Search This Blog

Topline Summary of the Mueller Report


A. Russia Did Try To Interfere
  • Russia used covert propaganda to sow discord among the American public and undermine the election process. Their tools included included social media, advertising, and political rallies.
  • Russia stole proprietary information from the Democrats and released it through several phantom social media accounts as well as Wikileaks.
B. No Wrongdoing By Candidate Trump
  • There is no evidence of collusion.
  • There is no evidence of obstruction of justice.
C. Trump Campaign Activity That Is Not Collusion
  • Because the Russian actors concealed their identity as paid trolls, Trump supporters and the Trump campaign unknowingly used their social media posts at times to advance campaign positions. The IRA also contacted the campaign, representing themselves as Trump supporters, to seek their assistance at rallies.
  • The Trump campaign expressed its interest in Wikileaks releasing information hacked from Democratic campaign officials that would be damaging to the Clinton campaign (and expressed doubt that Russia was responsible for hacking Democratic Party emails).
  • Trump sarcastically encouraged Russia to release Hillary Clinton’s missing emails.
  • Trump said he did not have business with Russia despite negotiations that were ongoing into June 2016 for a “Trump Tower Moscow” skyscraper licensing deal.
1. Covert Propaganda Campaign, Internet Research Agency (IRA) - Russian Oligarch Yevgeniy Prigozhin 
  • 2014-2015: IRA initiates a social media campaign to sow disunity within the U.S. and “undermine the U.S. electoral system.”
  • 2016: IRA evolves into a pro-Trump operation, adding advertising and rallies staffed by individuals who concealed their true identity and intentions.
2. Cyber-Attack Against Democrats - General Staff of the Russian Army (GRU), Main Intelligence Directorate
  • April 2016: GRU cyber-attacks key Democratic targets successfully, including Hillary Clinton Campaign Chairman John Podesta, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) and the Democratic National Committee (DNC).
  • June 2016: GRU starts releasing hacked data through "DCLeaks" and "Guccifer 2.0" (both fake online personas).
  • July 2016: GRU releases hacked data through Wikileaks.
  • October 7, 2016: Wikileaks starts releasing Podesta emails.
3. Professional Contacts - Various Between Trump Campaign and Russians
  • 2015-2017: Meetings covered a range of topics including business, offers to help the campaign, invitations to meet Russian President Vladimir Putin, and policy matters.

A. Intelligence Community Assessment

January 6, 2017 - A joint assessment by the CIA, FBI, and NSA was released which argued that Russia had intervened in the 2016 Presidential election.
B. Congressional Inquiries
  • Mid-January - February 2017 - three congressional committees (the Senate and House Intelligence Committees and the Senate Judiciary Committee) announced that they would pursue an investigation.
  • C. FBI Investigation
  • March 20, 2017 - James Comey, then-director of the FBI, confirmed publicly to Congress that an election was already underway.
  • May 9, 2017 - President Trump fired James Comey and Comey’s FBI investigation ended.
  • May 17, 2017 - Acting Attorney General Rod Rosenstein appointed the Special Counsel to continue the investigation and any related matters under 28 C.F.R. § 600.4(a). These could include attempts to interfere with or block the investigation, or “new matters that come to light in the course of his or her investigation.”
1. National Security Advisor Mike Flynn
  • January 26, 2017 - President Trump was told that Flynn lied to Vice-President Pence and the FBI over two conversations with the Russian ambassador, Sergey Kislak, during the Presidential transition.
  • February 13, 2017 - President Trump requested Flynn’s resignation. One day later he stated (to an external advisor): "Now that we fired Flynn, the Russia thing is over." The advisor said he disagreed.
  • Shortly after this: President Trump asked Deputy National Security Advisor K.T. McFarland to write that a letter saying he hadn’t told Flynn to discuss sanctions with Kislyak, but she refused because she didn’t know whether this was true or not, and because a lawyer in the White House thought it would look like payback for a position (ambassadorship) that had been offered to her.
  • When Flynn began cooperating - President Trump’s personal lawyer left a message for his lawyers saying he still held Flynn in warm regard, and asked for a "heads up" if Flynn knew "information that implicates the President." Flynn’s lawyer said he couldn’t do that because they were no longer in a joint defense agreement. The President’s lawyer threatened Flynn’s lawyers over the “hostility” of his response.
2. Campaign Manager Paul Manafort

President Trump praised Manafort during his trial and said a pardon wasn’t off the table. When he was convicted, President Trump said Manafort was “a brave man” who wouldn’t “break.” He also said “flipping” “almost ought to be outlawed.”
3. Attorney General Jeff Sessions
  • February 2017 - Sessions started to think about recusing himself from the Special Counsel investigation because he had been involved in the Trump campaign.
  • March 2017 - Trump told White House Counsel Donald McGahn to stop Sessions from recusing. Sessions recused anyway. Trump told advisors Sessions was essentially not doing his job (of protecting him) and asked Sessions to “unrecuse.”
  • Summer 2017 - President Trump called Sessions and again asked him to reverse his recusal.
  • October 2017 - President Trump asked Sessions to consider investigating Hillary Clinton.
  • December 2017 - President Trump met with Sessions and suggested (senior advisor notes) that if Sessions reversed his recusal and took the investigation back, he’d be a "hero." President Trump stated: "I'm not going to do anything or direct you to do anything. I just want to be treated fairly." Sessions noted that he’d never seen anything “improper” during the campaign, but refused to reverse his recusal.
4. FBI Director James Comey
  • January 27, 2017 - President Trump invited FBI Director Comey to dinner and told him he required loyalty.
  • February 14, 2017 - Regarding fired National Security Advisor Flynn, President Trump met with FBI Director Comey and stated: "I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go."
  • March 2017 - President Trump called FBI Director Comey directly twice, despite attorney McGahn’s guidance to stay away from the Department of Justice. The purpose of the call was to ask Comey to “lift the cloud” of the Russia investigation by saying publicly what he had already told the President privately - that he was not personally under investigation.
  • May 3, 2017 - Comey, having already told the President that he was not under investigation, testified at a Congressional hearing but wouldn’t answer whether the President was being investigated for Russian interference. The President saw this, decided to fire him, and wanted the termination letter (written for public consumption) to say what Comey had told him - that he wasn’t under investigation.
  • The White House officially said that the Department of Justice (Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General) recommended the firing due to Comey’s handling of the Clinton email investigation, but this was untrue. President Trump decided to fire Comey before they contacted him. President Trump admitted this in a television interview and referred to the “made-up story” about Russian collusion.
  • One day after firing Comey, President Trump stated to Russian officials that he’d "faced great pressure because of Russia," and that this pressure had been removed by his firing of Comey.
  • President Trump was asked about whether he was angry at Comey over the Russia investigation, and responded: "As far as I'm concerned, I want that thing (the investigation) to be absolutely done properly." He said that his decision to fire Comey might “might even lengthen” it.
5. Intelligence Community

March 2017 - Knowing that he was not under investigation, President Trump called the Director of National Intelligence and the heads of the CIA and NSA to ask them to say so publicly. They did not.
6. Special Counsel Robert Mueller
  • May 17, 2017 - Mueller was appointed Special Counsel. President Trump got upset, said it was "the end of his presidency," and said Sessions should resign, which he did, but President Trump did not accept it.
  • President Trump suggested that Mueller had conflicts of interest, and his advisors said those had already been factored in by the Department of Justice and ultimately wouldn’t hold up.
  • June 14, 2017 - News reports stated that the Special Counsel was investigating obstruction of justice even though Comey had already told the President he was not being investigated. The President Tweeted criticism of the Department of Justice and the Special Counsel.
  • June 17, 2017 - President Trump called McGahn and told him to call Sessions regarding Mueller for conflict of interest. McGahn did not make the call out of concerns over mass resignations that might ensue.
7. Former Campaign Manager Corey Lewandowski
  • June 19, 2017 - President Trump met with Lewandowski and told him to tell Sessions to announce that even though he was recused, the investigation was “very unfair” as the President had not done anything wrong. President Trump wanted Sessions to say that the Special Counsel would focus on “investigating election meddling for future elections." Lewandowski didn’t do it.
  • July 19, 2017 - The President followed up on July 19 to ask for a status. Lewandowski still hadn’t done it. President Trump criticized Sessions in a New York Times interview and Tweeted that Sessions’ job was in trouble. Lewandowski asked senior White House official Rick Dearborn to send the message that the President had requested, but Dearborn didn’t do it either.
8. Senior Campaign Official/Son Donald Trump Jr.
  • Summer 2017 - President Trump learned that the media was now focusing on a June 9, 2016 Trump Tower meeting between a Russian lawyer and campaign officials including his son, Don Jr. The lawyer had reportedly offered negative information about his opponent Hillary Clinton as "part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump."
  • The President told his aides not to share the emails setting up the meeting.
  • The President edited Don Jr.’s press statement to delete the part about “information helpful to the campaign” and focused only on the matter of adoptions of Russian children. The President’s lawyer denied that the President had edited the statement.
9. White House Counsel Don McGahn
  • Early 2018 - The media reported that the President told McGahn to have Mueller removed in June 2017, and McGahn said he’d quit before he’d do it. President Trump told White House officials to tell McGahn to say that story was not true, but McGahn told them it was true.
  • President Trump told McGahn personally to deny the news reports, and he refused.
  • The President asked why McGahn told Mueller about his attempt to remove him, and why McGahn “ took notes of his conversations with the President.”
10. Former Trump Organization Lawyer Michael Cohen
  • Cohen was familiar with the President’s involvement in the Trump Tower Moscow skyscraper licensing project. The President’s lawyer told Cohen not to contradict President Trump and to “stay on message.”
  • April 2018 - the FBI searched Cohen’s home, and the President told him to “stay strong.”
  • Summer 2018 - Cohen began cooperating with the government, President Trump publicly called him a “rat,” and “suggested that his family members had committed crimes.”
  • Any evidence that might be admitted to court would not be enough to get and keep a conviction.
  • Prosecution would have to serve a “substantial federal interest” that couldn’t be served in other ways (“prosecution elsewhere or through non-criminal alternatives.”)

Some Trump campaign-affiliated individuals lied about their interactions with Russians, and those lies impaired the investigation. These include:
  • Former National Security Adviser and retired Lt. General Michael Flynn
  • Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort
  • Former Trump Organization lawyer Michael Cohen
  • Trump campaign foreign policy advisor George Papadopolous

The social media campaign (IRA) and “hacking-and-dumping operation” (GRU) both violated U.S. criminal law.  Many of the individuals involved in these operations have been charged.  Crimes include:
  • Conspiracy to defraud the United States (“by undermining through deceptive acts the work of federal agencies charged with regulating foreign influence in U.S. elections”)
  • Identity theft
  • Conspiracy to violate the federal law against computer intrusion
  • Some information was not usable.
  • Some people invoked their right not to incriminate themselves (“pled the Fifth”)
  • Some information provided was false or incomplete
  • Some witnesses deleted their communications or used encrypted communication tools.
  • Some witnesses and information were not pursued “such as information known to attorneys or individuals claiming to be members of the media—in light of internal Department of Justice policies. See, e.g., Justice Manual §§ 9-13.400, 13.410.”
  • Many witnesses lived outside the United States and/or documents were held outside the U.S. 
Prepared By Dannielle Blumenthal, Ph.D. All Opinions Are Those Of The Author. Public Domain.

Help The Organization Make A Rational Decision

In the era of "fake news," people are prone to make decisions according to mob consciousness. Those who succeed in such an environment pull themselves away from the emotional craze of the moment using what Chris Argyris called "double-loop learning," questioning their own assumptions even as they consider the topic at hand.


Core Group Theory: The fundamental unit of the organization is not the person, but the decision.

I believe there is a market out there for professionals who can serve as the rational brain of an organization. Such individuals do not need to have an advanced degree, because what we are talking about here is common sense and a strong commitment to rational critical thinking. 


That said, here are some areas of study that may prove beneficial if you're interested in playing this role:

• Sociology, organizational development, organizational behavior, psychology, psychoanalysis, learning theory, leadership, and business.
• Collaboration in theory and practice, using technology platforms that support project management, knowledge management, customer service, and teamwork. 
• Leadership, networking (online and offline), management, influence without authority. Twitter, Facebook. 
• Visual rhetoric, communication studies, social media, digital media. Corporate communication, internal communication. Marketing, branding and advertising - to understand how propaganda works and how to counteract it. Journalism/media studies, cinema studies, literary studies, scriptwriting - anything to do with narrative development.
• Workflow management and knowledge management: Sharepoint, Salesforce, Jive, Yammer, Groups (Facebook, Google, Yahoo, etc.) 8chan, Voat, Quora.
• Website design, user design, marketing research, focus group testing, consumer behavior, anthropology, qualitative analysis, research, and ethnomethodology (the study of the assumptions underlying everyday life). Open-source research.
• Data science, business intelligence, search engine optimization, library science, tagging, taxonomy development, social media/hashtags, customer segmentation.


Successful people make decisions with full awareness that the mob will pull them in a certain direction. They turn away from this insanity and instead use information + logic. 


As well, they typically draw on collaborative technology platforms to gather information, and 

test their thinking against others' reactions rapidly. 


The person who helps the organization think rationally is valuable.


By Dr. Dannielle Blumenthal. All opinions are the author's own. Public domain. Photo by kewl via Pixabay


Realizing The Value Of A Skill Set I Overlooked

In a fit of whiteboard, it became clear that my deeper skill lies in using social tech platforms to connect people. Structuring research and collaboration. Moving the group toward a rational decision.

To have studied sociology, organizational development, communication. To have built knowledge-sharing platforms on Yahoo! and Google Groups, Google Sites, Ning, Sharepoint, Salesforce, Jive and Yammer. And to not have realized this skill set existed as a distinct value-add for 15 years.

This is totally mind-boggling

By Dr. Dannielle (Dossy) Blumenthal. All opinions are Dr. Blumenthal's own. This post is hereby released into the public domain. Photo by the author.

When Someone Is Upset, Be Quiet

As part of this weekend's lecture on "Why Bad Things Happen To Good People," Rabbi Friedman talked about our natural response to grief, which is to scream: 
Why did this happen?
Why me?
Why them?
Why now?
Why this?
He pointed out that when someone is screaming out in grief like this, the question of "why" is not really a question but more like a request. It can be paraphrased something like:
"Please help me, I am in anguish."
When someone is in anguish, you do not attempt to reason with them. You simply sit there quietly.
The rabbi brought up the connection to Jewish mourning ritual.
When a loved one passes away, our tradition is to mourn for seven days straight.
"Some people try to cut it short," the rabbi said. "But you have to see it through and really grieve."
Emotions at a time of grief are completely overwhelming. This is why the Torah forces us to stop everything else we are doing and simply be in the pain.
When you visit a house of mourning, you are not supposed to make small talk. 
This is something I did not know, and it explained a phenomenon that seemed very weird when I personally observed it. I did not understand why people simply sat there and didn't say anything except a quiet "May God comfort you."
When someone is in pain, you are supposed to shut up.
The rabbi brought another example, a typical husband-wife scenario where the wife is upset and the husband tries to explain. 
"Just shut up," he said. "When your wife is upset is not the time to explain.
This sermon came to my mind as I saw the Notre Dame cathedral engulfed in flames yesterday.
I am not Catholic, but my heart hurt at the sight of it. 
Even now, it hurts.
There is a time to figure out what went wrong in a situation. 
But when someone is feeling deep emotional pain, simply being there in a supportive way is the best thing you can do, whether as a leader or as a friend.
By Dr. Dannielle (Dossy) Blumenthal. All opinions are Dr. Blumenthal's own. This post is hereby released into the public domain.

So We Are Hypocrites. Now What?

This weekend my family and I had the privilege of hearing from a well-known Jewish educator, Rabbi Gavriel Friedman, on the painful topic: "Why Do Bad Things Happen To Good People?"
It would have been a helpful lecture in any case. We can always use a reminder both to accept what we cannot control, and to work on our own personal responsibility for our problems, many of which we cause in the first place.
But it was the preface to the talk that made it stand apart. Right from the start, the rabbi put it right out there, admitting that he often struggled with the ideals he teaches. "I change my own behavior by saying the right things out loud," he admitted. "I am teaching you, but really I am teaching myself."
It was a humble thing to say, and rare. How often does any teacher, or leader, admit that they are lacking?
The rabbi recounted being a young teacher, and meeting with the revered Rabbi Noah Weinberg (may he rest in peace). Weinberg asked how his classes were going, and Friedman answered in a reasonably articulate way, and then the elder asked something quite startling.
"But do you do what you teach?"
It is interesting that the elder rabbi did not tell the younger one to "stop teaching if your deeds fall short." Rather he said, in effect: "Keep on teaching, but be mindful of the gap between word and deed - and keep on trying to improve."
What a profound lesson; what a powerful approach to personal growth.
We live in the Internet age, where our lives are digitally recorded pretty much from birth. Every thought, every word, every bad haircut is time-stamped, and lives forever.
Struggling with your flaws is embarrassing, especially when there are so many reminders. We saw this on a recent episode of Billions, where one of the main characters is being blackmailed. He is literally backed into a corner, forced either to throw a political race or pursue it, because his most personal secrets may be revealed. He chooses to out himselfrather than have the shame of imperfection held over him, ruining his career.
The other day we attended a talk by a local theater group, about their journey toward finding a mass-market audience. In listening to them, I found that the most interesting parts were those where the company talked about failure - the flaws in their performances, the limits of their business model, even their shame at having to descend from the heights of Shakespearean training to enter the world of making money from a production.
We all want to be more than we are. But we are all also failures - and yes, at times, we are hypocrites. Those who are willing to admit this are the real successes, because shame does not stand like a looming monster in their path - impeding any chance of growth.
I wish I could tell you that the world is a kind place, and that people are endlessly forgiving of your human flaws. It isn't, and many of them are not.
I learned this over the weekend myself. I made a statement of fact as definitive, when more familiarity with the subject matter would have helped me see both sides of the story. In fact there were multiple ways of seeing the same thing, and although I was not strictly "wrong," I had missed an essential nuance.
Tough to admit, but then it prodded me to learn. (And the learning is really endless.)
When you genuinely try, and you genuinely fail, strangely enough the experience is satisfying. Where in the past you might have thought only perfection would satisfy, it is a greater relief to look in the mirror and be proud of the fact that you admitted your limits and you tried.
That, in the end, is all most people can do.
Posted 4/15/2019 by Dannielle Blumenthal, Ph.D. All opinions are the author’s own. Public domain. Photo Credit: Robinsonk26 via Pixabay

Was The United States "Founded By Genocide," As Ilhan Omar Says?

August 2017: "Founded by Genocide"

On August 17, 2017, then-Minnesota State House Representative Ilhan Omar made the following statement on Twitter: "We must confront that our nation was founded by genocide and we maintain global power through neocolonialism."

April 2019: "Founded On The Ideas of Justice, Of Liberty, Of The Pursuit Of Happiness"

Nearly two years later, on April 13, 2019, the same individual, now a member of the United States House of Representatives (serving Minnesota's 5th Congressional District), stated, also on Twitter:
"This country was founded on the ideas of justice, of liberty, of the pursuit of happiness. But these core beliefs are under threat. Each and every day. We are under threat by an administration that would rather cage children than pass comprehensive immigration reform."

Contradictory Statements

Logically, motives lead to outcomes. As such, to say that our country was "founded by genocide" (2017) stands in contradiction the moral foundation of "justice, of liberty, of the pursuit of happiness" (2019).
  • An example of a consistent statement would be that our country was "founded by genocide" because it was "founded on the ideas of might makes right." Omar does not say that.
  • An opposing example of a consistent statement would be something like: "Our country was founded by intense struggle," because it was "founded on the ideas of justice, of liberty, of the pursuit of happiness"and it is difficult to achieve those ideas without a great deal of conflict.
But Omar's statements don't hold together in the way a consistent thought does. How can she on the one hand say that our Nation was founded by people who intentionally sought to kill off an entire identity group (specifically Native Americans) and on the other hand say that these same people had the noblest of ideals?

Formal Criteria for the Crime of Genocide

I find the simple definition found in Wikipedia to be workable:
"Genocide is intentional action to destroy a people (usually defined as an ethnicnationalracial, or religious group) in whole or in part."
Genocide requires:
  • Mass killing;
  • A defined identity group; and
  • Intention by the killing group to destroy the defined identity group.
Some well-known examples of genocide: Armenia, the Holocaust, Rwanda, Bosnia and Darfur.

Of course, it is not necessary for a massacre to be a genocide for it to matter. The brutal massacre, rape, colonization and other mistreatment of Native Americans and their lands is not just one atrocity, but many:
"For hundreds of years a mixture of colonial conflict, disease, specific atrocities and policies of discrimination has devastated the Native American population. In the course of this time, it is estimated that over nine million Natives died from violent conflict or disease. 
"For too long this history has been under-recognized and too little discussed.
Today there are over 500 Native American tribes in the United States, each with a distinct culture, way of life and history. Even today, Native Americans face large challenges to cope with the disadvantages history has left them and ongoing cases of discrimination."

An Alternative View

Today on social media, Omar's supporters flooded Twitter to say that she was actually correct, essentially because the ideals of the founders did not mesh with their actions on the ground.

This more nuanced approach ("intrinsic genocide") suggests that the United States perpetrated genocide on the Native Americans because we took actions that resulted in the death of their culture. And it is factually true that we arrived on this continent, colonized it, killed the Native Americans, took their land, and substituted our culture for theirs.

The History Channel has published a list of massacres of Native Americans by the settlers that were fueled by a kind of hatred that mingled race and religion, and they call these massacres "genocide":
"The reasons for this racial genocide were multi-layered. Settlers, most of whom had been barred from inheriting property in Europe, arrived on American shores hungry for Indian land—and the abundant natural resources that came with it. Indians’ collusion with the British during the American Revolution and the War of 1812 exacerbated American hostility and suspicion toward them. 
"Even more fundamentally, indigenous people were just too different: Their skin was dark. Their languages were foreign. And their world views and spiritual beliefs were beyond most white men’s comprehension....all this stoked racial hatred and paranoia, making it easy to paint indigenous peoples as pagan savages who must be killed in the name of civilization and Christianity."
Another way of putting this view is "passive intent," or perhaps "unconscious intent." While on the one hand espousing high ideals, the settlers demonized and dehumanized people who were perhaps not equally entitled to vision of justice, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

"All War Is Is Genocide"

If we take Omar's words at face value, then we are forced to reconsider all wars in light of the idea that the conquering party is actually committing genocide, particularly in cases where religion is at issue.

If we look at Jewish history alone, all persecutions aimed at eliminating the Jewish people from the face of the earth were genocides or attempted genocides.

We could include the persecution of Christians by those of other faiths as a form of genocide or attempted genocide.

And we could say, obviously, that radical Islamic terror is inherently genocidal in nature.

Omar Is A Complete Hypocrite

The fact that Omar likely has a more nuanced view of genocide than many is all the more reason to condemn her actions in Congress, particularly with respect to Jews. As both a sitting member of the U.S. House of Representatives, and a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, it is shocking and revolting that Ilhan Omar repeatedly shows her support for genocidal radical Islamic terrorists.

Omar is a fundraiser for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, which was established to support the genocidal terror group HAMAS, which has in its founding covenant the "struggle against the Jews" and the destruction of Israel. Most recently, Omar spoke at a CAIR event where she referred to the 9/11 terror attack as a case where "some people did something, and all of us (us, meaning Muslims) were starting to lose access to our civil liberties, minimizing the horrific nature of the crime.

She has made so many statements attacking Jews that she was forced to apologize publicly, but even after her apology Omar continued to attack Jews, calling the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee (not Arab lobbying) "problematic"; singling out Jewish adviser to President Trump Stephen Miller to refer to him as a "white nationalist"; and so on.

Omar has claimed ignorance, but she is a Congresswoman; so many are making excuses for her that a video is now circulating that calls out their dumb excuses.

Finally, Omar has taken action on the ground to support terrorists who seek to commit genocide against Americans. She minimizes the worst terror attack in our Nation's history, 9/11laughs when discussing al-Qaeda; voted to continue life insurance payments to terrorists' families; asked a judge for "compassion" in the sentencing of radical Islamic ISIS terror recruits; and her own Somali community in Minnesota is the "terror recruitment capital of the U.S."

By her own measure of genocide (referred to here as "passive intent") Omar has demonstrated that she is a willing enabler of a hostile invasion of both the United States and of Israel. 

But she still has a good point about the Native Americans.

Recommended Reading 

The following books, articles and sites were recommended by readers with regard to the treatment of Native Americans by the United States.

By Dr. Dannielle (Dossy) Blumenthal. All opinions are Dr. Blumenthal's own. This post is hereby released into the public domain. Photo credit: Free-Photos via Pixabay.