Conservative Chronicle for July 20 2016 by Mid-America Publishing Corporation

At Issue this week... July 20, 2016 2016 Election Barone (21) Cushman (8) Greenberg (20) Anti-Police Atmosphere Prager (27) Sowell (1,2) Big Oil Moore (13) Blacks Malkin (5) Williams (3) Brexit Tyrrell (30) Clinton, Hillary Buchanan (3,10) Lowry (9) Morris (9) Dear Mark Levy (19) Economy Will (13) FBI Recommendation Erickson (8) Krauthammer (16) Lambro (17) Limbaugh (15) Thomas (17) Foreign Policy Charen (30) Health Care McCaughey (12) Morris (12) Iraq War Harsanyi (31) Islam Chavez (29) Leslie’s Trivia Bits Elman (14) Media Bias Bozell (18, 29) Elder (28) Obama Presidency Farah (26) Limbaugh (23) Lowry (20) Shapiro (18) Party Conventions Barone (25) Proposition 57 Saunders (24) Race Massie (22) Thomas (22) Republicans Schlafly (11) Rule of Law Hollis (6) Napolitano (21) Social Consequences Murchison (4) Will (4) South China Sea Bay (26) USPS de Rugy (14) VP Pick Coulter (7) Saunders (25)

Anti-Police Atmosphere by Thomas Sowell

The war on cops: Poisonous atmosphere

here was never a more appropriately named book than The War on Cops by Heather Mac Donald, published a few weeks ago, on the eve of the greatest escalation of that war by the ambush murders of five policemen in Dallas. Nor is this war against the police confined to Dallas. It is occurring across the country. Who is to blame? There is a ton of blame, more than enough to go around to the wide range of people and institutions that have contributed to these disasters. In addition to the murderers who have killed people they don’t even know, there are those who created the atmosphere of blind hatred in which such killers flourish. CHIEF AMONG those who generate this poisonous atmosphere are career race hustlers like Al Sharpton and racist institutions like the “Black Lives Matter” movement. All such demagogues need is a situation where there has been a confrontation where someone was white and someone else was black. The facts don’t matter to them. The same is true of the more upscale, genteel and sophisticated race panderers, including the President of the United States. During his first year in the White House, Barack Obama chastised a white policeman over his handling of an incident with a black professor at Harvard — after admitting that he didn’t know the specific facts. Nor did he know the specifics when he publicly announced that, if he had a son, that son would look like Trayvon Martin. Are we to decide who is right and who is wrong on the basis of skin color? There was a long history of that in the days of the old Jim Crow South. Are we fighting against racism today or do we just want to put it under new management? No one should imagine that any of this is helping the black community. The surge in murder rates across the country, in the wake of the anarchy unleashed after the Ferguson, Missouri and Baltimore riots, has taken a wholly disproportionate number of black lives. But, to the race hustlers, black lives don’t really matter nearly as much as their chance to get publicity, power, money, votes or whatever else serves their own interests.

The mainstream media play a large, and largely irresponsible, role in the creation and maintenance of a poisonous racial atmosphere that has claimed the lives of policemen around the country. That same poisoned atmosphere has claimed the lives of even more blacks, who have been victims of violence by thugs and criminals who have had fewer restrictions as the police have pulled back, or have been pulled back, under political pressure. THE MEDIA provide the publicity on which career race hustlers thrive. It is a symbiotic relationship, in which tur-m o i l in the streets gives the media

Thomas

something exciting to attract viewers. In return, the media give those behind this turmoil millions of dollars’ worth of free publicity to spread their poison. It is certainly news when there is turmoil in the streets. But that is very different from saying that giving one-sided presentations at length of the claims of those who promote this turmoil makes sense. The media have also actively promoted the anti-police propaganda by the way they

present the news. This goes all the way back to the Rodney King riots of 1992. Television stations all across the country repeatedly played a selectively edited fraction of a videotape covering the encounter between the police and Rodney King, who had been stopped after a wild, high-speed chase. The great majority of that video never saw the light of day on the TV networks that incessantly played the selectively edited fraction. When the police were charged with excessive violence in overcoming Rodney King’s resistance to arrest, the jury saw the whole video — and refused to convict the policemen. That is when people who had seen only what the media showed them rioted after the jury verdict. Today, the media keep repeating the mantra that there was a “peaceful demonstration,” even when it ends in violence. How many people have to die in “peaceful demonstrations” before the media admit that those who promote mob disruptions have to know what is likely to happen when you put mobs in the streets at night? MOB RULE is not democracy. It threatens democracy, as it threatens lives — black or white — and all lives should matter. July 12, 2016

Conservative Chronicle

ANTI-POLICE ATMOSPHERE: July 8, 2016

The war on cops: Part II

ven in this age of runaway these more severe penalties. So did the emotions, there are still some New York Times, the promoter of many people who want to know the crusades on the left. Fast forward to the present, when both facts. Nowhere are facts more important, or more lacking, than in what has been black leaders and the New York Times are aptly called The War on Cops, the title of blaming white racism for the more sea devastating new book by Heather Mac vere penalties for selling crack cocaine. If you want to see what they Donald. were saying back Few, if any, of in the 1980s, check the most fashionpages 154-159 of able notions about The War on Cops. the police, minoriWhen the politties and the crimi(c) 2016, Creators Syndicate ical winds change, nal justice system can withstand an examination of hard politicians change. But that does not facts. Yet those fashionable notions con- change the facts about what they said and tinue to dominate discussions in the me- did before. As in her previous book, Are Cops dia, in politics and in academia. But Ms. Mac Donald’s book of documented facts Racist? Heather Mac Donald put hard facts front and center — and those facts demolishes many fashionable notions. devastate many a fashionable notion in CONSIDER ONE of the big talk- the media, in politics and in academia. One of the most popular arguments ing points of politicians and others who claim that the harsher penalties for peo- used in many different contexts is to show ple selling crack cocaine than for people that blacks have been disproportionately selling powder cocaine show racism, represented among people stopped by since crack cocaine is more likely to be police, arrested or imprisoned, as well as disproportionately represented among used by blacks. The cold fact, however, is that black people turned down for mortgage loans political and community leaders, back or for other benefits. Although many people regard these in the 1980s, spearheaded the drive for more severe legal penalties against those “disparate impact” statistics as evidence, who sold crack cocaine. Black Congress- or virtually proof, of racial discriminaman Charlie Rangel of Harlem was just tion, suppose that I should tell you that one of those black leaders who urged black basketball players are penalized by

Thomas

Sowell

NBA referees out of all proportion to the 13 percent that blacks are in the American population. “Wait a minute!” you might respond. “Blacks are more than just 13 percent of the players in the NBA.” Black basketball players are several times more numerous than 13 percent of all NBA players. This is especially so among the star players, who are more likely to be on the floor, rather than sitting on the bench. And players on the floor most are the ones most likely to get penalized. THE DIFFERENCE between the percentage of blacks in the general population and the percentage of blacks in the particular activity being discussed is the key to the fraudulent use of “disparate impact” statistics in many other contexts. Hillary Clinton, for example, decried a “disgrace of a criminal-justice system that incarcerates so many more African-

Americans proportionately than whites.” The most reliable crime statistics are statistics on murders, 52 percent of which were committed by blacks over the period from 1976 to 2005. If blacks are convicted of far more than 13 percent of all murders, does that mean that racism in the courts must be the reason? On the benefits side, there was instant condemnation of mortgage lenders when statistics showed blacks being turned down for prime mortgage loans in 2000 at twice the rate that whites were turned down. Seldom, if ever, did the media report that whites were turned down at nearly twice the rate that Asian Americans were turned down — or that Asian Americans’ average credit scores were higher than the average credit scores of whites, which were higher than the average credit scores of blacks. SUCH FACTS would have spoiled the prevailing preconceptions. Many facts reported in The War on Cops spoil many notions that all too many people choose to believe. We need to stop this nonsense, before there is a race war that no one can win.

•USPS: 762-710/•ISSN: 0088-7403 Published by Hampton Publishing Co. (Established 1876)

Division of Mid-America Publishing Corp. The Conservative Chronicle is published weekly for $75.00 (U.S.) per year by Hampton Publishing Co., 9 Second Street N.W., Hampton, IA 50441, and entered at the Post Office at Hampton, Iowa 50441, as periodicals postage under the Acts of Congress. Editorial Offices Conservative Chronicle, P.O. Box 29, Hampton, IA 50441. Ph. 1-800-888-3039. Editorial Coordinators, Kevin and Ruth Katz Circulation & Subscriber Services Conservative Chronicle P.O. Box 29, Hampton, IA 50441-0029. Ph. 1-800-8883039. Circulation Manager, Deb Chaney. Subscription Rates One Year.......................................... $75.00 (Call for outside USA rates for Air Mail) Single Copy........................................ $3.00

Need to make a correction on your mailing label?

POSTMASTER: Send address changes to Conservative Chronicle, P.O. Box 29, Hampton, IA 50441-0029. E-mail address: conserve@iowaconnect.com Visit our web site at: www.conservativechronicle.com

July 20, 2016 HILLARY CLINTON: July 12, 2016

Will Hillary ditch Black Lives Matter?

fter the massacre of five Dallas cops, during a protest of police shootings of black men in Louisiana and Minnesota, President Obama said, “America is not as divided as some have suggested.” Former D.C. Police Chief Charles Ramsey, an African-American, says we are “sitting on a powder keg.” Put me down as agreeing with the president. For when a real powder keg blew in the ‘60s, I was there. And this is not it.

IN 1965, the Watts area of Los Angeles exploded in the worst racial violence since the New York draft riot of 1863 when Lincoln had to send in veterans of Gettysburg. After six days of looting, shooting and arson in LA, there were 34 dead, 1,000 injured, 4,000 arrested. In 1967, Newark, New Jersey, and Detroit exploded, bringing out not only the Guard but the 82nd Airborne. After Dr.

This writer was on the 19th floor of King was assassinated on April 4, 1968, a hundred American cities burst into flame. the “Comrade Hilton” in August 1968, Troops defended the White House. looking down as Mayor Daley’s finest Marines mounted machine guns on the marched up Balbo to Michigan Avenue, Capitol steps. Thousands of soldiers pa- then stormed into Grant Park to deliver trolled the city. The 7th and 14th street street justice to the radicals calling them corridors of my hometown, D.C., were “pigs.” “A police riot” liberals raged. The gutted and would not be rebuilt for years. That was a powder keg — that went off. cops beat “our children” up. Richard Nixon came down on the side But only crazed cop-haters applaud cops, carried Illinois that Dallas atrocity by the delusional anti- of the and won the elecwhite racist Micah tion. Liberals were X. Johnson. As for still calling “law the shootings of and order” code Philando Castile words for racism. in Minnesota and (c) 2016, Creators Syndicate Most Americans Alton Sterling in Baton Rouge, almost all agree they must had come to recognize they were the indispensable elements of a decent and be investigated, and justice done. Chief Ramsey says he expects trouble civilized society. “Richard Nixon,” lamented Hunter S. at the conventions. But if Black Lives Matter shows up to raise hell in Cleve- Thompson, “is living in the White House land, then that is going to be a problem today because of what happened that night in Chicago.” for Hillary Clinton.

Pat

Buchanan

BLACKS: July 13, 2016

Challenges for black people

resident Barack Obama and his first attorney general, Eric Holder, called for an honest conversation about race. Holder even called us “a nation of cowards” because we were unwilling to have a “national conversation” about race. The truth of the matter is there’s been more than a half-century of conversations about race. We do not need more. Instead, black people need to have frank conversations among ourselves, no matter how uncomfortable and embarrassing the topics may be.

AMONG THE nation’s most dangerous cities are Detroit, Chicago, St. Louis, Baltimore, Memphis, Milwaukee, Birmingham, Newark, Cleveland and Philadelphia. These once-thriving cities are in steep decline. What these cities have in common is that they have large black populations. Also, they have been run by Democrats for nearly a halfcentury, with blacks having significant political power. Other characteristics these cities share are poorly performing and unsafe schools, poor-quality city services, and declining populations. Each year, more than 7,000 blacks are murdered. That’s a number greater than white and Hispanic murder victims combined. Blacks of all ages are killed at six times the rate of whites and Hispanics combined. According to the FBI, the police kill about 400 people a year; blacks are roughly one-third of that number. In Chicago alone, so far this year, over 2,000 people have been shot, leaving over 320 dead. It’s a similar

tale of mayhem in other predominantly black cities. Heather Mac Donald’s most recent book, The War on Cops, points out some devastating and sobering statistics: “Blacks were charged with 62 percent of all robberies, 57 percent of all murders, and 45 percent of all assaults in the 75 largest U.S. counties in 2009, while constituting roughly 15 percent of the population in those counties. From 2005 to 2014, 40 percent of cop-killers were black. Given the racially lopsided nature of gun violence, a 26 percent rate of black victimization by the police is not evidence of bias.”

Walter

THE PRIMARY victims of lawlessness are black people. To address this problem and most others, black people should ignore the liberal agenda. If civil authorities will not do their job of creating a safe environment, then black people should take the initiative. One example comes to mind. In 1988, at the request of residents, black Muslims began to patrol Mayfair Mansions, a druginfested, gang-ridden, unsafe Washington, D.C., housing project (http://tinyurl. com/zsszjgk). The gangs and drug lords left. The Nation of Islam sentinels were not deterred by the wishes of politicians and the American Civil Liberties Union. They didn’t feel obliged to give kid

glove treatment to criminals. Black residents of crime-infested neighborhoods should set up patrols, armed if necessary, to challenge thugs, gangs, drug dealers and other miscreants and make black neighborhoods safe and respectable. No one should have to live in daily fear for his life and safety. Most Americans have no idea of — and wouldn’t begin to tolerate — the climate of fear and intimidation under which so many black people live. Without self-initiative, there is not much that can be done about the high crime rate in black neighborhoods. Black and white liberals and their allies in the ACLU, as well as many libertarians, will not countenance the kind of tools needed to bring about civility. For example, the Chicago Police Department recently entered an agreement with the ACLU to record contact cards for all street stops. The ACLU claimed that police were disproportionately targeting minorities for questioning and searches. The practical result will be fewer investigative stops by policemen and more crime, and it will be black residents who suffer. BLACK PEOPLE have the capacity to run the criminals out of their neighborhoods. Let me put the issue another way. Suppose it were the Ku Klux Klan riding through black neighborhoods murdering 7,000 blacks year after year. How many black people would be willing to wait for the Klansmen to behave themselves or accept political promises and wait for a government program?

This weekend, Rudy Giuliani called Black Lives Matter “inherently racist.” Does he not have a point? After the death of Eric Garner in a police takedown, Black Lives Matter led mobs onto the streets and highways of Manhattan chanting, “What do we Want? Dead Cops! When do we want them? Now!” IN ANTI-POLICE demonstrations since, another chant has been, “Pigs in a blanket, fry ‘em like bacon.” This is pure hatred, and as it is directed against white cops, racist. Obama should tell Black Lives Matter to stop the hate. But though he has shown no reluctance to lecture white America, he has rarely shown the same stern judgment with black America. Now there is no denying that urban black communities are among the most heavily policed. Why? As Heather Mac Donald, author of The War on Cops, writes of a city she knows well: “Black people make up 23 percent of New York’s population, but they commit 75 percent of all shootings. ... Whites are 33 percent of the city’s population, but they commit fewer than two percent of all shootings... “These disparities mean that virtually every time that police in New York are called out after a shooting, they are being summoned into minority neighborhoods looking for minority suspects.” As these percentages are unlikely to change, we are going to have more collisions between black males and white cops. Some will end in the shooting of black criminals and suspects and, on occasion, innocent black men. Some are going to result in the death of cops. Mistakes are going to be made, and tragedies occur, as with the shooting of 12-year-old Tamir Rice, killed in Cleveland while waving a toy pistol. But if there is to be a social explosion every time an incident occurs, like the deaths of Trayvon Martin, shot while beating a neighborhood watch coordinator, and Michael Brown, shot in Ferguson after trying to grab a cop’s gun, America is going to be permanently polarized. And there is no doubt where the majority will come down, and who will be the near-term beneficiary. Monday, Donald Trump declared himself “the law and order candidate,” and added: “America’s police ... are what separates civilization from total chaos and destruction of our country as we know it.” AND CLINTON? On Friday, she said, “I’m going to be talking to white people. I think we’re the ones who have to start listening.” Prediction: If Black Lives Matter does not clean up its act, Obama and Clinton will have to throw this crowd over the side, or the BLM will take her down.

Conservative Chronicle

SOCIAL CONSEQUENCES: July 7, 2016

The sobering evidence of social science

he report was so “seismic” — Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s word — that Lyndon Johnson’s administration released it on the Fourth of July weekend, 1966, hoping it would not be noticed. But the Coleman report did disturb various dogmatic slumbers and vested interests. And 50 years on, it is pertinent to today’s political debates about class and social mobility. So, let us now praise an insufficiently famous man, sociologist James Coleman, author of the study “Equality of Educational Opportunity.”

IN 1966, postwar liberalism’s confidence reached its apogee. From 1938, when the electorate rebuked Franklin Roosevelt for his plan to “pack” the Supreme Court, through 1964, congressional Republicans and conservative Democrats prevented a liberal legislating majority. But Johnson’s 44-state victory that year gave Democrats 68 Senate seats and a majority of 155 in the House. Effortless and uninterrupted prosperity seemed assured as the economy grew in 1965 and 1966 by 10.7 percent and 7.99 percent, respectively. So, a gusher of tax revenues coincided with liberalism’s pent-up demand for large projects. It hoped to meld two American traits — egalitarian aspirations and faith in education’s transformative power. The consensus then was that the best predictor of a school’s performance was the amount of money spent on it: Increase financial inputs and cognitive outputs would increase proportionately. As the postwar baby boom moved through public schools like a pig through a python, almost everything improved — school buildings, teachers’ salaries, class sizes, per pupil expenditures — except outcomes measured by standardized tests. Enter Coleman, and the colleagues he directed, to puncture complacency with the dagger of evidence — data from more than 3,000 schools and 600,000 primary and secondary school students. His report vindicated the axiom that social science cannot tell us what to do, it can tell us the results of what we are doing. He found that the best predictor of a school’s outcomes is the quality of the children’s families. And students’ achievements are influenced by the social capital (habits, mores, educational ambitions) their classmates bring to school: “One implication stands out above all: That schools bring little influence to bear on a child’s achievement that is independent of his background and general social context; and that this very lack of an independent effect means that the inequalities imposed on children by their home, neighborhood, and peer environment are carried along to become the inequalities with which

Moynihan and then Coleman foresaw the consequences. Moynihan said the “tangle” of pathologies associated COLEMAN’S REPORT came ex- with the absence of fathers produces actly one year after — and as an explo- a continually renewed cohort of inadsive coda to — what is known as the equately socialized adolescent males. ing them is society’s Moynihan Report, which was leaked Socializurgent business if in July 1965. it is to avoid chaMoynihan, then otic neighborhoods a 37-year-old soand schools where cial scientist in maintaining disJohnson’s Labor (c) 2016, Washington Post Writers Group cipline displaces Department, preteaching. Colesented in “The Negro Family: The Case for National man documented how schools are reAction” what then counted as shocking flections of, rather than cures for, the news: 23.6 percent of African-Amer- failure of families to function as the primary transmitters of social capital. ican births were to unmarried women. The extraordinary synergy between Today 71 percent are. Almost 47 percent of all first births are to unmarried Moynihan and Coleman was serendipiwomen, and a majority of all mothers tous. Today, their baton of brave and under 30 are not living with the fathers useful sociology has passed to Charles Murray of the American Enterprise Inof their children. The causes of family disintegra- stitute. His Losing Ground (1984) was tion remain unclear, but 51 years ago an autopsy of 1960s aspirations. His they confront adult life at the end of school.”

George

Will

Coming Apart (2012) explores the social consequences — we are wallowing in the political consequences — of a bifurcated society in which many do very well while many others are unable to reach even the lowest rungs on the ladder of upward mobility. COLEMAN’S EVIDENCE that cultural rather than financial variables matter most was not welcomed by education bureaucracies and unions. Similarly, we now have more than half a century of awkward, and often ignored, evidence about the mostly small and evanescent effects of early childhood education. Today’s Democratic Party fancies itself “the party of science;” Barack Obama pledged, in his first inaugural address, to “restore science to its rightful place.” Social science, however, is respected by Democrats only when it validates policies congenial to the interests of favored factions.

SOCIAL CONSEQUENCES: July 12, 2016

Matters of right and wrong So, to get the country past this awful moment, we need: Gun control? A presidential speech? An end to political posturing? A blue-ribbon commission? Hugs? Or maybe we need something more. What about a concentrated effort to reconstruct the moral understandings formerly embedded in our ways and institutions, orphaned by the personal entitlement culture that rules the roost — the culture of Me, the culture of “I Want; I Deserve?”

“establishment” propounded with some vigor: starting with loving the Lord your God with all your heart, soul and mind, and your neighbor as yourself. It was the kind of stuff that elevated your neighbor to a higher status than that of rifle or pistol target, or the object of vile language. Thus the heart spoke and the churches spoke. But so also — and with no less force — the family spoke. And the community. And the schools. “Here’s what’s right, and here’s what’s wrong,” they all said. And you could object to that assessment with indig-

I HOLD college degrees in history. I am painfully aware there was never a time before us and never will be after us — humanity being what it is — when the moral norms bound us all with hoops of steel. We used to do better, though. We didn’t use to assume cultural approval to decide for ourselves, on a case-by-case basis, what’s right and what’s wrong. Generally speaking, we had standards — guardrails between which we operated. We weren’t to gambol gaily around the pasture, doing the first thing that came to mind, unless that first thing squared with the duties and obligations that went with life. There were well-known, well-advertised sources for scrutiny of duties and obligations. There was the law written on the heart — the natural law, telling you what to do whether you liked doing it or not. The natural law intersected with religious commands that the religious

Murchison

William

nation and — preferably — intelligence. You could argue for change and reform and adaptation, knowing nobody’s right all the time. But that included you. You weren’t right all the time. You couldn’t assign everyone else an overhead berth in the Hot Place because you thought you alone knew what should be done. WHERE’D IT all go? The insurgencies of the ‘60s and ‘70s gave the Me culture its place in the sun. Me, I know what’s wrong with society! The rest of you, shut up while I talk. The Me culture, once it became general, was impatient with institutions of “control” — for instance, the family. Why can’t I live the way I want?! Divorce, abortion-ondemand, illegitimacy, and “shackin’ up”

were the consequences. So what if our great teaching institution disintegrated? In a Me culture, there’s nothing worth teaching. You figure it out for yourself. You make your own rules, sort of the way the Dallas gunman Micah Johnson appears to have decided who should live and who should die: judge, jury, executioner. The country’s racial divide stems in part from the disintegrative forces that have sharply reduced the number of twoparent black families, leaving, generally, the single mother to raise her brood. Not much time for teaching in so strained an environment! But then, teaching isn’t popular in white households where the Me culture holds sway. Putting it back the way it used to be: What are the prospects? Who would do it? Where would we start? In any case, who ever saw the clock turned back? Arrested, maybe, but never turned back. The advantage of the enterprise would be the enduringness of the norms we now see as so influential previously in sparing us moments like the present one — the 1861-1865 war being an obvious exception — through emphasizing common decency over individual chestpuffing. THE NORMS can be ignored; they can’t be taken away. You just have to assert them, and keep on asserting them, until their undeniable Truth can no longer be dodged. “Me First” is folly: That would be the first Truth, the unassailable Truth.

July 20, 2016 BLACKS: July 13, 2016

Caucus of Congressional Black Corruption

tens of thousands of dollars in cash deposits to their accounts. The charitable contributions paid for lavish galas, NFL tickets, concert luxury box seats, golf tournaments and apparently Brown’s tax bills. Despite raising nearly a million bucks, Brown’s “charity” only issued two measly educational scholarships for minority students. So while shamelessly claiming this week to be a martyr akin to the murdered Dallas police officers and INSTEAD OF moaning about victims of the Orlando jihad, Brown is “#WhitePrivilege,” I invite radical racial embroiled in a sordid scandal that exidentity warriors to join me in taking on ploited black children’s lives to line her the black political elites selling out their own pockets. You can’t blame righty or whitey this people. Help expose the most crooked members of the caucus of Congressional time, Crooked Corrine. Chaka Fattah: This 11-term PennBlack Corruption: Democrat was conCorrine Brown: This 12-term sylvania victed in late June Democrat from on 23 charges of Florida received racketeering, mona 24-count fedey laundering and eral indictment fraud, along with last week while (c) 2016, Creators Syndicate four other co-deher Congressional Black Caucus colleagues tried to fendants. His son was sentenced earlier drown out the news with diversionary this year to a five-year prison term after gun-control theatrics. Brown and her being found guilty of 22 counts of sepachief of staff are charged with creating rate federal bank and tax fraud charges a fraudulent education charity to collect related to his misuse of business loans over $800,000 in donations from major and federal education contracts to pay corporations and philanthropies for their for designer clothes, massive bar tabs own private slush fund between 2012 and luxury cars. Fattah the Elder’s crimes are tied to and early 2016. The director of the hoax group, schemes to repay an illegal $1 million dubbed One Door for Education, Inc., campaign loan. Like his rotten apple of pleaded guilty last year to fraud and con- a son, Fattah siphoned off federal grant spiracy. Prosecutors say two relatives money and nonprofit funds (including of Brown and her chief of staff steered donations to his educational foundation f Black Lives Matter, then why have entrenched members of the Congressional Black Caucus spent more time enriching themselves than taking care of their neglected constituents? Too many social justice protesters are busy throwing shade, rocks, bottles, concrete blocks and vicious death threats at police officers of all colors trying to keep the peace.

Michelle

Malkin

— sound familiar?) to pay off political And vice versa. After Waters’ office consultants. personally intervened and lobbied the Treasury Department in 2008, the finanTHE CON ARTISTS inside your cial institution received $12 million in own communities are your own worst federal TARP bailout money — despite enemies. another government agency concluding Eddie Bernice Johnson: 12-term that the bank operated “without effective Democrat from Dallas, similarly helped underwriting standards” and engaged “in steer thousands of dollars in Congres- speculative investment practices.” Top sional Black Caucus Foundation college bank executive Kevin Cohee squandered scholarships for four family members money on a company-financed Porsche and two of her top aide’s children in vio- and a Santa Monica, California, beachlation of the nonprofit’s rules. front mansion. After the federal bailout Maxine Waters: This 13-term Belt- of Fannie/Freddie, OneUnited’s stock in way swamp queen from California and the government-sponsored enterprises past chair of the Congressional Black plunged to a value estimated at less than Caucus walked away with a slap on the $5 million. Only through Waters’ interwrist from the toothless House Ethics vention was OneUnited able to secure Committee in 2012 after being charged an emergency meeting with the Treasury with multiple ethics violations related and its then-Secretary Henry Paulson. to her meddling in minority-owned Waters’ government cronyism earned OneUnited Bank. her a “Most Corrupt member of ConThe banks’ executives donated gress” designation from the left-wing $12,500 to Mad Maxine’s congressio- Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in nal campaigns. Her husband, Sidney Washington. Williams, was an investor in one of the Then there’s Alcee Hastings, the 12banks that merged into OneUnited. As term Florida corruptocrat impeached stockholders, they profited handsomely while a federal judge in 1989 for makfrom their relationship with the bank. ing false statements and producing false documents in a 1983 criminal trial accusing him of seeking a $150,000 bribe. He went on to win a seat in Congress in 1992 and used his position to enrich his various lady friends, including paying one girlfriend-turned-congressional deputy district director more than half a million dollars in salary and another he calls a “staff assistant” to accompany on his endless junkets abroad. Those three are just the start. There’s Texas’ Sheila Jackson Lee and the Medicare fraud racket involving a local hospital in her district; Greg Meeks and his $400,000 earmark for a fake health clinic in New York City and Caribbean resort jaunts underwritten by convicted financier Allen Stanford; and Wisconsin’s Gwen Moore and her lucrative friends and family. And, of course, the ethics violations, shady business deals and tax troubles from New York’s Charlie Rangel deserve their own encyclopedia. MY MESSAGE for BLM? Put down your black power fists and weapons. Give the “#BlueLivesMurder” and “Fry ‘em up like bacon” chants a rest. Aim your outrage at self-serving black leaders and their abject failure to improve black people’s lives.

Conservative Chronicle

RULE OF LAW: July 7, 2016

No western culture without the rule of law

he major news events of the And, oh, are we objecting. past few weeks (and longer, Great Britain just dealt a body blow frankly), have a common to the European Union by voting demtheme: Our culture matters. And we’re ocratically to leave it. Free trade is losing our grip on it. peachy, but a majority of British citizens I don’t just mean American culture; I object to their laws being handed down mean western culture — that which has to them by unelected bureaucrats in produced Greek philosophy, Roman po- Brussels. They resent their litical theory, the industries being French approach crippled by an into diplomacy, the cessant barrage of magnificent Britregulations. And (c) 2016, Creators Syndicate ish legal system, they are irate that and so much more. a literal handful of One of the west’s greatest contribu- politicians have opened Europe’s bortions to human governance is the idea of ders to literally millions of unscreened the rule of law. Dictionary.com defines people, some unknown number of it as “the principle that all people and whom are terrorists and criminals ripinstitutions are subject to and account- ping European cities apart with bombs, able to law that is fairly applied and en- gun rampages, beheadings, rapes and forced.” other physical assaults. Thus was there Brexit. Britain said, ANY CULTURE grounded in liber- “Enough.” ty and limited government is dependent We are seeing similar sentiments in upon citizens who voluntarily abide by the United States, and they are bipartithe law, and most do. Additionally, most san. Democrat presidential candidate citizens of western nations believe in Bernie Sanders has shocked the polititheir systems and expect them to work. cal establishment with his popularity At least historically, we have also be- among voters that heir apparent Hillary lieved that those we have elected to Clinton assumed would be hers for the represent us believed in those systems plucking. Sanders has capitalized on a well. left-wing voters’ widespread discontent Increasingly, however, it is appar- with income inequality, political corent that we have a class of elites who ruption, revolving-door lobbying and no longer believe in the systems of crony capitalism. governance that have made our nations On the right, newcomer, brash realstrong, powerful and adaptable. They ity TV star and presumptive Republican no longer hold to the values that the presidential nominee Donald Trump is rest of us thought we shared. They do already in the history books for his havnot believe that they are subject to the ing knocked out 16 other GOP candisame rules or the same laws. They act dates. Trump, too, is a product of votwith audacity and impunity, and when er outrage; in his case, outrage with a we dare to object, they are indignant. GOP-controlled Congress that cannot

Laura

Hollis

muster the will to rein in government later, FBI Director James Comey, right bloat, a federal deficit of $19 trillion and on cue, announces that there will be no the ongoing culture wars. prosecution of Hillary Clinton. 3. In his public statement, Comey efHOW DOES our government re- fectively admitted that Clinton actually spond to the rising tide of anti-elitist violated federal law by using an unsepopulism? By refusing to press charges cure email system for classified governagainst Democrat presidential candidate ment materials, thus subjecting top-seHillary Clinton. cret information to hackers and foreign The circumstances of this decision agents. We already know that she deare nothing less than a flagrant rejection leted tens of thousands of nonpersonal of the rule of law, and at the highest lev- emails. And now we know that she lied els of government. Consider just a few about it. But Comey demurred, Clinton points: really didn’t intend to hurt the U.S. gov1. All attorneys are bound by the ernment, she was just “extremely careModel Code of Professional Respon- less.” sibility, which prohibits conduct that 4. Except that the statute doesn’t recreates even just “the appearance of im- quire “intent;” it only requires “gross propriety.” Loretta Lynch, the attorney negligence.” What does “gross negligeneral of the United States, certainly gence” mean, you ask? “Extreme careknows this. But she met with Bill Clin- lessness” is a pretty good definition. ton, alone, while his wife was the sub5. Here’s the worst part: Comey furject of a pending FBI investigation. This ther stated, “To be clear, this is not to was not some casual conversation at a suggest that in similar circumstances, beltway cocktail party. It was a deliber- a person who engaged in this activate, carefully orchestrated conversation ity would face no consequences. To on a private airplane. That is not the the contrary, those individuals are ofmere appearance of impropriety, it is ten subject to security or administrative impropriety. sanctions. But that is not what we are 2. Lynch protested that they just dis- deciding now.” cussed “grandchildren and golf.” That Translation: “Anyone else would be is implausible. But who cares? Days prosecuted. But not Hillary Clinton.” Comey is speaking in an easily decrypted code. This decision was preordained. The fix was in. That the government could hand down a decision like this, amidst the phenomena of Trump, Sanders and Brexit; and that Clinton could dare to invoke Martin Luther King Jr. in her legal “victory,” means that these people are even more divorced from reality and more dissociated from the public mood than I thought possible. Clearly, they are confident that there will be no reckoning. But undermining the rule of law does not always grease the wheels of the politically connected the way they think it does. Voters are already irate. If Hillary Clinton thinks that a public statement of her wrongful actions, coupled with an admission that anyone else would be prosecuted, means that Americans will catapult her into the White House, she’s smoking crack. WE WANT our culture back. And that starts by electing someone who understands that the law applies to us all — not just “the little people.”

July 20, 2016 VP PICK: July 6, 2016

My VP prediction: Trump’s first mistake

y vice presidential predic- a Trump pop-off, and his nominee will tion is: Trump is about to come under enormous pressure to remake his first mistake. pudiate Trump — destroying Trump’s I knew this would happen as soon as candidacy and winning himself a lifehe hired campaign consultants, rather time of media adulation. The nominee than relying on his gut. If these cam- will have visions of well-compensated paign consultants were any good, their board positions, Time magazine’s Man Year, meetings with first piece of advice to Trump would of the actresses, his own be, “Fire us imshow on Fox News mediately!” — maybe NBC! — Trump’s adand not one, but visers are untwo covers on doubtedly telling (c) 2016, Ann Coulter Vanity Fair. him he’s got the How much “outsider” image covered. He needs someone with ex- pushing would it take for any of the perience in Washington — as if presi- GOP donor shills to sell out Trump for dents don’t have staffs — an elected the media’s admiration? A month ago, Republican official with solid standing Newt became a media darling for dein the GOP, preferably a sitting senator nouncing Trump’s attacks on a judge or governor, who will give the ticket who belongs to a Hispanic supremacist organization. You could probably get gravitas and heft. Rubio for a decent bass boat. If Trump chooses a vice president THIS IS completely wrong. Trump isn’t a standard-issue GOP, trying to who supports cheap labor for the donor balance the ticket to get his party into class, how long before both parties depower. He’s starting a new party! He’s cide to impeach President Trump? Gingrich lobbied for the instant lejust blown up the old GOP. Instead of a party for, by and of globalist pluto- galization of illegals because his benecrats, the new Trumpian party is a par- factor, superglue heiress Helen Krieble, needed cheap labor for her horse ty of Americans for America. How is Trump going to find a decent farm. Trump impeached. Pence’s big immigration initiative running mate from among the Republicans who have gotten ahead under the was mass legalization for cheap forold model of sucking up to donors and eign workers if they went home first, with any employer request bringing lobbyists? Almost any sitting Republican sena- them right back. Trump impeached. Sen. Bob Corker was one of only tor or governor would be total counterprogramming to Trump’s message. 14 Republicans to vote for Rubio’s One searches the country in vain to nation-destroying amnesty bill — and find a half-dozen elected Republicans went the extra mile to pass it. Trump who have not supported amnesty, job- impeached. Chris Christie’s temporary Senate killing trade deals, Wall Street bailouts — or all of the above. Trump’s mes- nominee was one of the other 14, afsage is: I’m leaving the deadwood be- ter Sen. Chuck Schumer convinced Christie to support amnesty in a single hind. We always secretly suspected Re- phone call. Trump impeached. publicans were selling out the country TRUMP DOESN’T need a vice for their own interests, but now Trump has flushed them all out. At least the president from the party he’s just burGOP isn’t being subtle. Their position ied. Everyone thinks Trump’s model is: No, we will never allow anyone to be president who wants to do some- should be Reagan, who chose his main primary rival as his vice presidential thing about the border. The moment Trump chooses his vice nominee. It’s true that the important presidential candidate, every person in thing is for Trump to win. Reagan the media will be handed a personal- couldn’t have saved the country if he ized crowbar to pry daylight between had lost, and nor can Trump. But, apart from signing off on amTrump his nominee. What do you say about Mr. Trump’s nesty, choosing a Bush for his vice comment 19 years ago in an appear- president was Reagan’s biggest misance on Howard Stern? Can we really take, foisting this pestilence on the trust our nuclear codes to a man who country for no reason. Reagan won in a landslide. Did he really need to worry likes attractive women? If Trump picks a typical Republican, about carrying Greenwich, Connectithe odds are better than even that his cut? It took 26 years for voters to correct nominee will end up withdrawing in order to win the good opinion of the Reagan’s vice presidential mistake, finally rejecting the Bush brand beginNew York Times. Once a week until the election, there ning with the 2006 midterm elections. will be some fresh media hysteria about This year, they are trying to correct

Ann

Coulter

Reagan’s amnesty mistake. Why pick a vice president who won’t let the voters do that? If any of the establishment Republicans brought one thing to the table, it would be a different story. If they brought a roll of nickels — great, Trump should be bowing and scraping to them. Hey, look! Chris Christie has 5,000 unused campaign balloons in his garage — bring him in! But these guys bring nothing. They’ll only be a drain on Trump’s campaign. The model shouldn’t be Reagan, but Lincoln, whose candidacy also introduced a new party — one that arose from the exact same battle roiling the party today. The rich wanted cheap labor — slavery — and both parties, the Democrats and the Whigs, were happy to give it to them. Lincoln’s new Republican Party stood for the soul of the nation against the self-interest of the rich and powerful, just as Trump’s does today. Lincoln didn’t choose some eminent Whig politician to give his ticket gravitas. He chose Hannibal Hamlin. No one other than a Jeopardy! contestant even remembers Hamlin’s name today. He didn’t exactly set the world on fire. Hamlin was a former Democrat, didn’t meet Lincoln until after the election, served only one term as Lincoln’s vice president, was not liked by first lady Mary Todd and didn’t work closely with the president. He made no sense as Lincoln’s vice president on any level, except the only one that mattered: Hamlin was ferociously opposed to slavery — the new party’s signature issue. He strongly supported Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation, arguing that slaves should be armed. As soon as slavery was ended, Lincoln dropped Hamlin as his vice president.

The official GOP’s opposition to Trump is the modern slavery party’s version of the Civil War, fought by plutocrats with money and media. For his vice president, Trump needs anyone — from business, academia, the military or the political world — who is Hannibal Hamlin on immigration, a warrior to defend our country from the rich’s predatory demands for cheap foreign labor. His running mate also needs to be smart and courageous and not in love with his own press notices. Among the possibilities Trump ought to be considering are people like Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, former Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown, North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory and Idaho Sen. Mike Crapo (the latter two are up for re-election this year, but perhaps they can run for both offices simultaneously). Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama is one of approximately one elected officials I completely trust to protect Americans from the cheap labor-demanding rich — which is why Trump needs to keep him in the Senate. The same consultants who would have told Trump to never, ever mention immigration are telling him now that he needs a Christie, a Newt, a Corker, a Rubio — or a woman. (Because that’s how Margaret Thatcher emerged. No one had ever heard her name until the British Conservative Party decided it needed a woman on the ticket!) (That’s sarcasm.) IF THE consultants prevail with Trump, our only hope is that the conventional wisdom about vice presidents being irrelevant is correct — at least for the six months of a Trump presidency before impeachment.

Conservative Chronicle

2016 ELECTION: July 7, 2016

Careless Clinton: A new campaign narrative FBI Director James Comey’s remarks regarding then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton being “extremely careless” in the “handling of very sensitive, highly classified information,” along with his conclusion that “any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation,” have the potential to change voters’ view of Clinton’s intelligence and readiness to lead the nation.

IN SHORT, to change the race for president. While the Clinton camp is celebrating that Comey did not recommend criminal charges, the fact remains that the FBI findings are dangerous and damaging for Clinton. A lackluster candidate who is known for her intelligence, work ethic and persistence, Clinton’s handling of classified information was determined by the FBI to be careless and not very smart. As secretary of state, Clinton should have handled the security and secrecy of U.S. classified information as her top concern. Instead, she appears to have been more focused on safeguarding her personal privacy. If Clinton had simply been as thoughtful as any other reasonable person in her position, she would have used a government email address and a government server for Department of State communications. Thousands of everyday Americans follow this structure, and they don’t deal with national secrets. The fact that she used a personal email address and a personal server could lead one to believe that she puts herself and her privacy above the safety and security of the United States. Secondly, Clinton’s use of a private email address and server resulted in expensive investigations, paid for by the U.S. government. Comey noted this week that they included thousands of hours of investigation work. Since Clinton did not do what any reasonable person in her position would have done and was careless, at best, it seems as though there is a need for her to reimburse the government for time and effort that would not have spent if she had been careful and reasonable. How many classified emails were sent from her personal account? “From the group of 30,000 emails returned to the State Department, 110 emails in 52 email chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received,” Comey said. “Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information, which is the lowest level of classification.”

Comey’s remarks come at a time when HE ADDED, “the FBI also discovered several thousand work-related emails that the presidential race is tight and appears were not in the group of 30,000 that were to be about which candidate voters disreturned by Secretary Clinton to State in like the least. According to Quinnipiac University’s 2014 ... three of those were classified at the time they were sent or received, one most recent presidential poll, taken beat the Secret level and two at the Confi- fore the FBI issued its report, Clinton was at 42 percent versus Repubdential level.” presumptive nominee While Comey did not rec- l i c a n Donald Trump’s 40 ommend criminal Jackie percent. According prosecution, he to the news release, noted that people the race was, “too in similar circum(c) 2016, Creators Syndicate close to call — as stances shown to American voters be careless or to mishandle classified information “are of- say neither candidate would be a good ten subject to security or administrative president and that the campaign has increased hatred and prejudice in the nasanctions.” If Clinton were applying for a job other tion.” (National poll June 21 — 27, 1,610 than the one she is seeking, her potential registered voters, +/- 2.4 points). When asked about their opinion of the future employers would likely consider her history of carelessness in weighing candidates, regardless of how they were planning to vote, and their character atwhether to make her an offer.

Gingrich Cushman

tributes, potential voters said they considered Trump to be more honest and trustworthy than Clinton, and viewed him as a stronger leader than Clinton. Asked who is better prepared to be president, those polled cited Clinton (58 percent versus 33 percent of total voters, with independent voters viewing Clinton as more prepared by 54 percent to 34 percent). When asked, who “is more intelligent: Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump,” those polled again cited Clinton (53 percent versus 33 percent of total voters, with independent voters viewing Clinton as more intelligent 48 percent to 33 percent). COMEY’S COMMENTS regarding Clinton’s carelessness certainly puts these two areas into play. Clinton’s strong point has been her thoughtfulness and intelligence — the two attributes that the FBI investigation has called into question.

FBI RECOMMENDATION: July 8, 2016

Disqualifying in a sane world

ILLARY CLINTON: I opted for convenience to use my personal email account, which was allowed by the State Department, because I thought it would be easier to carry just one device for my work and for my personal emails instead of two. FBI DIRECTOR JAMES COMEY: Secretary Clinton used several different servers and administrators of those servers during her four years at the State Department, and used numerous mobile devices to view and send email on that personal domain.

CLINTON: I responded right away and provided all my emails that could possibly be work-related, which totaled roughly 55,000 printed pages, even though I knew that the State Department already had the vast majority of them. We went through a thorough process to identify all of my work related emails and deliver them to the State Department. At the end, I chose not to keep my private personal emails. COMEY: The FBI also discovered several thousand work-related emails that were not in the group of 30,000 that were returned by Secretary Clinton to State in 2014. We found those additional emails in a variety of ways. Some had been deleted over the years and we found traces of them on devices that supported or were connected to the private email domain. CLINTON: I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material. So I’m certainly well aware of the classification requirements and did not send classified material.

COMEY: From the group of 30,000 emails returned to the State Department, 110 emails in 52 email chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information, which is the lowest level of classification. Separate from those, about 2,000 additional emails were “up-classified” to

Erick

make them Confidential; the information in those had not been classified at the time the emails were sent. CLINTON: But whether it was a personal account or a government account, I did not send classified material and I did not receive any material that was marked or designated classified, which is the way you know whether something is. COMEY: With respect to the thousands of emails we found that were not among those produced to State, agencies have concluded that three of those were classified at the time they were sent or received, one at the Secret level and two at the Confidential level. CLINTON: Well, my personal emails are my personal business, right?

COMEY: With respect to potential computer intrusion by hostile actors, we did not find direct evidence that Secretary Clinton’s personal email domain, in its various configurations since 2009, was successfully hacked. But, given the nature of the system and of the actors potentially involved, we assess that we would be unlikely to see such direct evidence. We do assess that hostile actors gained access to the private commercial email accounts of people with whom Secretary Clinton was in regular contact from her personal account. We also assess that Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal email domain was both known by a large number of people and readily apparent. She also used her personal email extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related emails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries. Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal email account. IN A NORMAL world, what the FBI discovered about Clinton’s emails would disqualify her from office. But these are not normal times. The FBI Director laid out an impressive case against Mrs. Clinton, but will not recommend an indictment. One must wonder if it is because James Comey wants to stop Donald Trump or has visions of Vince Foster dancing in his head. One must also remember that this is the same FBI that interviewed the Orlando terrorist, Omar Mateen, twice and decided he was harmless.

July 20, 2016 HILLARY CLINTON: July 8, 2016

Rigged 101: Hillary Clinton and enablers

If Hillary’s abysmal numbers for illary Clinton has scored a highly characteristic political honesty and trustworthiness don’t drop “victory” — namely, not get- further, people aren’t paying attention. The email episode bears all the hallting indicted. During a political season when marks of a Clinton scandal. The Clintons always move the ethi“rigged” has been the most emotive description of the economy and political cal goal post so that anything short of system, Hillary and her enablers have prosecutable criminality is supposed be considered acceptconducted what appears to be a seminar to able. in Rigged 101. They rely on First, Bill Clinmincing distincton had an imtions. To such promptu “social” classics as “I meeting with At(c) 2016, King Features Syndicate didn’t inhale” and torney General Loretta Lynch. If Bill is a much reduced “it depends on the meaning of ‘is’” can figure, he still has his unfailing instinct be added the latest distinction without for the inappropriate. The confab was a difference, courtesy of Comey, this followed up with a report in the New one between “extremely careless” (his York Times that Hillary might keep characterization of Clinton’s conduct) Lynch on as AG, as if to remove any and “gross negligence” (the standard doubt about Lynch’s conflict of interest. set out in the relevant criminal statute).

Rich

Lowry

THE FBI interview with Hillary occurred on the Saturday of a long July Fourth weekend, the best day for bad news to drop short of Christmas Eve. The FBI immediately leaked that there would be no charges, advertising that the interview with Hillary was only about checking the box. Finally, a mere three days later, FBI Director James Comey issued a stinging indictment of Hillary’s conduct in the case coupled with a discordant statement of absolute opposition to an indictment. It came just in time for President Barack Obama’s inaugural joint campaign appearance with Hillary later that day.

THEY FALL back on staggered defenses as they are steadily rendered inoperative. “I didn’t have sex with that woman, Monica Lewinsky” becomes “Now that you mention it, I did, only you can’t impeach me for it.” Or “I didn’t send classified material” becomes “I meant that it wasn’t marked classified, and even if it was, hey, it’s not a crime.” Comey argued that Clinton shouldn’t be prosecuted for violating the law in the absence of aggravating factors compounding her offense. A less generous account of her conduct would find such aggravating factors: She set up her email system to evade

HILLARY CLINTON: July 7, 2016

Indict HRC for contempt

FBI Director James Comey testified swered that he did not have a referral before Congress Thursday, July 7, that and that he needed one to investigate Hillary Clinton lied when she said that further. The Committee Chairman Jason she neither sent nor received classified Chaffetz, R-Utah, said he would send a material. And that she lied when she referral over in a matter of hours. Now, maybe, we’ve finally got her. said that nothing was marked classified The Justice Department on the emails on her server. And that she has decided not to lied when she said indict her for misher server was handling of classinot hacked. And fied material. But that she lied when how about lying she said that she (c) 2016, Creators Syndicate under oath to Conturned over all her work-related emails to the State Depart- gress? The FBI will find it hard not to recment. ommend prosecution. The facts are eviALL OF these lies where spoken dent and clear. in media interviews on virtually every IF THE Justice Department won’t news show in the country. But they were also repeated before prosecute this clear instance of perjury, Congress in her sworn testimony during a decision that will have been made following an FBI recommendation, their the Benghazi hearings. Asked why he did not recommend partisanship will be on display. prosecution for perjury, Comey an-

Dick

Morris

federal records laws and freedom-ofinformation requests; she lied about why she set it up; she persisted in her private system despite getting warned about its perils. Comey clearly concluded that Hillary is simply too big to indict. A major political party has, for reasons that will escape most observers, put all its eggs in her basket. Hillary isn’t a fresh face, a bipartisan healer or a transformational figure. She is a barely adequate political talent with exceptional survival skills honed over decades of scandal. In other words, she is Michael Dukakis with a broken ethical compass. At their joint appearance in North Carolina, Obama did all he could to pretend Hillary had fired up the crowd. Then he stepped up to show how it’s done. In basketball terms, it was a little like watching Steph Curry play a game

of 21 with the second-string point guard on the Washington Generals. Just not fair. Both political parties this year have chosen corrupting nominees. Republicans fully on board the Trump Train must routinely defend the indefensible, or at least avert their eyes from it. In the Clintons, Democrats are in bed with two operators whose idealism long ago got inextricably mixed into a toxic stew of ambition and greed. THE EMAIL scandal shows that the Clintons play by their own rules and assume, correctly as it happens, that they are famous and powerful enough to escape the worst consequences. But that is, as she and her husband like to say, old news.

Conservative Chronicle

HILLARY CLINTON: July 8, 2016

Is Hillary morally unfit to be president?

Yet, he charged her with having oes Hillary Clinton possess the integrity and honesty to been “extremely careless” with U.S. be president of the United national security secrets, a phrase that States? Or are those quaint and irrele- seems synonymous with the gross negvant considerations in electing a head of ligence needed to indict and convict. While recommending against prosstate in 21st-century America? These are the questions put on the ecution, Comey added, “This is not to table by the report from FBI Director suggest that in similar circumstances, James Comey on what his agents un- a person who engaged in this activity face no consequence. earthed in their criminal investigation of w o u l d To the contrary, the Clinton email those individuals scandal. are often subject Clinton dodged to security or adan FBI recomministrative sancmendation that (c) 2016, Creators Syndicate tions.” she be indicted for Tr a n s l a t i o n : gross negligence in handling U.S. security secrets, a rec- Were Clinton still the secretary of state ommendation that would have aborted and were such recklessness with seher campaign. But Director Comey dy- crets to be discovered, she could have namited the defense she has been offer- been forced to resign and stripped of her security clearance forever. ing the country. Yet if Clinton is elected president, COMEY ALL but declared that our commander in chief for the next Clinton lied when she said she had State four years, and her confidantes Huma Department approval for the email serv- Abedin and Cheryl Mills, will all be individuals the FBI has found to be recker in her home. He all but declared that she lied when less and unreliable in the handling of she said she had only one server, and national security secrets. We will have security risks running that no classified or secret material was transmitted. He also implied that she the armed forces of the USA. Nor is this the first time Clinton’s lied when she said she had used only one device and had turned over all of truthfulness has been called into quesher work-related emails to State. The tion. Twenty years ago, she fabricated a tale about crossing a tarmac in BosFBI found “several thousand” more. Clinton said her emails were stored nia “under sniper fire,” and running in a secure area. This, too, was false. with “our heads down.” Photos showed Hostile actors and hostile regimes, said a peaceful arrival featuring a smiling Comey, had access to email systems of little girl. those with whom she communicated. FAMILY MEMBERS of the dead Comey said he found no criminal heroes of Benghazi’s “13 Hours” say “intent” in what Clinton did.

Pat

Buchanan

Clinton told them she would see to it that the creator of the anti-Islamic video that incited the mob that killed their sons would be run down, all the while knowing it had been a planned terrorist attack. In 1996, the New York Times’ William Safire went over all of the statements Clinton had made in Whitewater and related scandals of Bill Clinton’s first term, compared them with subsequently revealed truth, and pronounced Hillary Clinton a “congenital liar.” She has claimed she tried to join the Marines in 1975, and long contended she was named for famed mountaineer Edmund Hillary, who conquered Mount Everest. Only Sir Edmund climbed Everest when Hillary was six years old. The perfect running mate for this serial fabricator would be the Cherokee lass Elizabeth Warren.

Still, a question arises as to Comey’s motives in airing the findings of an FBI investigation. Normally, the bureau passes on the evidence it has found, along with its recommendation, to the Justice Department. And Justice decides whether to prosecute. Instead, Comey called a press conference, documented the charge that Clinton was “extremely careless,” contradicted, point by point, the story she has told the public, then announced he was recommending against prosecution. What was behind this extraordinary performance? By urging no prosecution, but providing evidence for a verdict of criminal negligence in handing classified material, Comey was saying: I am not recommending prosecution, because, to do that, would be to force Hillary Clinton out of the race, and virtually decide the election of 2016. And that is my not decision. That is your decision. You, the American people, should decide, given all this evidence, if Clinton should be commander in chief. You decide if a public figure with a record of such recklessness and duplicity belongs in the Oval Office. Comey was making the case against Clinton as the custodian of national security secrets with a credibility the GOP cannot match, while refusing to determine her fate by urging an indictment, and instead leaving her future in our hands. And, ultimately, should not this decision rest with the people, and not the FBI? If, knowing what we know of the congenital mendacity of Hillary Clinton, the nation chooses her as head of state and commander in chief, then that will tell us something about the America of 2016. AND IT WILL tell us something about the supposed superiority of democracy over other forms of government.

July 20, 2016 REPUBLICANS: July 12, 2016

Trump battles globalist Republicans

efore heading to Cleveland to Cruz still utilize a high-priced campaign accept the Republican nomi- manager to join high-level discussions nation for president, Don- with the presumptive nominee? ald Trump paid a high-profile visit to The answer is that Cruz never stopped Capitol Hill, where he hoped to unify running for president, and the people Congressional Republicans behind his who spent $158 million — more than presidential campaign.Many of the 247 twice what Trump spent — to back Cruz in Republican Representatives and 54 2016 are not going away. Cruz recently Senators were cordial to their party’s set up two new nonprofit organipresumptive nomizations to keep his nee, but others key people emremained hostile ployed, prematureand weren’t shy ly launching another about expressing run for president in (c) 2016, Creators Syndicate it to reporters after 2020. leaving the closedCruz’s delays door meetings. in endorsing Trump and his disloyal One Congressman reportedly de- preparations to run for president in 2020 manded that Trump promise to pro- help only one person: Hillary Clinton, tect Congress’ Article I powers if he is which is what some Republican megaelected. Trump tactfully refrained from donors actually prefer, because they are pointing out how many times the Re- globalists who oppose Trump’s stances publican Congress has unilaterally sur- against immigration and free trade. rendered its Article I powers, including The globalists will never accept the power “to regulate commerce with Trump or anyone else who puts Amerforeign nations.” icans first, and they are using Cruz to undermine Trump’s campaign. Cruz’s SENATOR JEFF FLAKE of Arizo- mega-donors think they can buy their na openly mocked Trump at the meet- way to control of the Republican Party ing and then bragged to reporters about even if Trump wins the presidency this their “tense” exchange. Flake, an unre- year, and they are already funding the pentant member of the Gang of Eight takeover of several conservative organithat produced the 2013 amnesty bill, has zations. already announced plans to resurrect that discredited bill next year no matter THESE GLOBALIST money-men who is elected president. are also hostile to our Constitution, Trump’s next stop was a private meet- which they want to rewrite in a new ing with Senator Ted Cruz, who inappro- constitutional convention, also called priately brought his campaign manager “Convention of States.” Eric O’Keefe, Jeff Roe to the meeting. Two months af- who has close ties to the billionaire ter suspending his campaign, why does Koch bothers, backs the Never Trump

Phyllis

Schlafly

movement and is a board member of the Convention of States project. Justice Scalia in May 2015 called this attempt for a new constitutional convention a “horrible idea,” but several of its cheerleaders were able to get on the Republican platform committee that is meeting this week. Cruz has praised the delusional proposal to add many amendments to the Constitution, and some of his donors are part of the same group that seeks to alter our Constitution. Cruz earned support by many conservatives when he first came to D.C. four years ago. It is long overdue for Cruz to repudiate the support of these globalists who are working against Trump and against our national sovereignty. “We will no longer surrender this country or its people to the false song of globalism,” Trump promised in his

April 27 foreign policy speech in Washington. That sentiment is anathema to the globalists who provide much of the money for Republican candidates. “I am skeptical of international unions that tie us up and bring America down,” Trump continued. “Under my administration, we will never enter America into any agreement that reduces our ability to control our own affairs. Americans must know that we’re putting the American people first again.” When Trump vows to “put Americans first” the globalists complain about “protectionism,” as if there’s something wrong with expecting our own government to protect American jobs and America’s economic interests. “On trade, on immigration, on foreign policy, the jobs, incomes and security of the American worker will always be my first priority,” Trump said. “Both our friends and our enemies put their countries above ours, and we — while being fair to them — must start doing the same.” In a June 22 speech in New York, Trump intensified his attack on the globalist money interests: “We’ll never be able to fix a rigged system by counting on the same people who have rigged it in the first place. The insiders wrote the rules of the game to keep themselves in power and in the money.” “It’s not just the political system that’s rigged, it’s the whole economy,” Trump continued. “It’s rigged by big donors who want to keep wages down. It’s rigged by big businesses who want to leave our country, fire our workers, and sell their products back into the United States with absolutely no consequences for them.” WE’VE WAITED a long time for a Republican candidate to express these pro-American views, but Donald Trump’s victory in the presidential primaries proves they are what the voters want to hear.

Conservative Chronicle

HEALTH CARE: July 13, 2016

Sanctuary hospitals: Who pays the bills?

edical bills are pushing flocking to Florida hospitals for the more Americans into se- free care. He doesn’t begrudge them, vere financial distress, but taxpayers have every right to be even if they have insurance. That’s the outraged. grim news from a top medical journal. SO DO AMERICANS facing bankThese bills force hundreds of thousands into bankruptcy each year. What’s ruptcy from their medical bills. Soaring so galling is that while Americans deductibles are worsening the pressure, ing to the JAMA Instruggle to pay their bills, freeloaders accordternal Medicine refrom other counport, which shows tries get the same deductibles up a care at no cost by whopping 86 pergaming our gencent since 2009. erous open-door (c) 2016, Creators Syndicate If you have hospital policies. cancer, you’ll pay They take a flight to the U.S., go straight to an emergency thousands out of your own pocket beroom, and get pacemakers, chemother- fore your insurance kicks in. But in apy and other expensive care, leaving New York, which has about the most liberal emergency Medicaid policies U.S. taxpayers to foot their bills. of any state, a medical tourist claimEVAN LEVINE, a cardiologist at ing poverty can get up to 15 months a Bronx, New York, teaching hospi- of inpatient chemotherapy — worth tal, recently treated a Trinidad resident $150,000 — sticking taxpayers with who had learned his pacemaker battery the bill. The same holds true for inpawas about to give out. He came to New tient dialysis, which sometimes costs York to avoid paying for cardiac care even more. Patients who don’t mediback home. Cost to him? Zero, aside cally require hospitalization are sometimes put in the hospital anyway befrom airfare. It’s a common practice, according to cause emergency Medicaid only pays a medical device salesman who servic- for inpatient care. Uncle Sam turns a blind eye but at es hospitals in the New York area. He gets calls for pacemakers destined for the same time hassles older Americans patients from South or Central Amer- who come to the ER. Under a sneaky ica who fly in and take a bus directly to the hospital. The bill for one paceHEALTH CARE: July 13, 2016 maker patient can reach $96,000. John Q. Public gets stuck with it. Taxpayers cough up an estimated $2 billion a year for a program called Emergency Medicaid, according to Kaiser Health News. It covers everyhen President Barack one unable to pay for emergency mediObama and Hillary Clinton cal care, including illegal immigrants conceived of a private inand residents of other countries here surance-based, government-subsidized for medical freebies. scheme for medical care, they knew it No one should be left to die on the was only a halfway house toward their street. But forcing taxpayers to foot ultimate goal: Socialized medicine. the bill for foreigners here to rip us off Obama announced as much. Now Clingoes too far. ton is taking the inevitable next step and Federal law requires that hospitals backing government-controlled medihelp all patients who come to the ER cine for those over 55. in labor or with a life-threatening conThe Obama-Clinton strategy was dition. Lenient regulations are turning always deceptive: Enact a program — this into a gravy train. Hospital admin- Obamacare — that could not work and istration cannot ask about immigration blame the insurance companies for its status at any time, and they are barred failure. Then move it with a recommenfrom asking if patients can pay or dation for government-funded medical have insurance until after they’ve been care — single payer. helped. Every ER posts signs telling patients they have a right to be treated, EARLY IN the days of his push for no matter what. Obamacare, the president pushed his Noah Schreibman, pulmonologist fellow Democrats to embrace a “public and critical care physician in Delray, option” that would put the governmentFlorida, explains that “if someone is run insurance company into competishort of breath, has chest pains, coughs tion with private insurers. After Conup blood, or recently lost 20 pounds, gress — even with 60 Democrats in they’ll get admitted.” the Senate — said no, he embraced his “We are here to help, we treat every- backup plan. body,” Schreibman insists, even as he He decided to burden private insuracknowledges seeing foreign patients ance companies with such ridiculously

Betsy

McCaughey

Obama administration policy, seniors seeking emergency care are put in “observation care” and then, when it’s time to leave, they’re slapped with huge bills and told they were never formally admitted to the hospital so Medicare won’t pay. And what about vets? As a thank you for their service, they’re clobbered with a hefty bill if they dare go to an emergency room that isn’t run by the

VA. It’s so outrageous, a federal court just ruled against this practice. Levine has a sensible fix: Bill countries when their citizens come here to freeload, or deduct the cost from their foreign aid packages. OUR NATION’S priorities need to be fixed. Stop scrimping on care for vets and seniors, to spend money on people from other nations.

Clinton backs socialized medicine

strict mandates for their coverage that they could not possibly charge affordable premiums. The administration required that of every possible form of medical care — sex reassignment surgery, psychotherapy, drug rehabilitation, mammograms for men and women — so as to raise costs and assure failure. Obama and Clinton also insisted that insurers cover everyone regardless of pre-existing conditions and cover all children on their

Dick

parents’ policies up to age 26. Together these requirements forced insurance companies to charge high premiums and even higher deductibles, just as Clinton and Obama knew they would. As expected, this set in motion a downward spiral — a death spiral — for Obamacare. As premiums and deductibles rose, fewer healthy people signed up and the risk pool became sicker and older, forcing even higher premiums and the deadly spiral continued.

All the while, the Democrats blamed the insurance companies, claiming that they put profits ahead of people. Insurers originally agreed to Obamacare because they were promised an openended subsidy to repay any losses they incurred. But Senator Marco Rubio helped close that door when he pushed for an amendment into the budget bill banning the subsidies. So the insurance companies were in a trap of their own making. Now Obama and Clinton, and Bernie Sanders, are swooping in for the kill — demanding that Obamacare give way to socialized medicine. Right now, they are urging it for those over 55, but they could soon eliminate any age requirement. The costs of their new proposal will be huge, perhaps doubling the 2.9 percent Medicare tax — a payroll tax that all employed Americans pay. THE SOCIALISTS will be pleased. But we will not be when we learn how government-controlled medicine truncates and limits our options and worsens our medical care.

July 20, 2016 BIG OIL: July 12, 2016

The Exxon shakedown: Witch hunt of an industry

deep-pocketed industry for money. The Wildlife Federation and the Center for attorneys general are hoping for a re- American Progress. The goal is to silence any opposition peat of the multibillion-dollar tobacco company settlement in the 1990s. The to the climate-change industrial comThe way to create a big and obvious difference here is that p l e x . scientific consensus tobacco compaon an issue is to nies sell a product muzzle anyone who that is dangerous dares disagree with to one’s health. the scientific conThe oil and gas (c) 2016, Creators Syndicate sensus. If these companies sell science policemen energy that makes had been around several hundred years all modern industrial life possible. Worse, they want to use the steel- ago, we’d all be forced to believe that heeled boot of government to get en- the earth is flat. ergy companies to stop giving money TO ENFORCE the global warming to free-market institutions that the left THIS IS nothing more than an old- doesn’t agree with. But they are per- consensus, the attorneys general want fashioned, political mob shakedown of a mitted to donate to the Sierra Club, the more than money: They want to figuiberal attorneys general from 17 states have put a big red bulls-eye on the chest of big oil. Their bizarre claim is that, for years, energy companies fraudulently covered up their knowledge that greenhouse gases from fossil fuels cause catastrophic climate change. The most recent chapter of this witch hunt is a remarkable subpoena filed by Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey, which would require Exxon Mobil Corp. to turn over 40 years of internal company documents. It also demands that Exxon Mobil produce all its internal communication with conservative-leaning think tanks.

Stephen

Moore

ECONOMY: July 10, 2016

Is anemic growth the new normal?

merica’s economy has now slouched into the eighth year of a recovery that demonstrates how much we have defined recovery down. The idea that essentially zero interest rates are, after seven and a half years, stimulating the economy “strains credulity,” says James Bullard, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. But last month he and other members of the Federal Reserve Board understandably felt constrained to vote unanimously to continue today’s rates for an economy that created just 38,000 new jobs in May, and grew just 0.8 percent in the first quarter, after just 1.4 percent in the previous quarter. THE GRIM news is not that the economy continues to resist returning to normal. Rather, it is that this “current equilibrium” (Bullard’s phrase) is the new normal. If two percent growth is, as he says, “the most likely scenario” for the foreseeable future, the nation faces a second consecutive lost decade — one without a year of three percent growth. N. Gregory Mankiw, Harvard economist and chairman of George W. Bush’s Council of Economic Advisers, writes in the New York Times that in the last decade the growth rate of real GDP per person averaged 0.44 percent, down from the historical norm of two percent: At two percent, incomes double every 35 years; at 0.44 percent, about every 160 years. With the recovery aging, Larry Summers, former treasury secretary, guesses that “the annual probability of recession is 25 to 30 percent.” When it arrives in a near-zero interest rate environment, the Fed’s monetary policy, normally its countercyclical weapon — it usually reduces rates at least four percentage

points in a recession — will be unable to cushion the shock. Bullard says “labor market data is giving us different” — he means more encouraging — “signals than the GDP data.” But surely the fact that the official unemployment rate is down to 4.7 percent is less important than this: The workforce participation rate has plunged, which has been only partly because of the population aging — baby boomers retiring. If labor participation were as high as when Barack Obama became president, the unemployment rate would be over nine percent.

George

Will

BESIDES, IT is unclear how to distill the significance of traditional data for an untraditional economy. For example, six-year old Uber, with just 6,700 employees (not counting drivers), has a public market valuation ($68 billion) $13.8 billion more than that of Ford Motor Co. (201,000 employees globally). Certainly very low interest rates, by driving liquidity into equities and assets in search of higher yields, are exacerbating the inequality that is disturbing American politics with distributional conflicts. Homeowners, and the 10 percent of Americans who hold 81 percent of the directly and indirectly owned stocks (the stock market is 160 percent higher than its 2009 low), are prospering. Those whose wealth comes from wages — formerly, the Democratic Party’s base — are losing ground. No wonder Hillary Clinton vows to “expand”

Social Security, never mind its rickety financial architecture. The public’s perception, and perhaps the Fed’s conceit, is that the Fed “manages” the economy. “We are,” Bullard says, “our own worst enemy.” By taking credit when things go well, it acquires responsibility in the public’s mind “for everything that happens.” Bullard says “the most disturbing number” about the economy is that for five years productivity has grown only half a percent a year. Still, he is not among those who are in a defensive crouch about immigration: “We have a great thing happening in that a lot of people want to come here and work.” Neither does he subscribe to Robert Gordon’s hypothesis (developed in The Rise and Fall of American Growth) that we must abandon the unrealistic growth expectations we acquired as a result of an exceptional century (1870-1970) of transformative developments (e.g., electrification, the internal combustion engine, urban sanitation) that have no foreseeable analogues. Bullard imagines someone a millennium ago saying: Fire has been harnessed, the wheel and agriculture have been invented — we already have most of the possible growth from new technologies. BESIDES, BULLARD says, it takes a while for technologies to “diffuse through the economy.” And some of the diffusion — in leisure, in richer living experiences (social media; smartphones and their apps) are not captured in GDP statistics. Perhaps that helps to explain why Obama’s job approval has reached 52 percent at a moment when she who seeks to replace him concedes that the economy is so anemic that her husband will be assigned to “revitalize” it.

ratively hang the oil and gas company CEOs in effigy in the public square. New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman hinted that he’d like to see criminal prosecution and jail time for the energy company executives, saying, “Financial damages alone may be insufficient. ... The First Amendment does not give you the right to commit fraud.” The end game here could hardly be more sinister. The attorneys general are following the example set by the Obama administration and the Environmental Protection Agency to bleed and “bankrupt” oil and gas producers in America as they are doing now to the domestic coal industry. All the while, there has been no factual basis for these allegations, just conjecture and speculation. First, there is no evidence that the companies produced global warming research; second, there’s no evidence they covered it up; third, there is no evidence that whatever findings this research (if it happened) confirmed or denied global warming; and fourth, there is no consensus among leading scientists about whether global warming is happening, why it is happening, or what its effect might be (positive or negative) on the planet. Moreover, unlike the tobacco company litigation, where smokers got cancer and heart disease, who is the victim here of the purported fraud by the energy companies? While these attorneys general are using their positions of power to intimidate big oil, Exxon Mobil, Chevron, BP and others have been busy creating millions of energy-related jobs, helping the United States become the largest energy producer in the world, driving down the cost of energy, and adding to U.S. growth. Without the energy companies and the shale oil and gas boom of the last decade, the U.S. would not have escaped the Great Recession of 20082009. But in Washington, no good deed goes unpunished. Now for the ultimate irony of these witch hunts. The oil and gas companies are reducing their greenhouse gas emissions already. Partly because of fracking and the new boom in natural gas, carbon emissions have rapidly declined over the past decade. So where is the fraud? WHAT’S MORE, because natural gas burns clean, and because of its availability, affordability and abundance, it is more and more the fuel that powers the engine that drives our economy. Exxon Mobil and all the other energy producers should be honored and given medals for environmental cleanup, not demonized.

Conservative Chronicle

USPS: July 7, 2016

Neither snow nor rain nor billion-dollar losses

aking a profit by selling goods and services that consumers want to buy at given prices is the first goal of any business. If consumers aren’t interested and the business doesn’t adapt, it will go under. That’s unless you are the U.S. Postal Service. The Postal Service is a major business enterprise operated by the federal government. Thanks to Congress, it has something many business owners would love to have — protection from competition. Its monopoly on access to mailboxes and the delivery of first-class and standard mail means it doesn’t have to worry about someone offering a better service at a lower price. But that’s not all. In a new Cato Institute study, Chris Edwards explains that unlike private businesses, the Postal Service has access to low-rate loans from the Department of the Treasury, effectively pays no income or property taxes, is exempt from local zoning rules and even has the power of eminent domain.

YET THE government still can’t make the postal system work very well. Though it was created to be a self-sustaining entity, since 2007 it has lost more than $50 billion, and the losses will most likely continue unless radical reforms are put in place. These financial problems are mostly the result of a 40 percent decline in mail volume between 2001 and 2015, thanks to the increasing use of email, online bill payment, Facebook and other electronic tools — services that consumers can get free once they have internet access. In 2006, Congress mandated that the Postal Service start making payments to fund the generous retirement health benefits it has promised workers. This was an important reform because the Postal Service has built up an unfunded liability for these benefits of nearly $100 billion. Ideally, postal workers should be paying for these benefits from payroll contributions rather than leaving the liabilities to federal taxpayers down the road. Sadly, Congress is too timid to take on special interests that benefit from the inefficient status quo, such as postal unions, and won’t support serious reforms this year. As Edwards notes, Congress stopped the Postal Service from closing unneeded post offices “even though the bottom 4,500 rural locations average just 4.4 customer visits a day,” and it blocked the consolidations of mail processing centers. Even such a small reform as ending Saturday delivery, which would save an estimated $2 billion a year and is supported by both the Obama administration and the majority of Americans, isn’t going anywhere.

What should be done? Some cenSTILL, MANY people recognize that something must change. A few trist scholars have called for partial years ago, President Barack Obama privatization under which a governcalled for a $30 billion bailout from ment Postal Service would continue the federal government, a five-day de- delivering to all homes but that mail livery schedule and an increase in the collection and transportation and other price of stamps. Unfortunately, that parts of the industry would be opened would be a bad solution from the per- to private competition. But numerous spective of customers and taxpayers. European countries — including BritIt also would perpetuate the blatantly ain, Germany and the Netherlands — unfair competition with companies have fully privatized their systems and opened them to such as FedEx and competition. The UPS. The Postal dominant postal Service doesn’t companies in those pay taxes and recountries continue ceives other ben(c) 2016, Creators Syndicate to deliver to evefits, and it uses ery address. Full earnings from its monopoly letter business to subsidize privatization works. One bad idea that “reform” Postal its package and express services in unfair competition with the private com- Service supporters are pushing is to allow the government service to compete panies.

Veronique

de Rugy

with private firms in other industries, such as banking. That would be hugely unfair to taxpaying private businesses, and do we really believe that such a bureaucratic agency as the U.S. Postal Service could out-compete private businesses in other areas if there were a level playing field? BOTH LIBERAL and conservative economists think that monopolies are bad because they’re inefficient and harmful to consumers. The government enforces antitrust laws to prevent monopolies in other industries. So why does the government itself enforce a giant mail monopoly? It’s time to put an end to this gift to special interests, privatize our postal industry and open it to competition. If the Europeans can do it, then so can we.

LESLIE’S TRIVIA BITS: July 11, 2016

Leslie’s Trivia Bits

lthough we call all Olympic first-place finishers gold medalists, no gold medals were awarded at the first modern Olympic Games in Athens in 1896. Firstplace finishers received a silver medal, an olive branch and a diploma. Second-place finishers received a bronze medal, a laurel branch and a diploma. The first time athletes received gold medals for first place, silver for second and bronze for third was at the 1904 St. Louis games.

THE DESIGN for Norman Bates’s house in Alfred Hitchcock’s Psycho came from a 1925 painting by Edward Hopper called “House By the Railroad.” (The real house that Hopper painted is in Haverstraw, New York.) But that wasn’t the only instance of Hitchcock’s film imitating Hopper’s art. Paintings Hopper made in New York City, such as “Night Windows” and “Room in New York” inspired the look and feel of Hitchcock’s Rear Window. A “kangaroo ticket” refers to a presidential campaign in which the vice presidential nominee has more political clout — or kick — than the presidential nominee. The expression might date to 1844, when James K. Polk was the Democratic presidential nominee and New York senator Silas Wright was selected by the party as his running mate. Critics claimed that pair’s strength would be in its VP nominee — its “hind legs” (so to speak). Wright declined the nomination and Polk won without him. Everybody knows butterscotch, but no one knows where it came from. Origins in Scotland would account for

the “scotch” part of its name, but butterscotch could just as well have come from England. As early as 1854, a candy importer in Chicago was advertising “London Butterscotch” candy “for the cure of coughs.” Then again, the idea of mixing hot butter and sugar, with a dash of lemon juice or vanilla, might have occurred to cooks in other countries even earlier. And aren’t you glad it did?

Leslie

Lake retention time is the average length of time that water, or substances like pollutants, remain in a lake. Some lakes “flush” themselves in a matter of days: precipitation, runoff and groundwater sources bring water in; evaporation and subterranean channels carry it out. Large lakes with minimal drainage have long retention times. For Lake George in New York State retention time is eight to nine years. For Lake Superior, largest of the Great Lakes, it’s more than 170 years. For Lake Tahoe, it’s about 700 years. THE DELAHANTYS were the biggest band of brothers ever to play Major League Baseball. Five of them — Ed, Tom, Joe, Jim and Frank — had big league contracts and a sixth brother, Will, suffered a career-ending injury in the minors. “Big Ed,” the eldest, was the standout. He batted above .400 two times — and .399 once — with a career batting average of .346 over his 16-year

career. Midseason in 1903, at age 35, he mysteriously fell to his death from a bridge spanning Niagara Falls. TRIVIA 1. Which country is the world’s largest producer of olive oil? A) Greece B) Italy C) Spain D) Tunisia 2. In what year did Microsoft released Windows 1.0? A) 1965 B) 1975 C) 1985 D) 1995 3. What’s the name for an infant marsupial, such as a kangaroo? A) Joey B) Kit C) Phoebe D) Pup 4. “I Want Candy” was a U.S. hit in 1982 for which pop group? A) Bow Wow Wow B) Duran Duran C) Talk Talk D) Wet Wet Wet 5. Lake Baikal, the world’s deepest lake, is in what country? A) Canada B) China C) Kenya D) Russia 6. Who was the first Major League Baseball player to have his jersey number (4) retired? A) Luke Appling B) Lou Gehrig C) Mel Ott D) Duke Snider (continued on page 19)

July 20, 2016 FBI RECOMMENDATION: July 8, 2016

Hillary Clinton: Guilty as not charged

t’s no mere academic question: Do prosecuted under the statute in question we believe in the rule of law any- (Title 18, Section 793(f) of U.S. Code) more? Are we a nation of laws or for gross negligence. It would be “unfair,” he says, to make this a case of first of men? The cherished idea of the rule of law impression. So are we to conclude that statutory in our system is about everyone’s being subject to the law in equal measure. The language of Congress has a “sell by” That if no one is proslaw, including criminal law, applies even d a t e ? ecuted under the to our political clear words of a leaders. statute, the meanBoth members ing of those words of the American changes over power couple (c) 2016, Creators Syndicate time? Or does it known as the Clintons have escaped accountability all of change only if the acts of a special public their adult lives, so it comes as no shock official are involved? Ask yourself: Would law enforcethat Hillary Clinton is once again being allowed to skate, even though the head of ment officials conferring about whether the very body tasked with investigating to bring charges against a nonpublic figher — the FBI — has detailed precisely ure or nonpublic official tie themselves in pretzels to avoid bringing criminal how Clinton did in fact break the law. charges? That has not been my experiFBI DIRECTOR James Comey laid ence as an attorney. Should the overriding concern here out, with specificity, how Clinton violated our national security laws, but then be fairness to Clinton or respect for he proceeded to explain that he was nev- our national security secrets? Surely, ertheless declining to refer Clinton for in a matter of such grave magnitude, it would be fair to hold Clinton accountfederal prosecution. Comey acknowledged that the federal able for knowingly commingling private criminal statute in question, by its terms, and public (and classified) emails. Other requires “gross negligence” — and not subparagraphs of this very statute, e.g., specific intent — and that Clinton’s be- Section 793(a), require specific intent havior was “extremely careless.” We can for criminal liability, which means that split hairs all we want, but there is little, Congress had to have deliberately set if any, difference, factually or legally, the standard lower in 793(f) — the secbetween gross negligence and extreme tion that applies to Clinton here. Why carelessness. Comey, despite his refusal would Congress do that? Well, because to equate the two, is essentially saying the stakes are so high in these situations. it’s a moot point because he finds no Our national security is so important that precedent for anyone’s ever having been a person entrusted with secret or classi-

David

Limbaugh

fied information should know, whether she does in fact know, how dangerous it is to engage in the grossly reckless conduct Clinton engaged in. Moreover, having consciously declined to follow the clear language of the statute, Comey also decided that Clinton did not have specific intent, because that standard, in his view, requires that a person knowingly broke the law. When I studied criminal law, specific intent didn’t usually require proof that a person knew her acts violated the law, only that she specifically intended to commit the acts that were unlawful. When a prosecutor brings a criminal case against a defendant, say, for bank robbery, does any reasonable person believe that the prosecutor has the burden of proving the defendant was conversant with the statute forbidding bank robbery? No, he just must prove the person intended to rob the bank — an act forbidden by the law. BUT EVEN IF we accept Comey’s bizarre redefinition of specific intent, is it conceivable that Clinton, with all her vast experience with classified mate-

rial, was unaware that what she was doing was criminally wrong? No, Clinton specifically intended to commingle her emails — personal, private, public, classified — knowing it would put national security at grave risk. In addition, reportedly, Clinton’s lawyers permanently deleted 30,000 emails. Would any reasonable person believe that Clinton was unaware they were going to do this? Would they have had any reason to allegedly obstruct justice in this way if these emails hadn’t been damning for Clinton? Would law enforcement give any other person the benefit of the doubt in this situation? Regardless of what you assume about Comey’s integrity or whether you agree with his decision not to refer any charges for prosecution, how could he possibly say, with a straight face, that no reasonable prosecutor would prosecute on the facts of this case — facts that demonstrate Clinton violated the plain language of the statute? Democrats keep saying Republicans are engaging in a partisan witch hunt — as if Republicans aren’t rightly outraged that Comey virtually admitted Clinton violated the clear language of the statute yet decided not to prosecute. Clinton put our national security at risk. She put us all at risk while entrusted with the high and solemn duty of safeguarding our national security, and she is closer to being rewarded for it than she is to being punished. Is it any wonder that people have wholly given up on the system? Given his record and his reputation for integrity, I will not jump to the conclusion that Comey is intentionally playing politics here, but I do believe it is plausible that he and his team are succumbing to a strong desire not to be accused of partisanship and therefore bent over backward to avoid prosecuting her. Call it the Justice Roberts effect. It is a sad day for the rule of law and for the state of our national security because Comey’s decision takes the teeth out of the law and strongly weakens any deterrent force of the statute. COMEY MAY have succeeded in convincing himself that he is ensuring that Hillary Clinton is not subject to a different standard than the ordinary citizen, but through his explanations alone, he has convinced us of the exact opposite.

July 20, 2016

FBI Director Comey’s Report: A theory

Comey summed up Clinton’s behavior hy did he do it? FBI director James Comey spent 14 min- as “extremely careless.” How is that not utes laying out an unassail- gross negligence? Yet Comey let her off the hook, citable case for prosecuting Hillary Clinton for the mishandling of classified material. ing lack of intent. But negligence doesn’t Then at literally the last minute, he rec- require intent. Compromising national secrets is such a grave offense that it reommended against prosecution. This is baffling. Under the statute quires either intent or negligence. Lack of intent is, therefore, no de(18 U.S.C. section 793(f)), it’s a felony But one can question to mishandle classified information ei- fense. that claim as well. Yes, ther intentionally it is safe to assume or “through gross that there was no manegligence.” The licious intent to evidence, as outinjure the nation. lined by Comey, is (c) 2016, Washington Post Writers Group But Clinton clearly overwhelming. intended to set up an unsecured private CLINTON EITHER sent or received server. She clearly intended to send those 110 emails in 52 chains containing mate- classified emails. She clearly received rial that was classified at the time. Eight warnings from her own department about of these chains contained information the dangers of using a private email acthat was top secret. A few of the classi- count. She meant to do what she did. And she fied emails were so marked, contrary to Clinton’s assertion that there were none. did it. Intentionally. That’s two grounds for prosecution, These were stored on a home server that was even less secure than a normal one requiring no intent whatsoever. Yet Gmail account. Her communications Comey claims that no reasonable proswere quite possibly compromised by ecutor would bring such a case. Nor has hostile powers, thus jeopardizing Ameri- one ever been brought. can national security. NOT SO. Just last year, the Justice “An unclassified system was no place for that conversation,” said Comey of the Department successfully prosecuted naclassified emails. A rather kind euphe- val reservist Bryan Nishimura, who immism, using the passive voice. In plainer, properly downloaded classified material more direct language: It is imprudent, to his personal, unclassified electronic improper and indeed illegal to be con- devices. The government admitted that there ducting such business on an unsecured was no evidence that Nishimura intended private server.

Charles

Krauthammer

to distribute the material to others. Nonetheless, he was sentenced to two years of probation, fined and forever prohibited from seeking a security clearance, which effectively kills any chance of working in national security. SO WHY NOT Hillary Clinton? The usual answer is that the Clintons are treated by a different standard. Only little people pay. They are too well connected, too well protected to be treated like everybody else. Alternatively, the explanation lies with Comey: He gave in to implicit political pressure, the desire to please those in power.

Certainly plausible, but given Comey’s reputation for probity and given that he holds a 10-year appointment, I’d suggest a third line of reasoning. When Chief Justice John Roberts used a tortured, logic-defying argument to uphold Obamacare, he was subjected to similar accusations of bad faith. My view was that, as guardian of the Supreme Court’s public standing, he thought the issue too momentous -- and the implications for the country too large -- to hinge on a decision of the court. Especially after Bush v. Gore, Roberts wanted to keep the court from overturning the political branches on so monumental a piece of social legislation. I would suggest that Comey’s thinking, whether conscious or not, was similar: He did not want the FBI director to end up as the arbiter of the 2016 presidential election. If Clinton were not a presumptive presidential nominee but simply a retired secretary of state, he might well have made a different recommendation. Prosecuting under current circumstances would have upended and redirected an already year-long presidential selection process. In my view, Comey didn’t want to be remembered as the man who irreversibly altered the course of American political history. And with no guarantee that the prosecution would succeed, moreover. Imagine that scenario: You knock out of the race the most likely next president -- and she ultimately gets acquitted! Imagine how Comey goes down in history under those circumstances. I admit I’m giving Comey the benefit of the doubt. But the best way I can reconcile his reputation for integrity with the grating illogic of his Clinton decision is by presuming that he didn’t want to make history. I DON’T endorse his decision. (Nor did I Roberts’.) But I think I understand it. July 8, 2016

This Week’s Conservative Focus

FBI Recommendation

Comey’s report on the emails reveals gross negligence FBI Director James B. Comey used the softest word in the dictionary to criticize Hillary Clinton for sending classified information through her unsecured home computer system. Comey’s report to the Justice Department said the FBI uncovered repeated cases where, as secretary of state, Clinton sent messages on her email system in reckless disregard for the “top-secret,” “very sensitive” and “highly classified” information that could have, and may have, fully exposed America’s highest national security secrets to our enemies. SO HOW DID Comey describe Clinton’s irresponsible, grossly negligent and, some might say, criminal behavior? Well, he said, as the guardian of our nation’s most sensitive secrets, she was “careless,” even “extremely careless” in her mishandling of classified material. Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary defines “careless” as “free from care,” “untroubled,” “indifferent” and, brace yourself, “unconcerned,” and maybe even a bit “negligent.” Surely, Comey could have used a far more accurate, and legally applicable,

“There is evidence to support a conterm to describe Clinton’s misdeeds. He certainly understands the laws that clusion that any reasonable person in would apply to Clinton’s actions. And he Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the flatly says so in his FBI report that dug position of those government employees into whether “there is evidence classi- with whom she was corresponding about fied information was improperly stored these matters, should have known that an or transmitted on (her) personal system, unclassified system was no place for that sation,” Comey said. in violation of a federal statute making conver“In addition to this it a felony to mishighly sensitive inhandle classified formation, we also information either found information intentionally or in that was properly a grossly negligent (c) 2016, United Media Services classified as Secret way.” Clearly, the woman who aspires to by the U.S. Intelligence community at the highest office in the land, who would the time it was discussed on email ...” he have knowledge of and daily access to added. our government’s most critical national NONE OF these top-secret emails security secrets, sent and received such information on her own private email “should have been on any kind of unclassified system,” like the one installed system. “For example,” Comey said in his rein Clinton’s home. Such indiscriminate port, “seven email chains concern matters handling of material “is especially conthat were classified at the Top Secret/Spe- cerning because all of these emails were cial Access Program level when they were housed on unclassified personal servers sent and received. These chains involved not even supported by full-time security Secretary Clinton both sending emails staff, like those found” at departments about those matters and receiving emails and agencies throughout the government, Comey said. from others about the same matters.”

Donald

Lambro

Free pass for Hillary — again FBI Director James Comey has given Hillary Clinton something better than a get out of jail free card. He’s protected her from indictment by recommending to the Department of Justice that she not be prosecuted for her and her staff’s “extremely careless” handling of emails on private servers that included documents classified as “top secret,” “secret” and “confidential.” Once again the Clintons have escaped the long arm of the law, which in their case is much shorter than the arm extended to other government officials who have been caught committing far fewer infractions. IN HIS statement, Comey went through a list of points about Clinton’s several private servers and the erasures of emails. He didn’t touch on the recent revelation that she burned her daily schedules while secretary of state. But then in a whiplash moment after making what sounded like a good case for her guilt, Comey said the FBI would not be recommending to the attorney general that she be prosecuted. Comey’s use of the term “extremely careless” is significant. Had he said “gross negligence” it would have been grounds for an indictment. Here’s how federal law 18 U.S.C 793 reads: “Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of

any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer — Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.”

Cal

THIS WOULD seem to describe what Clinton and her staff did with her emails, but characterizing their actions as “extremely careless” rather than grossly negligent reminds one of Bill Clinton’s remark: “It depends upon what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.” Comey also said while there was no “direct evidence” that “hostile actors” in-

vaded her personal email domain, “given the nature of the system and of the actors potentially involved,” the bureau concluded hackers likely did gain access to the private email accounts of people with whom Clinton was in regular contact. While Comey has let Hillary off the hook, his decision cannot wash her clean of the indelible impression among a majority of voters that she is untrustworthy. Donald Trump has an open invitation to continue battering Hillary as dishonest, incompetent and careless, even grossly negligent. People with long memories will recall Hillary Clinton’s stint on the House Judiciary Committee during its investigation of Richard Nixon in the Watergate affair. Nixon would later say, “I’m not a crook.” Now, based on the FBI’s decision, Hillary can say the same, and perhaps she will enjoy the same level of credibility with voters that Nixon had. ONE ISSUE on which Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders are in agreement — and Trump tweeted this in his initial reaction to Comey’s statement. The voters believe the system IS rigged. Comey’s decision not to recommend to the Justice Department that Hillary be indicted gives more credence to that belief. July 7, 2016

Nor was Comey buying Clinton’s repeated excuses that the information she openly discussed in her emails was not marked as “classified.” Even “if information is not marked ‘classified’ in an email, participants who know or should know that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it,” he said. Of the 30,000 emails that Clinton returned to the State Department, 110 were “determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received.” Eight contained “Top Secret” information at the time they were sent, 36 contained “Secret” information and eight contained “Confidential” information. About 2,000 additional emails were “up-classified” to “Confidential.” Among several thousand other emails that were deleted, a few were recovered and were found to be classified, secret or confidential. There were other damaging consequences from Clinton’s incredibly stupid actions that have drawn little news media coverage. Clinton “also used her personal email extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related emails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries,” Comey said. He added, ominously, that “it is possible hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal email account,” and thus obtained the top-secret, confidential, highly sensitive information she transmitted during the four years she ran the State Department. Comey says there were thousands of other emails the FBI was unable to read because Clinton deemed them to be “personal” and destroyed them. In an unusual departure at the end of the FBI’s months-long investigation, Comey took it upon himself to tell his boss, Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch, that there were no grounds on which to prosecute Clinton for her many transgressions. “(We) did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information ...” he concluded. But to a large degree, Comey’s detailed report convicts Clinton on a number of counts that are going to hound her from now until Election Day. SHE RISKED exposing top-secret information and other classified foreign policy details to our foreign enemies. She lied repeatedly to the American people about the nature of her emails and sought to cover up the damaging information they contained. “I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email,” she said throughout 2015 and this year, too. The electorate will render its political verdict on Nov. 8. July 7, 2016

Conservative Chronicle

MEDIA BIAS: July 13, 2016

Absolving Black Lives Matter in Dallas

hen white racist Dylann Black Lives Matter agitators. “I hope Roof allegedly shot and police officers around the nation see killed nine people in a black how rapidly and completely the peochurch in Charleston, South Carolina, it ple of Dallas — including those in the was very easy for President Obama and Black Lives Matter movement — have his media enablers to paint with a broad rallied around their city’s bereaved Pobrush and blame the wider political cul- lice Department. ... Such tragedy is beture. Bill Maher even blamed Fox News yond color.” Likewise, the New York and the Daily Caller and the Drudge ReTimes editorial port. board pretended But when black that Johnson’s racist Micah Johnmotive in Dallas son gunned down was an unsolvable five cops and (c) 2016, Creators Syndicate puzzle: “In the afwounded seven termath, possible others in Dallas, suddenly the motivation was compli- motives will be ticked off for the killer cated, and it couldn’t be blamed on a and any accomplices. But the police and protesters alike could only won“climate” of hostile rhetoric. der what might truly account for such a virulent supporters in the media responDALLAS POLICE Chief David level of atrocity.” But after the Tucson shooting in sible for the gale of anger that has proBrown reported, “The suspect said he was upset at white people. The suspect 2011, when madman Jared Loughner duced the vast majority of these threats, stated he wanted to kill white people, killed six and wounded Rep. Gabrielle setting the nation on edge. Many on especially white officers.” His Face- Giffords, the same editorialists wrote it the right have exploited the arguments book page had “likes” for Black Lives would be “facile” to blame the tea party of division, reaping political power by Matter and the New Black Panther Par- or the GOP, but “it is legitimate to hold demonizing immigrants, or welfare reRepublicans and particularly their most cipients, or bureaucrats.” ty. But in a news conference on Saturday in Warsaw, President Obama igOBAMA PRESIDENCY: July 13, 2016 nored that, claiming it was “very hard to untangle the motives of the shooter.” It couldn’t be blamed on the rhetoric of, for example, Black Lives Matter protesters, who chanted, “Pigs in a blanket. Fry ‘em like bacon.” hen it comes to the link- police racist radicals attacked officers in But the media gushed over the age between violence and Minn., Tenn., Mo., Ga. and Texas again speech Obama gave in the wake of the rhetoric, I abide by a fairly — and Obama suddenly got amnesia. Charleston shooting, as the president simple rule: If you’re not advocating Now, it turned out, rhetoric had nothhammered home a denunciation of rac- violence, you’re not responsible for ing to do with their actions. In fact, said ism. “The fact that this took place in violence. That doesn’t mean your rheto- Obama, he had no idea why Johnson — a black church obviously also raises ric is decent or appropriate; it may be who explicitly said he wanted to murder questions about a dark part of our his- vile, awful and factually incorrect. But white cops — would do such a thing. “I tory. This is not the first time that black it isn’t the cause for violence. think it’s very hard to untangle the mochurches have been attacked, and we President Barack Obama also abides tives of this shooter,” Obama said while know the hatred across races and faiths by a simple rule when it comes to link- in Poland. “What triggers that, what pose a particular threat to our democ- ing violence and rhetoric: If he doesn’t feeds it, what sets it off — I’ll leave that racy and our ideals.” like the rhetoric, it’s responsible for vio- to psychologists and people who study Nobody expects Obama to stand lence. And if there’s violence associated these kinds of incidents.” He anywhere and say anything like that with rhetoric he likes, then the violence about Black Lives Matter or the New must have been caused by something Black Panthers. Shouldn’t that alone be else. a news story? It won’t be, because the same double THIS SHINING double standard (c) 2016, Creators Syndicate standard occurs in the media. MSNBC was on full display this week after an analyst and Washington Post columnist anti-white racist black man shot 12 poEugene Robinson announced after the lice officers in Dallas just hours after did blame one element for the attack, shooting in Charleston, “There’s more Obama appeared on national televi- however: lack of gun control. “If you than a whiff of white supremacy in the sion explaining that alleged instances care about the safety of our police ofair. It’s still a stench. It’s fainter than of police brutality and racism were “not ficers,” he lied, “you can’t set aside the it used to be, but it’s there. And some- isolated incidents” but rather “symp- gun issue and pretend that that’s irrelhow he breathed it in.” Chris Matthews tomatic of a broader set of racial dis- evant.” agreed: “I do think you’ve got some- parities that exist in our criminal justice thing there with the atmospherics. And system.” Obama was happy to label the ODD HOW this works. When a it’s not all one person acting alone, it’s shootings of Alton Sterling in Louisi- white racist shoots up a black church always about something that gives mor- ana and Philando Castile in Minnesota, in Charleston, South Carolina, Obama al license to certain kind of behavior.” without evidence, as part of a broader targets America’s legacy of racism, and racist trend in law enforcement across the entire media call for a national fight BUT AFTER Dallas, Robinson the country. against Confederate flags; when a nut wrote a column that completely avoidThen Micah Xavier Johnson opened tries to shoot up a Planned Parenthood ed Johnson’s motives and absolved the fire on white police officers — and anti- building in Colorado, the left emerges to

Brent

Bozell

CONSERVATIVES start by blaming murder on the actual murderer, not a “climate.” And yet liberals only blame a “climate of hatred” when they can smear it on conservatives. The left’s hatred is perennially dismissed as a cause, and not recognized as a blight on our discourse.

Leftist rhetoric is always innocent

Ben

Shapiro

claim that the pro-life movement bears culpability. But when an Orlando jihadi shoots up a gay nightclub, Obama and company declare the motives totally mysterious and then impugn Christian social conservatives and the National Rifle Association. Here’s the truth: Obama’s rhetoric isn’t responsible for murder, but it’s certainly responsible for death. That’s because Obama’s racist rhetoric has led to the greatest rise in racial polarization since the 1970s. In 2010, just 13 percent of Americans worried about race relations, whereas in April 2016, 35 percent of Americans did. That racial polarization has, in turn, led to distrust of police officers, many of whom respond by pulling out of the communities that need their help most. Crime rates go up, including murder rates. Ironically, Obama’s supposed rage at white officers killing blacks leads to more blacks killing blacks in cities no longer policed by whites. BUT THERE’S good news: Obama can always blame everyone else. When you’re held responsible for your feelings rather than your actions, it’s always simple to direct attention toward the evil conservatives who insist that all lives matter rather than care enough about black lives to save them by endorsing the police who work to protect black men and women every day.

July 20, 2016 DEAR MARK: July 8, 2016

Ouch, Hillary is careless and unsophisticated Dear Mark: Based on the 15 minute speech by James Comey, Director of the FBI, the security clearance previously granted to Hillary Rodham Clinton must be removed. Access to the Nation’s most guarded secrets must be maintained and she has proven that she is no longer worthy of that trust! — Ted in Abilene Dear Ted: I’m sorry but when was Hillary ever worthy of that trust? With that being said, you’re not alone as House Speaker Paul Ryan wrote to James Clapper, Director of National Intelligence, to revoke Mrs. Bill Clinton’s security clearance. A group of GOP senators also wrote Secretary of State John Kerry demanding the same action but to also include several of Clinton’s close advisors including the infamous Huma Abedin. Sadly with the present state of cronyism and corruption in the Obama administration, I’m not holding my breath that Hillary’s security clearance will be pulled as a result of the investigation. Like millions of Americans I am disgusted that Director Comey didn’t believe Hillary’s actions were worthy of charges because the FBI’s investigation did not reveal any sort of “intent” on Hillary’s part to play fast and loose with top secret information. Director Comey laid out exactly how Hillary violated each security statute and law and then for some mysterious reason punted at the last minute because of a nonexistent rule. There are numerous instances where a person did not “intend” to commit a crime but laws were broken and penalties were applied nonetheless. The drunk

driver didn’t intend to kill somebody when they left the nightclub. The teenager didn’t “intend” to cause a house fire when he played with fireworks. The homeowner didn’t “intend” for the child to be accidently shot when a loaded gun was found in the nightstand.Citizens didn’t “intend” to cheat the IRS when mistakes were made on tax returns. Once again, I’m no legal scholar but in using the FBI’s own findings it looks to me like Mrs. Bill Clinton’s

Mark

“intentions” were pretty obvious. Hillary intended to set up multiple private servers. She intended to destroy emails. She intended to lie to the American people for the past 16 months about her story. She has intentionally avoided press conferences for the past seven months. Too bad for Bill though because he could have used the newly invented “intent” clause to squirm out of the Monica Lewinsky scandal by saying he didn’t “intend” to have sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky when he walked into the Oval office that morning. Oh who I am I kidding — of course those were his intentions. DEAR MARK: I’m so angry because it looks like Hillary is going to escape another scandal scot-free. After what FBI Directory James Comey lined out concerning all of the laws and State Department rules Hillary violated ,she’s going to waltz back into the White

House. Please tell me there’s a silver lining. — Waltzing Matilda Dear Waltzing: You’ve answered your own question. Democrats won’t be able to have it both ways. How can they praise James Comey for having the so called nonpartisan wisdom to not indict Mrs. Bill Clinton and then turn around and decry his overall findings in the case? The silver lining is that Director Comey succinctly and irrefutably laid out how Hillary directly lied to the American people on numerous occasions concerning her use and destruction of emails from her own personal server. She will not be able to run from the tidal wave of super PAC ads between now and November featuring her actual statements contrasted with the FBI Director’s statements. Another silver lining is that Hillary is throwing lamps at Bill while fuming on the inside because of the public reason she has to give for eluding indictment. As a result of the FBI’s conclusions, Hillary has to sit silently and let voters think she was extremely careless, reckless, and unsophisticated with top secret information while Secretary of State. The FBI’s conclusions concerning Hillary’s lies are so damning that her people can’t even afford for Hillary to hold a press conference. Remember the saying “better to be quiet and let people think you’re a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt?” If you’re the smartest woman on Earth that must really hurt. Pass the silver polish.

E-mail your questions to marklevy92@ aol.com. Follow Mark on Twitter @MarkPLevy

CONTACT INFORMATION Individual Contact Information Greenberg - pgreenberg@arkansasonline.com Krauthammer - letters@charleskrauthammer.com Levy - marklevy92@aol.com Lowry - comments.lowry@nationalreview.com Malkin - malkinblog@gmail.com Massie - mychalmassie@gmail.com Napolitano - freedomwatch@foxbusiness.com Saunders - dsaunders@sfchronicle.com Schlafly - phyllis@eagleforum.org Thomas - tmseditors@tribune.com Will - georgewill@washpost.com Contact through Creators Syndicate Michael Barone, Austin Bay, Brent Bozell, Pat Buchanan, Mona Charen, Linda Chavez, Jackie Gingrich Cushman, Larry Elder, Leslie Elman, Erick Erickson, Joseph Farah, David Harsanyi, Laura Hollis, Terry Jeffrey, Larry Kudlow, David Limbaugh, Dick Morris, William Murchison, Dennis Prager, Ben Shapiro, Thomas Sowell, Matt Towery

Contact - info@creators.com Contact through Universal Press Ann Coulter or Donald Lambro Contact by mail : c/o Universal Press Syndicate 1130 Walnut Street Kansas City, MO 64106

Answers from page 14

TRIVIA ANSWERS T rivia B I T S

ANSWERS 1) Spain is the world’s largest producer of olive oil. 2) Microsoft Windows 1.0 was released in 1985. 3) Infant marsupials are known as joeys. 4) Bow Wow Wow hit the U.S. charts with “I Want Candy” in 1982. 5) Lake Baikal, the world’s deepest lake, is in Russia. 6) Lou Gehrig’s No. 4 was retired by the New York Yankees in 1939.

Need to make a correction on your mailing label? Contact us at 800-888-3039 or conserve@iowaconnect.com

Conservative Chronicle

OBAMA PRESIDENCY: July 11, 2016

President Obama’s police distortions President Barack Obama is a lawyer, take a few instances of police-involved shootings and dramatize and obsess not a statistician, and it shows. After the controversial officer-in- over them to create a sense that cops volved shootings in Baton Rouge, Loui- are itching to shoot black people. Some siana, and Falcon Heights, Minnesota, of these cases involve genuine crimes Obama unloosed a series of statistics in by the police; others harrowingly misjudgments; and still his remarks in Warsaw, Poland, to show t a k e n others completely “racial disparijustifiable acts that ties that exist in are lied about by our criminal jusBlack Lives Mattice system” — in ters, most notably other words, racial (c) 2016, King Features Syndicate the shooting of bias by police, Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri. prosecutors and judges. If President Obama really wanted Obama related numbers about disparate rates of police shootings, arrests to try to cool passions on this issue, he and searches, among other things, with- would go even further in saying comout mentioning the single most impor- mon-sensical things unwelcome to an tant factor to put such figures in context, inflamed Left. which is that blacks commit criminal ofHE MIGHT routinely mention that fenses at higher rates than whites. the best way to try to avoid a police NO ONE LIKES to point this out, confrontation that might go tragically and so it usually is left out of our per- wrong is to comply with police orders petual “national conversations” about and pursue a complaint or lawsuit latrace, even though it is highly relevant er, outside the heat of the moment. He information. It opens up whoever says it might note that just because an incident to charges of racism, or at least callous- looks bad on an initial video, it doesn’t ness in the aftermath of questionable mean the police did anything wrong, police shootings. If anyone should be free to speak 2016 ELECTION: July 7, 2016 the truth, though, it should be President Obama, who imagines himself a coolly analytical figure on a historic mission to bind the nation’s racial wounds. Instead, he routinely gives a fundamentally disny student of the American torted picture of the American criminal Revolution and the critical justice system — and police shootings period that followed it will — by eliding truths apparently too unrecognize the name Montesquieu, and comfortable for him to say and his supthe role he played in shaping our Conporters to hear. stitution. “African-Americans,” Obama said He was cited early and often by the in Warsaw, “are arrested at twice the Founders, as well he should have been. rate of whites.” But African-Americans commit about 24 percent of violent Especially for his warning that no one crimes, even though they are 13 percent branch of government — executive, of the population. Of course they are legislative or judicial — should be able going to be arrested at disproportionate to concentrate all power in its hands. rates. About half of murderers are black, Instead he proposed a system of checks and over 40 percent of killings of police and balances in which each branch would be separate, yet all would have to officers are committed by blacks. This doesn’t mean that there aren’t cooperate to get anything done. bad cops or that there isn’t bias in poMONTESQUIEU’S WAS a revolulicing, but the picture painted by Black Lives Matter of pervasive police preda- tionary idea at the time, for it eliminated tion, and an open season on blacks, is a France’s old Estates General that had long dominated that country’s politics: politicized lie. A new study published by the Na- monarchy, nobility and clergy. They tional Bureau of Economic Research would all have to go, along with any found racial disparities in lower-level other remains of medieval rule. Montesquieu’s magisterial works inuse of police force — e.g., police placing hands on civilians or pushing them clude a short but comprehensive study into walls. But it concluded that “on the of the decline and fall of Rome’s repubmost extreme use of force — officer- lic. It, too, is full of still useful insights. involved shootings — we are unable to Like this one: “At the birth of societies, detect any racial differences in either the leaders of republics create the instithe raw data or accounting for controls.” tutions; thereafter it is the institutions How is that possible, given the out- that form the leaders of republics.” But in this Age of Trump, one instisize role of allegedly racist police shootings in our politics? It just might be tution — the now less than Grand Old that Black Lives Matter and the media Party — has imploded. The contrast

Rich

Lowry

and no one should assume as much. He might gently remind Black Lives Matter that its initial understanding of what happened in Ferguson was entirely erroneous and that the case should remain a cautionary tale about drawing large conclusions on the basis of fragmentary (or dishonest) evidence.

HE COULD do all of this and still speak to his belief, and that of so many other blacks, that they have been targeted and treated unfairly by police. That he won’t is an indictment of his political courage and intellectual honesty on an issue where he should be uniquely suited to lead.

Montesquieu saw it coming

Montesquieu drew between Cicero and Cato is still relevant: “Cicero always thought of himself first. Cato always forgot about himself. The latter wanted to save the republic for its own sake, the former to boast of it.” Sound familiar? Which of Donald Trump’s rivals want to beat him in order to advance their own careers, and which to save their party? Note which ones are striking out on their own and which are sticking with the Republican Party — and the whole two-party system come hell or Hillary Clinton.

Paul

IT IS THE Democratic Party these days that is the traditional, well-organized one, complete with a loyal opposition headed by Bernie Sanders — independent, socialist and Democrat by turns. But always a general disturber of the peace. Every party needs one Bernie Sanders, if only one. It is all so traditional. And stable. What a turnaround from the old days when Will Rogers could boast: “I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat.” Now it is the Democratic nominee-presumptive who

presides over the well-organized party. Hillary Clinton could be the traditional political boss at the head of a wellgreased machine. She could be today’s Boss Crump or Mayor Daley the First. There’s just this one not-so-small problem with HRC: From the beginning till now in her ever-rising political trajectory, she’s been a wheeler-dealer with no discernible set of moral values. She used to have somebody else fix her commodity trades. Now she and her daughter, Chelsea, have assumed a leading role in Clinton Inc., that complex network of foundations whose tentacles extend around the world. Now we learn she will not be indicted because of her secret emails. That’s typical of an era when political clout counts more than the mere rule of law. So Hillary Clinton beat this rap, too. But that scarcely makes her an ideal leader for a republic that ought to be based on virtue instead of self-interest. IT WAS Montesquieu who warned us that “more states have perished by the violation of their moral customs than by the violation of their laws.” Speculation about whether Hillary Clinton’s dubious emails violated the law will doubtless continue, but what will matter more to this republic is a higher law: the one that sets moral virtue as the goal of a republic.

July 20, 2016 2016 ELECTION: July 8, 2016

Hillary Clinton’s non-indictment may not help her

nindicted co-conspirator: Technically, the term, made familiar in the Watergate scandals, does not apply to Hillary Clinton, since no one has been or apparently will be indicted in the emails case. But if you read the bulk of FBI Director James Comey’s statement, it’s plain that Hillary Clinton and her top aides conspired to do things that violated the law. And yet Comey made it clear she would not be indicted.

COMEY SAID that “no reasonable prosecutor” would indict her, even though the facts he set out show that she violated section 793(f) of the criminal code. That section does not require criminal intent but imposes liability in cases of “gross negligence.” It’s hard to

distinguish that from Comey’s descrip- decision of prosecutors. Actually, Comtion of the conduct of Clinton and her ey is an investigator, not a prosecutor, but in the circumstances he was forced aides as “extremely careless.” Can Comey’s decision be justified? to function like one. He would decide Well, consider the position he was in. whether the presumptive Democratic On June 30 it was revealed that Bill presidential nominee would be prosClinton had met with Attorney General ecuted. H e probably felt the Loretta Lynch two days earlier on her ofsame way about this ficial plane on the as I imagine a lotarmac of Phoecal state or federal nix’s Sky Harbor judge feels when Airport. She says he is called on to they talked about (c) 2016, Creators Syndicate decide a credengrandchildren and golf. But the obvious message was: If tials challenge at a Republican or Demyou don’t indict her, you can keep your ocratic national convention. Such cases are always thrown out of court. job in the Clinton administration. After the meeting was made public, JUDGES DON’T say so, but I’m Lynch said, sort of, that she would not rule on the case but would accept the sure they’re thinking something like

Michael

Barone

RULE OF LAW: July 7, 2016

The Department of Political Justice

s it worth impairing the reputation of the FBI and the Department of Justice to save Hillary Clinton from a deserved criminal prosecution by playing word games? What has become of the rule of law — no one is beneath its protections or above its requirements — when the American public can witness a game of political musical chairs orchestrated by Bill Clinton at an airport in a bizarre ruse to remove the criminal investigation of his wife from those legally responsible for making decisions about it? How hairsplitting can the FBI be in acknowledging “extreme recklessness” while denying “gross negligence” about the same events, at the same time, and in the same respect?

THESE ARE questions that now beg for answers in light of what can only be the politically motivated FBI report delivered earlier this week on the likely criminal behavior of Hillary Clinton. The espionage statute that criminalizes the knowing or grossly negligent failure to keep state secrets in a secure venue is the rare federal statute that can be violated and upon which a conviction may be based without the need of the government to prove intent. Thus, in the past two years, the DOJ has prosecuted a young sailor for sending a single selfie to his girlfriend that inadvertently showed a submarine sonar screen in its background. It also prosecuted a Marine lieutenant who sent his military superiors a single email about the presence of al Qaeda operatives dressed as local police in a U.S. encampment in Afghanistan — but who inadvertently used his Gmail account rather than his secure government account.

And it famously prosecuted Gen. David Petraeus for sharing paper copies of his daily calendar in his guarded home with a military colleague also in the home — someone who had a secret security clearance herself — because the calendar inadvertently included secret matters in the pages underneath the calendar.

Andrew

Yet earlier this week, FBI Director James Comey — knowing that his bosses in the DOJ would accept his legal conclusions about Clinton’s failure to keep state secrets secure, because they had removed themselves from independently judging the FBI’s work — told the public that whereas the inadvertence of the above defendants was sufficient to justify their prosecutions, somehow Clinton’s repeated extreme recklessness was not. IT IS OBVIOUS that a different standard is being applied to Clinton than was applied to Petraeus and the others. It is also now painfully obvious that the game of musical chairs we all witnessed last week when Bill Clinton entered the private jet of Comey’s boss — Attorney General Loretta Lynch — unannounced and spent 30 private minutes there with her at a time when both he and his wife were targets of FBI criminal probes was a trick to compromise Lynch and remove her and her aides from the DOJ chain of command regarding the decision as to whether to present evidence

of crimes against either of the Clintons to a federal grand jury. Why do we stand for this? The criminal case against Mrs. Clinton would have been overwhelming. The FBI acknowledged that she sent or received more than 100 emails that contained state secrets via one of her four home servers. None of those servers was secure. Each secret email was secret when received, was secret when sent and is secret today. All were removed from their secure venues by Clinton, who knew what she was doing, instructed subordinates to white out “secret” markings, burned her own calendars, destroyed thousands of her emails and refuses to this day to recognize that she had a duty to preserve such secrets as satellite images of North Korean nuclear facilities, locations of drone strikes in Pakistan and names of American intelligence agents operating in the Middle East under cover. Why do we stand for this? Comey has argued that somehow there is such a legal chasm between extreme recklessness and gross negligence that the feds cannot bridge it. That is not an argument for him to make. That is for a jury to decide after a judge instructs the jury about what Comey fails to understand: There is not a dime’s worth of difference between these two standards. Extreme recklessness is gross negligence. UNLESS, OF COURSE, one is willing to pervert the rule of law yet again to insulate a Clinton yet again from the law enforcement machinery that everyone else who fails to secure state secrets should expect. Why do we stand for this?

this: Who am I, a local judge, to decide who should be the nominee of a major party for president of the United States? I wasn’t appointed or elected to make that kind of decision. Leave it to the delegates and the voters. It would be surprising if Comey, with his sterling reputation and knowing the likely political ramifications, didn’t feel the same way. A Clinton indictment would probably mean she would be shoved aside by the Democratic Party, in favor of the obvious substitute candidate, Joe Biden. You can argue that this would have been better for the Democrats in November. Before he announced his non-candidacy last October, Biden was running stronger than Clinton in presidential pairings. He has plenty of White House experience. He is, to put it mildly, more likeable than she is. So far as anyone knows, he doesn’t use a personal email server for government communications. But getting Clinton delegates to vote for Biden might have been a messy process. Bernie Sanders supporters would surely have argued that their man, having finished a pretty strong second in votes and delegates, should get the nomination. The ruckus might cost the democratic ticket votes in November. But so might many passages in Comey’s statement, if they are hammered home by Republicans. He showed how she lied again and again and again about her email system. He showed that she violated the letter of the law. Her fans are treating her non-indictment as a triumph, another attempt by hateful Republicans to tarnish the wondrous Clintons foiled. Nothing to see here; time to move on. Maybe not. Clinton’s dishonesty may already be priced in by the electorate, with 60 percent or more of voters considering her dishonest and untrustworthy. And there are many voters who believe she’s better on the issues and/or that Donald Trump is dangerously unreliable who are willing to overlook her dishonesty. But it’s also possible the minuet we’ve witnessed, from the tete-a-tete on the tarmac to the particulars of the Comey non-indictment, will sap the morale of many Democratically inclined voters. Majorities have negative feelings about both presumptive nominees, and current polling shows 15 percent not voting for either in two-way pairings — significantly above the nine percent figure at this point in the 2012 race — and 22 percent supporting neither if Libertarian Gary Johnson and Green Jill Stein are presented as alternatives. DEMOCRATIC TURNOUT has been declining during the Obama years, and Clinton’s non-indictment isn’t likely to boost it back up.

Conservative Chronicle

RACE: July 11, 2016

Why do white cultural-Marxists hate whites?

hite people, and white children specifically, have no reason to be ashamed or to permit themselves to be castigated because they are not a crayon in a box, i.e., a color. Americans I have known since my earliest remembrances have gotten up and gone to work each day; they’ve raised their children and enjoyed their grandchildren. They have suffered tragedy, loss of employment, loss of savings, loss of children, and debilitating health concerns. But I’ve never witnessed the lack of melanin in one’s skin prevent the realities of life, nor the results of bad decisions, from adversely affecting them. BUT THAT is what those who subscribe to cultural-Marxism are inculcating into black and Hispanic children; and they are doing it to the detriment of said children. It wasn’t enough that a near bankrupt (financially and morally) New York opened a school exclusively for homosexual students. New York has now opened an elite Manhattan school named “Bank Street School for Children.” The express purpose of the school is to brainwash white children K through 8 “that they’re born racist and should feel guilty benefiting from ‘white privilege,’ while heaping praise and cupcakes on their black peers.” (See: Elite K-8 School Teaches White Students They’re Born Racist; Paul Sperry; New York Post; 7/1/2016) In reality the black and Hispanic children are not their peers. They are being infused with bigotry, animus, and acrimony that has since the so-called end of the civil rights struggle, transmogrified into a variant form reverse racism. The school has 430 students segregated into two groups; an “Advocacy Group” which is comprised of white students and an “Affinity Group” comprised of blacks, etc. The chief goal of the white student group is to: “Raise awareness of the prevalence of white privilege” and “change notions of colorblindness.” The chief goal for the black and Hispanic group is to have them: “Voice their feelings” and “feel embraced.” It is beyond comprehension that even the most rabid race monger would so despise modernity and social cohesiveness that they would go to such extreme measures to insure hatred, acrimony, selfloathing, and victimization. White students are segregated in separate classrooms and subjected to an exhaustive curriculum of guilt-ridden inculcation pursuant to a stated goal of: “Understanding and owning [their] European ancestry and the tie to privilege.” These are innocent children, who are being placed in an emotionally abusive and emotionally debilitating environment, where white students are treated like hunted animals and blacks are en-

couraged to example and embody god- antipathy and distrust of whites, which leads to socially maladjusted adults. less antipathy. Black and Hispanic children should This is not teaching — it is nothing short of what Hitler ordered taught in be taught about hard work, two parschools, so as to be sure Jews were de- ent homes, and homes where the fagoes to work each day and spised and viewed as inferior for the ther at night. They need singular purpose of reducing them to returns to be taught that inobjects of no valvolvement in drugs, ue, worthy only guns, prostitution, of brutality and and baby-making death. should not be This school (c) 2016, Mychal Massie viewed as a life serves no worthwhile purpose other than to act as a pursuit. White children must be taught breeding pond for future generations to embrace the hatred the late Daniel that they have nothing of which to be Patrick Moynihan so expertly set forth ashamed. The nation’s Founding Fain his proposed policy of “Benign Ne- thers came here to avoid the tyranny and religious persecution of the English glect” in 1969. Throne are to be applauded for not only BLACK CHILDREN do not need a exampling an inclusive way of life, but taxpayer funded school to teach them to they placed same into action, many hate. They are enveloped in a cocoon of times at great personal risk. The school of segregation is barbaracial animus from birth to death. Black children are fed a steady diet of racial rism and social regression that in many

Mychal

Massie

ways is more extreme than Jim Crow. It is certainly more insidious. We cannot permit our children to be segregated by skin color and behaviorally engineered to foster hate and embrace guilt. The question that begs answering is why would so-called “educators” be so fixated upon creating and attempting to sustain a zeitgeist of hatred, guilt, and mistrust? We must ask who benefits from such an Erebusic evil? If this is allowed to be successful, what will America be like socially a generation from now? Pursuant to that question, we must ask what is the end game goal for those committed to socially engineering our children to have godless contempt for self and their fellow mankind? PARENTS SHOULD be removing their children from that school and raising objections to a controlled setting that exists to reintroduce a perverse form of Jim Crowism.

RACE: July 12, 2016

The race narrative: The worst lie

n just the last few days, two African-American men were shot and killed by non-African-American police officers in Minnesota and Louisiana and five non-African-American police officers were shot and killed in Dallas by an African-American man who declared he “wanted to kill white people, especially white officers.” The gap in our racially divided country has never been wider. Immediately, familiar narratives came into play. The narrative for some African-Americans appears to reinforce the belief that racism and discrimination are responsible for whatever difficulties they face. For some whites recent events seem to reinforce the narrative, seen on local news, that African-Americans are violent criminals, welfare cheats or liberal politicians out for themselves instead of others. DON’T WE already have enough to fear from Islamic terrorists? Must we also fear racial conflict, stoked by groups like “Black Lives Matter?” Are we reverting to the ‘60s when police officers were often seen as the enemy? Will some again refer to police officers as “pigs,” fuzz,” “The Man?” Will they have targets on their backs? Attorney General Loretta Lynch touched on part of the problem in her remarks about the Dallas ambush. She said we must “turn toward each other, not against another.” We don’t really know each other. Labels and images have replaced human contact. Social media tends to make the

Later, when I began playing basketball, I met, traveled, showered and ate with African-American teammates. Sport is a great equalizer. It was said that the late congressman and football player Jack Kemp showered with more AfricanAmericans than attend Republican political conventions. He showed up in poor neighborhoods and spoke up for the poor to the embarrassment of many white Republicans. He called himself a “bleeding heart conservative.” Kemp inspired others. Isn’t inspiration, not accusation, what we need now? Failed liberal policies, not racism, are mostly responsible for the condition (c) 2016, Tribune Media Services in which poor African-Americans find IF YOU are white and reading this, themselves. Welfare dependency and how many African-Americans do you the narrative that because one is black know? If any, do you know the names one will always be discriminated against of their family members? Have you ever keep many discouraged and defeated. There are more African-American shared a meal with them or invited them to your home? Do you attend church politicians today than ever, even in the together? I ask these same questions of White House. Why isn’t their narrative African-Americans. Dr. Martin Luther inspiring the next generation? I think it’s King once said, “... 11 o’clock on Sun- because if the poor were to become selfday morning is the most segregated hour sustaining they might not need liberal in Christian America.” Why is this? A politicians. Poor African-Americans are church congregation should model equal- a core Democratic voting bloc, despite ity and a common worship experience of receiving little in return from the politithe God who made us all and to whom cians they help elect. racism is a sin. WHAT IS the biggest lie and worst I was born in Washington, D.C., at a time when the city was segregated. The narrative of all? It’s that politicians can only black people I knew growing up deliver economic and social salvation. were our two maids. I never knew their Hating the police will not affect this narlast names, which I later learned was a rative nor will it improve anyone’s cirpractice held over from slavery, a way to cumstances. denigrate, demean and keep in one’s place. problem worse. Information shared there is often half-true or completely inaccurate. The “hands-up, don’t shoot” narrative that followed the Ferguson, Missouri, shooting of Michael Brown is just one example. Despite a thorough investigation that proved Brown did not have his hands up in an act of surrender to a police officer, the false narrative continues, with even members of the Congressional Black Caucus promoting it.

Cal

Thomas

July 20, 2016 OBAMA PRESIDENCY: July 12, 2016

Barack Obama’s divisive double standards

resident Obama’s knee-jerk reaction to the Dallas shootings brings into clear relief his biases and double standards on racially or religiously motivated violence. Have we ever had a president as blinded by his ideology and as oblivious or dismissive about his own biases and the double standards he invokes? If blacks or Muslims commit acts of violence, Obama calls for unity and demands we not rush to judgment. He bends over backward to deny the racial or religious motives of the actors. In countless acts of Islamic terrorism, before he has even expressed outrage or sorrow over the victims’ deaths, Obama lectures us on the immorality of blaming actors of a single religion, tells us how wonderful and peaceful the religion is, and admonishes us against drawing inferences based on indisputable facts.

IF, ON THE other hand, blacks or Muslims are even arguably the victims of racial or religious violence, he immediately rushes to judgment and attributes racial or religious motives to the actors. In Warsaw, Poland, during a news conference, one journalist asked Obama to address the motives of Micah Johnson, the shooter who massacred police officers in Dallas. She said: “Help us understand how you describe his motives. Do you consider this an act of domestic terrorism? Was this a hate crime? Was this a mentally ill man with a gun?”

Obama replied, “First of all, I think clusions until we have all the facts.” When police in Cambridge, Massait’s very hard to untangle the motives of chusetts, arrested black Harvard profesthis shooter.” No, it’s not hard to untangle the mo- sor Henry Louis Gates Jr. at his home, tives of the killer, because they weren’t Obama sprinted to judgment, wholly tangled. He made them quite clear both without benefit of all the facts, and conon Facebook and in his exchanges with demned the police, who he said “acted cops during the standoff. Troubled or stupidly.” After George Zimmerman was acnot, he appeared to hate white people and was livid at cops. Indeed, Dallas Police quitted for the shooting of Trayvon MarChief David Brown said Micah Johnson tin, Obama couldn’t resist the urge to with Martin, saying, “wanted to kill white people, especially identify “Trayvon Martin white officers.” could have been me Obama simply 35 years ago.” He ignored the quescouldn’t pass up a tion of whether the chance to lecture Dallas shootings (c) 2016, Creators Syndicate us on the “history were a hate crime, yet he had no difficulty in so character- of racial disparities in the application of izing the recent police shootings of black our criminal laws,” even though Zimmen in Louisiana and Minnesota. Nor merman is Hispanic. When the Tsarnaev brothers planted in these cases did he call for unity and restraint. Instead, he reflexively detailed bombs at the Boston Marathon and killed the evidence that allegedly demonstrates three people and injured hundreds more, law enforcement discrimination against Obama said: “In this age of instant reminorities, though the evidence of such porting ... there’s a temptation to latch on bias is hotly disputed, as shown by to any bit of information, sometimes to Heather Mac Donald’s thorough exami- jump to conclusions. But ... it’s important nation of the data in her new book, The that we do this right. ... That’s why we take care not to rush to judgment — not War on Cops. Obama’s flagrant double standard has about the motivations of these individubeen on display throughout his tenure in als, certainly not about entire groups of people.” office. When Nidal Hasan, with known ties WHEN WHITE police officer Darto radical Islam, fatally shot 13 people and injured more than 30 others while ren Wilson shot and killed Africanscreaming “Allahu akbar,” Obama said, American Michael Brown in Ferguson, “We don’t know all the answers yet, and Missouri, after his robbery of a conveI would caution against jumping to con- nience store, his resisting arrest and his

David

Limbaugh

storming of the officer, Obama didn’t calm activists who were wrongly claiming that Wilson had shot Brown in the back without provocation. He deliberately exploited the incident as an example of the “gulf of mistrust (that) exists between local residents and law enforcement.” He said, “Too many young men of color feel targeted by law enforcement — guilty of walking while black or driving while black, judged by stereotypes that fuel fear and resentment and hopelessness.” Maybe so, but it was highly inappropriate for Obama to mention those matters in connection with the Brown shooting, which had nothing to do with race. And it was reckless for Obama to fan the flames of racial animosity in that way. He expressed no similar indignation when riots ensued, and the havoc resulted in injured people and millions of dollars of property damage. Obama didn’t demand restraint when Muslims were shot in Chapel Hill, North Carolina. He said the FBI was taking steps to determine whether federal laws were violated. “No one in the United States of America,” he said, “should ever be targeted because of who they are, what they look like or how they worship.” When African-American Freddie Gray died one week after riding without restraints in a police van after his arrest, Obama, again rushing to judgment while pretending not to, said: “We have some soul-searching to do. This is not new. It’s been going on for decades.” Immediately after Dylann Roof allegedly shot black Christians in Charleston, South Carolina, Obama said: “The fact that this took place in a black church obviously also raises questions about a dark part of our history. ... We know that hatred across races and faiths (poses) a particular threat to our democracy and our ideals.” About the terrorist shootings in San Bernardino, California, Obama insisted we go along with his patronizing charade that the slaughter may have been the handiwork of disgruntled office workers. He said: “It is possible that this was terrorist-related, but we don’t know. It’s also possible that this was workplacerelated.” Concerning the recent jihadi murder of 49 people in Orlando, Florida, Obama said: “We are still learning all the facts. This is an open investigation. We’ve reached no definitive judgment on the precise motivations of the killer.” Never mind that the killer clearly expressed his motives. IF OBAMA were to apply a consistent standard to these incidents and not reveal his own biases, he might have some credibility in those cases where he calls for unity. Instead, he has been a catalyst for racial and religious division in his words, actions and policies.

Conservative Chronicle

PROPOSITION 57: July 10, 2016

Feel safer: Easier to get parole, harder to buy bullets

Count me among the skeptics about ov. Jerry Brown and the Democratic Legislature have a the Newsom measure. I supported Caliunique plan to enhance public fornia’s 1989 assault-weapons ban, but I safety in California. They have reduced don’t think it made the state safer. It did the state prison population from close not prevent last year’s San Bernardino to 150,000 in 2010 to 113,000 now by terrorist attack, where 14 innocent people downgrading what crimes put an offender were killed. Newsom wants to expand in prison. Now they are pushing a ballot state gun laws to prohibit large-camagazines. When measure that would enable repeat serious pacity Democrats start and violent offendtalking gun coners to qualify for trol, law-abiding early release — to gun owners rush further reduce the to gun stores and state prison popu(c) 2016, Creators Syndicate buy more guns. lation. No worries, though, because they also are passing The most certain outcome of the ammo laws that make it harder or costlier for checks, predicted Michael Rushford of the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation: everyone to buy guns and ammunition. “People will buy God-awful amounts of THIS MONTH, Brown actually ve- bullets.” Before 2010, I supported efforts to retoed a bipartisan measure to make stealing a gun a felony. In his veto message, duce that state prison population, which Brown wrote that Assembly Bill 1176 exceeded 162,000 at its peak in 2006. was “nearly identical” to a provision in Even state prison officials who served in a gun-control ballot measure championed Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegby Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom. “While I ap- ger’s administration supported efforts to preciate the authors’ intent in striving to reduce the state prison population to alenhance public safety, I feel that the ob- leviate overcrowding, as ordered by three jective is better attained by having the federal judges. (The state prison populameasure appear before the voters only tion is now below the court cap.) Every once.” Imagine the outcry if a Republican enterprise can benefit from careful prunhad vetoed that bill for such bald partisan ing. Once elected, Brown continued to pare reasons. It’s hard to buy Brown’s explanation the inmate population, so in the last dewhen the governor did sign a Demo- cade the state prison population dropped cratic bill to require background checks by almost one-third. The governor pushed for ammunition purchases. As the San “realignment,” his plan to move nonseriFrancisco Chronicle’s Melody Gutier- ous, nonviolent offenders from prison to rez reported, ammunition background overcrowded local jails. Democrats also checks also are included in the Newsom pushed Proposition 47, approved by voters in 2014, which downgraded many gun initiative. property and drug crimes from felonies Prisons budget growing

Debra J.

Saunders

to misdemeanors that result in jail, not state cannot close prisons without violatprison, terms. All the while, Brown talked ing the federal overcrowding order. up reductions in the number of inmates as Proposition 57 authorizes parole for a great way to save taxpayers money. nonviolent offenders who have completed “the full sentence for their primary BROWN’S Proposition 57, which offense,” according to the Yes campaign. would allow offenders convicted of non- But the measure takes away three-strikes violent felonies to be considered for early enhancements for former violent convicparole, is supposed to “save money by tions, Rushford counters. He has taken to reducing wasteful spending on prisons.” calling Prop. 57 “the Jailbreak Initiative.” Don’t hold your breath. The state’s annual In 2014, the Criminal Justice Legal corrections budget is $10.6 billion; it was Foundation opposed Prop. 47 because $10 billion in 2007. Brown’s own correc- of its foreseeable and unintended consetions secretary, Scott Kernan, told the San quences. A provision that downgraded Francisco Chronicle editorial board that the classification for theft to under $950 if voters thought inmate reductions would changed gun-boosting from a felony to a cut costs, it was “an unreasonable expec- misdemeanor. Last year, San Franciscan tation.” The corrections budget would be Kate Steinle and Oaklander Antonio Rabigger without inmate reductions, Kernan mos were killed with stolen guns. Rushargues. Still, taxpayers won’t see a small- ford is at a loss to explain why Brown er tab with fewer inmates because the vetoed the gun-theft bill. When voters approved Prop. 47, he figures, “I don’t think voters knew what they were doing.” Assessing results of reforms Prop. 57 could repeat the cycle. “One of the significant concerns that we have,” said Yuba County District Attorney Patrick McGrath at a news conference, “is that the average voter, going into a voting booth and simply reading a title and summary, will have no idea of what the actual consequence of the language is.” I THINK voters’ perceptions are 10 years behind reality. Folks think it’s 2006 with 162,000 inmates. The policy pendulum swings toward overincarceration, then overcorrects with underincarceration. Instead of passing more laws to release inmates, Brown and company should assess the results of their so-called reforms. Attorney General Kamala Harris just released a report that shows violent crime went up in 2015. Maybe it’s a fluke. Maybe not. Maybe the state already has released thousands of repeat offenders who endanger public safety. Don’t you think it makes sense to find out before handing out more get-out-ofprison-early cards?

July 20, 2016 PARTY CONVENTIONS: July 12, 2016

Will conventions change delegate selection rules ... again?

hen the Republican and Democratic national conventions gather in successive weeks in Cleveland and Philadelphia, respectively, one item on their plates will be reconsideration of their parties’ nominating rules. Just about everyone agrees that they are unsatisfactory in some way or another, and many itch to do something about it. But what? Perhaps I can give some advice as one who was present at the creation. I was in Chicago’s International Amphitheatre at the 1968 Democratic National Convention on the one roll call when the delegates voted down the convention managers. It was a resolution, sponsored by Geoffrey Cowan, now head of the Annenberg Foundation Trust, requiring creation of a commission to recommend changes in the delegate selection process. THIS WAS the McGovern-Fraser Commission, which effectively changed the system from having most delegates selected by party officials

and caucuses to one in which most are declined. These leaders represented chosen in primary elections, as they dwindling constituencies and weren’t were in 1972 and have been ever since. able to deliver votes on Election Day. Some people argue for going back Something new — multiple primaries to the pre-1972 system, but, as the Chi- — filled the vacuum they left. Since 1972 both parties have been cago convention and the ensuing caming with their rules and paign showed, it was already dysfunc- t i n k e r their primary and tional — at least caucus schedules, for the Democratwith not entirely ic Party, which in satisfying results. those days conA Democratic trolled most state (c) 2016, Creators Syndicate commission led legislatures and by four-term therefore tended North Carolina Gov. Jim Hunt gave to set the rules. The three main forces dominating superdelegates — elected and party ofDemocratic conventions, as described ficials — automatic convention votes. by Theodore White in his The Mak- Republicans give each state’s party ing of the President, 1960, were the chairmen and national committeemen big city bosses, the leaders of big la- votes as well. The purpose is to give knowledgebor unions and conservative Southern able professionals some voice, to balgovernors. But as people moved to the suburbs, ance delegates usually chosen by canthe bosses lost clout; the industrial didates’ campaign managers. There’s a labor union membership rolls started serious argument for that, though not falling and the number of conserva- one accepted by Bernie Sanders backtive Democratic Southern governors ers this year.

PARTY RULES also guarantee that Iowa and New Hampshire hold the first caucuses and primaries, as if it were required by the Constitution. This is untouchable, since no politician with any dream of running for president dares to alienate voters there. The scramble of other states to vote early lengthened the schedule, to the point that in 2008 Iowa voted on Jan. 3, the ninth day of Christmas, after a two-week period in which few voters are paying attention. Republicans, controlling most legislatures now, kicked back with rule changes that set the first contests in February and blocked winner-take-all primaries before March 15. The parties differ on delegate allocation rules, based on their differing historic character. Republicans, with a large core constituency, have had more winner-take-all contests. Democrats, a coalition of disparate minority groups, tend to favor proportional representation. This year those rules worked against candidates favored by party leaders. Winner-take-all allocation helped Donald Trump clinch the nomination May 3 with 42 percent of popular votes, while proportional representation might have stopped him. Bernie ham and former Texas Gov. Rick Perry Sanders, with 42 percent of votes, is served in the military. Front-runner still in the race thanks to proportional Donald Trump once told a biographer representation; winner-take-all con“(I) always felt I was in the military” tests would have given Hillary Clinton because he attended a military board- a 2-1 delegate lead months ago. Inevitably there are proposals for ing school for five years. Really. The Los Angeles Times published a change. But there’s no prospect for a list of likely running mates Monday. single national primary, nor will 50 Among the GOP possibles, only two states ever agree on whether to hold — Sens. Jeff Sessions of Alabama and primaries or caucuses, or to have party Tom Cotton of Arkansas — served in registration or open primaries. A prothe military. Both are lawyers. For- posal to have four primary dates, with mer House Speaker Newt Gingrich, the smallest states voting first, died New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, Indi- aborning. Michigan Republican Saul Anuzis ana Gov. Mike Pence and Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin did not. Team Trump wants voters to indicate second, third leaked that The Donald might pick re- and fourth choices, to penalize a cantired Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn. Fly- didate who, like Donald Trump, is nn’s a registered Democrat, but at least beloved of some but unacceptable to most or very many others. law school was not his boot camp. One lesson of earlier reforms is that NOT ONE Democrat on the Times’ solving one year’s perceived problems short list is a vet. All of the short-list creates new, unanticipated problems in Dems — Housing and Urban Devel- the future. Reasonable arguments can opment Secretary Julian Castro and be made both for and against every Labor Secretary Tom Perez, and Sens. procedure mentioned above and others Cory Booker of New Jersey, Sherrod as well. Brown of Ohio, Tim Kaine of Virginia THIS YEAR’S reformed and re-reand Elizabeth Warren, of Massachusetts — went to law or graduate school. formed process produced the two most Whether they’ll be called chicken unpopular nominees in recent history. hawks is unclear. But if the experts are But unfortunately, there simply is no right about likely picks, most will have single satisfactory way to choose nombegun their careers barking orders and inees for the world’s most important elective office — the only part of our never had to learn how to salute. electoral system not referenced by the framers of the Constitution.

Michael

Barone

VP PICK: July 12, 2016

Law school is the new boot camp

illary Clinton and Donald Trump are about to choose running mates. I don’t know whom they’ll pick, but I hope that one or both picks a military veteran. The next president will inherit war zones in the Middle East and Afghanistan, yet neither major party’s front-runner can boast military chops. In the last century, military service was considered an important part of a portfolio for a would-be commander in chief. After all, how can a president send others into battle when he has not seen combat himself? Military service hasn’t been mandatory in a president, nor should it be, but certainly it is preferable. IN 1992, Bill Clinton won the White House despite his legal evasion of the draft. Smartly, Clinton balanced his ticket by choosing as his running mate Sen. Al Gore, D-Tenn. While Gore’s Harvard classmates found ways to avoid serving in Vietnam, this senator’s son had enlisted in the Army and served five months in Vietnam. In 2000, Democrats dismissed George W. Bush’s service as a pilot in the Air National Guard as akin to draft evasion. It wasn’t. But Bush didn’t help himself on that score when he chose as his running mate Dick Cheney, a former defense secretary who enjoyed five draft deferments during the Vietnam War. In 2004, Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., branded Cheney a “chicken

hawk” because the veep was a hawk on the Iraq War. You don’t hear “chicken hawk” often these days, even though President Obama never served in the military. Vice President Joe Biden enjoyed five student draft deferments during Vietnam and the no-mil-

Debra J.

itary-experience Obama administration has continued to engage the U.S. military from Libya to Afghanistan. In 2009, I took a gander at Obama’s first Cabinet and found that members were three times more likely to be lawschool grads than veterans. LAW SCHOOL is the new boot camp. Party elites prefer academia to the military. In the 2016 Democratic presidential primary, only one candidate, former Sen. James Webb of Virginia, served in the military. Hillary Clinton claims she once looked into joining the Marines, but she never did. Like former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley, she graduated law school. Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont and former Rhode Island Gov. Lincoln Chafee never enlisted. In a GOP field rich with foreignpolicy hawks, only Sen. Lindsey Gra-

Conservative Chronicle

SOUTH CHINA SEA: July 13, 2016

South China Sea decision a heavy political blow to China

rbitrators in The Hague have game the system by pouring concrete in given the Philippines a unan- the sea was illegitimate. The panel ruled imous legal victory over that the “Convention classifies (sea) China, one that definitely frustrates Chi- features on their natural condition” and na’s “divide and conquer” strategy for China’s “land reclamation and construcgaining sovereign control of the South tion” program didn’t change that. The island construcChina Sea. tion program has been The ruling, Beijing’s most outrahowever, does not geous activity in the answer the quesregion. However, tion that could Chinese ultra-na- by 12 miles of territorial water. The Chiignite a deadly re(c) 2016, Creators Syndicate tionalists back this nese military then says no one can sail gional war. Given China’s immense military and economic maritime imperialism. For some two de- through those waters without permispower, how will the Philippines enforce cades China has been building artificial sion. Except international arbitrators conislands in the South China Sea. China’s the decision? In 2013, the Philippines asked The neighbors contend the program amounts cluded the claim is rubbish. So here we are. The Chinese govHague’s Permanent Court of Arbitra- to conquest with concrete braced by tion to rule on the territorial disputes steel. The concrete transforms sea fea- ernment refused to participate in the between Manila and Beijing. The Court tures into fake islets big enough to sup- arbitration. It now refuses to accept the would convene under terms prescribed port airfields for combat aircraft. Think decision. Beijing insists that it will only recognize bilateral agreements with its by the UN Convention on the Law of of them as immobile aircraft carriers. neighbors — which means it will bully the Sea. 167 nations have signed the BEIJING’S DIPLOMATS and in- them one on one. treaty, including the Philippines and No nation in Southeast Asia can ternational lawyers then say the islets China. China ratified it in 1996. are sovereign Chinese land surrounded match Chinese power and it is very THE PANEL addressed “the role of historic rights and the source of mariOBAMA PRESIDENCY: July 13, 2016 time entitlements in the South China Sea, the status of certain maritime features and the maritime entitlements they are capable of generating, and the lawfulness of certain actions by China.” he back-to-back fatal police backyard, Washington, D.C., the result The panel concluded China has inshootings last week of two was the worst cover-up, the worst whitedeed violated the Philippines’ Exclusive black men, both caught on vid- wash of police wrongdoing I have ever Economic Zone in the South China Sea. witnessed in my lifetime. I refer to the EEZs extend 200 nautical miles from eo, are understandably disturbing. Before the retributive sniper attacks outrageous, unconscionable, unjustified sovereign territory. All natural resources found in those waters belong to sov- on police officers in Dallas, they were 2013 murder under the cover of authoramong the most talk-about stories across ity of Miriam Carey, a 34-year-old denereign nation. tal hygienist with her toddler in tow. You The decision got into the seaweeds. It the nation. What we see with our own eyes and can read the incredible gruesome details had to, for EEZ violations involve money and jobs. China interfered with Fili- what we hear, as well as the reports by in the exhaustive WND series on her pino oil exploration operations. China eyewitnesses, of these incidents in Baton death for yourself. It’s soon to be the batried to prevent Filipino fisherman from Rouge and outside St. Paul, Minnesota, sis of a book by WND Washingfishing in their own EEZ while encour- should be enough to make any Ameri- ton bureau chief Garth Kant. aging Chinese fishermen to violate it. can’s skin crawl. I certainly mourn with the families In other words, China was committing and friends of Philando Castile, 32, of St. large-scale robbery. The ruling savaged China’s so-called Paul, a school cafeteria supervisor, killed (c) 2016, Creators Syndicate “nine-dash line,” and in so doing dealt by police Wednesday, and Alton Sterling, Beijing a heavy diplomatic and politi- 37, of Baton Rouge, killed Tuesday. cal blow. The nine-dash line maritime I WOULD GO even further to sugIT’S HORRIFYING. It leaves me claim has become something of a Chigest that this heavily politicized Justice nese ultra-nationalist symbol for restor- speechless. One thing I can say with certainty: If Department, which even whitewashed ing Chinese hegemony in Asia and the state and local officials believe calling Secret Service culpability in the Carey world. The boundary defined by its dashes in the U.S. Justice Department to inves- killing, will only make matters worse. dips south for hundreds of kilometers tigate is the answer, they are hopelessly This is the same band that refused to indict Hillary Clinton for crimes and from China’s southern coast and curves wrong. cover-ups that would have put most of Why do I assert that? as it nears the island of Borneo. Singaus in prison for a very long time. Two reasons: pore, Malaysia and Indonesia think the Why do we suppose Big Government — The U.S. Justice Department bottom of its rough parabola is suggestively close to the Strait of Malacca. and its boss, Barack Obama, have only is better suited to serving justice? When and where has that ever That waterway is the primary shipping served to fan the flames of racial divipassage between the Pacific and Indian sion for the last eight years, thus becom- worked? There’s one more critical facet of ing part of the problem rather than part Oceans. these two recent police killings that are The panel concluded there “was no of the solution. — When perhaps the most egregious worth noting. legal basis for China to claim historic In both cases, the men killed had rights to resources within the sea areas” police shooting in recent memory ocwithin the line and China’s attempt to curred in the Justice Department’s own guns in their possession — and that

Austin

Bay

doubtful a coalition of nations could, either ... unless that coalition had the backing of the U.S. WHICH LEADS to the next unanswered question: What will Washington do? Washington says it supports its traditional ally, the Philippines, and also supports the panel’s decision. But does “support” include a willingness to wage war with China if China and the Philippines come to blows? No one really knows.

Police shootings: No justice at Justice

Joseph

Farah

fact led directly to their executions. For victim Castile, it was particularly heartbreaking. He had a concealed carry permit and offered to the police officers who had stopped his vehicle with his girlfriend and child aboard that he had in his possession a firearm and a permit for it. He was trying to be forthright, candid, helpful. It cost him his life. As he reportedly reached for his wallet at the instruction of an officer who demanded his license and registration, he was repeatedly shot and left to bleed to death without any medical attention from officers. They never even checked his pulse. What attracted cops in Baton Rouge to the other victim, Sterling, was a call placed by a homeless man to police about a man with a gun. Sterling never drew his gun on officers. He can’t be seen reaching for it as two cops tackle him to the ground. Then he is shot point black in the chest at least five times while he is subdued. There is no excuse for this. Cops like this are unfit to wear a uniform and carry guns themselves. Again, who has helped perpetuate this notion that armed civilians automatically represent danger to the public and the police? I CAN THINK of no one more responsible for creating that climate of hysteria than Barack Obama.

July 20, 2016 ANTI-POLICE ATMOSPHERE: July 12, 2016

The NYT and the left have blood on their hands

t was very appropriate that on exists is for white folk to get stopped by Friday, the day after the massa- a cop and not end up dead when the encre of five Dallas police officers, counter is over.” Dyson wrote these words based on the New York Times devoted nearly the whole top half of its front page to four the police killings of two blacks last about which he enormous photos of the death of Philan- w e e k , knows nothing do Castile, a black except the narramotorist killed by tive of the (lefta Minnesota police wing) media and officer. what he has seen Of course, the (c) 2016, Creators Syndicate on some grainy paper was printed phone videos. prior to the Dallas And not once does Professor Dyson murders; and even the New York Times might not have so prominently featured mention that the Minnesota police ofthe Minnesota killing on its front page ficer was Latino. Why would he? That had the Dallas murders occurred a few would suggest that Latinos, too, are given racist binoculars at birth. But Dyson hours earlier. would never say so, because it is white NEVERTHELESS, it was com- America he loathes. Nor does he note, or perhaps even pletely appropriate. The New York Times has been in the forefront of the know — because of his left-wing binleft’s hysterical, hate-filled attacks on oculars — facts such as these: In 2015, of the 990 people shot dead police officers and whites. Also appropriately, on the day of the by police, 93 were unarmed and 38 of Dallas murders, the Times published them were black. Of the 505 people two white-hating, police-hating pieces. shot dead by police thus far in 2016, One was by Michael Eric Dyson, a 37 were unarmed and of them 13 were radical black professor of sociology at black. Given that blacks murder and rob more than whites — they committed 62 Georgetown University. The Dyson column is nothing more percent of robberies, 57 percent of murthan a racist hit piece on “white Amer- ders and 45 percent of assaults in the 75 biggest counties in the country in 2009 ica.” (despite comprising about 15 percent of An example: “At birth, (whites) are given a pair of the population in these counties) — an binoculars ... Those binoculars are priv- unarmed black is less likely to be killed ilege; they are status, regardless of your by police than an unarmed white. (Data class. In fact the greatest privilege that from the Washington Post.)

Dennis

Prager

DOES DYSON, a professor of sociology, not know these statistics? Does he not know that, statistically, whites have more reason to fear being murdered by a black than vice versa? If he doesn’t, he shouldn’t be teaching sociology. If he does, students should be aware that he is a left-wing, black nationalist propagandist, not a teacher. The same day the Times published Dyson’s piece, it published a second anti-white, anti-cop, hate-America piece by the mother of Michael Brown, the young black man killed in Ferguson, Missouri. That black grand jurors and

even Obama’s Department of Justice found the policeman who killed Brown was acting in self-defense after being attacked and thus justified him in doing so means nothing to the New York Times. So it published the grieving mother’s anti-cop hate. The blacks and whites of the left have led much of America, especially black America, to believe that cops are generally racist, that there is “systemic” racism and that whites are privileged and racist. It’s all a lie that has had — and will continue to have — murderous consequences. America has become the least racist multiracial, multiethnic country in world history. This drives the Americahating left crazy. That’s why leftists manufacture fantasies like “microaggressions” — non-racist statements that the left labels racist, foolishness like “white privilege” and the dangerous rhetoric of “Blacks Lives Matter.” Just yesterday the New York Times published the results of a study conducted by a black Harvard professor of economics that shows that “when it comes to the most lethal form of force — police shootings — the study finds no racial bias.” “It is the most surprising result of my career,” said Roland G. Fryer Jr., the author of the study. ONE ASSUMES that this Harvard professor has never read Heather Mac Donald or any other conservatives who have been writing this for years. The New York Times — as the flagship publication of the left — and the rest of the left have the blood of police on their hands. And not just cops’ blood — the blood of the blacks murdered because of police reticence to vigorously patrol black areas. What is known as the “Ferguson effect” was created entirely by the left.

Conservative Chronicle

MEDIA BIAS: July 7, 2016

Jesse Williams’ rant — media didn’t fact-check his lies

here to start with actor Jes- killed by cops. And we are told that se Williams’ widely praised blacks, while 13 percent of the popularant on police brutality and tion, represent a much greater percentage white racism delivered at this year’s of those killed by cops. Institutional, sysBlack Entertainment Television awards temic, structural racism! Here’s what those promoting the show? disproportionately kill To his enthusiastic audience, Williams “ p o l i c e people” narrative reeled off lie after lie, all in the name of b l a c k consistently omit. black “resistance” Whites, despite being over the “oppresalmost 65 percent sor” — meaning of the population, anyone he believes (c) 2016, Creators Syndicate disproportionately benefits from “this commit less of invention called whiteness.” Time magazine called his the nation’s violent crime — 10 percent. Blacks, at 13 percent of the population, discourse “powerful.” disproportionately commit more violent WHERE ARE fact-checkers when crime. As to murders, blacks commit the fact-devoid desperately need fact- nearly half. Yet whites are 50 percent of checking? After all, Williams practically cop killings. Criminology professor Peter Moskos begged to be fact-checked when he said, “What we’ve been doing is looking at the looked at the numbers of those killed by data and we know that police somehow officers from May 2013 to April 2015 manage to de-escalate, disarm and not and found that 49 percent were white, while 30 percent were black. “Adjusted kill white people every day.” The “police ... manage to ... not kill for the homicide rate,” says Moskos, “whites are 1.7 times more likely than white people every day?” Let’s start with 2014, the last year for blacks to die at the hands of police.” So if which there are official records. Accord- anything, whites have more to complain ing to the Centers for Disease Control, about than Mr. Williams. What about traffic stops and race? the police killed 261 whites and 131 blacks. The CDC also found that from Surely cops racially profile blacks, 1999 to 2013, the police killed almost wrongly and disproportionately stopping twice the number of whites compared to them? Not according to the National Institute of Justice, the research arm of the blacks, 3,160 and 1,724, respectively. Activists promptly note that whites Department of Justice. In its 2013 report, account for nearly 65 percent of the pop- “Race, Trust and Police Legitimacy,” ulation and that, therefore, one would the NIJ found that 75 percent of blacks expect whites to comprise most of those admitted that they were stopped for “le-

Larry

Elder

gitimate reasons.” And it turns out blacks disproportionately commit traffic offenses, whether speeding, driving without a license, driving with expired tags, driving without the seat belt on or without a car seat for a baby, and so on. Numerical disparities, said the NIJ, result from “differences in offending” in addition to “differences in exposure to the police” and “differences in driving patterns.” WHAT ABOUT 2015, a year in which Black Lives Matter protested a number of high-profile police/black suspect encounters? According to the Washington Post, the police killed 965 people.

But the Post found that “white police officers killing unarmed black men represent less than four percent of fatal police shootings.” Remember, a black man, extremely popular among blacks, has been president for over seven years. He has nominated, and Congress has approved, back-to-back attorneys general. Nothing stops the Department of Justice from filing civil rights charges against the officers for “murder.” But the DOJ has not done so. Williams attacked whites for engaging in what has become known as “cultural appropriation,” although he did not use that term. He said: “This invention called whiteness uses and abuses us, burying black people out of sight and out of mind while extracting our culture, our dollars, our entertainment like oil — black gold, ghettoizing and demeaning our creations then stealing them, gentrifying our genius and then trying us on like costumes before discarding our bodies like rinds of strange fruit. The thing is though ... the thing is that just because we’re magic doesn’t mean we’re not real.” That’s a mouthful, especially when the primary buyers of rap music, a blackdominated genre, mostly are white consumers. Snoop Dogg, Ice-T, Run-D.M.C. and Jay Z got rich while happily being culturally appropriated by white kids living in the suburbs. IT’S ALSO interesting to note that Williams is a product of a white mother and black father, both of whom were in the audience. So his mom is an “invention,” while his dad is “magic.” Must make for interesting conversation in the Williams’ home at dinnertime. And a rich, half-white actor delivered an attack on whites on a cable channel owned by a corporation whose primarily shareholders are a family headed by a patriarch named Sumner Redstone, a Jew. Only in America.

July 20, 2016 MEDIA BIAS: July 8, 2016

Now controversial: ‘God Bless America’

The folks at the New York Daily News er. By “everyone” he means his circle have embraced a mission to become the of friends, professional and personal, most provocative jerks in the Big Apple. which says something more about his One day it’s personal attacks on those circles than his complaint. Kuntzman began: “It’s time for God praying for the victims of terrorism, the next it’s declaring the National Rifle As- to stop blessing America during the sociation to be murderous. In keeping seventh-inning stretch. Welcome to the with this stream of insulting behaviors, July 4 weekend — when once again, fans will be assaulted columnist Gersh Kuntzman has issued a b a s e b a l l the saccharine-sweet demand, saying, “Major League Base- by non-anthem ‘God ball must permaBless America’ nently retire ‘God at stadia all over Bless America,’ a this great land.” song that offends The song, he says, everyone.” (c) 2016, Creators Syndicate “should be sent Everyone? Surely, this man could find a handful permanently to the bench.” THAT STUPIDITY never gained of people in midtown Manhattan who THIS BILGE came just days aftraction. But that doesn’t mean the idi- aren’t offended by “God Bless America.” That isn’t what he meant, howev- ter Kuntzman drew attention for oddly ots don’t keep trying. t didn’t used to be — that’s a phrase we use a lot these days, isn’t it? — but the Fourth of July festivities bring out the angriest guff from the left. In 1991 Boston Globe arts critic (and aspiring poet) Patricia Smith decided to refashion the national anthem in the leftist rag the Nation. “Oh say, we’ve seen too much,” she began. “The Star-Spangled Banner pushes like a cough through America’s mouth and the twilight’s last gleaming is just that, a sickly flash above our heads as we ride unsuspecting in the bellies of sleek trains, plop to our knees in churches, embracing truths that disgust us.”

Brent

Bozell

ISLAM: July 8, 2016

Islam needs a Reformation

slamic terrorism has become the single biggest threat to stability in the world. Attacks killing many hundreds have occurred over the past 18 months in Bangladesh, Turkey, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya, Egypt, Kenya, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, Belgium, France, the United States and elsewhere. But fighting this threat will require more than drone attacks to take out leaders of groups such as the Islamic State — or even full-scale assaults to recapture territory claimed by the terrorists, as we did recently in Iraq.

AS THE terrorist killings in San Bernardino, Orlando and Paris prove, Islamists’ poison can reach into the very heart of the West to infect those born and raised in nations that value freedom, promoting attacks on their fellow countrymen and neighbors. What is to be done? Military action is clearly part of the solution where Islamic terrorists control actual territory from which to launch further attacks, but it is insufficient to root out the threat. President Barack Obama has dangerously refused to acknowledge that a radical, fundamentalist interpretation of Islam drives the terrorists. Indeed, fundamentalist Islam is gaining adherents throughout the world, and autocratic regimes in Iran and the Persian Gulf States already enforce it throughout their populations. If we are to be successful in the fight against Islamic terrorism, we must look to the Muslim world itself for a Reformation. Unfortunately, there are few bright lights in that firmament. The two major sects of Islam, Sunni and Shiite, have both spawned terrorist movements; and

whatever their differences, they share a common enemy in modernism and Western values. And in both, the denigration and subjugation of women plays a fundamental role. But there are glimmers of hope, one of which will be on display in Paris on July 9. As I have for the past few years, I will be emceeing an event that brings together tens of thousands of opponents of the Iranian regime, in addition to representatives from around the world who oppose Islamic fundamentalism. Addressing the group will be a broad range of dignitaries

Linda

from various nations, including a bipartisan group of Americans composed of, among others, former governors, Cabinet members, ambassadors and White House officials. THIS YEAR’S event marks the anniversary of the U.S.-Iran nuclear arms deal, which has strengthened the Iranian regime by infusing much-needed cash into the hands of the ruling mullahs. Iran continues to be a major state sponsor of terrorism, as well as ruthlessly suppressing freedom for its own populace. The chief opposition to the regime is the National Council of Resistance of Iran, whose president-elect, Maryam Rajavi, is an outspoken critic of fundamentalism and the convener of the Paris conference. “A political, religious and cultural antidote is required to uproot this cancerous tumor permanently,” Rajavi said

last year in front of the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation and Trade. “In absence of an alternative interpretation of Islam ... extremist ringleaders will portray the war against fundamentalism as a fight against Islam itself. By doing so, they will then create the most important source of nourishment for this ominous phenomenon.” In Paris this weekend, Muslims — as well as Christians, Jews and others — will stand up for the belief that freedom of religious practice is fundamental to reform. “We reject compulsory religion and any form of compulsion in religion,” Rajavi has said. She has spoken out against mandatory veiling laws and against the mistreatment of women and denial of their rights in the name of Islam. UNFORTUNATELY, the Obama administration not only does not support the efforts of Rajavi and her group but also has opposed them at every opportunity. But equal rights for women and freedom of conscience for religious practice are the best way to combat radical Islamic fundamentalism. We can continue to fight the Islamic State group, al Qaeda, Boko Haram and other fundamentalist groups on the battlefield and from the air. We can capture or kill their leaders and their foot soldiers. But until we battle the ideology that has spread around the world, we will not succeed. And the most effective way to do that is to work with those, like Rajavi, who have been doing it for decades. If she is not afraid to name the danger for what it is, why should we hesitate to say that Islamic fundamentalism is a threat to us all?

comparing the AR-15 assault weapon to a bazooka: “The recoil bruised my shoulder ... The brass shell casings disoriented me as they flew past my face. The smell of sulfur and destruction made me sick. The explosions — loud like a bomb — gave me a temporary form of PTSD.” Children in kindergarten have stronger dispositions than this guy. It’s only natural that gun owners have mocked this overwrought routine. One video showed a little girl shooting an AR-15 without getting hurt. One man shot one with the butt of the gun pressed against the tip of his nose to show how harmless the recoil is. Since he enjoyed all the negative attention this brought, Kuntzman took to Twitter, promising, “First guns, now I take on god: Baseball must permanently retire ‘God Bless America.’” Yes, God is uncapitalized. You can insult our Lord with impunity at the New York Daily News. Kuntzman protested the apparent fascism of the whole exercise, the “ponderous Mussolini-esque introduction of the song, when fans are asked to rise, remove their caps and place them over their hearts.” He made wisecracks, saying it’s “as much a symbol of post-war patriotism as the flag, the space program and all the white people moving to the suburbs.” He says the song “still embodies great things about America, but also our worst things: self-righteousness, forced piety, earnest self-reverence, foam.” He’s not alone in hating a mix of baseball and patriotism. ESPN also has lurched far left in promoting a harsh political agenda. ESPN Magazine columnist Howard Bryant recently bashed the idea of police officers singing the national anthem at baseball games. This is somehow an “authoritarian shift at the ballpark,” he asserted. Baseball-team owners ignored “the smothering effect that staged patriotism and cops singing the national anthem in a time of Ferguson have on player expression.” And “it’s indirectly stifled, while the increasing police pageantry at games sends another clear message: The sentiments of the poor in Ferguson and Cleveland do not matter.” According to Bryant powerful people in the culture have to choose: Honor the cops, screw the poor. Honoring the poor means dishonoring the police. Last November, Bryant attacked the Chicago Blackhawks for wearing camouflage jerseys on Veterans Day, which he said clashed with their Native American logo given that the “systematic removal of native tribes occurred at the hands of the U.S. Army.” ESPN IS the same network that fired Curt Schilling for being too political.

Conservative Chronicle

FOREIGN POLICY: July 8, 2016

Orgy of guilt and imagine history of the past

he Islamic State, you have to acknowledge, is on quite a roll. Over the July 4 weekend, the FBI arrested a northern Virginia neighbor of mine, Mohamed Bailor Jalloh. He was apparently plotting a Fort Hood style attack and told an FBI informant: “I just want to live a good Muslim life and die as a Shaheed (martyr).”

JALLOH WAS thwarted, but around the globe, fellow admirers or members of ISIS have been inflicting chaos and death at an accelerating rate. Just in the past 24 months, ISIS-inspired killers have struck the Brussels airport, a Tunisian beach resort, the Istanbul airport, a Paris satirical magazine and a kosher market, a Christmas party in a San Bernardino office, a Russian plane flying over the Sinai, a restaurant catering to westerners in Bangladesh, Paris cafes and a concert venue, a nursing home in Yemen founded by Mother Teresa, and a gay nightclub in Orlando — to name but a small fraction of the hundreds of attacks. The list doesn’t count the horrific beheadings, sex slavery, forced labor, crucifixions and other murders ISIS has committed in territory it controls in Iraq and Syria. That such an orgy of viciousness attracts as well as repels is one of the mysteries of the human condition. There is little question, though, that despite President Obama’s claims that “ISIL is contained,” the perception worldwide is that ISIS is successfully holding territory and expanding — thus earning the right to call itself a caliphate. For Muslims of a radical turn of mind, that is intoxicating. You might suppose that in the mighty nations of the West, debate would be ongoing about how to destroy ISIS and rescue the desperate people — one thinks particularly of the religious minorities like the Yazidis — who’ve come under its control. You’d even suppose that people who style themselves human rights crusaders on the left would be condemning our inaction as a form of racism or xenophobia, since the overwhelming majority of ISIS’ victims are Muslim and/or dark skinned. But no. In our counsels, the great issue we’re relitigating is whether Tony Blair should be tried for war crimes at the International Criminal Court and just how responsible George W. Bush was for all of the mayhem in the world. In the wake of a just-released prolix exercise in second-guessing by Sir John Chilcot, a sneering BBC host interviewed Blair and demanded to know whether “even now” he had the nerve to pray about his actions. (Blair, unlike most BBC types, is religious.) Progressives, like those who run the BBC and the Democratic Party here, have concocted an imagined history of the past quarter century in which everything was fine until George W. Bush

lied us into war in Iraq and opened the prison in Guantanamo. Those crimes, Democrats contend (and Donald Trump agrees), cost the lives of 4,497 Americans, killed at least 160,000 Iraqis, offended the Muslim world, destabilized the region, and led to the rise of ISIS.

It requires small-minded malice to blame George W. Bush for attempting to protect the United States and its allies. Yes, he made mistakes in the Iraq War. Name an American war, or any war, that was flawless. Have you heard of Anzio or Market Garden? By 2009, when Obama took office, the Iraq War was won and THE PROBLEM with this account is the country mostly pacified. Just ask Joe that jihadism predated Bush by decades. Biden. In the 1980s, they struck us in LebaBut beyond the political non, in Berlin (at point scoring, there a disco frequented is something off by American serabout the Blame vicemen), on the Bush First syndrome Achille Lauro — namely, that we (c) 2016, Creators Syndicate and in the air over have now had 7 1/2 Lockerbie. In the 1990s and early 2000s, years worth of experience with the opthey hit the Khobar Towers, the U.S.S. posite policies. Barack Obama has withCole and the embassies in Kenya and drawn from Iraq, declined to intervene Tanzania, and they perpetrated the Mog- in the Syrian civil war, kept inadequate adishu attacks and the first World Trade forces in Afghanistan, denied defensive Center bombing. The 9/11 attacks obvi- arms to Ukraine, sought rapprochement ously predated the Iraq War. with Cuba and Iran and stiff-armed Israel.

Mona

Charen

Where is the accounting for these policies? In Syria, 400,000 is a low estimate of the dead. Some 4.5 million Syrian refugees have fled to Turkey, Iraq, Lebanon, Jordan, and Egypt, and thousands are streaming into Europe creating a crisis for the EU. Half of Syria’s population (about 11 million people) is internally displaced and in need of humanitarian assistance, which is difficult to deliver in a war zone. As for ISIS, it has sprouted in the ungoverned regions of Iraq and Syria. The Iraq territory would have been denied them if the U.S. had maintained a small force in the country. AROUND THE globe, jihadis see American diffidence as weakness. Some of the results are catalogued in the first paragraphs of this column. Other consequences are all too foreseeable. I await the BBC host who will ask Obama if he dares to pray.

BREXIT: July 7, 2016

A walk with the demonstrators

week after the historic Brexit referendum I attended what we might call its sequel. As Americans will recall, on June 23 all of Great Britain’s bien-pensants ever so unctuously voted against Brexit. That is to say they voted against leaving the EU. They lost 52 percent to 48 percent. The outcome was a bit of a surprise, but they lost fair and square. Thus, a week later they flooded the streets of central London to protest the outcome of the vote and piously call for a new election. It was not that they claimed the election had been rigged. Rather, they claimed the wrong people won. They wanted a second try. FRANKLY, I hope the majority who voted to leave the EU grant these sore losers a second vote. If the sore losers lose that vote I say grant them a third vote and a fourth vote. If they do finally win — say, on the 23rd or 24th vote when many of the proponents of exiting the EU have grown bored or have left for vacation — what will the victorious Remain voters do? How will they treat the roughly 50 to 52 percent who won the previous votes and presumably are still desirous of leaving the EU? Well, if you heard how the Remain advocates were describing the Leave advocates just before the referendum you might be concerned for their civil liberties and for the rule of law in old England. The Remain advocates denounced their adversaries as the “less educated,” the “rural voters,” the “old people who only have a limited life

expectancy,” as opposed to the young, robust, highly educated, urban sophisticates who lost on June 23 and were now marching through central London to reverse the vote with another election. Mobs of young, highly educated egotists (and not so educated thugs) who do not take elections seriously, but take themselves very seriously have been seen in this old world before. They often ship their opposition off to re-education camps or put them up against the wall. The only thing

R. Emmett

that might save the Leave vote today is Leave voters’ vast numbers. They beat these prigs by 1,269,501 votes. People who believe they should get a second vote do not care much for the legitimacy of their opponents, but such opponents can put up a good fight. There was a hint of this in what became Spanish Civil War. Numbered amongst the Remain crowd were thousands of latent authoritarian personalities. AS LUCK would have it, I was in London for the historic march on London that followed the historic vote. I enjoyed every minuet of the spectacle. I marched down Piccadilly Street with the self-righteous shouters and placardwavers. They reminded me of demonstrators I had marched with before: those at the anti-war rallies of past decades,

the ban-the-bomb rallies, the workers rallies, the rallies of vegetarians — all the lost causes of the West. Their goals had for the most part been won by the American armed forces, the CIA, politicians, such as Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, free market economics and Milton Friedman. Here’s to you, Friedman! The crowd was very polite, unlike some others through the years: those at the 1968 Chicago Democratic National Convention, the 1963 March on Washington and more recently the anti-Trump rallies. The families of the 30-somethings brought their children. The college-aged were pretty much sober. After all, it was midday, and they had yet to auspicate their binge drinking. There were some rude signs, and there was some lewd gesticulating, but not much. These people were on their best behavior. YET, AS A seasoned observer of these demonstrations I sensed an ominous undercurrent. These, after all, were the morally superior of a great nation. They had publicly proclaimed that they would not be governed by the outcome of a vote. If the vote did not go their way they would bloody well thwart it, just as they thwarted other initiatives of British democracy. They would resort to the bureaucracy, to the courts, to the media, to academe. They are the bien-pensants of the left. Think of what they did to Margaret Thatcher. They are relentless. Only Donald Trump has had the perspicacity to identify them as losers.

July 20, 2016 IRAQ WAR: July 8, 2016

Let’s debate the Iraq War. Let’s not rewrite history

elieve it or not, you can simul- stable tyrannies that counteract each taneously believe a number of other and suppress terrorism. To accept this as a truth you must things about the Iraq war and also revise history. And Donald Trump’s its aftermath. You can believe Saddam Hussein take on Saddam and Iraq is a complete wasn’t merely a “bad guy,” but that he falsehood. Trump told a crowd in North harbored terrorists and offered them Carolina: “He did that so good. They read them the rights. safe haven and material support. You d i d n ’ t They didn’t talk. can believe that They were terrorists. the Bush adminisIt was over. Today, tration genuinely Iraq is Harvard believed Saddam for terrorism. You possessed weap(c) 2016, Creators Syndicate want to be a terons of mass derorist you go to struction, and also that the war turned out to be a massive Iraq. It’s like Harvard, OK? So sad.” Trump isn’t alone. Not everyone strategic failure. You can believe that the administration believed the Iraqi celebrates the ability of a government people would embrace democratic in- to kill its own people without any semstitutions once the Baathist regime was blance of due process, but less severe overthrown, and also that the project iterations of this sentiment are repeated often by anti-war proponents. We made failed, leaving us with a bloody mess. everything worse. Well, for starters, Saddam didn’t kill NOT ONE OF these things underterrorists, he killed those who threatmines the other. You should not, however, believe ened his power, which sometimes hapthat pundits and politicians are uniquely pened to include those we might deem blessed with the capability of seeing al- terrorists. Whether it was the Sunni or ternative realities. Yet, the way people Kurdish or Shiite theocrats, his goal was talk about Iraq these days they probably to consolidate power. No, he didn’t read them their rights or talk. He gassed cithink they are. It is completely rational to hold poli- vilians (“a little,” according to Trump) ticians who supported the Iraq War (and and tortured and raped the families of the ones who claim they would extricate his enemies during his Stalinist purges. us from it) accountable for their votes At the time, there was an underlying and policies. It’s an incredible mess. It’s moral argument for changing the lives irrational, though, to claim you know of victims, and with it the trajectory of what the Middle East would look like the Middle East. It failed. It’s one thing to argue that allowing had Saddam (or one of his depraved sons) remained in power. Yet nearly ev- Saddam to stay may have helped counery contemporary counterhistory of the terbalance Iran or save Christians or Iraq War tells us hundreds of millions avert a Syrian civil war. It’s something of people would be living quietly under else to perpetuate the fiction that he

David

Harsanyi

did not export terrorism. If Iraq wasn’t Harvard for terrorists it was surely a safety school for top-notch extremists. Not only did Saddam aid and shelter the murderers of American citizens, but the United States designated Iraq a terror state for providing bases to a number of violent organizations. At the Weekly Standard, Stephen Hayes offers a long list of ways Saddam aided terrorists. He mentions “a 2008 Pentagon study, based on 600,000 Iraqi regime documents captured in postwar Iraq, that concluded: ‘Evidence shows that Saddam’s use of terrorist tactics and his support for terrorist groups remained strong up until the collapse of the regime.’” WITHOUT ANY evidence to support his claim, Trump professes to have opposed this war before the invasion. Let’s concede that’s true. It’s worth

pointing out that many anti-war progressives and paleoconservatives — and because Trump most resembles Buchananites I’ll lump him in with them — do not possess any prescience on Middle East matters because they happen to be partially correct about the Iraq War’s aftermath. Even if weapons of mass destruction were found on day one, and even if Iraq were a stable democracy today, they would have still have opposed it. They are in blanket opposition to any military action at any time for any reason against any terror state or regime that threatens American interests. Some segments of this opposition perfunctorily rationalize and justify the actions of enemy regimes, including the Iranian state and Palestinian terrorism. Plenty of people deserve credit for warning Americans about the downsides of the invasion, but Trump-style paleos are not among them. Nor should we fool ourselves. In a Reason-Rupe poll conducted a couple of years ago, 51 percent of Americans claimed they were opposed to the Iraq War when it started in 2003. Only 39 percent say they supported the war. This is highly unlikely. Soon after the invasion, 72 percent of Americans interviewed in a CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll were still in favor. Only 25 percent were opposed. In the same poll, only 41 percent believed it necessary to find weapons of mass destruction to justify the conflict (as opposed to the 38 percent that thought the war was justified regardless). Support for the Iraq War didn’t begin to crumble when it was obvious we wouldn’t find a large cache of weapons of mass destruction. It crumbled when Americans realized that creating a viable nation was futile. I REGRET my support for the Iraq invasion, as well. But the decision was far more complex, both morally and politically, than today’s revisionism implies. Let’s debate the war. Let’s not change history.

Name _________________________________________________ Address ________________________________________________ City _____________________ State _____________ Zip _________ Credit Card Number # ___________________________________

Billing Information.

Name _________________________________________________ Address ________________________________________________ City _____________________ State _____________ Zip _________

Send a Free Sample.

(U.S. Currency Only) Call for current foreign rate information.

Name _________________________________________________ Address ________________________________________________ City _____________________ State _____________ Zip _________

______/_______

Expiration Date

Credit Card

❏ American Express

❏ Discover Card

❏ MC / VISA

❏ Check Enclosed

Order Total $___________

❏ 52 issues - $75.00

❏ 26 issues - $41.00

❏ 13 issues - $23.00

Select the number of issues you would like.

❏ 52 issues - $75.00

❏ 26 issues - $41.00

❏ 13 issues - $23.00

Select the number of issues you would like.

Michael Barone, Austin Bay, Brent Bozell, Pat Buchanan, Mona Charen, Linda Chavez, Ann Coulter, Jackie Gingrich Cushman, Larry Elder, Leslie Elman, Erick Erickson, Joseph Farah, Paul Greenberg, David Harsanyi, Laura Hollis, Terence Jeffrey, Charles Krauthammer, Larry Kudlow, Donald Lambro, David Limbaugh, Rich Lowry, Michelle Malkin, Mychal Massie, Stephen Moore, Dick Morris, William Murchison, Andrew Napolitano, Marvin Olasky, Dennis Prager, Debra J. Saunders, Phyllis Schlafly, Ben Shapiro, Thomas Sowell, Cal Thomas, Matt Towery, R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr., George Will, and Walter Williams.

Featured and Contributing Columnists

The weekly publication that features newspaper columns from America's leading conservative commentators.

Conservative Chronicle

Place your order on line at www.conservativechronicle.com

Call toll free in the US 1-800-888-3039

Send this form with payment to: Conservative Chronicle, Box 29 Hampton, IA 50441-0029 or

Your Own Subscription.

(2 or 3 would be great!)

Name _________________________________________________ Address ________________________________________________ City _____________________ State _____________ Zip _________ Sign Gift Card as: ________________________________________ Attach extra sheets for additional gifts.

Give a New Gift Subscription.

You can share this publication and help us expose the truth in 3 ways.

Help Us Spread The Conservative Message.

•NEWSPAPER• •DATED MATERIAL•

RUSH!

Postmaster: Timely Material Please deliver on or before 7/20/16 Periodicals Postage Paid Mailed 7/14/16

Read Charles Krauthammer, Donald Lambro & Cal Thomas on Pages 16-17

FBI Recommendation

This week our CONSERVATIVE FOCUS is on:

Read Thomas Sowell’s Column on Page 1

The War on Police Escalates

Murder in Dallas

Wednesday, July 20, 2016 • Volume 31, Number 29 • Hampton, Iowa