Dems' latest Trump "gotcha" backfires, could torpedo their best chance of winning in 2020

The Democrats, and their allies in the mainstream media, were breathless. After many failures, they finally had the smoking gun; the evidence that would finally take down Donald Trump's presidency. Where the Russian collusion allegations and claims of racism had not succeeded, this controversy would do the trick.

Ironic, isn't it, that this big "gotcha" moment is backfiring, and instead may shoot down the candidate in the best position to defeat Trump next year?

The big event, of course, is the laughable "whistleblower" affair regarding Trump's conversation with a foreign leader, now identified as the president of Ukraine, that was such a hot topic last week.

This is the point where certain government employees need to be reminded, once again, that just because they disagree with their organization's policies or procedures, or the officials in charge, they don't get the privilege of sabotaging things from within. Even if you except true whistleblowers from this, this event still doesn't qualify. Nothing that's been reported about Trump's conversation with the Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky even rises to illegality. This episode might someday be "Exhibit A" when it comes time to repeal civil service protections for government workers.

Now, it's been learned that the so-called whistleblower didn't even have firsthand knowledge of the information contained in the phone call. "Heard it from a friend, who heard it from a friend, who heard it from another you'd been messing around." Isn't there a song that says that?

The real scandal here isn't Trump's interaction with Ukraine leaders, but with what happened when Joe Biden was vice president and interacted with them.

A little research will turn up details of the involvement of Biden's son, Hunter, with the Ukrainian natural gas company Burisma Holdings. Now, a tape has emerged of Biden bragging at a 2018 Council on Foreign Relations panel discussion about how he threatened to withhold United States loan guarantees unless the Ukrainian prosecutor investigating his son's activities was fired. "Well son of a b---h, he got fired," Biden proclaims in the video.

Funny how that works, isn't it? Biden, who obviously doesn't know when to shut up, admits in a public event with the cameras rolling that he leveraged American finances -- and with the blessing of President Obama, he also said -- to achieve a result that most likely benefitted his notoriously wayward son. Yet Trump is the one who needs to be investigated, impeached, and hung by his neck until dead from the top of the Washington Monument because a likely member of the Deep State who's opposed to Trump's policies heard something that had been passed through several channels and decided to play hero?

Does anyone remember the old childhood playground game where a bunch of people would sit in a circle, one person would whisper something into the ear of the person next to them, that person would repeat what they heard -- or thought they heard -- to their neighbor, and so on until they got back around to the originator? Most times, what came back to the first person was nothing at all close to what they first said. There's a reason that hearsay isn't admissible in legal cases.

Things have a way of working out, though. This controversy may end up taking out Biden, not Trump, and help ensure the incumbent's re-election next year.

Biden, along with Sens. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth "Fauxcahontas" (or "Lieawatha," take your pick) Warren, are the three front-runners for the Democrats' nomination. Democrats may not want to admit it, but for all his faults, Biden represents their best chance for defeating Trump. America is not ready to embrace the radical economic policies that Sanders and the "Pretendian" support. And none of the other candidates have much to recommend them. Casting Couch Kamala, Mayor Pete, Beto? They aren't serious candidates. They aren't really much removed from nuts like Yang or the woman who was talking about spirits and crystals.

It's not really odd that while Democrats may be calling for Trump's impeachment over this matter, they're strangely silent on investigating Biden's role in what started it, or even in calling for him to drop out of the race.

The mainstream media, as should have been expected, continues to focus on Trump instead of Biden in this matter. And hard-left outlets like Vox, The Intercept, Media Matters, and of course MSNBC continue to insist there's no "there" there with Biden but Trump needs to be tarred and feathered.

As with all these laughable scandals before it, this one will blow over. The real Russian collusion was the fake Steele dossier that formed the basis of the entire investigation. Some questionable Ukrainian documents of questionable authenticity formed the basis of much of the complaint against Paul Manafort (that fact hasn't gotten much play in the media, surprise surprise.) And now, anyone with any intellectual honesty can see that this current matter is much more of a threat to Biden's continued viability as a candidate than it is to Trump's conduct while in office.

And if the Democrats pursue impeachment, that almost guarantees Trump's re-election. Impeachment is a political process, not a legal one, and even if the House impeaches him, there's no way the Senate will convict him and remove him from office. It didn't work when Bill Clinton was impeached when the Republicans held both houses of Congress, despite undisputable evidence of the charges against him. It generated sympathy for Clinton and the Democrats.

So, when the taint from this, combined with all his other gaffes, chases Biden from the race, and the Democrats nominate an unelectable candidate to face Trump next year, Trump's opponents can blame themselves for what happened. The rest of us will thank them, but not before enjoying a hearty laugh at their expense.

Kentucky press commits journalistic malpractice once again

How can you tell an election is forthcoming in Kentucky? The mainstream media shows its biases once again by either trying to impact public perception of a candidate or officeholder, or by omitting pertinent information from a story.

It happened twice in one day in the pages of the Lexington Herald-Leader this week.

First, a reporter named Daniel Desrochers penned a hit piece about Gov. Matt Bevin's use of state-owned aircraft for travel. Six paragraphs into the story, this appears:

"Bevin's use of the state plane -- and his refusal to disclose where he's going and why -- has become an issue as he campaigns for a second term as governor."

Nonsense. No one was making this an issue until the press brought it up. Members of the public were talking about the economy, abortion, education, and pensions. They weren't discussing Bevin's use of the state plane.

Nothing in the story even comes close to implying that Bevin is improperly using state aircraft. The story points out that non-official travel has been reimbursed by a number of parties, including the Republican Party, Republican Governors Association, and the governor himself.

If the press really wants to know where the governor is going, there are plenty of ways to find out before rushing a story into print. Did Desrochers file open records requests for all flight records? If so, that detail was overlooked. Those records should be available upon request. If the request is denied, then appeal. Attorney General Andy Beshear would be more than happy to rule against his November opponent.

The story cites court precedent that the governor's schedule is not a public record. Why hasn't the Herald-Leader filed suit to overturn that prior ruling and seek to make the schedule available? The decision cited was from the Court of Appeals, meaning that the original parties didn't see fit to appeal up the ladder to the Kentucky Supreme Court.

Of course, that would not serve the paper's purpose, which is to make a Republican governor look bad. And the final two paragraphs of the story illustrate that. They mention delays in getting records from the Kentucky State Police. No mention is made of filing official challenges to those delays. And then the governor's communications director, obviously aware of what was going on, said:

"The communications office has been working with you for over a year now to answer your questions and provide detailed records showing that all flights have been properly reimbursed and to explain to you how this process works. It's clear to us that you are more interested in trying to prove that we have somehow failed to follow this process rather than writing a fair story. This is the last request for information that we will be responding to related to this topic."

In true Herald-Leader fashion, the paper used its own story as the basis for a negative opinion piece. The paper hasn't published editorials in quite some time, but opinion columnist Linda Blackford weighed in, using only Desrochers' story as a basis for her anti-Bevin screed.

The second piece of journalistic malpractice came from not what was reported, but what was not reported, in a story about a lawsuit challenging the eligibility of attorney general candidate Daniel Cameron.

Greg Stumbo and his cronies have long been complaining about Cameron's relative youth and whispering that because of that, he's not qualified to be attorney general. (At least he's never fathered a child out of wedlock, failed to pay child support, and then countersued the mother of the child when she finally did go to court to get the arrearage; and he never abused his office for partisan purposes to take down a political opponent as he did during his prior term as attorney general. I would think those are much more disqualifying factors, but that's just me).

On Tuesday, John Cheves, another Herald-Leader reporter with a demonstrated bias against conservatives, wrote a story about a lawsuit filed by someone named Joseph Leon Jackson Sr. of Louisville, that seeks to have Cameron removed from the November ballot. It alleges that he has not practiced law for the required eight years that's necessary to be eligible to be attorney general. Nevermind that there is court precedent in Kentucky that it's only required to have been admitted to the bar for eight years prior, and not necessarily to have met some arbitrary definition of "practicing law."

The story identifies Jackson only as a retired union worker and someone described by his lawyer as a "concerned citizen."

Why did the story not delve deeper into Jackson's motives and connections? Is he a registered Democrat? Is he politically active? To whom has he contributed? Does he have some sort of link to Stumbo, the Beshear family, Amy McGrath (Cameron is a protege of Mitch McConnell, after all), or any other partisan opponents to Republicans? Isn't that important? One would certainly think so.

Of course, the same publication that didn't find it relevant to report on the conflicts of interest by the members of that Stumbo-led grand jury that investigated Gov. Ernie Fletcher's administration couldn't be bothered to dig a little and answer the questions that any person with common sense might have.

In a week where "journalistic malpractice" has been a commonly used phrase because of the way the New York Times' latest attack on Brett Kavanaugh crashed and burned once the truth came out, it's important to note that it's alive and well in the Bluegrass State as well. It's vital to realize that anything you read about Bevin or any of the other Republican candidates for statewide office is being presented to you through a biased filter.

A man of God's final words for a nation that needs to hear them

My family recently said farewell to one of its cornerstones. My cousin, Marvin Farmer, was 98 years old and had lived a long, rich, full life. Although he had lived in Berea since before I was born, he was a larger-than-life presence on my dad's side of the family. He and my grandmother were first cousins; his father and my great-grandmother were brothers and sisters. He and his wife, and one of my dad's sisters and her husband, were married at the same time and honeymooned together.

My fondest memories of Marvin are the "Decoration Day" services at Stone Coal Cemetery in Lee County, where many of my ancestors are buried. Each year, he would bring the message at the memorial service held on the Sunday of Memorial Day weekend, then the family would adjourn to my grandmother's place for a huge meal and time of fellowship. Given the opportunity to speak a few words at his funeral, I mentioned that Memorial Day, not Christmas, was my favorite holiday when I was growing up because of this.

Unbeknownst to me until recently, two years ago Marvin wrote an autobiography, covering his life from his childhood on Farmers Ridge in the area where Lee, Owsley, Jackson, and Estill counties all converge; through his World War II service in the Marine Corps; to his career at the Blue Grass Army Depot in Madison County; and finally to his retirement and his civic involvement and volunteerism in his adopted hometown of Berea and his love for and pride in his family.

I was fortunate enough to have been sent a copy of Marvin's Story several weeks ago, shortly after I joined with most of my grandmother's remaining family in visiting with Marvin, his wife Virginia, and one of their sons in Berea back in the spring. Marvin was in declining health, but his mind was as sharp as ever, and we learned during that visit that he was working on another book.

Sometime between that visit and his recent death, that book was published. It's entitled One Knee is Not Enough and is a Biblical look at the state of our nation today. It's a short booklet, but it's filled with much wisdom.

Begun the week of Marvin's 98th birthday back in February, the book addresses a number of current issues and applies Biblical verses to their resolution. Health care, the national debt, global warming, illegal immigration -- all are looked at through a spiritual microscope. (Surprisingly, despite what the name of the book might lead one to believe, disrespect of the American flag by athletes and celebrities is not touched upon). He themes the book as a conversation he's having with governmental leaders from the comfort of his den as they've come to pay him a visit.

Throughout the book, Marvin never lets on as to his own views on these subjects, save for an admonishment to the press to report the truth and to apologize for and correct errors. Through his experiences as a longtime Sunday school teacher and someone who probably knew the Bible more thoroughly than some ordained, seminary-educated ministers, he urges decision-makers to seek God's will as they govern.

Although the book gives no clues as to Marvin's political leanings, that visit our family paid him and Virginia provided a tell-tale clue. The family home, on a quiet street corner in Berea, was expanded many times as the family grew. An office filled with mementos from a long life, and an immaculate shop with many tools from his family's connections to the sawmills and oilfields of Lee County on display, will stand as testament to his interests and wisdom and the changes he saw in society and technology in more than 98 years. But near their front door, on a hat rack that held some of his favorite headgear, were a couple of Donald Trump hats.

Most of the Farmers from Lee County are conservatives -- we're still trying to figure out where Tracy Farmer went wrong -- and given Marvin's life experiences and his very real faith in God, it's not surprising that he'd have Trump apparel on display. We certainly didn't get into an in-depth discussion of politics during that final visit, but it's probably safe to say that like many of us, he supported the president's overall policies while being turned off by certain aspects of his life.

At any rate, there's a lot of wisdom and wise counsel in 13 short pages in One Knee is Not Enough. The closing paragraph sums it up: "As you return from your visit with me, please take with you the reminder that returning to God is the only hope for this wayward, struggling nation. Looking to God for leadership, guidance and direction as we pray on both knees, may, very well, bring back the wisdom needed. Thank you for your visit and may God bless you in your life and work."

Marvin Farmer was one of the most respected, most Godly men I've ever known. It was a privilege to call him a relative. May all who are in positions of power heed his counsel and wisdom, as expressed in his final written work.

You can't read this blog. It has no content

Not too long ago, I noted that my efforts to have ads placed on this blog through the Google AdSense program were being rebuffed. First I was told that there's no content, then that the content was prohibited. Unless Google considers conservative thought to be offensive, which they probably do, there's nothing here that violates any of Google's prohibitions.

Each time I've gotten a rejection notice, I dutifully click the "I certify I have fixed the problems" box and resubmit the application.

Well, we've again gone to getting "no content" rejections. The latest:

WarningYou need to fix some things to use AdSense

We've found policy violations on http://kentuckyvalleyviews.blogspot.com that are preventing your site from being approved:

• Valuable Inventory: No content

  As stated in our Program policies, we may not show Google ads on pages or apps with little to no value and/or excessive advertising until changes are made. This includes hosted ad pages or pages or apps without content.
  

So it would appear now that Google again considers conservative blogs to have no content or no value.

But I will keep on fighting the good fight in an attempt to make a little extra money. So again, in the meantime, if you have any freelance writing or editing needs, give me a shout.

Too many people have forgotten for whom they work

Something happened during my tenure with the communications office in the agency formerly known as the Kentucky Revenue Cabinet that I have carried with me for two decades. Once simple event has proven to be instructive in a variety of situations. It may never be more applicable than it is today.

Shortly after I started working there, Paul Patton was elected governor. One of his initiatives was called EMPOWER Kentucky, which was an effort to streamline and modernize governmental services. In Revenue, that project took the form of an effort to consolidate all tax collection services into one interconnected computer network, and an endeavor to increase revenue collection by closing the gap between what was being paid and what was actually owed.

As is customary with such projects, the state hired outside consultants at inflated prices to work with the various state agencies involved in the process. I can't remember exactly which consultant was working with Revenue -- I tend to think it was Deloitte & Touche, but it may have been the Gartner Group -- but we were overrun with them as EMPOWER Kentucky got started.

Being the chief writer in the public information office, who was responsible for communicating the project to employees and the general public, I attended numerous meetings and briefings about what became known as the Integrated Tax System (ITS). It was during one of those meetings that my memorable moment happened.

One of the consultants was speaking in a small gathering in the cabinet secretary's conference room, and he kept telling us all the things that we in Revenue needed to do for the benefit of the consultants. Finally, someone had had enough. That someone was Margaret Handmaker, the Revenue secretary herself. She looked squarely at the consultant, and uttered these fateful words:

"Are we working for you, or are you working for us?"

Properly chastened, the consultant promptly piped down, and began listening to the ideas the Revenue employees in the room were presenting, rather than pushing his own proposals. The state had hired the consulting firm to do a job for us, but instead, it was treating the state as if we were all there to do what they told us.

The circumstances are a bit different, but the gist remains the same, when today's situation with the government is examined. A lot of people are forgetting for whom they work. Their job is to carry out management's directives, not oppose them from within.

I spent eight years working for a governor I despised, Steve Beshear. I also was no fan of my agency's management. Yet I didn't try to throw wrenches into the works. I expressed my disagreement when appropriate, or when honest feedback was sought, but at the end of the day, I did my job. I didn't substitute my judgment for that of my superiors.

We have a whole lot of people in the federal government who need to be reminded of that. It's no secret that much of the bureaucracy is liberal, and thus isn't inclined to support President Trump and his policies and initiatives. But those bureaucrats aren't entitled to sabotage policies, oppose proposals, fail to comply with directives, or work from within to undermine the administration's goals and objectives. What would public outcry have been if there had been so much resistance to President Obama's agenda from within the federal government?

Government employees are free to express their disapproval with what's being done. I spent eight years in state government doing just that. But in the end, I did my job, whether it was personally palatable to me or not.

Elected officials and politically-appointed managers usually listen to the thoughts and opinions of career employees, and most take those views under serious consideration when making decisions. But once those decisions are made, government workers have one job: Carrying out those directives.

You may hate Donald Trump and what he's trying to accomplish. You may disagree with what he says and what he does. God knows I did with Steve Beshear. And I don't agree with everything Matt Bevin does. But I did, and continue to do, my job. If you work for the federal government, you should too. Your job is not to oppose or resist the Trump administration. Your job is to do what the administration tells you to.

It's no longer possible to politely disagree in America

You can't go very long these days without hearing how polarized the country is.

I will freely admit my role in that. I'm a staunch, unwavering conservative. If I had my way, we'd never elect another liberal politician and we would repeal liberal policies. I'm outspoken in my beliefs, and one of my guilty pleasures is trolling liberals on social media. Truth be told, I probably enjoy that more than I should.

But having said that, I don't mind a good, honest, civil debate on the issues of the day. I think it's important to discuss what's going on. At the end of the day, I still believe my side has the best answers, but it's important to know what the other side thinks, and why.

We're getting to the point where that's not possible. Post a pro-Trump comment, and you're a Russian bot. Speak up in defense of Hillary, or Bernie, and you're a libtard. While some of that is in good fun, sometimes it crosses the line.

Since when did it become acceptable to try to get someone fired because you disagree with them?

Read the comments on social media posts of news stories, and sooner or later you'll see it. "I see you work for so-and-so. What if your boss knew what you think?"

Translated: "Nice job you have there. It's be a shame if something happened to it."

I'm not talking about racism here, nor threats against anyone's safety or welfare. Just the simple expression of an opinion with which someone else disagrees. The anger in our society is so palpable that there are actually people who think someone should lose their job because someone has an opinion that runs counter to their own.

Last time I checked, we all have the freedom to hold different political opinions, and the freedom to express them. And while I realize this is strictly not a First Amendment matter, the core principle of that doctrine is to encourage discussion and dissent. You shouldn't have to pay a price just because you believe in something that someone else doesn't.

I had something like this happen to me recently. Someone unhappy with my opinion on a subject in the news let me know they just might feel led to let my employers know I'd weighed in on something and they disagreed with it. The details are unimportant, but the gist of the matter is that someone was not happy when I noted some hypocrisy being expressed in public by a member of the media.

Why anyone feels that when someone else posts something related to a current event when they're sitting in the comfort of their living room on a Friday evening, it merits such a reaction, is beyond me. But that's where we are now.

Not too long ago, I saw a liberal post what I felt was an outrageous take on some issue. A conservative followed up with, "Maybe I should tell your employer what you posted." I quickly chided them, saying something like, "We're better than they are. That's how they operate. They're entitled to their opinion, too, but we're different than they are. We don't threaten people's jobs just because they disagree with us."

We may never heal the divisions within this country. In fact, if the liberals ever take power again, I hope conservatives will be louder and stronger than ever in their opposition. But we have to be able to agree without being disagreeable. No matter how much I may oppose your viewpoints, I won't try to get you fired for expressing them. You should show the same courtesy.

What happens when everyone hates you? Walmart may find out

For years, liberals have vilified Walmart. The Arkansas-based retailer's employment practices, its business practices, the quality of the merchandise it sells -- all have come under withering criticism from people who think the company should pay its employees more, sell its wares for higher prices so as not to undercut locally-owned businesses, and not import goods from China or other countries.

It's fair to say that many liberals hate Walmart. You'll frequently hear them proclaim they prefer Target over Walmart, or Costco over Sam's Club. Even though Sam Walton's empire is the quintessential American business success story, many see that as a bad thing.

Now, scores of conservatives have joined liberals as being boisterous critics of Walmart. "Wally World" has gradually been cutting back on the sales of firearms and ammunition in the face of leftist pressure in the wake of some well-publicized shootings. This past week, Walmart announced another cutback, and also said that it would ask customers not to openly carry weapons in its stores.

(You may have heard this practice referred to as "constitutional carry," given the Second Amendment's acknowledgement of the right to bear arms as one of the same God-given rights on par with freedom of speech and freedom of religion. Anytime you hear the term "constitutional carry," what's really being described is the right to carry a weapon in full view, as opposed to carrying a concealed weapon, which is illegal or allowable only under permit in many states.)

So, after years of alienating liberals, Walmart has now angered and offended conservatives who are unhappy with yet another assault on their rights.

What happens now? This certainly isn't going to appease the "living wage" and "union yes" and "no self-checkouts" and "support your local retailer" crowds. They're not going to magically love Walmart all of a sudden and start flocking there to spend money. They'll still prefer Target or Meijer or some other store. Pandering to those folks on this matter is not going to earn Walmart any goodwill whatsoever. But in the meantime, constitutional conservatives are now turned off as well and are looking for other options.

One business that stepped up is Rural King, which offers many of the same products as does Walmart and is rapidly expanding from its Illinois base. After Walmart's announcement, Rural King came out with a statement saying they respect America's history of firearms usage and its constitutional rights.

Walmart's decision prompted a bizarre rant from Fox News' Tucker Carlson the other night. The conservative commentator rightly criticized Walmart's decision as pandering to the left, but then he launched an odd rant against the company that repeated some of the classic liberal anti-Walmart talking points.

If liberals have shown us anything, it's that nothing is ever good enough for them. Walmart could completely cave on every issue its critics raise, and people with that mindset still wouldn't shop there. Now, Walmart's managed to tick off folks on the other side. If they keep going, they may end up at the point where everyone hates them.

Just this past week, the final nail may have been pounded into Kmart's coffin. Another round of store closures was announced, including a couple of the last remaining stores in Kentucky. Kmart was never able to compete with Walmart once Walmart gained prominence. Kmart was more expensive, had a smaller selection of products, and its stores weren't appealing. Once a leading national general merchandise retailer, it wasn't able to keep up with the changing times. There might be a lesson there for Walmart. If they continue to tick off various segments of the populace, Kmart's present might be Walmart's future.

Interesting signals in Kentucky's Senate race

Kentucky hasn't even elected its statewide officeholders yet, and next year's U.S. Senate race is already getting attention.

Incumbent Mitch McConnell, the Senate majority leader and a target of Democrats nationwide, hit the airwaves this week with an ad focused on Amy McGrath, the best-known of the Democrats who have announced their candidacy.

This signals two things.

One is that McConnell is not concerned about his primary challenger. former State Rep. Wesley Morgan. I'll be voting for and supporting Morgan over McConnell, but the safe bet is that the incumbent will win by a wide margin.

Second is that this move makes it fairly obvious that McConnell thinks McGrath will be the Democrats' nominee. Even with sports radio host Matt Jones announcing his formation of an exploratory committee this week, and with state House Minority Leader Rocky Adkins saying he'll delay a decision until after this fall's gubernatorial election despite being a hoped-for candidate by many in the state, it appears McConnell thinks he'll be up against McGrath next November.

Kentucky's Senate election will be in the national spotlight, as Democrats try to depose the majority leader. National groups from both parties will be spending lots of money here in an attempt to sway voters. Who knows, it might even put Kentucky back in the presidential election spotlight. It wouldn't be surprising for President Trump to hold a rally in Kentucky in support of McConnell, even with Kentucky's electoral votes pretty much guaranteed to go to Trump.

For those who grow weary of politics, it's going to be a long 15 months. Many are already cringing at seeing McGrath's ads on television, as they bring back horrible memories of her omnipresent commercials during her failed run for the House of Representatives last year.

But for now, it'll pay to keep an eye on McConnell's tactics and strategy. Will he broaden his aim to include Jones and possibly Adkins? Or will he keep the focus on McGrath?

Did the governed consent to this? Taxing bodies can challenge the assessed value of your property if they don't think it's high enough

...Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,...

This line from the preamble to the Declaration of Independence, spells out exactly why this country was founded. Taxation and religious freedom were the two main reasons the colonists wanted to break free of British rule, and to establish a representative republic form of government instead of a top-down monarchy. The people choose their lawmakers and grant them certain authority, but they are to exercise only the authority given by the citizenry.

Taxes are a necessary evil resulting from that decision to establish a government. In theory, the people have chosen, through those elected representatives, to publicly fund certain programs and projects.

But did the people really ever expect that one arm of government could challenge a decision by another arm of government that could materially and financially affect them? That's exactly what happened in Grant County, where the school board has challenged the property valuation administrator's assessment of the worth of the Ark Encounter park and exhibit.

Forget for a moment the Ark Encounter's controversial nature. The gist of this story was lost on many who weighed in when the news came out earlier this week. Tax breaks granted by the state for the facility's construction have nothing to do with the controversy at hand.

In Kentucky, an elected county official called the property valuation administrator has the responsibility of assessing the value of all real property for taxation purposes. Kentucky property owners have always had the ability to challenge the assessed value of their property if they feel it's been set too high. Gov. Matt Bevin's challenge of the value of his Louisville home has been in the news. He followed the procedure spelled out in law when he felt the taxable value of his home was more than it was really worth on the open market.

But unbeknownst to me, and probably most everyone else, taxing agencies can challenge individual property assessments if they feel they're too low. That's what's happening in Grant County.

The PVA assessed the Ark Encounter's property at around $48 million in 2017. The school board there challenged the assessment to a local appeals board but lost, then also lost a challenge before a state board. Thus the lawsuit.

Nevermind that prior to the Ark Encounter's construction, the property was vacant woodland worth probably not more than a couple of hundred thousand dollars, if that much. A $48 million addition to the county's tax rolls means an increase in tax revenue to all local agencies that levy property taxes. News reports indicate that the school board received nearly $276,000 from the Ark Encounter in 2017. That's more than a quarter of a million dollars that they didn't get before the park was built. But it's apparently not enough.

While this appears to be nothing more than a blatant money grab from the Grant County school board, the implications of this are scary. What if someone has a confrontation with an official from an agency that has the power to levy taxes? Will they become a target? What if the agency decides its critic's home or business is assessed too low? Will they have to hire a lawyer and defend themselves in court?

It's a misconception that businesses pay taxes. Taxes are an expense that are either passed along to customers, or recouped through cuts in other places. If a prominent business owner finds their assessment increased through a taxing body's challenge, what if they increase prices or lay off employees to make up the difference? Doesn't that hurt, rather than help, the community at large?

Of course, Grant County is the same place where earlier this year, the high school refused to place an empty chair at graduation to honor the memory of a student who would have been graduating had she not died. So that gives you an idea of the mentality of school officials there.

What will probably come as a bigger shock to most, though, is that a PVA actually undervalued someone's property. In most cases, he exact opposite happens. Property is supposed to be valued for tax purposes as the amount that its sale would bring in a voluntary transaction between a willing buyer and a willing seller. Most property owners wish they could sell their real estate for what the PVA says it's worth. I know that in three recent property sales, I wish I could have gotten the taxable value out of them.

Kentucky legislators need to take steps to prevent this type of thing from happening. If the PVA is undervaluing property, there are mechanisms in place to deal with that. The state took over management of a number of PVA offices back in the 1980s. But if a taxing body has an issue with a specific taxpayer, then this process opens up a whole lot of potential for abuse.

This specific issue is far from over. The suit was filed in Grant Circuit Court. No doubt, the losing party will appeal to the Court of Appeals, and a Supreme Court appeal is likely given the sum of money in question. No matter your opinion on the Ark Encounter, tax breaks for industrial development, or Christianity in general, this bears watching. The ability of a government taxing authority to single out an individual taxpayer is scary, and is something anyone who's concerned about an increasing government overreach and abuse of authority should be concerned about.

Media continues to destroy its own credibility

For several years, the cover photo on my personal Facebook page has been a banner stating, "I Don't Believe The Liberal Media!" It's a replica of a bumper sticker distributed by the watchdog Media Research Center (and I really need to find my copy of it and put it on my vehicle.)

Those who know me know my background. My college degrees are in journalism/communications. I spent 14 years in the newspaper field, most of that time in editorial positions. When I got out of college, and for several years thereafter, my career goal was to write for the Lexington Herald-Leader. It's a goal I'm glad I've never attained, given the leftward leanings of that publication. Imagine my disappointment when I found out that the reporter I most looked up, someone I had gotten to know when I was in college and with whom I had several professional dealings after I went into the profession, to turned out to be another stereotypical liberal journalist.

I've been out of the journalism field for 15 years now, but still keep a keen eye on my former occupation. It's gotten to the point where I'm ashamed of my education and my background.

Another thing those who know me know is that I did not support Donald Trump in the 2016 Republican presidential race. I supported Ted Cruz, and was not a fan of Trump's primary campaign. But it was impossible not to notice the bias with which the national press covered Trump's campaign. It was plain for me, a Trump opponent, to see that the media was against him and was trying every way possible to bring him down. It got to the point where in my house, we couldn't watch the CBS Evening News anymore between the local news and "Wheel of Fortune."

The coverage of Trump's presidency has been an embarrassment. He's right to attack CNN, NBC, and the leading newspapers as "fake news." They aren't interested in facts. They want to torpedo his administration.

If you need proof, look at the way Trump's criticisms of various Congressional Democrats has been branded. Stories about Trump's tweets usually state they are "racist" or "inherently racist" as if it's the gospel. Truth is, it's a lie and a fabrication. Trump has never mentioned race at all when he's gone after Elijah Cummings and Baltimore, or any of the four freshman females known collectively as "The Squad." He's mentioned policies and ideologies and unpleasant truths about the areas some of them represent, but he's never touched on race. Only a media looking for a way to criticize him sees racism in his comments and actions.

That's why the revelations last week about the infamous New York Times staff meeting come as no surprise. Distill that to its essence, and you get this: "We tried, and failed, to get Trump on this Russian collusion stuff. So now, we're going to try to get him as a racist, and we're going to brand his supporters as racist, as well." I've read the transcript of the leaked staff meeting. Those who dispute that's the gist of what was said are being willfully ignorant.

And that's not to mention their "1619 Project," which is an attempt to sell the absurd idea that America is an inherently racist nation, the real founding of this country occurred not in 1776 with the signing of the Declaration of Independence, but years earlier when the first slaves were brought to our shores, and that everything America is now was built by involuntary servitude.

I have yet to read Mark Levin's best-selling book, Unfreedom of the Press, but I plan to. Like all of Levin's books, it's a well-researched and unassailable history of the biases the press has shown in recent years. The New York Times' overlooking the Holocaust is a particular subject of concern, and it became even more relevant last week when the anti-Semitic comments of a NYT editor, Tom Wright-Piersanti, were made public.

Several years ago, something called "the Journolist" made news. It was an email group run by Ezra Klein of the Washington Post, and it further exposed key journalists as doctrinaire liberals.

Then, as now as the latest scandals erupt and little is said, except for liberal journalists and those they support circling the wagons. Arthur Schwartz, a Trump supporter who helped expose Wright-Piersanti, has come under fire for his disclosure that he and others have compiled a list of compromising statements journalists have made, and will make them public. Unlike the fake Russian dossier which began the investigation of Trump, these are 100 percent true and made up of the journalists' own words.

Or to state it differently, only liberal journalists have First Amendment rights. When someone else exercises them, they're engaging in blackmail and extortion.

Need any more examples of the media being tone-deaf and unaware? Look no farther than the new hire the Courier-Journal breathlessly announced last week, Joe Sonka. If the C-J needed any more reinforcement for the view that its coverage is biased to the left, this provides it in spades.

If Schwartz and his group of opposition researchers want a Kentucky trophy to hang on their wall, then Sonka gives them a rich history. For years, Sonka ran the "Barefoot and Progressive" blog in Lexington. There, his liberalism and atheism was on full display. He raged against Gov. Ernie Fletcher, President George W. Bush, Sens. Mitch McConnell and Jim Bunning, and anyone else of the Republican persuasion.

He left that blog, and Lexington, to go to work for the Louisville Eccentric Observer, otherwise known as LEO Weekly, but left in a snit with the publication's owner, Aaron Yarmuth (son of a certain congressman). From there, he went to Insider Louisville, which recently shut down. At those publications, he couldn't keep his viewpoint separated from his "reporting." He lucked out and scored a job at the C-J.

There, he'll fit right in with Joe Gerth. Gerth puts his anti-conservative bias on full display every time he writes a column. Given the views he freely expresses in his opinion pieces, it's easy to see why his news stories read the way they do.

I'd also say that he'll fit right in with Tom Loftus, but he won't for long. Loftus, who seems to think Gov. Matt Bevin's purchase of a house in Jefferson County is the biggest news story ever in the Commonwealth of Kentucky, announced his upcoming retirement last week. Maybe Sonka's hiring was too over-the-top for even Loftus to stomach.

When Trump tweeted over the weekend that "the media is destroying the free press," he took the usual heaping of abuse from the left. Those of us who have watched the press destroy its own credibility for years knew exactly what he was talking about.