Archive for the ‘AssClowns’ Category

Donald Trump Couldn’t Be Permitted to Win in 2016

Saturday, March 16th, 2019

An Haughty Spirit Before a Fall?

One of the questions many people have about the allegations of President Obama’s instigation and ongoing involvement in the spying against the Trump campaign in 2016 is “Why would he risk it?” The argument goes that after two terms, he was done, and there’d be no reason to risk his future for the sake of a Hillary Clinton victory.  It’s well known that there was no particular love between the Clintons and Obamas, and some would argue the opposite, so why go out on a limb for Hillary Clinton?  I think I understand the answer to this question, and it really comes down to ego.  Barack Obama was one of the most arrogantly inept men ever to be elected President.  He had no skills or experience to indicate he had any qualification for the office, and as I’ve covered elsewhere on this site, even his legal qualification remains in question.  He had a particular hatred of Donald Trump, however, and it centered around that very question of legal qualification and Donald Trump’s raising of that question more than two years into Obama’s presidency.  It came down to Obama’s ego, and the fact that from his point of view, his definitive statements assuring America and the world that Donald Trump would not be president would be fulfilled.

At a Leaders Summit of the Asian Nations, held in Rancho Mirage, CA , during the height of the 2016 election primaries, on February 16th, Barack Obama had the following exchange with a reporter:

Obama’s statement in answer to the reporter’s leading question was dripping with contemptuous hubris.  Here we see the classic Barack Obama, affecting a tone and a manner no achievement of his political career had earned, dismissively asserting that Donald Trump could not be president because the American people were too wise, presumably because they’d elected him, after all.  This sort of pandering, that he ironically lambastes in his answer, is the perfect example of why Obama felt compelled to see to it that his pronouncements on Trump’s presidential future would come true.

From the time of his reiteration of this statement, it is now clear, as it was disclosed in the testimony of Lisa Page, Obama wanted to be in on every step of the sabotage of their fake investigation.  We now have good reason to believe Senator Ted Cruz(R-TX) was also targeted by the Obama operation, and for the same reason. As my readers will remember, apart from the very stubborn John Kasich(R-OH), the primaries came down to Cruz and Trump as the last remaining contenders for the GOP nomination.  Obama would cover the Democrats’ bases: Sabotage them all!

There’s no doubt in my mind, having re-watched the clip above, that Barack Obama’s motive for risking his future and reputation to sabotage Donald Trump now makes perfect sense:  He’d already repeatedly staked his reputation that Donald Trump would not win the presidency. For the sake of his own fragile ego, and for the sake of his credibility with the fawning press, Donald Trump could not be allowed to win the presidency.  Throughout his entire presidency, from the incident with his Harvard professor friend, Henry Louis Gates Jr, and the Cambridge Police, in which he said the police “acted stupidly,” he has always demonstrated his runaway arrogance.

Proverbs 16:18 counsels:

“Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall.”

Frequently shortened to “Pride goeth before a fall,” if ever there had been a President of the United States to whom this bit of wisdom precisely applies, I believe it is Barack Hussein Obama II.  His pride led him to commit crimes in order to make his pronouncements come true, although some also allege darker, more directly criminal motives.  Whether those allegations are true or false, this one, pride, is certainly enough.  In any event, Obama had decided that Trump must not be permitted to win the Presidency.  He had motive, means, and opportunity. There is evidence now that he wanted to be updated on the progress of these schemes as they progressed.  Sometimes, the motive is lust or greed.  Often it’s simple pride. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the guiltiest party in the whole Russia-Collusion Hoax: Barack Hussein Obama.  Let us hope that justice will be done.

After all, given this bit, his pride deserves it:

 

John Cornyn Isn’t Merely a Coward – He’s a Shameless Fraud Too!

Tuesday, October 1st, 2013

I explained to fellow Texans in a note last Friday why they shouldn’t support John Cornyn.  Today comes further evidence.  In an effort to further mislead Texans, and in an attempt to pretend his cowardice hadn’t been, this deceptive politician, this un-Texan, has posted a phony poll on his website asking a question based on a false premise.  The question itself is a lie.  He asks: “Do you agree with Senator Cornyn’s vote to De-fund Obamacare?” The truth is that he didn’t vote to de-fund Obamacare. Instead, he voted to permit Harry Reid and the Democrats to prevail.  His poll is garbage.

This deception brands this man as a despicable liar.  To explain for the readers not up to speed on the trick, John Cornyn joined with Democrats to close off debate on the House continuing resolution, permitting Harry Reid to amend it.  After it had been amended, Cornyn then voted against it, along with twenty-four other sell-out Republicans.  His phony poll on this webpage(see screen-capture of site below) asks if you agree with his vote to defund Obamacare.  HE DIDN’T VOTE TO DEFUND OBAMACARE!  He voted to permit Harry Reid and the Democrats to strip the Defunding language out of the bill, so that he could vote against that amendment and pretend to have voted against Obamacare.  The cloture vote WAS the vote.  Texans aren’t stupid, whatever Cornyn may think of us, and I suspect that as the truth spreads, Senator Cornyn will be heading home for good next fall.

Here’s the sleazy, dishonest poll on his website:

This Poll is a complete scam and fraud.

A number of Senators implied or directly accused Ted Cruz of trying to use the de-funding push to raise funds.  Meanwhile, Cornyn’s phony poll is nothing less than an attempt to solicit email addresses and names so he can later solicit funds.   More, since the poll is based on a lie, he’s shamelessly misleading voters both as to his actual position and to the effect of his votes. Classic “for it before against it” nonsense! Naturally, there’s no way to answer it without seeming to support him or Obama-care.

Let’s Be Blunt: Lindsey Graham is a Liar

Monday, September 30th, 2013

Just a Little Lie

Let’s just get this out in the open: Senator Lindsey Graham(R-SC) is a liar. On Friday, when the Senate voted on whether to end debate on the House continuing resolution, that was the ball-game.  Once the number of Senators needed to amend the bill had been reduced from sixty-one to fifty-one, Reid was free to strip the de-funding language from the bill.  Senator Lindsey Graham(R-SC) was among the twenty-five Republican sell-outs who voted to permit Harry Reid to do so.  In tweets and in an official news release, Senator Graham subsequently claimed to have voted against funding for Obama-care, when that can be true only if you ignore the first vote for cloture.  The simple truth is that Lindsey Graham enabled Harry Reid to modify the bill.  Now he claims to be for de-funding Obama-care.  This half-truth is really a whole lie, but he will seek cover behind the latter vote.  He’s busily telling his constituents that he’s opposed to Obama-care, and that he voted to de-fund it, but he’s lying through his teeth, using the procedural nuances of the United States Senate as political camouflage.  Graham’s constituents need only ask him one direct question:

“Would Harry Reid have been able to amend the House continuing resolution without the support of Republicans, like you, Senator Graham?”

The true answer, indeed the only answer to this question is “no.”  Anything else is an attempt to obfuscate, evade, and otherwise obscure the truth.

Here had been his tweet, just moments after the vote:

 

Lindsey Graham is a despicable liar.  He’s hoping that the old formulation of being “for it before he was against it” will be enough to get him past his next re-election campaign, but voters of South Carolina should know that he’s lying to them, and that they now have an option.  Graham is being challenged in the primaries, and it’s about time somebody holds his feet to the fire.  What he’s done in the US Senate has been despicable.  His lies, misrepresentations, and his unflagging support of statism have earned him an involuntary early retirement from the US Senate.  It’s now up to the people of South Carolina to deliver it.

Lindsey Graham had hoped to do what twenty-four of his fellow Senate Republicans had hoped to do: Deceive voters with a shell-game.  Vote for cloture, permitting the bill to be amended, followed by a vote against the amendment, as the means by which to pretend he had voted to de-fund Obama-care.  The simple fact is what it is, and lying, duplicitous, back-stabbing politicians hope to trick voters with this sort of thing.  It’s really just a slightly different formulation of John Kerry’s infamous “for it before I was against it” nonsense of the 2004 campaign.  It’s always the same.  Graham isn’t listening to the people of South Carolina, and he’s gambling that most of them aren’t paying much attention, or will be fooled by this procedural dodge.

He may get away with it if the people of South Carolina don’t take the time to examine what he’s done, but he won’t get away with it here: Senator Lindsey Graham is lying when he claims to have voted to de-fund Obama-care as his previous vote enabled Harry Reid to remove the de-funding language.  This sort of behavior has become increasingly common from Senator Graham, who has supported going to war in Libya, and who has remained one of the key drivers in the Senate for the amnesty bill, leading many to refer to him simply as “Grahamnesty.” Whatever else he is, he’s neither honest, nor conservative, and it’s time he was sent home for good.  Most politicians can be found to have told a whopper or two during their careers, but Graham along with the others who are pretending to have voted against funding Obama-care after enabling it to go forward are simply liars.
Editor’s note: Senator Graham is being challenged in the GOP Senate primary by Nancy Mace, who is trying to overcome the Senator in a bid to replace him in the Senate. She may represent exactly what South Carolina needs in order to get beyond Graham’s duplicitous career in which he says one thing before voters in South Carolina, and another thing while in Washington DC. As you might guess, she has a few thoughts on Senator Graham, here.

Syria: The Establishment’s War

Sunday, September 8th, 2013

The message went out from the establishment intelligentsia: Link Syria to Iran and talk about the Iranian nuclear weapons program, and more in Congress will buy it.  John Boehner continues to “lead” House Republicans into President Obama’s pocket, as the word circulated that if a House vote on the use of force looked like a loser, they would spare Obama the embarrassment by simply tabling the matter.  Why are House Republican leaders seeking to spare Barack Obama the humiliation of losing a vote on anything?  If Boehner were any kind of opposition leader, he would revel in it.  The plain truth of the matter is that one can imagine a vital US interest in Syria’s civil war by the most contorted linguistic machinations.  We, the American people, have no interests there, and as polls reveal, we damned-well know it.

John McCain(R-AZ) can shout down detractors at town hall meetings all he likes, but simply put, the Senator is representing somebody the interests of somebody else when he advocates sending American forces to attack Syria.  Karl Rove is pushing, and all the rest of the DC intelligentsia is demanding a war on Syrian dictator (until recently referred to simply as “President”) Bashar Assad.  What is Assad’s grave crime?  Allegedly, forces under his command employed chemical nerve agent(s) against some number of civilians, estimated by the media in the range of 1,400.  Meanwhile, in the last two years, under the horrors of civil war, nearly 100,000 people have perished.  The calculation in use by Washington DC is that because Assad is alleged to have crossed this “red line,” employing these weapons of mass destruction, he must be punished(and ejected or killed) while they deny being after regime change.

Civilian death is horrible, but it is also an ugly and sometimes unavoidable reality of war.  The US has bombed civilians into oblivion in every war since the advent of the airplane. We excused those deaths as unavoidable  “collateral damage.” I don’t believe the method much matters.  This is another instance of Washington DC imposing its morality on the rest of us.  In 1994 Rawanda, when an estimated one-million Tutsi were murdered by the Hutus, nobody in Washington DC batted an eye.  You see, they weren’t slaughtered with chemical weapons, but in the main by Hutus wielding machetes.  Once again, the Washington DC establishment is more concerned with the weapon than the fact that people died.  More Americans will die prematurely as a result of Obama-care than have died in Syria as a result of chemical weapons.  Can we consider Congress and the President war criminals too?If chemical weapons are weapons of mass destruction, what then must we call Obama-care? It’s a legalized genocide machine, but nobody in the DC establishment seems the least bit perturbed by it.

For his part, President Obama has conducted his foreign policy like a lunatic.  Since he’s a looney-tunes leftist, this isn’t much of a surprise, but what has been more maddening is the voices of establishment Republicans rushing in to support him.  Most notable among these is that daft bugger with an anger-management issue from Arizona, who cannot wait to oust dictators in the Islamic world in order to replace them with even worse enemies of freedom in the form of al-Qaeda and its affiliate groups.  What sort of madman would demand a replacement of a known quantity of evil with a potentially more vast one?  John McCain believes apparently that any change is good change.

In fact, it seems as though McCain has been on a mission to sabotage the American people.  Some will cite his status as a war hero when excusing his bizarre policy positions in favor of illegal immigration, restrictions on the Second Amendment rights of Americans, as well as the First Amendment rights against which he legislated(McCain-Feingold.)  Frankly, it doesn’t much matter whether he’s incompetent or nefarious.  The fact is that his open support of this President’s anti-American agenda is all that one needs to know that something is wrong with McCain.  McCain was openly challenged by Arizonans at his town-hall meeting this week.  Every one of his detractors appeared more sensible than did the Senator.  While some think he’s senile, I think it’s worse than a touch of dementia.

The fact is that John McCain has joined the DC establishment-class at least a decade-and-one-half ago, as he sought the GOP nomination for President in 2000.  His treatment of the American people is driven by apparent disdain, and his contempt for plain old American values is shocking.  Why would he impel our country to intervene on behalf of rebels who are linked to the people who attacked us throughout the 1990s and particularly on 9/11/2001?  There are plenty of conspiracy theories, naturally, but whatever his reasons, they simply don’t add up in the manner he’s pitching them.  Of course, it’s more than John McCain.

The entire DC establishment wants this war.  As our economy careens toward a cliff, and as Washington DC inflates our money while preparing to stiff us on amnesty/illegal immigration and the funding of the WMD known as Obama-care, they want us watching Syria.  After all, if people in a town-hall are clobbering McCain over Syria, they’re not clobbering him over immigration or Obama-care.  I’m not suggesting that Syria is entirely a distraction, except that as creatures of opportunity, the establishment doesn’t mind using it that way.  Once again, however, the people who run this country are pushing an agenda the American people largely oppose.  Obama-care, amnesty, and military action in Syria are all things to which the citizens of this nation currently stand opposed.

It is for this reason that Iran and its nuclear weapons have now resurfaced as an issue linked to Syrian action.  Meanwhile, the people in Washington continue to angle for the creation of a vast new caliphate spanning the Islamic world, and they’re willing to use US forces as the mercenaries in that pursuit, as the Saudis and others offer to pay for the costs of removing Assad.  It’s become so bizarre that McCain claimed “Allahu Akbar” means “thank God.” Literally translated as the battle-cry it has been, it means “Allah is greater[than your God.]”  For those who have bought the misplaced notion that Islam worships the same god as Christians and Jews, this might pass the sniff-test, but for those who have studied the matter, McCain’s comment reeks of a naiveté or blatant dishonesty, either of which represents a clear and present danger to our country.

We have no business in Syria, never mind assisting the radical elements there.  1,400 civilians have been killed allegedly by chemical weapons, allegedly employed by Assad, but the American people have seen no evidence.  Instead, the DC establishment chatters about “intelligence briefings” as if the same people who didn’t prevent 9/11 are some sort of omniscient Oracle that knows, or that having seen such alleged intelligence, we, the American people ought simply to believe them, and accept it without further discussion.  Honestly, we’ve been here before.

While Washington DC prepares for war against Assad, we should remain mindful that the government is largely in a war against us.  No longer interested in serving the interests of the American people, and no longer bothered by that fact being obvious, they intend to have their war whatever we may think about it. Just like Obama-care, and exactly like amnesty.  It’s all part of one war: Washington DC against us.

 

Obama to Hide Disaster of Obama-care Until After 2014 Mid-Term Elections

Wednesday, July 3rd, 2013

Imagine enacting a law that will be so devastating to the economy that you feel compelled to hide it through subsequent election cycles.  That’s precisely what the Obama administration is doing, as the Democrats scheme for some way to take back the House in 2014.  Worse, the Republicans are just stupid enough to help.  As has been widely reported since Tuesday evening, the Obama administration, citing widespread corporate concerns, is delaying the implementation of the employer mandate.  That’s right, they don’t want you to see how many people are going to lose their jobs, or how bad healthcare is going to become until after the mid-terms in 2014.  Worse, a former Congressional Budget Office Director is calling the move “deviously brilliant.”  Excuse me, but is there that sort of discretion in Obama-care?  Does the law permit the administration to simply delay implementation of these “features” in this way?  I don’t think we’ve yet determined if all of the waivers the administration has issued to various favored groups are legal, much less a wholesale roll-back of the law.  We are being clobbered, and in largest measure, it’s because we are a country governed by tyrants who wish to manage us like a herd.  Where are the Republicans on this? My apologies, I shouldn’t have asked because we all know John Boehner is busy figuring out how to shove amnesty down our throats.  Maybe he can concoct another symbolic repeal vote!

The simple fact of the matter is that our government is under the complete control of criminals and people who must be considered criminally incompetent.  Do you know what this really means?  This means that the Obama administration and their stooges on Capitol Hill have crunched the numbers, and what will come with Obama-care is massive unemployment and lost wages just in time for an election season.  If that were to occur, you would see massive anti-Democrat turnout, which while possibly helpful to the hapless Republicans, would threaten to take away John Boehner’s excuse that he’s only one-half of one-third of the government, as the Senate would come into reach.  What’s more frustrating than this is the fact that so many Americans are so disconnected that most will not know of this even with all of the hoopla.  Most of those who notice will go back to their reality television and their sports and forget all about it before the election.

At the current rate of alienation of their voting base, Republicans will manage to miss this opportunity as they continue their drive for amnesty, and the large corporations are getting it.  Surely, they can drive away far more conservatives than the number of independents who will notice or remember this story some sixteen months from now.  Don’t worry, because the individual mandate will go on as scheduled.

Now the real and unvarnished truth of Obama and Obama-care is revealed: It’s a job-killing, care-rationing act of tyranny from which corporate giants can find relief with the Obama administration, while individual citizens must pay fines, er, uh, “taxes,” according to some particularly treasonous Supreme Court justices.

Ladies and gentlemen, there is no fixed law.  Law is whatever Herr Obama decides it will be from day to day, while Johnny, Mitch and the boys on Capitol Hill are content to leave it that way, with John Roberts giving his seal of approval.  Think what you will, because while what is being done by design and carefully plotted intention to this country might have landed the culprits on the gallows in years long bygone, nowadays there exist nobody who is going to do the first little thing about it.  Nobody.

Now, what’s on the tube?

Rubio Aide: American Workers “Can’t Cut It”

Monday, June 17th, 2013

Rich Lowry, writing for NRO Sunday, posted a bit of an exchange between Chuck Schumer’s staff and Marco Rubio’s staff on the haggling over the immigration reform bill.  In that exchange, the Rubio aide, purportedly said:

“There are American workers who, for lack of a better term, can’t cut it. There shouldn’t be a presumption that every American worker is a star performer. There are people who just can’t get it, can’t do it, don’t want to do it. And so you can’t obviously discuss that publicly.”

I’d like to address this sentiment, but for the purposes of this discussion, I am going to assume that Lowry’s reporting as well as the source materials he’s relying upon are accurate.  Rather than direct my ire at Senator Rubio for employing such a dolt, or assuming that he shares the twisted reasoning of his staffer, I simply wish to direct this to the staffer in question:

You take a salary month after month, and month after month, the American worker is the poor rube paying it.  The “American worker” is defined by men and women of all ages and races, including those who have been naturalized as citizens.  To say that the “American worker can’t cut it” is the most intensely disdainful remark you could make about the people your boss was elected to serve!  The people who keep the lights on in your office are the American worker.  You defame the people who get up each morning and who beat you to the Starbucks, who also seem to “cut it” as they’re making your coffee.  The people who keep the traffic flowing as you make your way to work seem to “cut it” as you move on down the road.  The poor bastards who keep the lights burning certainly “cut it.”

You and your boss along with the ninety-odd other dolts and their staffs seem to have no problem with the American worker “cutting it” when it comes to spending their money, and spending their future earnings.  No, I suspect the American worker “cuts it” just fine in that context.  Your boss wasn’t elected to represent the Chamber of Commerce or to take their position on the immigration bill, but then again, maybe he was. True, there is no presumption that we’re all star performers, except when it’s time to pay the nation’s bills, but one would think that you’d have the decency to consider them before the interests of the Chamber of Commerce.

Do you want to know what really doesn’t “cut it?” I’ll be happy to tell you, on behalf of all the men and women who will have done more before 8 o’clock this morning than you will have done by day’s end: Foolish, arrogant staff to elected or appointed government officials who along with their bosses hold the American people in disdain don’t cut it!  In short, you don’t cut it.  I can understand why you wouldn’t want your remarks repeated in public.  I can understand why Senator Rubio’s office doesn’t want NRO disseminating the remarks. As reported, what your remarks reveal about the sentiment of those in Washington DC who are pushing this immigration reform boondoggle is that the American people at large don’t “cut it” in your view.

Screw you.  The very idea that you would take such a position in an argument against the American worker should tell voters everything they need to know about you, and about your boss.  It surely didn’t take the space of four years for your boss to become captured by the machine, of which you are a part.  The truth may be that he had been captive all along, and ultimately, he bears responsibility for employing you. We’re going to need to see what we can do about that, although I have no doubt that even if dismissed, you’ll wind up working for a lobbying firm, perhaps arguing on behalf of the Chamber of Commerce that the American worker “can’t cut it.”

In my nearly half-century, I have watched the American worker “cut it” under the most egregious of conditions at times, and while it is always true that there may be some person in some job who is not quite up to it, the fact is that the American worker has managed to create trillions upon trillions of dollars worth of wealth during that span, much of which you and your boss and those with and before him have squandered.  Naturally, in a free market, you will get only as good as you give in most cases, but that’s a two-way street.  Over the last decade, costs have risen for businesses, but for consumers, they have risen even more.  How much has the average American’s wage increased?

There is nothing wrong with the American worker that the free market can’t fix, but sadly, you wish to tinker with the free market to the degree it still exists in the United States by changing the rules, in this case seeking to flood the market with millions of new employees.  All of this is because your real bosses – the people for whom you work while we who “can’t cut it” pay you – want bargain prices for labor and because your opposites on the political spectrum want more votes.  The truth is that you’re all a gang of criminals.  What this Immigration Reform bill will do to the American people, particularly the American worker, and to the American polity is and should be considered a criminal act.  I view it as treason.  How well does treason pay in Washington DC?  Apparently, quite well, with the tax-payer footing the bill.

It’s finally time the American worker taught you just a little bit about who runs this frigging show.  You wizards sit there in Washington DC, looking out over the land, imagining yourselves as captains of industries you could not build, you could not grow, and you certainly could not staff.  You dispense with our liberties and property and our wealth as though it had been yours to do by right, but when there are budget shortfalls because you spend our wealth like there’s no tomorrow, you undoubtedly conclude it’s because we, the American people, simply “can’t cut it.”

Here’s a little tip, and I hope you and your boss and all your analogs all over Capitol Hill will understand: This immigration reform bill stinks, and if you pass it, we who allegedly “can’t cut it” are going to send your asses home.  If there’s one thing to be learned in all of this, it is that we have left it in your hands far too often and without the oversight your intransigence has earned, in large measure because in the crippled economy is making it increasingly difficult to “cut it” as we pay our monthly bills while still funding your bloated salary.

“Can’t cut it?”  This comes from a staff member of an institution that has done nothing in more than five years to substantially relieve the burden on the American worker.  This comes from a glorified civil servant who enjoys the best benefits the government offers.  This sorry notion is born in a city that disposes of Americans and their wealth without the first thought to the morality of having done so.  This idea is the byproduct of a select club of people who cannot(or will not) balance a budget, fix the welfare-state bearing down on the American worker, or even protect the rights of the average American who simply wants to go about his life and business in peace.

This legislation was crafted as a compromise between big labor and big business, neither of which give a damn about the American worker. Sir, what doesn’t “cut it” is your legislation. What doesn’t “cut it” is your point of view.  That which doesn’t “cut it” is your deal-making with or on behalf of everybody under the sun except those who pay the freight on this whole mess.  What doesn’t “cut it” is the manner in which you so recklessly dismiss and disregard the hopes, the dreams, and the tireless exertions of the American worker. What doesn’t “cut it” is how you talk about us when we’re not in the room, which is most of the time, because we’re too busy trying to “cut it” in this mess of an economy you have made.  That doesn’t cut it.  You don’t cut it.

There’s a good deal more I could say to this staffer and all those like him on Capitol Hill who look with disdain or outright contempt upon the American people and the American worker, but most of it is not fit to print.  I dearly hope the American people will wake up to what this latest amnesty attempt will do to their lives and to their country, but I know that under these economic conditions, they’re awfully busy trying to “cut it.”

Carney: Benghazi Happened a Long Time Ago(Video)

Wednesday, May 1st, 2013

Jay Carney offered more excuses on the question of the Benghazi disaster, and this time, he explained it away as having “happened a long time ago.”  This corrupt administration continues to stonewall, and after listening to their Secretary of State ask the question “What difference does it make,” we now see the new talking point emerge that Benghazi happened a long time ago.  I suppose on that basis, we should simply forget it.

Watch this remarkable example of White House AssClownery:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJUwkCVjdHE]