a year to the death penalty in accordance with what the law demanded at the time. And since only 79 were actually hanged, he hanged about 4 a year in those 21 year. So for me, while looking at the numbers, I really don't know if his being called the "Hanging Judge" is really fair.

And there you have it, there so goes the story of one of the West's most interesting people. From everything that I've read about him, he stood for what was right and did his duty. And that, well that to my way of thinking is really all that one can do in the big picture of things.

And yes, that's just the way I see it.

Tom Correa 

Blogger To Pay "Substantial Sum" To Melania Trump In Defamation Lawsuit

Fox News:

Blogger forced to pay 'substantial sum' to Melania Trump in defamation lawsuit

February 07, 2017

A Maryland blogger has been forced to pay a “substantial sum” to Melania Trump as part of a settlement for a defamation lawsuit over an article containing unsubstantiated claims that the first lady once worked as an escort, her lawyers announced Tuesday.

"I posted an article on August 2, 2016 about Melania Trump that was replete with false and defamatory statements about her," Webster Tarpley, the 71-year-old blogger, said in a statement by Trump’s attorneys, according to the Washington Post.

Trump’s legal team declined to provide the settlement amount. Tarpley, of Gaithersburg, didn’t respond to requests from the Washington Post for comment, but his lawyer confirmed a settlement had been reached.

"I acknowledge that these false statements were very harmful and hurtful to Mrs. Trump and her family, and therefore I sincerely apologize to Mrs. Trump, her son, her husband and her parents for making these false statements," Trump’s lawyers -- in comments attributed to Tarpley -- wrote in their statement.

Trump on Monday also re-filed a libel lawsuit against the corporation that publishes the Daily Mail's website, this time in New York, for reporting on the escort rumors.

Trump had previously filed the lawsuit against Mail Media Inc. in Maryland, but a judge earlier this month ruled the case shouldn't be filed in Maryland and dismissed it. The lawsuit now filed in New York, where the corporation has offices, seeks compensatory and punitive damages of at least $150 million.

In the new filing Monday, the first lady's attorneys argue the report damaged her ability to profit off her high profile.

Melania Trump, the filing states, "had the unique, one-in-a-lifetime opportunity, as an extremely famous and well-known person, as well as a former professional model, brand spokesperson and successful businesswoman, to launch a broad-based commercial brand in multiple product categories, each of which could have garnered multimillion-dollar business relationships for a multi-year term during which Plaintiff is one of the most photographed women in the world."

Those product categories, it goes on to say, could have included apparel, accessories, jewelry, cosmetics, hair care and fragrance, among others.

-- end of article

So OK, this should be a warning to people who lie and fabricate things for their blogs. And yes, I hope the same type of lawsuits can be brought against the Liberal Democrat controlled mainstream news media who routinely runs stories that are FAKE NEWS and/or are "alleged" to be true.

For me, I work very hard producing articles that I've researched. It is not easy to make sure what you put out does not slander anyone with unsubstantiated reported. That's why I really like doing factual post on American history, guns, horses, and livestock. Granted that some have my "opinion" in them, but I look at that as my assessment from what I have researched.

Now with saying that, I'm sure that the couple of stories that I have had fun with with are in my fiction section. The reason that I have them in my fiction section is because parts of those stories, even though it may only be a line or two, are made up. For an example of this, I used a mythical snake story floating around the internet to write a tongue and cheek post. And believe it or not, I had people actually writing to ask where that other information came from?

As for my political posts and my Conservative beliefs and opinions? When I write those posts, I take my information from multiple news sources, back check them, and simply give my opinion.

As for writing about American History? I let real history speak for itself. And no, history should not be partisan. That's why I approach my history posts with the attitude that while I want to give you an entertaining story, I worry more about the facts. I see looking into history as being the same as being a crime scene investigator in that I'm only interesting in the facts of what took place and really not what someone thinks took place.

And frankly, the same goes for my articles on guns and equipment, horses and livestock, or other posts. I do the research and let the cards speak for themselves.
Point is if a blogger calls someone a liar, then he or she better show how they lied. If a blogger makes an opinion, don't just say it is "right" or "wrong".

Tell us what your opinion is based on. Don't be like  the vast majority of the rioters and looters we see these days since Donald Trump has been elected. They run off of emotion and completely lack any sort of logic for their actions. They rant and rave and call people names and attack and thing that that is how intelligent people act. And no, anger is not an argument.

So really, bloggers need to say why they see something as not right or not wrong. And before any blogger calls someone a hooker, other than metaphorically like say calling some politicians "political whores" because they dance to the wishes of their special interest donors, this lawsuit shows that you better have iron-clad proof of it.

And yes, that's just the way I see it.

Tom Correa

W.W. Pitman & His Against The Odds Shot

Marshal W.W. Pitman with the bandit's gun

Walter W. Pitman earned his place in gunfighter lore when he fired an against all odds shot. And yes, from what I can tell, it's the only such shot to ever take place in the history of the Old West.

Granted there was another time that an against all odds shot took place in a gunfight. That took place on February 8th, 1887, when at about 8:00pm known gunfighter Jim Courtright called known gambler and gunman Luke Short out of the White Elephant Saloon to meet.

Luke Short was a gambler and friends with the likes of Bat and Jim Masterson the Earps, who were also friends with Marshal Jim Courtright. Short managed the White Elephant Saloon in Fort Worth. Courtright was running a protection racket there at the time.

Like John Wesley Hardin, Jim Courtright had developed a reputation as being fast and accurate with a gun. He needed to make an example of Short who refused to pay. And yes, Short had a sizable reputation as a gunfighter. His reputation was mostly because of a 1881 gunfight with a gunslinger named Charlie Storms at the Oriental Saloon in Tombstone, Arizona. And no, Courtright and Short did not get along.

So when Jim Courtright called Luke Short out of the White Elephant, Short put on his flowered vest and top hat, and made sure his six gun was in his hip pocket before he stepped outside into the street. Once out there, both men walked up the street for about a block until they were in front of Ella Blackwell's Shooting Gallery. No, it wasn't a "shooting gallery". It was a the bar and brothel. 

According to reports, the two spoke while walking, but then the two men faced one another as angry words came from Courtright who had been drinking a lot. It was then that he made some indication about Short having a gun, but Short assured Courtright he was not armed. Although he was of course, Short lied to see where it would lead. 

At that point Short moved slowly toward Courtright saying that he could have a look for himself. Then Short pulled open his vest to display his not wearing a gun. And really, who knows if Jim Courtright felt embolden by the sight of an unarmed Luke Short, but witnesses stated that Courtright got louder in an attempt to intimidate Short.  

It is said that as Short dropped his hands to re-adjust his vest, right then and probably for the sake of bystanders to apparently give the impression of being justified in killing Short in self-defense, Courtright loudly yelled "Don't you pull a gun on me!" 

With that, thinking Luke Short was not armed, Jim Courtright drew his pistol. But according to reports, it hung up for just a second on his watch-chain. And in that split second, Luke Short pulled his pistol from his hip pocket and fired first.

Yes, that shot was one of the luckiest shots in Old West history. Short's bullet struck Courtright's right thumb as he was thumbing backing the hammer of his pistol. And yes, his thumb was tore off!

It was gone, and that meant Short had rendered him incapable of firing his single-action revolver with that hand. Please remember that Courtright had a single-action pistol, and subsequently he needed his thumb to cock the hammer back before firing each shot.

Knowing he couldn't do so, Courtright tried to switch his pistol to his left hand. But before he could get off a shot, Short fired what was said to be at least four more shots in quick succession. Yes, at point blank range until his gun was empty.

Jim Courtright is said to have then fell backward. The infamous long haired gunfighter and former lawman hit the ground like a bag of grain. Some say Courtright was dead before he hit the ground. Others say he lingered a while. Either way, Short was still alive because of a lucky shot that tore Courtright's thumb off.

Now compare Luke Short's shot that tore off Jim Courtright's thumbs to what happened to Wharton City Precint 1 Constable Walter W. Pitman, and you may think that it's pretty much a toss for who as had the against all odds shot. 

Born January 14th, 1884, west of Muldoon in Fayette County, Texas, Walter W. Pitman was raised to be a farmer and certainly not a gunfighter. And no, in fact, he really wasn't ever a gunfighter. 

Fact is, it's said he worked on his family’s farm until he got married in 1904. Then six years later, Pitman, his wife and two children moved to Wharton, Texas.

And as people do during hard times back in the day, he tried to make a living at whatever job he could find. Some say he was a salesman, but that didn't last very long so he returned to farming in 1912. Times were still hard, so in 1916 he ran for the position of Precinct 1 Constable. That was a precinct that included the county seat. And low and behold, Pitman won the election.

Immediately, Walter Pitman, known as "W.W.," cuts a deal with the sheriff to live for free in the jail in exchange for helping him run it. His family is on the farm, so to keep him in town the sheriff agrees if he also patrols Wharton at night.

Well, on the evening of September 15th, 1917, a local outlaw Francisco Lopez got drunk and started shooting up the town. It was Pitman’s job to confront him and that's when things went sour.

Pitman found the drunk Lopez on Main Street, so the constable simply walked up to the outlaw and told him he was under arrest. He then told him to come along peacefully. 

Now very angry, Lopez told Pitman that he wasn’t "Under anything!" And then, Lopez went for his gun. 

Lopez was carrying a .38 caliber Colt single-action pistol. Pitman was carrying a .45 Colt single-action. And yes, it's said that Pitman was slow as molasses that night. In fact, he was so slow that Lopez looked like greased lightning as he fired off two rounds at Pitman. Not too surprisingly coming from a drunk, both of the two shots from Lopez missed Pitman. 

Then Pitman fired at the exact same time as when Lopez fired his third shot. Yes, that's when Lopez screamed and dropped his weapon. Against all odds, Pitman’s bullet had struck the outlaw's pistol.  

Pitman would later describe his experience as a constable and what took place that night when he wrote:

"I undertook to arrest one Francisco Lopez, a drunken Mexican and as I approached him he jumped from the sidewalk into the street and opened fire on me with a little 38 Cal. revolver and I returned the fire as quickly as I could, pull my single action 45 Colt my first shot being immediately after his 2nd and as luck would have it my first shot put his gun out of commission ½ of my bullet entering his cylinder and the other ½ hitting him in his left hand as it split and glanced off. 

My second shot went through his right shoulder and the rest went wild just as the Mexican did. This all happened within 30 yards of the jail door and my wife hearing the shooting made a rush to the jail door with another 45 and my shot gun, an old reliable double barrel loaded with buck shot.

The hombre ran to within 20 yards of the jail door and hid behind a fence corner and when I got the guns from my wife I made a run in the direction of where I last saw him and the first flash of my lite hit him my [wife] followed there he is as She followed I raised the shotgun and then is when she really screamed “don’t shoot him”, and that scream from her is all that kept me from being tried for murder. 

I approached him with both barrels cocked in his center and taken the pistol) , or made him hand it to me handle first, then took him into the jail and locked the door behind and the people from all parts of town came rushing into the jail yard. But the Mexican was already safe behind jail bars. Waiting for a doctor to come treat his wounds which soon got ok. Then he was carried before the county Judge who fined him $200.00 and one year in jail for carrying a pistol later he was tried in District Court for assault to murder, during which trial his large family of small children occupied the front seats in front of the Judges bench. The jury brought in a verdict of 5 years suspended sentence, the sentence being suspended through sympathy for the children."

With a muzzle velocity of roughly 900 feet per second, the big .45 bullet from Pitman's handgun hit the barrel of the assailant’s revolver. Half of the slug entered the chamber holding what would have been the bad guy's third shot. The other half of the slug tore into Lopez's hand which forced him to drop his gun.

It is said that against all odds, Pitman's .45 bullet struck the .38 that Lopez was holding. And yes, it is believed that half of that lead slug had gone up the barrel of the outlaw's gun smashing into Lopez's next round. There is a bulge in the barrel where the bullets had collided with the other.

He was Wharton City Constable from 1916 to 1920, and Wharton City Marshal from 1920 to 1935. In the 1930s, Pitman read that Ripley’s Believe It or Not had a national contest under way to uncover astonishing facts for use in its syndicated newspaper column. So yes, the marshal wrote the story of his 1917 shootout and sent it to Ripley.
Pittman wrote:

"My first shot hit his pistol barrel on the left hand side about one inch in front of the cylinder and glanced up into his cylinder. It came in contact with a loaded cartridge and the two bullets are now stuck in the cylinder. I have the pistol in my possession and will never remove the two bullets as long as I live."

Six weeks after sending it in, Pitman is called to tell him that out of some 5 million entries he had won first prize in Ripley’s contest. He won an all-expense-paid trip for two to New York and then Cuba.

Pitman took the soon-to-be-famous pistol to the Houston Post for verification. Then on June 23rd, 1932, newspapers across the nation told the story of Pitman’s incredible shot. It is said that in the depths of the Great Depression, Pitman and his wife left for Cuba on a two-week vacation of a lifetime. Vacations were of course something that was basically unheard of for regular people in those days. People at the time were out of work and to busy trying to put food on their table, vacations were something for the wealthy.

Later that same summer, Pitman and another Wharton officer had a confrontation with none other than the famous Bonnie Parker and Clyde Barrow. That took place when the two officers tried to stop their car, a stolen car, when someone inside the car opened fire as the driver did a speedy U-turn and escaped. Fortunate for them, neither officer was hit.

On November 9th, 1935, he suffered a massive heart attack at the age of 51. His family buried him in the Wharton cemetery two days later.

As for the famous pistol, the jammed pistol remains in the holdings of Ripley’s Believe It or Not. Yes, the .38 caliber pistol that belong to Lopez is on display in one of Ripley’s Odditoriums.

So there you have it, two of the most implausible shots in the Old West. One during the hey day of the Old West, and the other at the end of that period. And yes, since both shots kept their shooters alive, they certainly do have a lot in common.  

At least that's how I see it.

Tom Correa

Adolphus Busch -- History vs 2017 Budweiser Super Bowl Commercial

Dear Friends,

This post is "History vs. The Budweiser 2017 Super Bowl Commercial."

So, let's get to it. For me, I love the Budweiser ads with their famous Clydesdale horses. And yes, I look forward to what Bud can come up with. It's always something to look forward to at each Super Bowl. This Super Bowl, I gather we won't be seeing any Clydesdales.

This year, maybe because the parent corporation of Bud is located where the European Union resides, Budweiser has decided make a statement regarding immigration and illegal alien policies here in the United States. They are doing so by running an ad about one of the founders of the American version of Budweiser.

First, to answer why I say, "here in the United States." 

That is because the company we know as Anheuser-Busch, aka Budweiser, is actually a foreign company owned by a Belgian/Brazilian multi-national corporation known as Anheuser-Busch InBev SA/NV. It's global headquarters is in Leuven, Belgium. 

Yes, it's the same foreign multi-national corporation that now owns Miller, Foster's, and Labatt Brewing Companies, among others. So no, our Budweiser and Miller are no longer domestically owned beers. 

Second, the reason that I say, "the American version of Budweiser." 

Anheuser–Busch has been involved in a trademark dispute with a beer company known as Budweiser Budvar Brewery in the Czech Republic since 1907. Yes, all over the trademark rights to the name "Budweiser".

In the European Union, excluding Ireland, Finland and Spain, as you can see in the above image, the American Budweiser beer is marketed as "Bud" because the "Budweiser" trademark name is solely owned by Budweiser Budvar of the Czech Republic.

So why is the name "Budweiser" so important you ask? 

Budweiser beer has been brewed in the city of "Ceske Budejovice," which in German means "Budweis," since it was founded by King Ottokar II of Bohemia in 1245. The name "Budweiser" supposedly means "of Budweis". 

Budweiser Budvar has been brewing beer in accordance with the 1516 Reinheitsgebot law, using water, barley and hops. Budweiser Bier Bürgerbräu was founded in 1795 by German-speaking citizens of Budweis. It's slogan as the "Beer of Kings" sounds so familiar.

Budweiser Bier Bürgerbräu actually began exporting beer under the "Budweiser Bier" name to the United States in 1875. Yes, a year before Carl Conrad developed a "Bohemian-style" lager that he called "Budweiser" in 1876.

So now I'm sure you're asking, "Where does Tom come up with this stuff, and who the Hell is Carl Conrad?" 

Well, he was the creator of the American version of Budweiser that we know today. And no, he wasn't a beer maker! 

Carl W. Conrad was born on April 1st, 1843, and died on October 26th, 1922. Among beer historians, Conrad is believed to be the person who created the name "Budweiser" which would later belong to Anheuser-Busch. 

Conrad marketed the beer we know as "Budweiser" which later became the property of Anheuser-Busch.

According to research, Conrad was a friend of the wealthy Busch family of Germany. He's credited with helping to develop the recipe for Budweiser beer. The brand name was first registered in the U.S. by Conrad, an importer of wines, champagnes & liquors. 

The Anheuser Brewery produced the brand for him under contract. C. Conrad & Company. Conrad is said to have had offices in Germany and in St. Louis, Missouri. 

Ever wonder about Anheuser of Anheuser-Busch fame? 

Well, his story has everything to do with the huge German migration to St. Louis Missouri in the early 1800s. and how one person's failure can be another's gain.

Eberhard Anheuser was born on September 27th, 1806 and died on May 2nd, 1880. For Anheuser, his involvement in brewing beer all started in 1852 when fellow German American George Schneider, who was a brewer and saloon operator, opened the Bavarian Brewery Company in South St. Louis. 

Schneider hit paydirt and even expanded it just four years later in 1856 to include a new brewhouse nearby. But the following years were different as Schneider was forced to sell the brewery, all while on the brink of bankruptcy. 

In 1860, Schneider's Bavarian Brewery was purchased by William D'Oench, a local pharmacist, and Eberhard Anheuser, a prosperous German-born soap manufacturer. Yes, Eberhard Anheuser was a German American soap and candle maker.

Anheuser was a soap manufacturer that lent money to the Bavarian Brewery. When the small brewery went bankrupt, Anheuser bought out the other creditors and renamed the company Anheuser. 

It is said that D'Oench was a silent partner in the Bavarian Brewery until 1869. That's when he sold out his half-interest in the company. I'll tell you who he sold it to in a minute. 

From 1860 to 1875, the Bavarian Brewery was renamed to E. Anheuser & Co.. Then from 1875 to 1879, it was renamed again as E. Anheuser Company's Brewing Association. Remember, they were still supplying beer to Carl Conrad's Budweiser beer company at that time. 

So what about Adolphus Busch, the young man who is the center of the you ask?

Adolphus Busch was born on July 10th, 1839, and died on October 10th, 1913. And as stated earlier, Adolphus Busch came from a very wealthy German family. And while it was a very wealthy family, it was also a very large family. So large that Adolphus was the twenty-first of twenty-two children. 

His wealthy family was known for running a wholesale business of winery and brewery supplies. Adolphus Busch and his brothers all were said to have received quality educations, and he graduated from the notable Collegiate Institute of Belgium in Brussels.

In 1857, at the age of 18, with three of his older brothers, Adolphus emigrated to St. Louis, Missouri. And no, they did not arrive in St. Louis by accident. 

In the mid-1880s, St. Louis, Missouri was of the number one destination for German immigrants. Immigrants from Ireland and Germany arrived in St. Louis in huge numbers starting back in the 1840s. 

The population of St. Louis grew from less than 20,000 in 1840, to 77,860 in 1850. And by 1860, to more than 160,000. It is said that by the mid-1800s, St. Louis had a bigger population than New Orleans. And because St. Louis was the new home to thousands of German and Irish immigrants, the market for beer in St. Louis was huge. 

Besides that, the city also had two natural resources essential for manufacturing and storing beer before refrigeration. The Mississippi River provided more than enough of the needed water supply to make beer, while the city itself had many underground caves that were used to keep beer cool. 

While everyone knows about Adolphus Busch through Anheuser-Busch Brewing fame, his older brother Johann established a brewery in Washington, Missouri. And yes, his other older brother Ulrich, Jr, married a daughter of Eberhard Anheuser in St. Louis and settled in Chicago. The third older brother who he came with was Anton, and he was a hops dealer but later returned to Germany.

Unlike his older brothers who were all in the beer brewery business in some way, Adolphus Busch's first job in St. Louis was working as a clerk in the commission house. Yes, as a city employee.

He then became an employee at William Hainrichshofen's wholesale company. Then he enlisted in the Union Army during the Civil War and served for six months. During this period, he learned that his father had died and he had inherited a portion of the estate. 

With his inheritance Adolphus Busch partnered with Ernst Battenberg in St. Louis to found the first of his businesses, a brewing supply company that sold to the three dozen breweries in St. Louis. Eberhard Anheuser was one of Adolphus' customers. 

Adolphus married Eberhard Anheuser's daughter, Lilly in 1861. He then entered his wife's family's brewery business. And yes, with the money from his inheritance and his business with Battenberg, Adolphus Busch bought out Eberhard's partner, William D'Oench. 

That's how the E. Anheuser Company's Brewing Association became Anheuser-Busch in 1879. Then in 1880, at the death of Eberhard Anheuser, Adolphus Busch became president and instantly wealthy.

So contrary to what Anheuser-Busch InBev SA/NV tells us in their commercial, Adolphus Busch did not not come to an unfriendly America to get beat up and told to go back to where he came from. 

While the end of their video says, "When nothing stops your dream, this is the beer we drink," this is a sorry re-write of a story of a young man who came here already with a lot going for himself. In fact, I'd say a tremendous amount more than most coming here.

The U.S. kept a lot of people out for various reasons during the 1800s. Most to have been affected were the Chinese and Catholics. To my knowledge, there wasn't any sort of anti-German protests at the time coming off the boat. 

Remember, Busch did not go through Ellis Island as an immigrant. Fact is, he had already been to the United States on a previous trip. In 1857, when he decided to live here, that was his second trip here. 

After he left the first time, he loved it so much that he wanted to come back. He arrived here a wholesaler from a wealthy family. He immigrated to St. Louis from Germany in 1857 into an already heavily German population here. He came with three brothers and not alone as the commercial tries to depict. And yes, he married Eberhard Anheuser's daughter, Lilly, in 1861. 

Then, following his service in the Union Army as a clerk, Busch began working as a salesman for his father-in-law at the Anheuser brewery. With his inheritance, he purchased 50% of the shares of the company in 1869. All by the age of 30.

Once he becomes half-owner, he assumes the role of company secretary. Then 11 years later at the age of 41, when his father-in-law dies in 1880, he then becomes president and even more wealthy. No, that's nothing like the commercial at all. And frankly, they should have incorporated some truth in their commercial. 

Now for those of you who are wondering when did Anheuser-Busch Brewing Association actually acquire Carl Conrad’s company and the brand name "Budweiser"? It was in 1883. Although, it should be noted that Conrad did not actually sign over the trademark name of "Budweiser" to Anheuser-Busch until 1891.

Carl Conrad declared bankruptcy in January of 1883. And yes, that was when Anheuser-Busch Brewing "acquired rights to bottle and sell Budweiser".

To pay off Conrad's debts to the Anheuser-Busch Brewing Association, the brewery assumed control of Conrad’s company and the brand name "Budweiser."

Adolphus Busch, who was running the company by then, accepted the Budweiser trademark as payment of the debt. It is said that Conrad was given a lifetime job with Anheuser-Busch in sales. 

By the 1880s, Carl Conrad’s Budweiser label was looking a lot like the Anheuser-Busch label it would become. And yes, the "CCCo" insignia and the name "C. Conrad & Co." remained in the center of their paper label until around 1920.

The label above shows the "AB" in the center. As you can see, it looked a great deal like Conrad's design.

Tom Correa

Let's Call It "Cowboy Fitness."

Dear Friends,

I started a post titled "Health and Fitness." And yes, I was going to give you information that I've gathered from websites, health magazines, and medical journals. I figured that, between that information, what I've learned in the Marine Corps, from friends about bodybuilding, and fitness in days gone by, I'd have some pretty good information to pass on to you.

Yes, I started a post titled "Health and Fitness" but deleted it.

Instead, I started thinking about how the other day I took advantage of the nice weather to repair water troughs and fix broken water pipes -- all broken as a result of our latest freeze. I started thinking about how the next day, I dug some small trenches to divert water and some other trenches so that I could put in more PVC water pipes to replace the leaking pipes. I also repaired some corral fencing after I unloaded my pickup load of sixteen 85 to 90-pound bales of alfalfa.

I thought about working our Mustang mare the other day before having to dig six post holes. I thought about mucking stalls, replacing chewed-up boards in our barn, and painting the new boards with a no-chew mixture. I thought about how a couple of weeks ago, I moved sixteen 12-foot panels and a gate panel. I recalled how I carried each panel about 70 yards to where my new round pen would go. I recalled manhandling each panel and hooking them together to make the pen. And yes, I recalled thinking this is why guys my age make things permanent instead of portable.

It's called "Chores," and that's what needs to be done when looking after a place. Granted, they're not like the everyday chores of making sure we have wood cut and split for our wood stove, or feeding our dog and cats, and of course, feeding our horses, or cleaning stalls. The chores for upkeep around a place can be a great workout of sorts, but you already know that that's where I'm going with this.

Besides the regular chores that come up and keep me busy on a daily basis around our place, I open up our local American Legion post on Monday afternoons at 4 o'clock. That is if I can ever remember to drop what I'm doing and get my butt over there and not keep my friends waiting.

Yes, being the 2nd Vice Commander of our local American Legion is a kick in the ass. Being a veteran, I like giving to our local veterans club. Over the years, I've become more and more responsible for a lot of the operation of our post, but that's okay. Truth is, all in all, though I'm in charge of the bar, the kitchen, the post's building maintenance, and a few other aspects of our post, I actually delegate a lot of things that need to get done. 

So, showing up at 4pm, I volunteer to open and work behind the bar for a few hours. Then, after I come home, my wife usually has dinner waiting. And after dinner, I usually feed the second feeding for our horses. It's then that I go outside and look into the stars and feel at peace and close to God. It's then that I tell the Lord how I miss my loved ones now passed. Yes, it's also then that I beg God to bless those I love who need help.

After I come in from checking the horses and doing what I do, that's when I sit at this computer. That's when I try to read email or write a post. That's when I smile, hearing my wife laugh at one of her goofy shows on television. OK, or cuss out some politician on the news.

Today is Sunday, and this morning I ran over to open our American Legion post for a small birthday party. Yes, a private party. Someone new to the area, visiting, asked me what we charge for the use of our post? I told them that we're supposed to charge a few hundred, but we make exceptions for folks.

As I'm sure you've heard me say a thousand times, Glencoe, California, has a population of 189. And frankly, I'm not really sure of exactly how many folks live in the town of West Point, about 7 miles to the east, or in Railroad Flat, about 6 miles to the south. But altogether, I really don't think there can be 1,000 people if we combine all who live around these parts.

So no, when someone came to me and asked to schedule a private party, especially us knowing that it was for a small surprise 80th birthday party for a resident from around here, our post won't charge her family to have it at our post. It's simply not the way we are.

So since I was determined to write something when I got home tonight, and I decided that I wanted to write something about health and fitness, I thought maybe I'd write something on workout schedules, using weights or a cable machine, on repetitions and sets, and the importance of intensity and length of workout. Then I laughed and thought about how a beer or two a day is now said to be good for us, and I tried to figure out how I would work that new research finding into a section on diet and exercise.

Yes, I was certain that today I was going to write about staying fit. But instead, I decided to write you about how my wife and I are staying busy. And yes, I decided that staying busy doing things is as good as hitting the gym.

Yes, I thought about how my wife and I went to town a few weeks ago to pick up a load of road-base gravel. And yes, how we laughed while shoveling the gravel in an effort to get it unloaded onto our driveway before it started raining cats and dogs.

So what is this country fitness program? 

Part of it's the chores that I've mentioned. It is the work that I've mentioned. It goes to what it takes to live in the country and take care of livestock and horses. It goes to what it takes to just maintain a place in the country.

Yes, it takes a never-ending to-do list that's for certain. And yes, it seems as though there are always fences to fix, gates to hang, bales to buck and stack, animals to feed, stalls that need mucking, pens that have manure to needs to be hauled. Of course, this time of year, my hands are frozen, and my arthritis acts up. Working in cold water and mud is not my favorite thing. But then again, I know things have to get done. And yes, that too is a part of the "Country Fitness Program."

Whether it's clearing brush, cleaning corrals, hauling manure, or fixing fences, unlike most folks in the city, most country folks just take things in stride and take care of things that need doing. If that means hard work, then so be it.

I figure my fitness program is one where I stay busy, sometimes busier than at other times. But all and all, stay busy. Right now, the weather is the pits. The fact is that problems like broken water pipes and frozen water troughs occur in winter. That's just the way it is.

Like everyone else who lives in the country, my wife and I get busy when the weather's better. Yes, mostly preparing for next winter. And while I'm not working as hard in the winter, other than problems that come up here and there, my "fitness program" is still taking place because I'm trying to keep on top of those problems. Yes, movement is like that. Besides, someone has to. And friends, as everyone knows, big or small, problems certainly won't fix themselves.

Because the ground is soft, tomorrow I will take on a fence post that needs replacing. And yes, I may muck stalls to stay on top of things. I may bathe two horses and work three, but that might wait until Tuesday.

I figure that I can get that done before I need to go to my Mom's house to do some chores there. She's 82 and pretty independent, but she's still 82 and needs a hand now and then. And yes, the Lord really frowns on a bad son.

So there you go, there's my article on health and fitness. It is my "ranch, farm, country sort of fitness program."  Oh heck! How about we just call it "Cowboy Fitness." It works by working and keeping busy.

It's a great program and easy to stick to. All you have to do is want to clean up around your home and property, do your chores, don't let your junk pile up too high, garden, plant, enjoy being outside, and keep things up. Yes, put things away, keep fences mended, cut, split, and bring in your wood to keep your stove fired up!

If you look around your home, I'm sure that you too can skip the gym membership and find enough activity to keep you busy. For me, while the pounds might not be melting off, they're not coming on either. And frankly, I'm feeling pretty good about that.

Tom Correa

Are Democrats Trying To Assassinate Trump?

Dear Friends,

There is a reason that I don't trust anything that comes out of ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, and MSNBC news organizations. It is the same reason that I don't trust a Liberal bigot to tell me something about Dr. Ben Carson. Their prejudice against the good doctor means that I can't trust anything coming out of their mouth.

The same goes for the prejudice, the hostility and the absolute hate coming from those same Liberal news organizations toward Donald Trump. It's an "in-your-face hatred" that's way above simply "not liking" our new president. And that's putting it mildly.

I really don't have to go into what commentators like Chris Matthews and the other ultra-Left on those mainstream media news stations have said about him. They are not even clever enough to hide their loathing of Donald Trump. The venom is incessant and they are really very open about it. And frankly, that really surprises me. I really would think they wouldn't want their hate for Trump to be so obvious. But friends, it really is.

Of course their openness about their hatred for Trump serves the purpose of my knowing absolutely unequivocally where they stand. They despise him in a way that leaves no doubt that they hate him. Call it revulsion, disgust, contempt, or whatever else you want, fact is they hate Trump in the same way that the Ku Klux Klan hates black-Americans. Yes, in the exact same way Black Lives Matters hates white-Americans.

Yes indeed, the Liberal mainstream media's openness about their deep seated hatred for our new president goes to my first point in this blog post: Liberal news organizations truly make no secret about their animosity and out and out hatred for President Trump. And that, well that goes to the heart of why I avoid those news organizations.

Friends, besides not being dishonest about their ill "feelings" toward Trump, they're also not very stealthy, covert, or simply sly about it either. No, they hate Donald J. Trump deeply and they are very public about it. They're very open about it.

Their hostility, animosity, antipathy, toward Trump certainly means that their news will be presented in ways that are biased against him. That's why Liberal news organizations should not be trusted.

They are prejudice against Trump and Conservatives in general. They don't have any idea what impartiality means as they demonstrate their partisanship, favoritism, and unfairness. I believe they knowingly to that while skewing reports to inflame the passions, the bigotry, the intolerance, of their fellow Liberals.

The Liberal media has an attitude of hate for Trump and Conservatives, and they're not afraid to show it. Their prejudice and one-sidedness, the way they color their stories, and way they attempt to sway their followers, the way they distort and slant issues to foster hate.

They are really out in the open about it. You don't need a poll to tell your what you can see for yourself. These people have hate speech about Trump and Conservatives all the time. That's just who I see them to be. They hate anything and anyone that goes against their beloved Democrat Party and Liberal ideology.

One can't help but see it. Liberal hate is out in the open and people see it for what it is.

To say they detest Trump would be an under-statement. They hate him deeply, so deeply that one has to wonder if it's something personal. I hope it's not, but one has to wonder simply because it's such an intense hate that it reminds me of my hatred for child molesters, rapists, baby killers, and those who attack the weak and defenseless.

It's the same sort of hate that I feel for anyone, and yes I know one person right now, who has threatened my family members. Friends, granted this is all just my opinion but that's what I see coming from ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, and a few people on FOX News.

On November 15th, of last year, just a few days after the election, a post-election Media Research Center poll showed that 78 percent of the voters said that the media coverage during the 2016 Presidential Election was biased. And 59 percent said, the press favored Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump. 

While 97 percent said they did not allow any of the bias from the media to impact their vote, 69 percent of voters said the media is not honest and truthful. While I thought the figures would be much higher, I totally agree that the mainstream media is not honest or truthful.

So is their hatred for Trump the same as my hatred for the Obama administration? 

No, it's not the same because I didn't hate President Obama personally. In contrast, the Liberal media apparently hates President Trump personally.

But, while I didn't hate Obama personally, I grew to hate his ineptness in office. And I certainly grew to hate his policies. His policies stunk! He proved himself to be incompetent and a joke to the world. And yes, I hated that. I disliked him on a level of not liking the actions of a bureaucrat or an administrator, I saw his horseshit conduct in office as someone who was just incompetent and uncaring. I saw him as not putting America first. Frankly, I couldn't understand why a president wouldn't put the concerns of our nation first.

So as for hating what he was doing to our nation, yes I admit to hating his actions. I didn't like the constant flow of regulations which he was putting into place on a daily basis. He was strangling our economic productivity, our industry, our ability to provide for our families, our ability to grow food without restrictions, or provide energy for our nation, or properly educate and not indoctrinate our children in schools. I hated the fact that he would not control entry into our nation for the sake of security.

I hated Obama's actions. He implemented policies to benefit his wealthy donors, benefit his voters, benefit the United Nations, and all was being applauded by our enemies and our economic rivals. Yes, all while dividing our nation as never before.

In many of the posts that I wrote taking him to task for his lousy policies, I always stressed why I hated his policies and how I wanted his Socialist policies to fail. I stressed how our nation's principles do not jell with socialist principles. Freedom and Socialism are polar opposites.

I wanted his policies to fail and he leave office in disgrace. I got my wish on January 20th, when he left knowing that he attempt to turn our nation into something that it is not has failed miserably.

His accomplishments, the Obama legacy, is that he added $10 Trillion to our debt with absolutely NOTHING to show for it. In our entire history prior to Obama, through 43 presidents, we accumulated a debt of a little less than $10 Trillion.

What did we have to show for almost $10 Trillion of debt before Obama? 

Well, to name a few things that our nation spent money on, we had a Revolution and the War of 1812 where we had to rebuild Washington D.C. after it was burned to the ground by the British; we had the Louisiana Purchase; two Industrial Revolutions; we had the cost of a War with Mexico and later the Civil War; the cost of the Indian wars in the Old West and our involvements overseas which people really don't hear about; we bought the state of Alaska; we fought and paid for two World Wars as well as other wars such as Vietnam and other recent wars; we've built dams and railroads, and we built the greatest highway system on earth; and yes, among other things, we sent men to the moon. Friends, that's just a small example of why we went into debt prior to President Obama.

So what did Americans get for the almost $10 Trillion of debt under Obama?

New roads, bridges, highways? No. We got nothing for it. Really, nothing. He used the money to create ObamaCare which forces Americans to use it or be fined; he armed Iran and ISIS; he helped build Muslim Mosques in Europe and Africa and Indonesia; he spend a $100 Million on his vacations around the world; he gave over $200 Million to the Palestinians just before leaving office, but seniors on Social Security and disabled veterans did not get a raise in 8 years; he implement more and more regulations, all the while increasing the size of our government bureaucracy; and yes, he made his environmentalist friends rich. Other than that, we have nothing to show for the almost $10 Trillion which Obama spent while in office. .

Did I want Obama's policies to fail? You damn right I did! Did I want his actions to stop? Absolutely! 

But while I wanted his policies to fail, I've always stressed how I hoped and prayed that he would not be harmed, that his family would not be harmed or attacked, that he would complete his term in office. I did not see violence as the answer to what Obama was doing in office. I knew that if something happened to him that a wave of his stalled legislation would pass and we would suffer for his being killed.

And I guess, that's part of what I see going on with the Liberal mainstream media today. Unlike how Conservatives felt about Obama, Liberals hate Trump before he has even started his term in office.

My friends, I truly believe that the hate coming out of ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, and MSNBC has inspired others to assassinate Donald Trump. Yes, I believe that the Left is already coaxing their followers to actually kill President Donald J. Trump right now.

Granted that this is just my opinion, but I see a segment of our population attempting to persuade their followers to assassinate a sitting president.

Of course, while the Liberal media hated George W. Bush viscerally. Yes, deep seated and emotionally without justification or cause. And while there were protests signs calling for the assassination of George W. Bush, I don't remember any network such as those which I've mentioned actually trying to manipulate the emotions of their followers to get someone to kill Bush like they are doing right now against Donald Trump.

Has the Liberal mainstream media been trying to demonize Donald Trump? Fact is the Democrat controlled mainstream media painted a target on Trump's back more than a year ago when they started comparing him to Adolf Hitler.

They give commentary, their opinions, which have consisted of constantly calling Trump "Hitler" and describing him as an evil that must be stopped by any way possible. Even on the day of his inauguration, Christ Matthews called his speech "Hitlerian."

And yes, they have spread FAKE NEWS to discredit him, brought fourth women to make unsubstantiated accusations only to find out that those women worked for the Clintons, and have over and over again made incendiary false claims to incite someone to try to kill Trump. I believe that that's the goal of Democrats.

Since they could not beat him in the election, I believe that they now want to resort to assassination as a way to eliminate him. They see this as a way to stop his efforts to make our nation great again.

Are Democrats trying to manipulate their followers so that one will assassinate President Trump? I believe they are. And friends, right or wrong, that's what I see them doing. That's what I see as their intent.

Democrats know that they can influence the thinking of their followers. They know that many of their followers don't think for themselves. They know their people run on emotion and not logic or intelligence. The rioting, the burning of cars, the looting, the vandalism all proves that they are an emotional group

Liberals are indoctrinated to believe that a weak mind is too easy to manipulate. They understand the old Communist tactic of repeating lies over and over again until people believe them. And really, all it takes is one to believe the FAKE NEWS, the lies, coming out of the Liberal media. If they can manipulate just one, then the Liberals in the mainstream media will get what they want.

Don't think it only takes one? 

Remember the gay Democrat man who accosted and harassed Ivanka Trump who was with her children on a Jet Blue flight. Because she did not have security with her, it was fortunate for her that that out of control Liberal didn't physically attack her or her children.

And how about this from June of last year when a 20 year old British man attempted to assassinate Donald Trump at a Las Vegas campaign rally. 

According to the official criminal complaint, Michael Steven Sandford, a Brit who entered the United States illegally, overstayed his Visa, and had "knowingly attempted to engage in an act of physical violence against Donald J. Trump in the Mystery Theatre in the Treasure Island Casino, Las Vegas, Nevada, a building where Donald J. Trump was receiving protection from the U.S. Secret Service."

The Associated Press reported at the time: 

A British man arrested at a weekend Donald Trump rally in Las Vegas tried to grab a police officer’s gun so he could kill the presidential candidate after planning an assassination for about a year, according to authorities.

U.S. Secret Service agents said Michael Steven Sandford approached a Las Vegas police officer at the campaign stop to say he wanted Trump’s autograph, but that he then tried to take the weapon.

The criminal complaint said Sandford was arrested after grabbing the handle of an officer’s gun while trying to remove it from a holster.

Sanford told authorities that he went to the Battlefield Vegas shooting range the day before the rally and fired 20 rounds from a 9mm Glock pistol to learn how to use it. Police detectives who visited the range spoke with an employee who confirmed that he provided Sandford shooting lessons, according to the complaint signed by Secret Service Special Agent Joseph Hall.

Wonder what made him do such a thing?

Wonder what made him decide to come to America and try to kill Donald Trump? I believe it's a safe bet to believe that it was the constant hate speech coming out of the Liberal media being directed at Donald Trump.

I believe if another assassination is attempted on now President Trump, I will certainly blame the Liberal media for their complicity in that murder. Of course later when questioned about their lack of ethics, their yellow journalism, about the fact that they may have had a hand in what was done? I can see them say they have the right to their venomous speech because of the First Amendment and their right to Free Speech.

Most likely they will conveniently not remember that no one has the right to incite a panic or attempt to create injury upon another by yelling "Fire" in a theater. Yes, just the same as no one has the right to vandalize and loot and set fires in the name of free speech. Fact is even free speech has it's limits.

So do I think the Liberal media will tone it down? I certainly don't see that happening!

I've never made a secret that I'm a Conservative who supports President Trump. I pray for his safety and security. I really believe there are Democrats who want to see him assassinated.

Because I believe that to be the case, my hope and prayer for the future is that President Trump has enough security to stop Liberals from getting what they want. Yes indeed, while I truly believe that Democrat want to see him killed, I will continue to pray for President Trump's safety and security. I will hope and pray that Democrats are not successful in getting what they want.
And yes, that's just the way I see things.

Tom Correa

Obama Is No Longer The President

One cold day in late January, 2017, an old Veteran approaches the White House from across Pennsylvania Avenue where he’d been sitting on a park bench.

He speaks to a U.S. Marine standing guard and says, "I would like to go in and meet with President Obama."

The Marine looks at the old Veteran and says, "Sir, Mr. Obama is no longer President and no longer resides here. President Donald Trump is now the President and the occupant of the White House."

The old man says, "Okay, thanks" and walks away.

The following day the same old Veteran approaches the White House and says to the same Marine, "I would like to go in and meet with President Obama."

The Marine again tells the old Veteran, "Sir, as I said yesterday, Mr. Obama is no longer President and no longer resides here. President Donald Trump is now our President and the occupant of the White House."

The man thanks him and again just walks away.

The third day the same old Veteran approaches the White House and speaks to the very same U.S. Marine, saying, "I would like to go in and meet with President Obama."

The young Marine, understandably agitated at this point, looks at the old Veteran and says, "Sir, this is the third day in a row you have been here asking to speak to Mr. Obama. I've told you already that Mr. Obama is no longer the President and no longer resides here. Donald Trump is now our President. President Trump is now the occupant of the White House. Don't you understand?"

The old Veteran looks at the Marine, smiles and says, "Oh, I understand. I just love hearing it."

The Marine snaps to attention, salutes, smiles and says, "See you tomorrow Sir!"

We Are Not A Socialist Democracy

By Terry McGahey

Associate Writer / Historian

In the past several years I have heard many statements made by the progressive left and others such as some of the Bernie Sanders followers, referring to our country's political system as a "socialist democracy". This is simply not true!

Even though we may have some socialist programs, such as welfare and others, we are not a socialist run country. Our political system is a republic, not a democracy, and surely not a socialist system.

Even though a republic and a democracy system are very much alike, there is one major difference between those two and the socialist system of government. In a republic or democracy system, there are laws which limit the governments power, in contrast in the socialist system there are no laws prohibiting such.

In other words, the socialist system of government is the law and this puts that system only one small step away from becoming a communist system of government.

As Roger Baldwin, the founder of the ACLU and self proclaimed communist had stated in 1920, "the end goal of socialism is communism."

It's my opinion that socialism and democracy, by the very interpretation of the two are like apples and oranges and the two do not mix, period! Sooner or later one has to overtake the other.

The social democracy ideals began as an ideology that advocated an evolutionary and peaceful transition from capitalism to socialism using political processes in contrast to the revolutionary approach to transition associated with Orthodox Marxism.

In Western Europe, they rejected this Stalinist model by not committing to either and took an alternate path to socialism or to a compromise between capitalism and socialism. Countries which refer to themselves as "social democracies" are, Bangladesh, India, North Korea, Sri Lanka, and Tanzania.

Below are the rates of poverty within those countries as opposed to the United States:

1. Bangladesh has a rate of poverty at 32 percent.
2. India's rate is 29.5 percent.
3. North Korea rate of poverty is at half of their 24 million people or approximately 50 percent.
4. Sri Lanka's rate is at 23 percent.
5. Tanzania has a rate of 33.3 percent.

The poverty rate here in the United States of America stands at 14.8 percent so why anyone would want to live under a socialist democracy is beyond me. The numbers don't lie. And as we crawl out of the major recession, which we have been mired in for the past many years. the poverty rate here in the United States will drop even further. The difference is the countries listed above are not as likely to do so. Also, below are the examples of the human rights records of these so-called "socialist democracies."

In Bangladesh such human rights offences are, torture, persecution of minority communities, attacks against Hindus, attacks against atheists, attacks against Santels, and control of many other aspects of life through the use of intimidation.

In India, from 2002 through 2008, over four people per day died while in police custody with hundreds of these deaths due to police torture. India has the highest number of people living in conditions of slavery which is 18.3 million times more than the next highest nation. Also in India, there are about 12.6 million children under the age of 14 involved in hazardous occupations, and human trafficking is an 8 million dollar illegal business.

North Korea remains among the worlds most repressive countries and all basic freedoms are severely restricted. North Korea practices extermination, murder, enslavement, torture, imprisonment, rape, and forced abortions as well as other sexual violence against it's people.

In Shi Lanka, Amnesty International stated that since 2006 there has been an escalating amount of political killings, child recruitment, and abductions. There is also concerns with violence against women, several reports of torture while in police custody, and state sponsored disappearances and murders.

Tanzania has a forced labor program which allows the government to compel individuals and groups to forcibly work for purposes of economical development, and trafficking of persons. It's also a source and destination country for men, women, and children subjected to trafficking, specifically under conditions of forced labor and or prostitution.  In Tanzania, there are also uses of excessive force, torture, arbitrary arrests, and corruption throughout the country.

The ideals of a socialist democracy government in the minds of many within our country are not as they perceive it to be. As I stated earlier in this article, the two types of governing ideals of socialism and a democracy are like apples and oranges and mix about as well as oil and water. It would only be a matter of time until one would have to overtake the other.

Socialists and Communists have been trying to gain a foothold within our country for years now and by using this so-called idea of a socialist democracy, or as others like to use the term, progressives, they believe their agendas will gain more steam then by using the term socialist which seems to be working, especially within our schools and colleges among our young people.

Again, as I have written above, Roger Baldwin, the founder of the ACLU stated, "The end goal of socialism is communism."