Andy Martin: Contrarian Commentary

My Photo
Location: Manchester, New Hampshire, United States

Sunday, February 05, 2017

Eight years ago corruption fighter Andy Martin explained why martial law was needed in Chicago, to stem the tide of relentless violence

Andy Martin was supposed to attend the University of New Hampshire, where his mother and uncle had graduated. But when Andy got the chance to play Big ten football at the University of Illinois he grabbed for the brass ring, eventually ending up as a corruption fighter in Illinois. Today Andy lives in Manchester, near the Merrimack River. But this year, 2017, he celebrates fifty years as a corruption fighter in Chicago and Illinois, and forty years as the last surviving reform mayoral candidate in the historic election to succeed “The Boss,” Mayor Richard J. Daley. Andy continues to fight political corruption from Hanover to Honolulu, and he remains an “honest broker” in explaining why martial law is the only approach that will succeed in quelling the violence in Chicago. Andy endorses President Trump’s promise to “send in the feds” if Chicago leaders cannot stop the killing; eight years ago in a blunt, landmark prediction, Andy said Chicago’s leaders were incapable of regaining control of the city. Andy was right. The failed political leadership in Chicago was wrong. And today President Trump is also right. Will Trump right Chicago’s wrongs?

“The Internet Powerhouse”
Andy Martin,  J. D.
adjunct professor of law
executive editor
one of America’s most respected
independent authors/investigators

“Factually Correct, Not Politically Correct”

you can call Andy:
National (866) 706-2639
Cell (917) 664-9329

you can email Andy:

you can write Andy by
faxing (866) 214-3210

Blogs/web sites  (partial):

To become a regular subscriber to our emails please send an email to and place “SUBSCRIBE” in the subject line.

Please feel free to forward and/or post this email, with proper attribution

Please sign up for our enhanced Twitter feed with enhanced, original coverage


Andy says that without a declaration of martial law, Chicago violence cannot be stopped

“Illinois and Chicago politicians lack the guts to act,” Andy says; “Only President Trump has the willpower to succeed”

In 2017 Andy celebrates fifty years as an Illinois and national corruption fighter, and forty years since he led a reform movement after the death of “Boss” Richard J. Daley in 1977

Andy Martin was once a modern day successor to “Eliot Ness and the Untouchables” in Chicago; today Andy lives in New Hampshire but occasionally takes on a Chicago corruption battle

(Near the Winter White House, Florida) (February 6, 2017)

Dear American:

Eight years ago I called for the imposition of martial law in Chicago, to stem the relentless tide of murder and violence (please see link #1 below). History has confirmed the accuracy and wisdom of my predictions. Since 2009 thousands have been murdered in Chicago, and tens of thousands have been shot. Local authorities remain unwilling and unable to stop the violence. In 2012 I again predicted that martial law was the only solution (please see link #2 below).

Since my original prediction both national personalities such as Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly and local public officials have joined my call for emergency action (please see link #3 below).

Now that President Trump has promised to “send in the feds” (please see link #4), it is time to understand why Chicago continues to fail to provide public safety for its citizens, and why only drastic measures can succeed.

First, a little personal history. I grew up in New England, not the Midwest. Because both my mom and uncle had graduated from the University of New Hampshire I was expected to attend there. But I got the chance to play football at the University of Illinois and the siren call of the Big Ten took me to Illinois. I come from a military family; the last thing on my mind was becoming a corruption fighter. But through a series of accidental opportunities I ended up working for a U. S. Senator who himself had been a legendary corruption fighter in Chicago, as well as a friend of the great lawyer Clarence Darrow.

As a college senior I went to the Illinois General Assembly (legislature) as an intern where I encountered the Mafia, which enjoyed its own state senate seat from Chicago. The machine politics of the 1950’s-1970’s Daley Machine was operating with little hindrance. And, somehow, fifty years ago the die was cast. The people who supported and encouraged me became an informal version of “Eliot Ness and the Untouchables.” We were a team that could not be bossed or bullied or bought and had a steadfast commitment to public integrity and fighting political corruption. I was the public face and took the brunt of the counterattacks and abuse.

Forty years ago in 1977 I participated in the historic mayoral primary election to succeed “Boss” Richard J. Daley. Today I am the only surviving candidate from that election. But I have just as much energy and commitment today as I did fifty years ago.

I moved back to New Hampshire in 2010 (please see link #5 below). But because of my national corruption fighting activity from Hanover (NH) to Honolulu (HI) we still get involved with Illinois and Chicago corruption from time to time. Why do I mention my long history of experience with political corruption and public integrity? Because many political leaders have a “here today, gone tomorrow” attitude and lack any institutional memory.

Forty years ago Governor “Big Jim” Thompson of Illinois passed “Class X felony” legislation to rid Chicago of gang violence. Thompson is long gone (but still alive); Class X felonies still remain on the law books. But the gangs are more powerful than ever. Everything the politicians have tried has failed. That’s why it’s time for the Donald Trumps and Andy Martins to offer solutions and in the case of President Trump to take action.

If you go back and read what I suggested in 2009 (link #1) you’ll think it sounds pretty mild. But in 2009 I was considered “way out” for proposing a massive campaign to end gang violence through an initial declaration of martial law. Since my original proposals, thousands have died and tens of thousands have been permanently maimed and wounded by violence. Obama has come and gone in the White House. The killing continues unabated. Significantly, Obama has not moved back “home” to Chicago.

Recently some of us went on a ride through the most dangerous neighborhoods. They are barely a stone’s throw from President Barack Obama’s mansion on the South Side. I first went to the South Side long, long ago. But the bombed out neighborhoods of the 1960’s are still largely bombed out.

Chicago is composed of good people who are held hostage by crooked politicians. Both the State of Illinois and City of Chicago are bankrupt. Taxes skyrocket, services are curtailed and the “death spiral” that caused me to move away in 2010 has gotten progressively worse. Can Chicago and Illinois be saved? I believe they can. But I also believe that neither Mayor Emanuel nor Governor Bruce Rauner is going to take action. So President Trump must act.

Mayor Rahm Emanuel has said he wants President Trump to “help.” But Emanuel doesn’t really want Trump’s help. Emanuel wants to continue the same old failed liberal Democratic Party solutions, while trying to shift the blame for failure to Trump. Trump is too smart to fall for that snare.

My 2009 proposals are strikingly current. But stronger action is needed today because of the deteriorated situation.

In 1957, President Eisenhower sent in a contingent of the 101st Airborne Division (U S Army) to support the Arkansas National Guard which the president had federalized. (While the National Guard remains under the control of a state’s governor, a president can “federalize” state troops and place them under national command). Thus, there is a precedent for federal action to protect constitutional rights when local officials fail or refuse to act.

The federal ATF agency supposedly will send twenty (20) more agents to Chicago, a claim the agency denies (please see link # 7 below). But “20 agents” is a drop in the bucket. In 2014 more ATF agents were sent to Chicago with no noticeable impact (please see link #8 below).

Drastic and dramatic gestures are necessary. Which is why local politicians prefer to do nothing and pray for cold weather to keep people indoors. Mayor Emanuel has claimed he is “hiring more police,” but that is a typical Emanuel smokescreen. Emanuel’s hires would bring the police force back to where it was when he took office (please see link #9 below).

In November Chicago voters chose to continue the chaos when they rejected Trump and elected to continue the state’s relentless decline into insolvency and mediocrity. So Trump doesn’t owe Illinoisans anything. He could let the people who voted against him stew in their own juices and it would be a condign response since he is under no immediate obligation to do anything.

Nevertheless if Trump could succeed in stemming violence in Chicago - and he can - that would send a message to every American, “Law and order is back, anarchy will not be tolerated, and if local officials refuse to act, we will.”

The tragedy is that African-Americans, who remain laminated to the failed Democratic Party policies of the last half century, and laminated to the failed political leadership of the Congressional Black Caucus, are the ones who are betrayed by their local and national leaders every day in every way. Trump could redeem his campaign promise to African-Americans by “making Chicago safe again.”

Eight years ago I laid out a rational and reasonable program to bring peace to the embattled streets of Chicago (#1). That program can easily be updated, as I have done in these few paragraphs.

The cost of bringing peace is far less than the ongoing cost of the bleeding which the city and region are enduring. While “Chicago hating” is a time-tested electoral strategy in Illinois, particularly downstate, Chicago is an economic engine that powers the entire Midwest. If Chicago dies, citizens across the region, from Indiana to Wisconsin and beyond will be impacted.

Martial law would not have to last very long. But it would involve an initial “shock,” followed by a precinct-by-precinct effort to regain control of lawless neighborhoods. Instead of seeking to regulate the police, as President Obama did, Trump could work to encourage and professionalize local law enforcement.

If politicians simply allow the same failed policies to continue, and allow the same failed leaders to persist with the same failed programs, the Midwest will eventually suffer irreversible injury.

Demanding “jobs” and “education” and other federal giveaways, which is what Emanuel and Black leaders expect from Trump, is a pathway to oblivion. Without public safety in the streets, no program can succeed. I have known Chicago for more than a half century. The trend has been down, down, down. There is no local leadership and no local initiative. The demands for justice and giveaways have been relentless and irrelevant. Nationally, trillions of dollars in “poverty programs” have accomplished little.

If Trump wants to tackle the problems with real solutions, he knows where to reach me. In Manchester, New Hampshire.

LINKS TO THIS STORY (cut and paste the entire link below and not just the underlined portion):











Andy Martin is a legendary New Hampshire, New York and Chicago muckraker, author, Internet columnist, talk television pioneer, radio talk show host, broadcaster and media critic. With forty-nine years of background in radio and television and with five decades of investigative and analytical experience in Washington, the USA and around the world, Andy provides insight on politics, foreign policy, intelligence and military matters. For a full bio, go to:; also see

Andy has also been a leading corruption fighter in American politics and courts for over fifty years and is executive director of the National Anti-Corruption Policy Institute. See also;

He holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law and is a former adjunct professor of law at the City University of New York (LaGuardia CC, Bronx CC).

He is the author of “Obama: The Man Behind The Mask” [] and produced the Internet film “Obama: The Hawaii’ Years” []. Andy is the Executive Editor and publisher of the “Internet Powerhouse,” blogging at and

Andy’s family immigrated to Manchester, New Hampshire 100 years ago; today his home overlooks the Merrimack River and he lives around the corner from where he played as a small boy. He is New Hampshire’s leading corruption fighter and Republican Party reformer.


Andy’s columns are also posted at

[NOTE: We try to correct any typographical errors in our stories; find the latest version on our blogs.]


© Copyright by Andy Martin 2017 – All Rights Reserved

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, February 01, 2017

New Hampshire Attorney General Joe Foster faces possible lawsuit from New Hampshire GOP corruption fighter Andy Martin over Foster’s immigration activism

Andy Martin, J.D.
Adjunct Professor of Law

P.O. Box 742
Manchester, NH 03105-0742
Tel. (603) 518-7310;
Fax (866) 214-3210

February 1, 2017

Hon. Joe Foster
Attorney General
33 Capitol Street
Concord, NH 03301

Re: Potential lawsuit against you for ultra vires actions

Dear General Foster:

You have recently made some very inflammatory and, frankly, irrational statements concerning the President Trump’s efforts to protect the United States from immigration problems. With all due respect, I believe that while you are free to present your views as a private citizen, as an appointed official of the State of New Hampshire whose public office is subject to and governed by statutes, you are not free to waste state assets propagating left-wing Democratic Party propaganda.

I am therefore writing to give notice that if you follow through on your plans to apparently join frivolous out-of-state litigation by other state attorneys general with too much time and money on their hands, and divert New Hampshire resource and the time of assistant attorneys general on your staff, I will file a lawsuit to enjoin you from taking part in such activity. I believe your actions would be ultra vires to the limited rights and duties embodied in your office. Again, I recognize that as a private citizen you are free to pop and toot as a goofy liberal Democrat; as a public official paid for by New Hampshire taxpayers you have to respect the limits of your official position and not use your office to grandstand or vindicate a political agenda.

1. The State of New Hampshire

The State of New Hampshire is the embodiment of “small government” and limited government. We are not New York or California or one of the other loony left states. Our state government is provided by the taxpayers through the General Court and state constitution with limited revenues, not a credit card for unlimited excursions into public expenditure.

Like most New Hampshire citizens I am the product of immigration. My maternal grandparents immigrated to Manchester over 100 years ago, see So I am not anti-immigrant. But at a time of increasing worldwide terror risks, I am pro-national security. I am very comfortable with a “time out” to immigration from unstable nations lacking robust government institutions to put down terrorist threats.

2. The Office of Attorney General

Before sending this letter I spent time doing research on the New Hampshire Constitution and New Hampshire Statutes. My due diligence did not find anything in Title 1, Chapter 7 of the New Hampshire Statutes that authorizes you to engage in litigation concerning the rights of foreign individuals or others who may not have immediate disputes with the State of New Hampshire. Therefore, your announcement that you apparently contemplate joining frivolous lawsuits filed by other state attorneys general is ultra vires to your office. If private entities have legal claims under the president’s policy, they are free to pursue them. I do not believe New Hampshire taxpayers have claims against President Trump's immigration policies.

3. Your statements concerning President Trump

You accused President Trump of engaging in an “unconstitutional assault” which violated “principles that are fundamental to our democracy.” Other than an isolated number of foreign citizens that served the military and were entitled to preferential treatment entering the United States, no foreign citizen has a generalized “right” to enter the United States. People with Green Cards and valid visas were clearly inconvenienced and I hope that the federal government will do everything possible to correct those mistakes and compensate for the unnecessary disruption. But there is simply no basis for your exaggerated and inflammatory rhetoric attacking the president. I repeat that in your private capacity you are free to make idiotic remarks. But when you use the letterhead of your public office, and the power and budget of your office, to publish doggerel, you are acting “unconstitutionally” and launching an “assault” on the rights of New Hampshire taxpayers who govern your behavior as a public official.

You need to understand that both federal statutes and the U. S. Constitution provide the president and his administration with exceptionally broad authority to regulate who enters and leaves the United States. Those powers do not accrue to your own office. The president, not you or I, gets to be the decision maker.

4. The lawsuits filed last weekend

Ironically, I agree that there may have been a limited basis for the lawsuits that were filed last weekend. Like you, I am not an expert in the minutiae of immigration law. But I suspect some of the administrative action taken by the federal government did not comport with the sprit of the President’s intention in signing his Executive Order.

It is also my view, however, that substantially all of the problems created by improvident enforcement of a valid order have now been alleviated or are in the process of being alleviated administratively. Thus, the “problem” giving rise to the lawsuits is over.

On the merits, to the extent that the pending or proposed state attorneys general litigation seeks to challenge and undermine the broad authority of the president and federal government in areas of foreign relations and immigration, where presidential powers and prerogatives are paramount, the lawsuits are ultimately frivolous and will not be successful.

As a constitutional scholar I see no conflict between the lawsuits that may have had an initial basis for judicial intervention last weekend, but which are now unnecessary because the legal basis for those claims has evaporated as the government responds to the lawsuits and takes corrective action. If you do not have a constitutional scholar on your staff I would be happy to volunteer my services and opinions pro bono.

I do not consider your office under New Hampshire law to be a “roving commission to do equity,” Moushigian v. Marderosian, 764 F.3rd 123 (1st Cir. 2014). The same limits apply to your office as enunciated by the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, in an opinion by Judge McCafferty who normally sits in Concord.

5. The “Will of the People”

Ultimately, unless the “will of the people” reflects some unconstitutional or unlawful intention, that “will” as implemented by the president and congress should be respected. Americans voted for change, even in New Hampshire where President Trump’s electoral votes were stolen by liberal Democrats who encourage unlawful out-of-state voting in our elections.

Most Americans want limits placed on immigration and Trump’s limits were and remain reasonable. I don’t think any of us, from Trump down to the single voter, has a concrete vision of what has to be done to conclusively protect us from unwise immigration and terrorism. That’s why Trump’s order was limited in time and scope. Trump is exploring alternatives and options.

The federal government has a right to take tentative steps without being bombarded with lawsuits making grossly exaggerated claims, or by flatulent rhetoric such as your own remarks.

Reasonable people can argue - we can - as to how the president should implement his agenda. But every coffee table policy difference with President Trump is not a trigger to file a frivolous lawsuit or stage a ridiculous demonstration.

6. Please help safeguard New Hampshire’s treasury

Former Governor Hassan, your boss, concealed tens of millions of dollars in state spending in order to fraudulently induce voters to support her election to higher office. She left the state in a mess. If not for the fortitude of the General Court (legislature), New Hampshire today would be another Illinois. Luckily, legislators had implemented sound fiscal policies and Hassan’s damage was limited. Nevertheless, we do not have money to waste on frivolous lawsuits over federal policies which do not concern your office.

I urge you to avoid the necessity for me to file a lawsuit by exercising the discretion that should be inherent in your office and by avoiding participation in any lawsuits seeking to malign President Trump for trying to do his job. If you proceed with your apparent course of action, I shall file suit in the Superior Court to enjoin your ultra vires activity. We may have a state judiciary that is dominated by Democrats; but even Democrats should be governed by common sense and the limits of New Hampshire law and the New Hampshire Constitution.

I am confident President Trump and his administration can both comply with the law and implement their policies without input from your office. Please do not waste our precious New Hampshire tax dollars on wild goose chases.

Respectfully submitted,



Labels: , , , , , ,