Conservative Chronicle for November 16 2016 by Mid-America Publishing Corporation

At Issue this week... November 16, 2016 2016 Election Barone (21) Coulter (6,7) Cushman (29) Elder (11) Fields (16) Harsanyi (5) Krauthammer (22) Kudlow (10) Lambro (9) Morris (12) Olasky (17) Saunders (1) Schlafly (20) Sowell (17,19) Will (18) Abortion Limbaugh (15) Bail System Saunders (30) Clinton, Hillary Buchanan (24) Moore (26) Tyrrell (25) Comey, James Lowry (22) Massie (29) Napolitano (23) Congo Bay (31) Democrats Lowry (5) Early Voting Chavez (8) Saunders (7) Electoral College McCaughey (3) Elites Hollis (3) Farmers de Rugy (12) Iraq Bay (28) Justice Williams (21) Leslie’s Trivia Bits Elman (14) Media Bias Bozell (14,30) Past, The Greenberg (28) Politics Malkin (2) Murchison (18) Republic Barone (25) Sharing Economy Saunders (13) Trump, Donald Buchanan (4) Charen (8) Prager (27) Thomas (11,26)

2016 Election by Debra J. Saunders

The all-Trump election of 2016

et me tell you about my life since Donald Trump won the Republican primary. I voted against Trump in June because of his history as an unreliable conservative and longtime supporter of big government. I voted for Libertarian Gary Johnson in the general election. Yet I have had this dark presence that has shadowed me. Wherever I have gone, I have been put in the position of explaining or defending Trump by people who saw it as my duty to denounce The Donald. ON THE RADIO and in speaking appearances, it has fallen to me to explain to Bay Area audiences why someone who is not a complete idiot would vote for Trump. I can only assume that my questioners don’t know any Trump voters — other than relatives they must endure over cocktails during holidays. To mention that Trump was preferable on regulation, Obamacare or the U.S. Supreme Court was to invite scorn. How dare anyone conjure up issues when Trump’s rhetoric is so divisive? I’ve watched countless hours of cable news, during which reporters grilled Republicans about whether they would vote for Trump in November. Never once did I see

a reporter demand that Democrats disclose whether they would vote for Clinton, even though she had set up home-brew servers for State Department emails and then deleted thousands of those emails after they were under subpoena. All you heard was nagging about Trump, Trump, Trump.

Debra J.

ON PANELS, it has been my job to watch liberals excoriating Trump as a racist, sexist bigot. It never occurred to these fine fellows that American voters might support him. Sure, they winked, he won the Neanderthal GOP primary, but he could never win the popular vote. His appeal, they knew, was limited to angry white men who didn’t go to college. I was wrong, too. I thought Trump most likely would lose and also that he could cost Republicans control of the Senate. I believed the polls. San Francisco sure believed those polls. How many times did I watch Democrats

agree that it would be better if Clinton won big? As Chris Lehane, a former aide to Al Gore and now a lobbyist for Airbnb, told the San Francisco Chronicle editorial board, if Clinton won big, Republicans would have to face reality. If the election were tight, on the other hand, both sides would learn nothing and just go back to their corners. I did not agree. A big win for Clinton would justify her bad decisions and her grabby ways. As I write this and Trump seems poised to win the Electoral College, I don’t think many Democrats are hoping that Trump wins really big — for the good of the country. I remain dubious about whether Trump is up to the job of president. On the other hand, it is possible that winning the White House will humble Trump and make him a better man. Whereas with Clinton, we know that power corrupts. HERE’S WHERE the media really got it wrong. Most people in the press never thought Clinton’s baggage would hurt her chances. Me, I thought Hillary Clinton would be a terrible president. And guess what. So did a huge chunk of American voters. November 9, 2016

Conservative Chronicle

POLITICS: November 9, 2016

Identity politics in America: A post-mortem Here is what eight years of President Obama’s “post-racial” reign have wrought. The weekend before Election Day, Hillary Clinton grinned from ear to ear at a Cleveland rally while reciting a verse from Jay-Z’s remix of Young Jeezy’s “My President is Black.” As the rapper and his Black Lives Matter-promoting wife, Beyonce, beamed on stage nearby, pandersuit-clad Clinton twanged with a stilted accent: “Remember, Jay memorably said: ‘Rosa Parks sat so Martin Luther could walk, and Martin Luther walked so Barack Obama could run, and Barack Obama ran so all the children could fly.’”

THIS WOULD be comical if not for the noxious cynicism of it all. Clinton may not remember (if she was ever aware in the first place), but the original version of “My President is Black” is a brazen middle finger to nonblack America. Just a few lines after the verse Hillary quoted, the song taunts: Hello Miss America, hey pretty lady Red, white, and blue flag, wave for me baby Never thought I’d say this s---, baby I’m good You can keep your p---, I don’t want no more Bush No more war, no more Iraq No more white lies, the President is black So the poster granny for liberal white privilege, groveling for black votes,

When all is said and done, one of the kissed the rings of celebrity Obama BFFs Jay-Z and Beyonce by parroting an most important cultural accomplishinflammatory anthem laced with profani- ments of Donald Trump’s bid will be the platform he created for Americans ties and radical racialized gloating. Could there have been a more perfect of all colors, ethnicities, political afbeclownment to cap Clinton’s phony- filiations, and socioeconomic backbaloney “Stronger Together” campaign? grounds to defy soul-draining identity After denigrating millions of Trump politics. Beltway chin-pullers expediently supporters as “deplorable” and “irredeemable” earlier this year, Clinton then focused on Trump’s white and consupporters who are unctuously confessed on election eve: “I servative rightly sick and regret deeply how tired of social jusangry the tone of tice double stanthe campaign bedards. But they came.” ignored the inNote the classic (c) 2016, Creators Syndicate creasingly vocal textbook employconstituency of ment of the passive hyphen-free, label-rejecting American voice to evade personal responsibility. The good news is that after being People Against Political Correctness blasted as haters by Clinton’s hate-filled who don’t fit old narratives and boxes. And the same “Never Trump” punminions, after being slapped down as racial “cowards” by Clintonite holdover dits and establishment political strateEric Holder, after being lambasted as gists who gabbed endlessly about the “xenophobes” and “nativists” by immi- need for “minority outreach” after gration expansionists in both parties, af- 2012 were flummoxed by the blacks, ter enduring a string of faked hate crimes gays, Latinos, women and Democrats blamed on conservatives, after ceaseless who rallied behind the GOP candidate. accusations of “Islamophobia” in the THE MOST important speech of the wake of jihad attacks on American soil, after baseless accusations of “homopho- 2016 election cycle wasn’t delivered bia” for protesting the government’s gay by one of the presidential candidates. It wedding cake coercion, and after mourn- came from iconoclastic Silicon Valley ing a growing list of police officers am- entrepreneur/investor and Trump supbushed and targeted by violent thugs porter Peter Thiel who best explained seeking racial vengeance, an undeniable the historically significant backlash movement of citizens in the 2016 elec- against the intolerant tolerance mob and phony diversity-mongers. tion cycle decided to push back.

Michelle

Malkin

“Louder voices have sent a message that they do not intend to tolerate the views of one half of the country,” he observed at the National Press Club last week. He recounted how the gay magazine The Advocate, which had once praised him as a “gay innovator,” declared he was “not a gay man” anymore because of his libertarian, limitedgovernment politics. “The lie behind the buzzword of diversity could not be made more clear,” Thiel noted. “If you don’t conform, then you don’t count as diverse, no matter what your personal background.” Trump’s eclectic coalition was bound by that common thread: Disaffected individuals tired of being told they don’t count and discounted because their views do not properly “match” their gender, chromosomes, skin color or ethnicity. That is exactly why the more they and their nominee were demonized, the stronger their support grew. “No matter what happens in this election,” Thiel concluded last week, “what Trump represents isn’t crazy and it’s not going away.” HE’S RIGHT. I too often take for granted my own personal awakening about the entrenched tribalism of identity politics at a crazy liberal arts college in the early 1990s. The liberation from collectivist ideology is profound and lasting. Witnessing so many outspoken newcomers arrive at this enlightenment, however circuitous the route, has been the most encouraging and underappreciated phenomenon of the 2016 campaign.

•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

November 16, 2016 ELITES: November 3, 2016

Exposing the elites and their sense of superiority

arlier this week, in what is perhaps the best indictment of our ruling class since Angelo Codevilla’s book of the same title, Thomas Frank wrote a scathing opinion column for the Guardian. Titled, “Forget the FBI cache: The Podesta emails show how America is run,” Frank is blunt about our betters’ smug sense of superiority, their overweening egos, their self-serving political machinations and their reeking hypocrisy.

HERE’S A choice passage: “There are wonderful things to be found in this treasure trove when you search the gilded words ‘Davos’ or ‘Tahoe.’ But it is when you search ‘Vineyard’ on the WikiLeaks dump that you realize these people truly inhabit a different world from the rest of us. By ‘vineyard,’ of course, they mean Martha’s Vineyard, the ritzy vacation resort island off the coast of Massachusetts where presidents Clinton and Obama

spent most of their summer vacations. ist Papers, or other contemporaneous The Vineyard is a place for the very, writings like Adam Smith’s Wealth of very rich to unwind, yes, but as we learn Nations, there is explicit recognition of from these emails, it is also a place of the value, and agency, of the individual. high idealism; a land of enlightened lib- And behind the loftier (and more freeral commitment far beyond anything quently discussed) notions of political liberty is a tacit acknowledgement that ordinary citizens can ever achieve.” have the right to run Frank’s sarcasm drips off the a d u l t s their lives as they page. And why see fit. shouldn’t it? The Indeed, “the condescension pursuit of happiand hostility dis(c) 2016, Creators Syndicate ness” was conplayed by Clinton sidered important and her cronies in the tens of thousands of emails that enough to include it among only three have already been exposed is enough to enumerated “inalienable rights” in a list make any of us “little people” infuri- that was not intended to be comprehensive, behind only “life” and “liberty.” ated. But in truth, this attitude explains a ONE WOULD never guess, reading great deal. For one thing, it provides some insight into why this class of John Podesta & Co.’s correspondence, people is so utterly indifferent — if not that government should be just one outright scornful — of the Constitution. institution among many in a nation of If one reads the Constitution, the Dec- competent adults. They make us sound laration of Independence, the Federal- like imbeciles and infants, incapable of

Laura

Hollis

ELECTORAL COLLEGE: November 8, 2016

Votes count, rules count more

he outcome of the wildest presidential election in our lifetimes will likely boil down to the rules in our rule book: The U.S. Constitution. There may be more surprises ahead, but the framers prepared us for almost any contingency. Look for electors going rogue, an Electoral College deadlock, or contested voting results like Florida in 2000. There’s even a bizarre possibility of a Trump-Kaine administration. Here’s what to watch for: Can the winner of the popular vote lose? You bet. That’s happened four times before, most recently when Al Gore won the popular vote by 540,000 in 2000. The Electoral College — a body set up by the framers — actually chooses the president. Each state gets a number of electors equal to its representation in the House and Senate combined. So New York with 27 congressional seats has 29 electors, but tiny New Hampshire has only four. Electors are expected to vote for their state’s popular vote winner. EVEN IF Hillary Clinton racks up huge margins in Ill., N.Y. and other states with lots of urban voters, Donald Trump could still eke out an electoral college win because of his following in many less populous states. That’s by design. The framers wanted to ensure that the president-elect has support from all parts of the nation. Late-breaking surprises are possible right up to Jan. 6. That’s the day Con-

gress meets to count the electoral votes. It’s generally just mechanical. But there could be shockers this time. Pay attention to maverick electors. Generally, electors are party loyalists and big donors who regard the task as ceremonial. But nothing in the U.S. Constitution or federal law prevents them from defying the popular vote in their state. Some state laws bar defiance, but those laws are constitutionally suspect.

Betsy

In our nation’s history, 85 electors have defied voters and gone with conscience instead. This time around, a Washington State Democratic elector — with strong feelings for Bernie Sanders — has already announced that he won’t cast his vote for Hillary Clinton if she wins his state. He says Clinton is a “criminal” and “she will not get my vote, period.” A second Washington State Democratic elector says he hasn’t ruled out going rogue. IN PAST elections, errant electors haven’t changed history, but with disaffection for the candidates rampant among the party faithful, and Clinton and Trump neck and neck in battleground states, all bets are off. An Electoral College deadlock is possible. To win, a candidate must get

270 electoral votes — a majority of the nation’s 538 total. The race is so close, it’s possible Clinton and Trump could tie at 269. In that case, the Constitution says the House of Representatives chooses the president, with each state having one vote, and the Senate chooses the vice president. The House is likely to stay Republican after the election, guaranteeing Trump a big advantage. No one knows which party will control the new Senate that will convene in January, just in time to resolve the deadlock. If it still has a Republican majority, Pence would be chosen. But if Democrats win Senate control, Tim Kaine would be their pick. Voila! A TrumpKaine administration. They’d get along about as well as Cain and Abel. Will the Supreme Court decide the election? Democrats and Republicans are already lawyering up, laying the groundwork for possible challenges to the popular vote in states such as Ohio and Pennsylvania. Just like Bush v. Gore, this election could land in the Supreme Court. With only eight justices, a deadlock there is possible. But hold on. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg may have to recuse herself due to her disparaging comments about Trump last July.

making even the most ministerial daily decision without the all-encompassing direction of Big Government. The push for government intervention may have started out with legitimate concerns for a minority of citizens who were less fortunate and incapable of upward mobility. But it has slowly morphed into the pervasive perspective that most people have neither the ability nor, in some cases, the right to run their own lives. We cannot do it as individuals, as families, as communities of faith, as schools, or even as states, without the diktats of leviathan government. The result has been an explosive expansion of the federal regulatory state. But for all the “good” that this is supposed to bring, it has largely backfired, in ways that progressives decry but refuse to take responsibility for — most notably, the problem of “too much money in government.” With increased government comes the pressure to carve out exemptions. Only very wealthy individuals or corporations who have the resources to pay lobbyists or make political donations can accomplish this. The rest of us are forced to fend for ourselves. The symbiotic relationship between those who declare themselves solely fit to govern and those who pay to get out from under the rules is laid bare in ugly details in the WikiLeaked emails. As is their disdain for those of us stuck with the “governance.” It is inevitable that these classes of people who scratch each other’s backs, line each other’s pockets and hire each other’s children would eventually come to despise the rest of us: The great unwashed masses who they feel don’t deserve their honesty but oh-so desperately need their leadership. If you do not judge a man capable of governing himself, then your pity for him eventually becomes contempt. It is inconceivable to this self-important class (which, regrettably, now includes innovators, artists and journalists) that we might dare to throw off the yoke of their benevolence and wisdom. And when we do, they don’t see it coming. Or if they see it, they predict havoc in its wake. Thus, Brexit never was supposed to happen, and thereafter would produce international chaos when it did. Thus, now, are we told that the American public will have the good sense to elect the corruptocratic Hillary Clinton, who knows what’s best for us and will appoint two or three judges to, accordingly, further rein in our rights.

THE FRAMERS anticipated politics would always be tumultuous and, yes, corrupt. Thanks to the rules they BUT MILLIONS of us still believe devised and Americans have respected in the promises behind the Constituever since, the nation has survived 57 tion. We still prize our autonomy. Anypresidential contests. We’ll get through thing can happen. this one, too.

Conservative Chronicle

DONALD TRUMP: November 8, 2016

What hath Donald Trump wrought? “If I don’t win, this will be the great- who repudiated the last two Republican est waste of time, money and energy in presidents and the last two Republican nominees? my lifetime,” says Donald Trump. Do mainstream Republicans think Herewith, a dissent. Whatever happens Tuesday, Trump has made history that should Trump lose a Bush Restoraand has forever changed American poli- tion lies ahead? The dynasty is as dead as the Romanovs. tics. The media, whose reputation has Though a novice in politics, he captured the Party of Lincoln with the larg- sunk to Congressional depths, has also a blow to its credibilest turnout of primary voters ever, and suffered ity. he has inflicted Its hatred of wounds on the naTrump has been tion’s ruling class almost manic, and from which it may WikiLeaks revnot soon recover. (c) 2016, Creators Syndicate elations of the Bush I and II, collusion between Mitt Romney, the neocons and the GOP commentariat all major media and Clintonites have condenounced Trump as morally and tem- vinced skeptics that the system is rigged peramentally unfit. Yet, seven of eight and the referees of democracy are in the Republicans are voting for Trump, and tank. But it is the national establishment he drew the largest and most enthusiasthat has suffered most. tic crowds of any GOP nominee. The Trump candidacy exposed what NOT ONLY did he rout the Repub- seems an unbridgeable gulf between lican elites, he ash-canned their agenda this political class and the nation in and repudiated the wars into which they whose name it purports to speak. Consider the litany of horrors it has plunged the country. Trump did not create the forces that charged Trump with. He said John McCain was no hero, propelled his candidacy. But he recognized them, tapped into them, and that some Mexican illegals are “rapunleashed a gusher of nationalism and ists.” He mocked a handicapped reporter. He called some women “pigs.” He populism that will not soon dissipate. Whatever happens Tuesday, there is wants a temporary ban to Muslim immigration. He fought with a Gold Star no going back now. How could the Republican establish- mother and father. He once engaged in ment advance anew the trade and im- “fat-shaming” a Miss Universe, calling migration policies that their base has so her “Miss Piggy,” and telling her to stay out of Burger King. He allegedly made thunderously rejected? How can the GOP establishment crude advances on a dozen women and credibly claim to speak for a party that starred in the Access Hollywood tape spent the last year cheering a candidate with Billy Bush.

Pat

Buchanan

While such “gaffes” are normally fatal for candidates, Trump’s followers stood by him through them all. Why? asks an alarmed establishment. Why, in spite of all this, did Trump’s support endure? Why did the American people not react as they once would have? Why do these accusations not have the bite they once did? Answer. We are another country now, an us-or-them country. MIDDLE AMERICA believes the establishment is not looking out for the nation but for retention of its power. And in attacking Trump it is not upholding some objective moral standard but seeking to destroy a leader who represents a grave threat to that power. Trump’s followers see an American Spring as crucial, and they are not going

to let past boorish behavior cause them to abandon the last best chance to preserve the country they grew up in. These are the Middle American Radicals, the MARs of whom my late friend Sam Francis wrote. They recoil from the future the elites have mapped out for them and, realizing the stakes, will overlook the faults and failings of a candidate who holds out the real promise of avoiding that future. They believe Trump alone will secure the borders and rid us of a trade regime that has led to the loss of 70,000 factories and five million manufacturing jobs since NAFTA. They believe Trump is the best hope for keeping us out of the wars the Beltway think tanks are already planning for the sons of the “deplorables” to fight. Moreover, they see the establishment as the quintessence of hypocrisy. Trump is instructed to stop using such toxic phrases as “America First” and “Make America Great Again” by elites who think 55 million abortions since Roe is a milestone of moral progress. And what do they have in common with a woman who thinks partial-birth abortion, which her predecessor in the Senate, Pat Moynihan, called “infanticide,” is among the cherished “reproductive rights” of women? While a Trump victory would create the possibility of a coalition of conservatives, populists, patriots and nationalists governing America, should he lose, America’s future appears disunited and grim. But, would the followers of Donald Trump, whom Hillary Clinton has called “racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic ... bigots,” to the cheers of her media retainers, unite behind her should she win? NO. WIN OR lose, as Sen. Edward Kennedy said at the Democratic Convention of 1980, “The work goes on, the cause endures.”

November 16, 2016 2016 ELECTION: November 4, 2016

This is the least important election of our lifetimes

uring the 1864 presidential race between Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan, the New York Times published an article that contained this sentence: “We have had many important elections, but never one so important as that now approaching.” Though there may have been some truth in this claim, three years into the Civil War means the Times was probably one election too late. In any event, every candidate or publication that’s made comparable declarations since that time regarding the presidential contest being the “most important” election of their “lifetime” or their “generation” or “in history” or “ever” is completely full of it. THAT GOES for Gerald Ford, who in a debate against Jimmy Carter claimed that the 1976 election was “one of the most vital in the history of America.” As it turns out, that was a contest between an accidental president and a highly ineffec-

tual future president. And it wasn’t even in a mere four years. Yet on Tuesday in the most important election Carter would Dade City, Florida, Clinton finally stated participate in. what many in her party (from the presiIt also goes for Walter Mondale, who dent to students to 96-year-old Roger in 1984 told a crowd, “This is the most Angell) have been saying for months: “I important election of our lives.” (Ron- believe this may be the most important ald Reagan lost a single state to Mon- election of our lifetimes.” For her, yes. dale, and the outcome was never really For the rest of us, not so much. in doubt.) It goes for John Kerry, who in 2004 said, “My fellow Americans, this is JUDGING FROM the histrionic the most important election of our life- rhetoric we hear daily, most people betime.” It goes for Joe Biden and Barack lieve this is the most important election Obama, both of whom claimed that 2008 ever. Did you see the meltdown was “the most imleftist media had after portant election Clinton’s ethical tribin my lifetime.” ulations again threatIt goes for Newt ened her chancGingrich, who said es at the White (c) 2016, Creators Syndicate it in 2012. It goes House? You’d also for the media think attacking that acted as if what they said were true. Clinton were tantamount to attacking the It certainly goes for Hillary Clinton very foundations of “democracy.” Partiand Donald Trump, neither of whom sans always seem to believe that everypossess the requisite talent, vision or thing that happens to them right now, at charisma needed to destroy this country this very moment, is the most important

David

Harsanyi

DEMOCRATS: November 7, 2016

The Democrats who cried wolf

he Republican nominee for president is a racist, sexist threat to American democracy — and this time, we really mean it. In a nutshell, this is the Democratic argument against Donald Trump. In a wild, topsy-turvy political year, it is the one exceedingly familiar piece of the political landscape — because it is a version of the argument the left makes against every Republican nominee. That this line of attack is so shopworn, just when Democrats think we need it most, has led to self-reflection and regret from one of the harshest commentators on the left. The HBO host Bill Maher said the other day that “liberals made a big mistake” when they attacked George W. Bush “like he was the end of the world,” and did the same thing to Mitt Romney and John McCain. MAHER HIMSELF was a prime offender, with no hesitation about resorting to Nazi analogies (he compared Romney’s aides to Adolf Hitler’s deadend loyalists, and Laura Bush to Hitler’s dog). Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have been touring the country saying that Trump isn’t like past Republican nominees, even though they were attacked in exactly the same terms. George W. Bush was a man of deep faith who did all he could to reach out to minorities and soften conservatism’s edge. Yet right out of the gate in 2000, the NAACP ran an ad accusing him

of being all but complicit in a hideous racist murder in Texas. His botched handling of Hurricane Katrina wasn’t portrayed as a mistake in trying circumstances, but of his disregard for black people. He was called a fascist, a war criminal and a would-be theocrat. Obama now says Romney was only “wrong on certain policy issues.” This is rank revisionism. His campaign’s entire approach in 2012 was to disqualify Romney as a person, basically for being too coldbloodedly rational and prim and proper (i.e., the opposite of Trump).

Rich

ROMNEY WAS not, as an Obama ad put it, “one of us.” He basically killed people with his heartless layoffs. He posed a real and present danger to Latinos with his policy of “self-deportation.” He was waging a “war on women.” One prominent piece of evidence for Romney’s unhinged sexism was his entirely anodyne, if awkward, comment that he asked for “binders full of women” when making appointments as governor of Massachusetts. Harry Reid infamously alleged, with no evidence whatsoever, that Romney didn’t pay taxes for a decade. When the Republican candidate released his returns, it turned out he had overpaid. And so it went.

It has always been the case that Republican leaders are retrospectively deemed statesmen by the left when they are dead or retired. It has happened to Ronald Reagan, who went from a warmongering right-wing radical to a statesmanlike moderate; to George H.W. Bush, who was an out-of-touch elitist and now is the epitome of class; and to George W. Bush, John McCain and Mitt Romney, who now are getting their revivals. This isn’t about the softening passage of time so much as opportunistically using past Republican politicians as a bludgeon against contemporary Republican politicians. Genuinely alarmed by Trump, Bill Maher apparently realizes how tinny it sounds to lodge against him all the accusations routinely made against any other Republican. It was just a couple of years ago that Paul Ryan — an earnest policy wonk who operates in the inclusive style of the late Jack Kemp — was attacked as a racist for commenting on men not working in troubled inner-city neighborhoods. IF THIS isn’t crying wolf, what is? Confronted with Trump, Democrats don’t have any radioactive denunciations in reserve. They have all been deployed against a couple of generations of Republicans whose politics and characters were starkly different than Trump’s. And will surely be deployed once again — the charges never change, just the target.

thing that has ever happened or will ever happen to humanity. Yes, government’s increasing involvement in the economic and moral lives of citizens has made political stakes high. It’s true that 2016 features the two suckiest candidates probably ever. It’s also true that our collective vision of the American project has frayed, perhaps beyond repair. With the intense scrutiny of contemporary political coverage, more people are invested in the daily grind of elections, which intensifies the sting of losing. This anger compounds every cycle (although winning brings its own disappointment with its unfulfilled promises). That’s not to say our constitutional republic isn’t slowly dying. It probably is. This condition isn’t contingent on an election’s outcome but on widespread problems with our institutions, politics and voters. Whatever you believe the future of governance should look like, one election is not going make or break it. In fact, when it comes to policy, it’s far more likely that very little will change over the next four years -- perhaps even less than changed with the election of Obama, who had two years of one-party rule before Republicans took back Congress. Last year, Bloomberg Businessweek ran a column headlined “Why 2016 May Be the Most Important Election of Our Lifetime.” Like many other similar pieces, it argues that as our politics become more polarized our elections become correspondingly more significant. But our growing divide might be exactly why 2016 turns out to be one of the least important elections in our lifetime. If providence (or dumb luck) takes mercy on the Constitution, Washington D.C.’s gridlock -- an organic reflection of the nation’s disposition -- will remain the status quo. Actually, what am I talking about? That’s exactly what the Constitution was built to do in a divided nation. The situation will render the next president weaker than most and somewhat contain his or her authoritarianism and poor judgment. This kind of frustrating environment is likely to cause more recrimination and, unfortunately, abuses of power that are meant to circumvent the congestion. Still, overall, it’s better than partisan unilateralism. The situation will not change until we find competent people to put into the White House or politicians with ideas that have some crossover appeal. That time is not now. OF COURSE, none of this is to completely diminish the importance of the presidential election. Obviously, voters are making a decision about the future of governance. Judges are at stake. Foreign policy is made. There are consequences. But if the republic can’t survive a bad executive, then it’s already dead.

Conservative Chronicle

2016 ELECTION: November 2, 2016

My final argument for Trump: Humiliate the media! Unlike the serial predations of her For every argument the media make husband, leveled repeatedly throughout against Trump, Hillary’s worse. (1) Eleven years ago, Trump said on the decades, the timing of these 11tha secretly recorded tape that celebrities hour allegations against Trump make can do anything — even grab a wom- them highly suspect. Recall that the New York Times spent an’s p--sy. Hillary, born-again Victorian virgin, months investigating Trump’s treatment campaigns with Beyonce, who performs of women earlier this year. The Newsa duet with the words “curvalicious, p- paper of Record put its best reporters on the job, interviewed a dozen -sy served delicious.” women, and the paper Hillary is splashed the story on thrilled to have its front page. But the support of Mathe best the Times donna — who has could come up publicly offered to (c) 2016, Ann Coulter with was a story give blow jobs to about Trump, as a anyone who votes for Hillary. (She’ll even remove her bachelor, publicly praising a model for looking great in a bikini at his pool parteeth!) Hillary’s campaign has deployed ty. Then they dated. The horror. Five months later, just weeks before Miley Cyrus to canvas for her — when Cyrus is not busy inviting men in the the election, there doesn’t seem to be a audience to reach up and grab her p- female Democrat who isn’t claiming to -sy. (Here’s a video of delicate flower have been groped by Trump — and getMiley Cyrus in action: youtube.com/ ting loads of fawning publicity. (3) Trump doesn’t give enough to watch?v=fQe2IoJVyhw.) charity. The media only counts “charitable WHEN VERNON Jordan was asked by CBS’ Mike Wallace what he talked giving” if it can be taken as a tax deducabout while golfing with Bill Clinton — tion with the IRS. When Trump spent aka Hillary’s husband — he answered: time and money saving a Georgia family farm from foreclosure in the 1980s, “P--sy.” Oh, and 11 years before Teddy Ken- for example, he didn’t get any tax writenedy ran for president as the Conscience off. of the Democratic Party — he killed a HILLARY, BY contrast, was a big girl. After grabbing her p--sy. philanthropist because, at about the (2) Trump’s a sexual predator! Hillary’s husband is a well-estab- same time, she was taking a deduction lished rapist, groper and pants-dropper. for donations of Bill’s used underwear — the modern equivalent of smallpoxShe’s his fixer.

Ann

Coulter

laden blankets. Today, the munificent Clinton Foundation spends less than 10 percent of its revenues on actual charity, using about 90 percent for salaries, offices and travel. (4) Several of Trump’s businesses went bankrupt. Trump has created or helped create hundreds of businesses. Fewer than 10 went bankrupt. Hillary had one business, Whitewater Development Corp., and it went bankrupt — after ripping off scores of ordinary Americans. Also, a dozen prominent Arkansans went to prison in connection with sleazy financial transactions involving Whitewater.

(5) Trump University was a scam! Approximately 10,000 graduates of Trump University were thrilled with the program and said so in writing. But a law firm that paid Hillary and Bill Clinton $675,000 for three speeches managed to find a handful of disgruntled students to be the named plaintiffs in a class-action lawsuit against it. Trump University was a minuscule portion of Trump’s portfolio. Whitewater was a huge part of Bill and Hillary’s get-rich-quick schemes, scamming the elderly, retirees and working-class Americans for the money-hungry Clintons. As described by the Washington Post, people who bought property from the Whitewater Development Corp. were required to submit a down payment, followed by monthly payments, until the entire purchase price of the property was paid off. But if buyers missed a single payment for any reason, the entire transaction would be deemed null and void, and the property, as well as all prior payments, would be forfeited to the Whitewater corporation. No foreclosure proceeding, no court hearing, no due process. More than half of Whitewater’s customers lost their entire investment. (See “Whitewater Repossessions; Sales Practice Benefited Clintons, Partners,” Washington Post, April 21, 1994.) Though Hillary had long claimed to have nothing to do with the operation of the business, when the books were finally opened, it turned out that the monthly checks were mailed to the Whitewater Development Corp. — “care of Hillary Rodham Clinton.” (See “Records Show Wider Role for Hillary Clinton; Whitewater Papers Detail Involvement,” Washington Post, April 21, 1994.) (continued next page)

November 16, 2016 EARLY VOTING: November 3, 2016

Election Day: The early voter gets remorse

s I write this, more than 27 million Americans already have voted in the Nov. 8 election. California voters can submit their ballots 30 days before Election Day. Minnesotans can vote 46 days out — starting Sept. 23, i.e., before the first of the three general election presidential debates. Many early voters cast their ballots before recent revelations about Donald Trump’s treatment of women and Hillary Clinton’s wayward emails,

OVER THE weekend, Fox News so there have to be voters who regret ran stories about the options available to their choice. If Democrats and Republicans had those who want a vote do-over. “I’m not in favor of do-overs,” known their actions in the primary election Loyola Law School would produce the worst top-two nominees professor Jessica imaginable, then Levinson respondthis general eleced when I asked for tion might not be her take. “I don’t so ugly. I’ve talked get to go back to to people who vot(c) 2016, Creators Syndicate change my law ed early just to get school exam.” According to a spokesman the whole dirty business over with.

Debra J.

Saunders

Coulter continued (6) We can’t allow Trump access to nuclear codes! Hillary is the one who is champing at the bit to go to war with Russia, which, I am reliably informed, is a nuclear power. At least Hillary’s adept at dealing with sensitive digital information. Huma! Quick! Are the nuclear launch codes on my Blackberry, my desktop thingy or my Facebook page? Compared to Hillary, we’d be safer if the nuclear codes were held by Miley Cyrus (unless she kept them in her p--sy). (7) Trump’s temperament will get us into World War III. Hillary’s temperament drove her to push for intervention in the Libyan civil war against Moammar Gadhafi for the sole purpose of giving her a foreign policy success that could be all her own. Obama was skeptical. Libya was Hillary’s baby. (Sidney Blumenthal’s email to Hillary: “First, brava! This is a historic moment and you will be credited for realizing it.”) AFTER GADHAFI was killed, Hillary’s temperament led her to go on TV and laughingly say, “We came. We saw. He died.” Unfortunately, Hillary hadn’t given the slightest thought to what would come next. What came next was: the Muslim Brotherhood, the murder of Americans in Benghazi and millions of refugees pouring into Western Europe. (8) Trump failed to denounce David Duke with the ferocity deemed sufficient by our media. No one even knows if Duke actually exists or is just a phantom produced by the media every four years to smear Republicans. I know that no one has ever been incited to commit murder after listening to a David Duke speech. Lots of people have been murdered by someone who’d just heard an Al Sharpton speech: Seven at Freddy’s Fashion Mart in Harlem, and one Orthodox Jew, plus one Italian mistaken for a Jew, in Crown Heights. Hillary has not disavowed Sharpton — nor would our media be so rude as to ask.

The mother of Ferguson thug Mike Brown, Lesley McSpadden, campaigns with Hillary — she even took the stage at the Democratic National Convention. The father of Omar Mateen, the Orlando nightclub shooter, appeared on stage behind Hillary at a rally. If the media won’t ask her to “disavow” the relatives of criminals and terrorists featured at her events, could they at least ask her if she approves of their parenting techniques? (9) Trump is a “racist” because of his plan to remove Muslim jihadists, Mexican drug dealers and rapists from our country. Apart from the fact that “drug dealer,” “rapist” and “jihadist” are not races, we didn’t do anything to Muslims or Mexicans, except send them billions of dollars in foreign aid. The only “racism” Americans care about is that toward black Americans. We did something to them. Hillary asks blacks to vote for her, then vows to bring in millions of Muslims and Mexicans to take their jobs — the ones that “Americans just won’t do.” That’s racism. (10) Trump “fat-shamed” Miss Universe! No, he didn’t — he saved her crown and she was grateful. It’s on tape. But more importantly, the Miss Universe in question is Alicia Machado, well-known in Venezuela as a publicityseeking clown. Machado is credibly accused of: Driving the getaway car in an attempted murder; threatening to kill a federal judge; and being the baby mama to drug cartel kingpin Gerardo Alvarez-Vazquez, who was on the State Department’s “Most Wanted” list under — let’s see, checking my notes — Hillary Clinton. Until 1975, everyone would have realized that it’s stupid to bring in single mothers with no marketable job skills, to add to the dependent class. If we did bring them in, politicians wouldn’t proudly introduce them at rallies. But Machado is Hillary’s model immigrant. Her only job skill is voting. Upside: Hillary gets another vote. Downside: You’ll be supporting Machado and her anchor baby for the rest of their lives, America.

(11) Trump is challenging the very foundation of our democracy by saying elections are rigged! They are rigged — ask former Sen. Norm Coleman of Minnesota, whose 2008 election was provably stolen from him when more than a thousand ineligible felons voted for Al Franken in a race Coleman lost by 312 votes. (At least it wasn’t an important election: Franken provided the 60th, and deciding, vote to pass Obamacare.) In any event, Hillary says the election is rigged, too — by the Russkies! The Democrats and the media have gone full John Birch Society on us. There’s a fifth column in America — and their leader is Donald Trump!!! This is a marked departure from their previous cosmopolitan sangfroid about communism. We could have really used this fighting spirit during the Cold War. Instead, we got Jimmy Carter warning Americans about their “inordinate fear of communism.” Today, bad-a--, eye-rolling journalists are somberly announcing: “I have in my hand a list — a list of Donald Trump supporters, who are a conscious, articulate instrument of the Russian conspiracy ...” (12) Trump is shallow, has a microscopic attention span and has not studied political issues deeply. On the other hand, he has a good heart, good judgment and wants the right outcome for America: Limits on immigration, fair trade deals, elimination of Wall Street tax breaks and no more pointless Middle East wars. Hillary doesn’t want any of these things. She is good at memorizing all her little facts, but is deeply evil. She wakes up early in the morning to make sure she does the wrong thing for America. (13) Trump has personal baggage. This election is not about Trump. It’s never been about Trump. Anyone running on his platform of putting Americans first would be torn to shreds. THERE ARE probably lots of bad things Trump’s done in his personal life in the past. The ruling class wants Hillary to do bad things to our country in the future.

for the California Secretary of State, there are no ballot do-overs in California. Me, I’d be on board for a vote doover — but only if it is nationwide and includes the primary vote. THE VERY fact that people are asking about vote do-overs raises the question: Are some states giving citizens too much time to vote? Tammy Frisby, who’s in charge of the Hoover Institution’s Golden State Poll, noted that this presidential race has seen “more than its fair share of October surprises.” More campaign surprises lead to more voter remorse. A BIGGER issue than presidentialpick remorse are down-ballot contests. While most early voters probably have a clear idea of whom they want in the Oval Office, they may be less informed about local elections. California has 17 ballot measures this year. Frisby believes average people — those who don’t get paid to follow politics and policy — only start paying attention in the last month before an election. The most recent Hoover poll shows that 37 percent of California voters aren’t sure how they’ll vote in the U.S. Senate race, where the top two candidates are Democrats. (Kamala Harris, the state attorney general, and Rep. Loretta Sanchez, D-Calif.) Clearly, voters haven’t focused on that race. Asked how they’ll vote on Proposition 61, which controls prescription drug prices the state pays, more Californians were not sure (25 percent) than said they would vote no (24 percent). Those examples, Frisby noted, show that when people vote before they are focused on a race, they probably are not making “the most educated” choice possible. Cleveland State University law professor Candice Hoke explained that early voting exists to accommodate military personnel and their families, as well as residents who have to juggle voting with work, health issues, religious calendars and travel. A longer voting window is more convenient for voters and registrars, who want to process a maximum number of ballots and reduce the risk of a technology glitch hitting all voters at a particular place and time. That said, Hoke agreed when I told her I thought 46-day and 30-day windows probably last too long. She suggested a window that lasts two weeks, or maybe 12 days but includes two weekends and all seven weekdays. She added, “That type of calendar would cover for every religion and work schedule.” EVEN BEFORE the election, many citizens feel voter remorse. I predict that in 2017, they’ll also regret votes on ballot measures. Smart states don’t encourage residents to vote before a campaign is over.

Conservative Chronicle

DONALD TRUMP: November 4, 2016

Don’t delude yourself: Thinking impeachment

o I guess the election is not “rigged” after all, eh, Donald Trump? Every possible damaging headline is falling on Hillary Clinton’s head as the country staggers toward Nov. 8. So many nets that Clinton appeared to wriggle out of — the alleged influence-peddling while secretary of state, the negligence about classified emails, the dishonesty (including possibly under oath), the kid glove treatment by the FBI — it’s all roaring back at the worst possible moment for her.

IF SHE WINS (a bigger “if” today than a week ago), it will be due only to the Republican Party’s suicidal decision to nominate and support a pathological narcissist/con man — a figure utterly outside the parameters of acceptability for public office. Any public office. So as culpable as Democrats are for nominating a person who ought to have been disqualified, Republicans are even more irresponsible for risking the terrible powers of commander in chief to someone most elementary school kids would regard as emotionally unstable. Winston Churchill described World War II as the most avoidable war in history. He meant that Hitler’s intentions were clear, and that if the allies had summoned the courage to stop him while he was weak, they would have made short work of it. Instead, they dithered and deluded themselves until he was strong, costing the world 50 million lives. No, I’m not comparing Trump to Hitler, but the parallel is just this: The 2016 election was the most winnable for Republicans since, oh, 1984. The party had gained nearly a thousand federal, state, and local legislative seats since 2008, including control of the House and Senate. Barack Obama’s presidency had disappointed even many of his most blinkered admirers. Until 2016 started to make him look good by comparison, Obama’s approval rating had been stuck in the 40s (a bad omen for the candidate of his party). Approval of Obamacare, the Democrats’ signature initiative, was under water (39.2 percent approve, versus 48.8 percent disapprove), and premium hikes were kicking in. The economy has been sluggish, logging one slow quarter after another — permanent second gear. But, some protest, if it’s close and there’s a chance to get a (nominal) Republican elected, why not jump on the Trump train? Because there’s a second lesson in that Churchill story — namely, that when someone has revealed his character to you, don’t delude yourself that he will change. Trump is the most shameless liar ever to advance this far in American politics. He doesn’t lie just about trivial matters like his poll numbers, the size of his crowds or his wealth; he engages in the kind of dishonesty that undermines civic

trust. He retweets false statistics about black-on-white crime and about Muslim Americans celebrating on 9/11. He legitimizes crazed conspiracy theories, like that vaccines cause autism; Rafael Cruz was implicated in JFK’s assassination; and George W. Bush lied us into war.

larly displays comprehensive antipathy for American values that one would have thought were nearly universal. He threatens war crimes. He applauds the war crimes of others, including those of Saddam Hussein (“He throws a little gas; everyone goes crazy”), and the butchers of Tiananmen Square. He praises VladiBEYOND HIS titanic dishonesty, mir Putin like a toady. Trump is appallingly uninformed about Trump openly encouraged foreign and defense violence at his ralpolicy — the most lies and threatened important (and unit at the Cleveland constrained) realm convention when of presidential ache feared that he (c) 2016, Creators Syndicate tion. He confused would fall short of the Kurds with the required deleAl-Quds. He thinks NATO is a protec- gates for nomination. That, alone, should tion racket and that Japan, South Korea have been enough for the party to drop and Saudi Arabia should go ahead and him like radioactive waste. It violated a develop nuclear weapons. He plans trade sacred civic norm that we abide by the wars. In addition to ignorance, he regu- democratic process and do not threaten

Mona

Charen

or bully our way to power. His refusal to say that he’ll respect the result of the election was part of a well-established pattern. His defense against the charge of sexual boorishness is ... confirmed boorishness, explaining that the women in question are too unattractive to merit pawing. SHOULD WE elect him and then impeach if necessary? Who, exactly, would we trust to do that — this crowd of Republicans who (with a few laudable exceptions) has fallen into line for him? What would he have to do to merit impeachment if his thousands of offenses did not merit censure, a much lower bar? No, once elected, there will be very few checks on Trump. It’s Clinton who should fear impeachment — which might be the best we can hope for at this dismal, dispiriting moment.

EARLY VOTING: November 4, 2016

Early voting is a bad idea

f ever there was an argument against early voting, which has become used by most states in recent years, it is what has happened over the past week of this presidential election. With days to go before Election Day, we’ve learned that the FBI is investigating a trove of emails, ostensibly from Hillary Clinton, on a computer operated by disgraced former Rep. Anthony Weiner, who also happens to be the estranged husband of Clinton’s closest aide, Huma Abedin. We’ve also learned of new evidence that Donald Trump abused tax laws in the early 1990s by taking personal deductions for losses of other people’s money while not also declaring as income the forgiveness of his loans and that his campaign may have been in direct communication with Russian operatives throughout the course of the campaign. We don’t know whether any of these allegations will prove that either candidate violated the law, but even if it turns out they do, many will have already voted without the information to make an informed choice. MODERN DEMOCRATIC elections have traditionally been a snapshot in time of the electorate’s preferences. In 1845, Congress passed legislation mandating that presidential electors be chosen on the Tuesday after the first Monday in November, fulfilling the constitutional dictate that “Congress may determine the Time of (choosing) the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.” At the time, of course, the states

themselves determined how the electors would be chosen, by popular vote or by the legislature of the state, with only the apportionment of votes set out in the Constitution: One elector for each senator and representative in the state. We’ve come a long way since then — and not necessarily for the better. The political parties in each state actually choose the slate of electors by rules and procedures they establish. When voters cast their ballots, they are stating a preference for a candidate, but they are actually choosing a slate of electors pledged to the candidate by state law or by party rules, with winnertake-all votes except in Nebraska and Maine. Some states provide

Linda

penalties against electors who do not cast their votes as indicated by the popular vote, although the Supreme Court has never ruled on whether those laws and penalties are constitutional. THESE PROVISIONS were put in place to ensure a republican form of government, not a direct democracy. But the trend in recent years has moved away from the Founding Fathers’ original vision, allowing all citizens to vote — women as well as men, the indigent as well as property holders, the illiterate and non-English-speaking, and, most importantly, former slaves and their descendants. All states now provide for direct election of electors by

popular vote, and most states now allow for early voting, either in person or by mail. Voting occurs as early as 50 days before Election Day. What this means is that each election is like voting on a moving picture. If you vote early in the reel, you may not know that your candidate turns out to be a villain. This year, more than 22 million people will have voted before actual Election Day, and many of them are operating on partial information on the state of the campaign and the candidates. There has never been an election in which so many late-breaking stories have had the potential to decide an election. We have begun to treat Election Day like one of those never-ending department store sales. Show up whenever you want and you’ll still get a deal. The idea seems to be that we make voting as easy as possible. Heaven forbid we make people actually treat the occasion like the privilege it is. ELECTION DAY should be a solemn occasion. If it takes some sacrifice to vote — for example, getting up early or standing in line awhile — isn’t it worth it to be able to determine the course of our own future? But most of all, shouldn’t voting be a civic celebration, a time when we meet our neighbors and gather at the same place and same time as everyone else in the country to act on the same information available to all of us? Expanding the franchise shouldn’t be about diluting the significance of voting in the name of convenience, but unfortunately, it has become so. I, for one, think we’re worse off because of it.

November 16, 2016 2016 ELECTION: November 3, 2016

Down to the finish line with two unpopular candidates

s the fiercely combative percent, said they have a “strongly unpresidential election races favorable” view of the former secretary to the finish line, a majority of state, as well as the billionaire real of voters agree on at least one thing: estate mogul. Like it or not, that’s the The two major contenders are the most disagreeable choice now facing voters disliked candidates in modern political when they go to the polls next Tuesday. For the past eight years, the Amerihistory. That wasn’t the case in many of our can people have had to suffer through past presidential contests when popu- what economists say is the longest resince the Great Delar, well-respected candidates sought c o v e r y pression. the highest office President in the land, win or Obama, and his lose. Democratic L e g e n d apologists, have ary names like (c) 2016, United Media Services boasted that the Dwight Eisenhower and Ronald Reagan, and even economy has in fact recovered nicely, Mitt Romney, among others, come job creation is up, unemployment is to mind. But not this year, when the low, and, well, you’ve never had it so choice is between two extremely un- good. But eight years later, the Obama popular figures. economy is growing by little more than WHEN A nationwide tracking poll one percent on an annual basis. The in the final days of the election asked jobless rate is low because millions registered voters to describe their fa- of long-term jobless Americans who vorable or unfavorable impression of haven’t looked for a job in four weeks Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, aren’t counted as unemployed. Millions more have dropped out of their responses were unequivocally disthe labor force, even though they want mal for both of them. Heading into this week’s campaign, to work. Many more are working only 59 percent of voters polled — nearly part time when they want and need fullsix in 10 — said they had an unfavor- time employment, according to the Buable impression of Clinton, and a virtu- reau of Labor Statistics. The average recovery time after a ally identical percentage had a negative view of Trump, according to a Wash- recession is just two years. President Reagan came into office in the midst ington Post/ABC News poll. Americans aren’t known for pulling of a fierce recession in 1981, cut taxes, their punches, and, when asked to elab- and the economy took off like an Atorate, they reveal just how disgusted las missile, fueled by quarterly growth rates of between three and 8.5 percent they are with their choices. Close to half of registered voters, 47 in 1983 and 1984.

Donald

Lambro

THE PERPETUALLY anemic Obama economy hasn’t been able to achieve and maintain even a three percent GDP growth. Hillary Clinton’s economic agenda is a carbon copy of Obama’s recovery plan, which has failed miserably: More public works spending, and higher taxes on businesses, investors and start-up enterprises. Add to that a wave of job-killing business regulations that have made it impossible for small businesses to get started and survive. If you think the government isn’t big enough, so does Clinton. She is calling for the enactment of dozens of new federal programs from “free” college tuition to a far higher minimum wage, which the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office says would kill up to a million jobs. But Donald Trump is in a class by himself: Given to wild exaggeration; false boasts and accusations; crude, bullying, insulting attacks; and an ugly past that reveals a man utterly without character. Need examples? Well, like his taped remarks in preparation for an ABC program, when he freely talked about sexu-

ally assaulting women and getting away with it, because, he said, “When you’re a star, they let you do it.” In his book, The Art of the Comeback, he boasts of his experiences “with ... seemingly very happily married and important women ...” Then there is his love affair with Russia’s Vladimir Putin, who provided the weapons and other backing to invade and annex the Ukraine’s Crimean peninsula and who has since rolled his tanks into the eastern part of that country. This is a man who has imprisoned or killed his political opponents, and has been bombing and killing civilians in Syria in support of Bashar Assad’s murderous regime. But Trump says, “I’ve always felt fine about Putin. I think he’s a strong leader, he’s a powerful leader.” When senior intelligence officials revealed that a wave of cyber attacks on the U.S. originated in Russia, he dismissed such allegations, then expressed the hope that the Russians would break into Clinton’s emails. Indeed, throughout Trump’s Neville Chamberlain-style campaign, he has become Putin’s biggest apologist. Appearing on MSNBC, Trump was reminded by host Joe Scarborough that Putin kills journalists who displease him. Trump replied, “Well, I think our country does plenty of killing also.” Long known as one of the most litigious, thin-skinned figures in the real estate industry, he says he would “open up” libel laws as president so he can sue journalists and their publications who criticize him. Apparently he hasn’t heard about the First Amendment to the Constitution. To be sure, Trump understands how to get America’s economy growing again, and he would no doubt sign the GOP’s tax-cutting reform bill, though it is not the one he has proposed. His plan would blow a hole in the budget; the bill on Capitol Hill will erase tax loopholes and corporate welfare to make it revenue neutral. But he has shown no signs of being able to work with Congress on much else, especially if the Democrats take control of the Senate. THE VOTERS are in for a rude awakening with either of these two candidates. We’re in for a bumpy ride.

Conservative Chronicle

2016 ELECTION: November 8, 2016

If Trump, buy the dip. If Clinton wins, sell the rally

Clinton proposes across-the-board he wisdom on Wall Street is that Hillary Clinton is the safe tax hikes on corporations, successful choice. She’s the certainty can- earners, health care, capital gains and fididate to Donald Trump’s uncertainty. nancial transactions. She would tax and So when Jim Comey announced the re- spend her way to a nationalized, singleopening of the FBI’s Clinton investiga- payer health system — a sure failure. tion, stocks fell for nine days. And after She would end fossil fuels altogether. rather than let market he pulled back over the weekend, stocks A n d forces dictate Amerrallied by over 300 ica’s energy portfopoints. lio, she’d return to Is the market Solyndra-like encorrect in viewergy subsidies. ing Clinton as the (c) 2016, Creators Syndicate That would not safe and certain be safe for the economy or stocks. choice? I don’t believe so. Essentially, her vision is to withdraw I’m not going to predict tonight’s outcome, though I think it will be close. But resources from the private free enterprise I offer this advice: If Trump wins and economy — robbing businesses and stocks fall, buy the Trump dip. And if workers of crucial incentives to perform Clinton wins and stock rise, sell the Clin- — and use these resources for another vast expansion of government power. ton rally. She envisions a larger regulator state, BY THE WAY, Strategas invest- even after the massive Obama regulament ace Dan Clifton points out that tions clogged the wheels of commerce. What’s more, she has been a weak when stocks fall in the months before a presidential election, it usually means the candidate. She had trouble putting away incumbent will lose. And Clinton is the Bernie Sanders and is now in the fight of incumbent — Obama 3.0. Investment her life against Trump. Translation: Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders are the pundits beware. But the idea that Clinton is the “safe new ideological architects of a far-left hands” candidate is plain wrong. If she Democratic Party that has completely wins, investigations will swirl around the written out of its history the great JFK Clinton Foundation’s pay-to-play she- tax reforms, which spurred a massive nanigans. In this way, she has become boom in the 1960s. the unsafe hand — the “high-risk candiNOW, TRUMP is a highly imperfect date,” as Wall Street Journal columnist candidate. We all know that. But — and Holman Jenkins puts it. But what make her especially unsafe this is a big but — warts and all, Trump are her economic policies, which would is an outsider who would work hard to damage growth, productivity, invest- drain the Washington, D.C., swamp of corruption, crony capitalism and corpoment, wages and jobs.

Larry

Kudlow

rate welfare. And only an outsider stands a chance of fixing this mess. What’s more, Trump is the growth candidate. His across-the-board tax rate reductions for individuals and businesses would boost the economy. His tax cuts for large and small businesses would re-incentivize startups and investment, from which productivity and real wages spring. We have had a dismal 16 years of less than two percent growth, virtually no real wage hikes and stagnant family incomes — or what Ronald Reagan called takehome pay. Trump’s economic plan would do for families what Democrats and Republicans have been unable to do in the past decade and a half.

In addition, Trump’s repatriation incentives would bring home trillions of dollars. And his policies for low tax rates and immediate expensing of new investment would keep American businesses at home and win the race for global capital. Tax reform most likely would be the first policy action in a Trump administration. A close second would be a thorough repealing and rewriting of Obamacare, restoring a freer market with true consumer choice and competition among providers. Trump also would roll back the massive Obama regulatory overkill. He would take all the handcuffs off U.S. energy production, push for school choice, protect the southern border and send criminal undocumented immigrants back home for good. The biggest flaw in the Trump economic plan is the tilt toward protectionism. I have parted company with him on this. The question here is whether his campaign bark will turn out to be bigger than his government policy bite if he wins. Enforcing trade deals is spot on. Acting in the interest of American workers is correct. But large-scale tariffs are a terrible idea. My hunch is that Trump would promote better trade deals while minimizing tariffs. Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama all used temporary targeted tariffs on specific industries. Let’s hope Trump would go no further than that. And as Trump has occasionally said, there are great benefits to trade. Let’s hope he holds that thought. I believe that Trump has a prosperity plan. I believe that Clinton has a recession plan. And you need an outsider to shake up Washington. ON MONDAY, I cast an absentee ballot for Donald Trump.

November 16, 2016 2016 ELECTION: November 3, 2016

Kasich — and fellow Republican ‘never Trumpers’

Gov. John Kasich, R-Ohio, just announced his decision. For his presidential vote on a mailin ballot, he wrote in the failed 2008 Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. Apparently, Kasich found Wendell Willkie too difficult to spell.

FOR THE umpteenth time, Donald Trump, out of 2016’s 17 Republican candidates, placed 20th on my list. He is a populist — not a fiscal conservative — with an assortment of views, some conservative, many centrist and even liberal. Has there ever been such a blatantly protectionist modern Republican candidate? Has any former Republican presidential candidate ever promised six weeks of paid family leave? One expects his Democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton, to say nothing about reforming entitlement programs that even President Barack Obama called “unsustainable.” But Trump offers no plan for reforms, blithely asserting that we can grow our way out of debt.

Then there is the Iran nuclear But as to Hillary Clinton, goodness, deal, which Hillary Clinton touted. where to start? Through the Clinton Foundation, WikiLeaks reveals that John PodesHillary and Bill Clinton took advantage ta, Clinton’s campaign chair, replied of her job as Secretary of State to sell “Yup” to an email sent to him calling influence and access. Hillary clearly the deal “the greatest appeasement wanted to avoid scrutiny and to control since Chamberlain gave Czechoslowhat information would be released vakia to Hitler.” Inexplicably, Clinurged the U.S. to join and how it would be released. So she t o n the British and the set up a private French in bombing server in her baseLibya — a country ment on which with no WMDs she conducted — for humaniofficial business (c) 2016, Creators Syndicate tarian purposes, — and on which, which resulted in despite her initial denials, she sent and received classi- a bloody civil war that made the hufied information. Now she steadfastly manitarian crisis much worse. insists her server was not hacked. Yet AS TO THE economy, Clinton FBI head James Comey found, at the very least, the email accounts of people maintains that things are great because to whom she sent information had been Obama dashed into a phone booth, put hacked. It is, therefore, highly prob- on his Superman costume and rescued able that our adversaries obtained clas- the economy by raising taxes, impossified information that could be used ing hundreds of billions in new reguagainst us in ways we perhaps may lations, signing Obamacare, spending nearly $1 trillion on a so-called “stimnever know.

Larry

Elder

DONALD TRUMP: November 8, 2016

Ever Trump — some converts

s a former “Never Trumper,” I have been interested in others who have converted, however reluctantly, if not into Trump supporters, then pragmatic accepters of Trump against Hillary Clinton. Call us ever-Trump-ers. Another such convert is Joel C. Rosenberg, the mystery writer who once worked for the late Rep. Jack Kemp (R-NY) and former Secretary of Education William Bennett, conducted research for Rush Limbaugh, and now writes biblically-themed novels. WRITING ON his blog, Rosenberg gives 10 reasons why he intends to vote for the Trump-Pence ticket. They are mostly about stopping Hillary Clinton and her secular-progressive agenda, which he believes would complete the moral, economic and political destruction of the country. In addition, he writes, “Hillary and her advisers may have committed federal crimes.” A Hillary victory, he believes, guarantees nonstop investigations, possibly leading to indictments, though President Obama could and probably would pardon her of any and all acts committed while she was secretary of state should she win. While Rosenberg writes he “continues to have deep reservations about Mr. Trump ... Hillary Clinton is the poster child for politics as usual at a time when we need change.” Most of the rest of his arguments — from federal judges,

to rebuilding the American military, to protecting our borders are familiar. He also thinks Trump’s running mate, Gov. Mike Pence, will soften some of Trump’s sharper edges. Jerusalem Post columnist Caroline Glick is another person who has reluctantly come around, if not in open support of Trump, then in explaining why he has gained so much favor. She writes: “After eight years of Barack Obama’s White House, America is in a different place than it was in 2008, when Obama ran on a platform of hope and

Cal

change. Americans today are angry, scared, divided and cynical.” GLICK CORRECTLY notes that Trump represents “the voters’ rebellion against the American establishment — not just the political establishment, but the full spectrum of the American elite. From Washington to Wall Street, from college campuses to the media, tens of millions of Americans believe that their establishment is rotten to the core. And they support Trump because he is running against the establishment.” The stakes in Tuesday’s election could not be higher. They are about life for the unborn and elderly, the Constitu-

tion, growing the economy and the private-sector jobs that accompany growth, advancement or retreat of the LGBTQ agenda, the strength of our military, terrorism, immigration, a government-run health care system that will inevitably follow the crumbling of Obamacare, restoring respect for the United States abroad and so much more. We Trump converts are not unaware of his many flaws, but none of his flaws come close to the alleged crimes committed by Hillary Clinton and her husband, including “pay for play” activities at the Clinton Foundation, which FBI investigators have been looking into for at least a year. With a President Trump and especially Vice President Mike Pence, America has an opportunity to go in a different direction. Trump has been specific about his promises and if the Congress remains in Republican hands, members can hold him to them. MAYBE TRUMP is like the box of chocolates Forrest Gump referred to — we won’t know what we are getting until he becomes president. But we know what we would get with Hillary Clinton as president: More corruption, possible indictments, if not of her then of some of her closest aides, and a continuation of the Obama agenda, which, along with the Republican wing of the establishment, has been the cause of so much citizen angst and anger.

ulus” and signing off on an assortment of other tax-and-spend gimmicks like “cash for caulkers” and “cash for clunkers.” Clinton criticizes none of this. Indeed, she wants to “build on” Obama’s economic policies. As to Obamacare, contrary to promises made, premiums are going up — over 60 percent in at least two states, along with higher co-pays and deductibles. And no, families did not, as Obama promised, “save” an average of $2,500 per household. As for Kasich’s voting dilemma, he mirrors the same angst experienced by many of my never-Trump Republican friends. One recently sent me the following email: “My sons — early 30s — are in town. I did not bring up Trump, or push. They know I am politically conservative and lean Republican. They said, Dad, you won’t vote for Trump, right? I said, no way. They said, whew. They find him disgusting. I said, right, I raised you well. I said, Hillary is horrible, but she’s only there for four years, way better than letting a moron in the White House. They agreed — will vote in Florida and Colorado, swing states. They said, Dad, you won’t be upset if we don’t vote for the Republican? I said, no, vote for who you want — but Trump is not even close to being a Republican. Not even close. He is a Democrat/populist. I hate Hillary, but know Trump is a complete idiot. Glad I raised my sons to recognize a carnival barker. They would not even consider voting for Trump. They feel he is racist, sexist and just plain stupid.” Why bother responding, right? But I did: “Right, Trump will re-enact slavery (‘racist’), end women’s suffrage (‘sexist’) and make decisions dumber than setting up an unsecured basement server on which to send and receive classified information — then lie about it and delete emails after getting a subpoena. He’ll support Obamacare, the Iran Deal, stimulus, cash for caulkers, cash for clunkers, unleashing the EPA and pulling all the troops from Iraq (‘just plain stupid.’)” MY FRIEND replied: “Just saying my sons are just young businessmen, lean Republican. But they cannot fathom Trump. Just think he is a bloated cartoon nut job. If that is where the Republican Party is headed, kids like my sons will not be on board, that’s all.” Me: “Well, one would think young Republican-leaning businessmen would not want their taxes raised, regulatory agencies unleashed, and Obamacare turned into single-payer. But what do I know?” Only days to go...

Conservative Chronicle

FARMERS: November 3, 2016

Panderer in chief and the ‘war on the American farmer’

uditioning for the title of farmers received over $46 billion in panderer in chief during subsidy payments in that time pethis election cycle are two riod. The top 20 percent of subsidy potential masters. On one side, you recipients received 91 percent of all have Hillary Clinton constantly of- subsidy payments, while the bottom fering “free” stuff, such as college 80 percent received just nine percent tuition. On the other side, you have of subsidy payments at an average of Donald Trump promising to protect $7,100.” So don’t be surprised if you that Saudi Prince Khalid Michigan’s cars, Idaho’s potatoes, hear bin Abdullah, a bilHarley-Davidson lionaire, could be in Wisconsin, collecting “hunCaterpillar in Ildreds of thousands linois and cornof dollars in U.S. based ethanol in (c) 2016, Creators Syndicate taxpayer-funded Iowa. But nothcrop insurance ing beats Trump’s contention that there is a “war on the subsidies through farms he owns in American farmer” requiring his help Kentucky.” to end. The truth is that if there’s a AS WITH other crony programs, it war on anyone, it’s on taxpayers and might not even be in the farmers’ inindividual freedom. terest to be reliant on handouts from TO BE FAIR, there is no doubt that taxpayers, given that economists have Trump’s promises to implement regu- repeatedly shown that privileged seclatory reform and to eliminate the es- tors of the economy often do not retate tax would be an improvement for ceive any actual benefit in the long farmers and everyone else. However, run. In farming, for example, the value of the subsidies (the ones who own farmers are such a protected class that it’s hard to take the notion of a war of the subsidy is capitalized into the the land), others are worse off a result price of farmland. So farmers have (e.g., young farmers with less capital against them seriously. By the end of 2016, the U.S. De- to pay exorbitant prices for the land looking to purchase land). partment of Agriculture will have entitling them to subsidies. Factoring IN OTHER words, if there is a spent approximately $25 billion sub- in these prices, they are no better off sidizing farmers this year and another as a group. However, while some sub- war on farmers, it is being waged by $10 billion to subsidize other agricul- groups of farmers capture the benefits a federal government that hands out tural interests, including rural businesses. Introduced in the 1930s to 2016 ELECTION: November 2, 2016 help struggling small family farms, the subsidies now routinely draw condemnation from both the left and the right as wasteful corporate welfare. Though the number of farms is down 70 percent since the 1930s — only ollsters are excellent at figur- ly overstating Hillary Clinton’s vote two percent of Americans are directly ing out how people will vote, by at least two points nationally. And engaged in farming — farmers aren’t but they do a poor job of in swing states with high concentrastruggling anymore. In 2014, the aver- judging whether or not they will vote. tions of minority voters — like N.C. age farm household earned $134,164 The best they can do is ask how like- and Va. — the results are likely to be — which is up over 50 percent from ly a person is to vote. Since most of even more skewed. 2010 and is 159 percent higher than the marginal voters don’t really know the income of the average American themselves what mood will strike household. them next Tuesday, their answers are Also, for all the talk about small not always a fair indicator of the truth. family farms, the data show that the market is dominated by massive farm SO POLLSTERS weight the re(c) 2016, Creators Syndicate businesses. According to the USDA, sults demographically to adjust for 88 percent of U.S. farms are small sampling error. That means they each family farms, but 64 percent of veg- assume a certain level of AfricanAnalysis of early voting in all states etable sales and 66 percent of dairy American turnout. But they can be indicates a big drop in black particisales come from just the largest three wrong. And the current indications pation in this election. In Florida, for percent of farms. from early voting in Fla., Ga. and N.C. example, blacks cast 25 percent of What’s more, only a handful of indicate that they may be in error. the early ballots cast in 2012 but, so farmers reap most of the benefits from Since blacks cast 13 percent of the far, account for only 15 percent of the the subsidies. Traditionally, wheat, vote in 2008 and 2012, it would be votes this year — a cut of 40 percent, corn, soybeans, rice and cotton have logical to assume that they will rep- according to the New York Times. taken the lion’s share of the feds’ lar- licate their turnout in 2016. Or so the gesse. The nonprofit Environmental models of most polling firms assume. IN FLORIDA, if black turnout is Working Group reports that “the top But before Barack Obama was on the down by anything like 40 percent, it one percent of farm subsidy recipients ballot, African-Americans cast an av- would throw statewide polls off by at received 26 percent of subsidy pay- erage of 11 percent of the vote in 2000 least five points, transforming a onements between 1995 and 2014.” and 2004. So when pollsters weigh the point lead for Donald Trump in curThe EWG adds: “Under 30,000 black vote at 13 percent, they are like- rent polls into a six-point laugher.

Veronique

de Rugy

subsidies to a few rich farmers while placing lower-income and younger farmers at a disadvantage along the way.

Lower black turnout makes polls wrong

Dick

Morris

One fallout of the email scandal is that it has so preoccupied the country that President Obama has not been able to hit the campaign trail for Clinton as hard as he might. Michelle Obama has been out there, but she’s no substitute. Hillary Clinton is not giving her voters any reason to turn out. Her closing campaign is wall-to-wall negative and she offers no alternative vision for the nation. Why are her voters to decide to get out of bed on Tuesday morning and vote? THE DEMOCRATS are relying on their vaunted “ground game” to produce a turnout, but the effectiveness of their phone calls, rallies and visits are likely overstated. While they produced a huge minority turnout for President Obama in his elections, it was likely voter enthusiasm rather than Democratic mechanics that generated the vote. And, this year, the enthusiasm just isn’t there.

November 16, 2016 SHARING ECONOMY: November 6, 2016

Airbnb belongs in Phoenix, Arizona “If you attack the establishment long existing space, they helped contain the enough and hard enough, they will make city’s carbon footprint. There were just a few problems. One: you a member of it,” is how late humorist Art Buchwald described the estab- GOP political consultant Reed Galen, lishment’s cruelest form of payback. noted that in San Francisco “the average In that spirit, I watch Airbnb, the $25.5 citizen who’s not a tech zillionaire hates billion company that was born to dis- the tech industry.” Locals blame tech and highly paid tech rupt staid financial institutions, slowly m o n e y ers for driving up become part of the usually taxpaying workthe cost of living power elite. in the Special City. If they were And Airbnb is anthinking strategiother tech comcally, then Airb(c) 2016, Creators Syndicate pany. nb’s founders Two: Opporprobably wouldn’t have started their home-rental platform tunists found they could make more in San Francisco, a city where residents money with short-term rentals than could do anything in their bedroom ex- long-term leases so they siphoned space from the city’s already stretched-thin cept rent it to Danish tourists. housing stock. Three: It wasn’t fair that bed-andIT PROBABLY felt right at the time. Brian Chesky and friends rented sleeping breakfast owners and small hotels had space in a South of Market apartment. to pay a hotel tax, while Airbnb “hosts” Airbnb seemed like a vehicle to let peo- did not. As Airbnb got bigger, it became ple be free — free to visit pricey cities like Ess Eff without paying hundreds of harder for the internet platform to allow dollars a night for a hotel room; free for hosts to opt out of paying the tax and renters and homeowners to make a little impossible for City Hall not to force the extra money on the side by renting out a issue. So Airbnb began paying the hotel spare bedroom. It seemed like a bargain tax — and, when squeezed harder, back for both parties, who could avoid paying taxes. Now critics complain that many hosts have not registered as businesses the city’s 14 percent hotel tax. Tourists who booked rooms with and are not submitting inventory of their Airbnb felt virtuous, because staying in furniture, appliances and housewares to someone’s home or residential neigh- be taxed, too. At a San Francisco Chronicle editoborhoods gave them entree to the less touristy side of San Francisco. “Hosts” rial board meeting Wednesday, Airbnb maintained that they were good for their biggies David Owen and Chris Lehane communities because they directed compared the company to a child apguests to local eateries and, by using proaching adulthood. In the toddler

Debra J.

Saunders

stage, the platform didn’t color within hailing drivers be fingerprinted, Uber the lines, but as the company matures, and Lyft left the city. As San Francisco it is learning to live within regulations. threatens more regulations, has the platform thought about moving its headCITY HALL now is pushing for a quarters out of Baghdad by the Bay? 60-nights-per-year cap on short-term Not at all. Lehane responded, “At the stays — undeterred by voters’ rejection end of the day, we can figure all this last year of a 75-night limit. stuff out.” Lehane told the editorial board that Uber and Lyft also have headquarters of all the home-rental platforms, “we’re in San Francisco. “You have a bunch of the only one that’s paying taxes.” Airbnb Democrats coming into blue cities” with tried to get Sacramento to push through their many regulations and taxes, Gaa statewide hotel tax that all home-rental len observed, “and the blue cities want platforms would pay. That’s right — nothing to do with them, or little to do now Airbnb is pointing fingers and push- with them.” ing for uniform payment of taxes. Why not settle in a red state, where In May, after voters in Austin, Texas, entrepreneurs are welcome? Lehane passed a measure requiring that ride- told the editorial board about visiting Arizona, where the Republican governor is committed to making the state a hub for the sharing economy. “We were in Arizona actually arguing for some regulations,” Lehane told the San Francisco Chronicle. Maybe that means Airbnb has become so big that it now wants to make sure scrappy competitors are regulated. Or maybe the head-office guys have migrated away from Airbnb’s roots. WILL THE tech community vote for Libertarian Gary Johnson, who wants to lower taxes and reduce regulations? No, they’re lining up behind Hillary Clinton, even though she has shown little sympathy for sharing-economy startups and repeatedly talks in favor of stifling regulations. Lehane said Clinton can “distinguish between the different types of sharing, labor versus assets.” The home-rental platform, he suggests, rents property (homes) — as opposed, we are to infer, to the ride-hailing platforms that rely on labor (drivers). In truth, both platforms are hybrids that rent assets (rooms, cars) and labor (housekeepers, drivers). Telling the government to pick on someone else may be the world’s oldest profession.

Conservative Chronicle

MEDIA BIAS: November 4, 2016

Media blackout exposes corrupt media

hile most of America was Anyone denying the double standard is transfixed by Game 7 of the lying. This is just the latest Clinton scandal World Series, Fox News Channel was doggedly pursuing a new scoop out of hundreds over the last 24 story: The FBI’s probe into pay-for-play years that the networks have skipped or schemes at the Clinton Foundation and downplayed or just dismissed as toxic the State Department has been far more waste. This is why an overwhelming ity of Americans tell expansive than anyone reported so far m a j o r pollsters it’s obviand has been going ous the media are on for more than a undisguised Hillyear. FBI sources ary boosters. Their Comey. There was no grounds to proseven warned there credibility is shot ecute her. So there are no lies, there’s no could be indict(c) 2016, Creators Syndicate with the public. ments down the criminality.” Within 18 road. This is the kind of spin you expect Then, the Wall Street Journal broke hours, MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell was from defense attorneys, not reporters. another new story online, saying, “Secret bizarrely denying there was any story It’s sinking in across America that our recordings of a suspect talking about the or any investigation worth noting. She “news” media are not First Amendment Clinton Foundation fueled an internal said: “She’s not under criminal investi- heroes or watchdogs of government. battle between FBI agents who wanted to gation. In fact, it’s not an investigation. Many of them are coddling deeply corpursue the case and corruption prosecu- It’s just a review of the e-mails. She did rupt politicians and denying any evitors who viewed the statements as worth- not lie to the FBI, accoring to James dence that these people have been enless hearsay.” Senior officials wanted to tell FBI agents to “stand down” from a LESLIE’S TRIVIA BITS: November 7, 2016 Clinton Foundation probe.

Brent

Bozell

THAT’S TWO nuclear explosions in one night. What was the reaction from the news media? Crickets. The stench of corruption between the Justice Department, the State Department and the Clinton Foundation machine is noxious. Add the leftist “news” media collusion and it becomes overpowering. This is a cover-up. No one at ABC, CBS or NBC was breaking from the World Series. They couldn’t locate the Clinton story and offer even the briefest summary the next morning. MSNBC’s Mika Brzezinski offered a serious report early on Morning Joe, but she was alone. The other “news” programs preferred the distraction of breathless baseball updates. The worst moment came on ABC’s Good Morning America, where they acted like the story did not exist. Political analyst Matthew Dowd noted a scandal story might still break. “So, anything can happen in that regard,” he said. Sounding totally oblivious to the breaking news, co-host George Stephanopoulos replied, “We’ll see if some big news comes out.” At taxpayer-funded National Public Radio, Morning Edition found anything and everything else more interesting and “newsworthy,” including — we’re not kidding — “teen night owls” who need later school start times and the perils of the illegal kidney trade in Pakistan. THE NETWORK blackout so far on this FBI probe is beyond the pale. Everyone knows what the media reaction would be were there a report about likely indictments related to the Trump Foundation. There would be an immediate flash mob of reporters camped in front of Trump Tower, breaking away from regularly scheduled programming and offering play-by-play commentary.

Leslie’s Trivia Bits

kira Kurosawa, legendary director of Rashomon and Seven Samurai (which inspired the western classic The Magnificent Seven,” was a devoted baseball fan. In fact, his 1949 noir film Stray Dog features a pivotal scene at a baseball game between the Yomiuri Giants and the Nankai Hawks — the top two pro teams in Japan in 1948. The son of a gymnastics school teacher, as a boy Kurosawa pitched and played shortstop. “My liking for baseball is deep-rooted,” he once wrote, “apparently I’ve been watching it since babyhood.”

THE FIRST licensed commercial radio station in the United States, KDKA in Pittsburgh, officially began broadcasting on Nov. 2, 1920. That wasn’t a randomly selected date. It was Election Day, and the evening marked the first broadcast of presidential election results. Republican Warren G. Harding defeated Democrat James M. Cox. When Harding took the oath of office on March 4, 1921, he became the first U.S. president whose inaugural address was broadcast live on the radio. The sperm whale is easy to identify because of its enormous square head. That head contains the largest brain of any creature on earth. A sperm whale’s brain weighs about 17 pounds. By comparison, the human brain typically weighs about three pounds. On Nov. 10, 1766, William Franklin, colonial governor of New Jersey (and son of Benjamin Franklin) signed the charter establishing Queen’s College, which would become the foundation of Rutgers University. Its original pur-

pose was training young men to enter the ministry of the Dutch Reformed Church. One of the more recognizable monuments at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point is a ring of 13 iron links, each more than two-feet long and weighing about 100 pounds. In 1778, they formed part of a 1,500-foot-long chain that stretched across the Hudson River — supported by log rafts — as a barrier to British ships. After the war, the chain was dismantled. Some of the links, including the ones at West Point, were saved. The rest were melted down.

Leslie

TWO COMMON interests unite classical composer Sergei Prokofiev with Robert Fitzgerald Diggs and Gary Grice, aka RZA and GZA of Wu-Tang Clan. One is music; the other is chess. Prokofiev played against grandmasters and other classical music giants, including composer Maurice Ravel. RZA and GZA play chess competitively and their music often contains chess references. The long list of chess-playing music stars also includes Ray Charles, Dizzy Gillespie, Willie Nelson, Sting and Bob Dylan. The band Phish is so into chess, that the members have played matches with the audience during concerts. TRIVIA 1. Nintendo was founded in 1889 to manufacture what type of product?

gaged in what appears to be a criminal conspiracy to enrich themselves using the federal government. WE ARE LOOKING right down the barrel of the greatest government crisis since the Civil War, with charges — like handing over our uranium mining capacity to the Russians — that could possibly reach the height of treason itself. And there’s no coverage.

A) Automobiles B) Beer C) Playing cards D) Power tools 2. Which soap opera ran for 72 seasons, starting on the radio in 1937 and moving to TV in 1952? A) All My Children B) Days of Our Lives C) The Guiding Light D) One Life to Live 3. Before they had a show of their own, Pinky and the Brain appeared in recurring segments on what animated series? A) Animaniacs B) Captain Planet and the Planeteers C) DuckTales D) Tiny Toon Adventures 4. New Brunswick is one of Canada’s three Maritime Provinces. What are the other two? A) Alberta and Manitoba B) Newfoundland and Labrador and Nova Scotia C) Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island D) Nunavut and Yukon 5. Who is the only U.S. president to have graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy at Annapolis? A) Jimmy Carter B) Grover Cleveland C) James K. Polk D) Woodrow Wilson 6. Reader Phil Schwimmer asks: How many possibilities are there for a chess player’s first move? A) 8 B) 12 C) 16 D) 20 (answers on page 19)

November 16, 2016 ABORTION: November 4, 2016

Hillary Clinton and the extreme abortionist culture

n the abortion issue alone, I deep — she will believe she is politically believe that Christians should bulletproof, and for good reason. She and vote for Donald Trump as husband Bill would never have behaved the only possible candidate to defeat the as cavalierly and recklessly as they have march of the death culture Hillary Clin- if they didn’t think they possess a lifeton would lead if she were to be elected. time get-out-of-jail-free card. I shudder Pro-abortion feminists are growing to think what their mindset would be if ever more militant in their make-believe Hillary were to be victorious. She would pursue the abortion-on-deworld that sees men and women as bitter rivals, if not outright enemies. They seem mand agenda with abandon. She would radical judges at all to view everything through a gender appoint levels who share her prism; people have worldview and her to support Clinton determination that not because she the courts conhas a better agenda tinue to rewrite but because she’s a (c) 2016, Creators Syndicate laws that thwart woman. Don’t get me wrong; they also think the will of the people. She’d accelerate she has a better agenda, but they are con- Barack Obama’s war on religious liberty stantly thinking and speaking in terms of through the courts, lawless executive orgender identification and loyalty. And all ders and other administrative avenues. Some will say I’m exaggerating here too often, they demonize men in the process — whom they perceive as a threat to — that the left just wants to protect beleaguered women, who should have sole women’s rights. sovereignty over their “reproductive” THIS ADVERSARIAL culture the decisions. Leftists aren’t pro-abortion; left fosters is not limited to gender. It in- they have benign motives, focused excludes race, economic “status” and every clusively on the mother’s choice and other imaginable category that can aid in health. Well, that may be true of some ranktheir politics of division, on which their political power depends. WikiLeaks’ rev- and-file Democratic voters. But most elations have confirmed that such polar- leftist politicians, thought leaders and ization is integral to the modern Demo- power brokers are pro-abortion extremcratic Party’s grand strategy for eventual ists and coldly calculating in promoting their goals. They know that protecting one-party dominance. If Clinton wins this election — despite the mother’s health is rarely involved the tsunami of corruption and scandal in abortion decisions. They know that that surrounds her, in which she is knee- pro-life advocates, many of whom are

David

Limbaugh

women, don’t believe in suppressing women. But they also know that by characterizing pro-lifers as women-hating, totalitarian ogres, they will increase the odds that they’ll keep moving their proabortion football down the field toward the end zone marked “death.” I WROTE in 2004: “People I’ve debated on the (abortion) issue have generally taken the position that the baby in the womb is ‘potential life’ or a clump of cells or a zygote. They seemed to sense that they would have no legitimate argument in favor of abortion if they admitted the baby was a life. But as secular and humanistic influences have gained ascendance in our culture, I’ve anticipated the day when moral relativists would become so brazen as to discard their reliance on the argument that ‘the fetus is not a human life.’ Indeed, with the breathtaking scientific and technological advances — such as the discovery that a baby in the womb smiles and feels pain — it’s practically inevitable that the pro-aborts will be forced to abandon that argument.”

Fast-forward 12 years and see how inevitable it actually was. Mary Elizabeth Williams, writing on Salon, asks, “So what if abortion ends life?” She writes: “Of all the diabolically clever moves the anti-choice lobby has ever pulled, surely one of the greatest has been its consistent co-opting of the word ‘life.’ Life! Who wants to argue with that? Who wants (to) be on the side of ... not-life? ... The ‘life’ conversation is often too thorny to even broach. Yet I know that throughout my own pregnancies, I never wavered for a moment in the belief that I was carrying a human life inside of me. I believe that’s what a fetus is: A human life. And that doesn’t make me one iota less solidly pro-choice.” I don’t like quoting just some of her statements and don’t want to mislead as to her intent, so I strongly urge you to read her entire piece, where you can judge for yourselves these comments in context. But I must share one more passage. She writes: “Here’s the complicated reality in which we live: All life is not equal. That’s a difficult thing for liberals like me to talk about, lest we wind up looking like death-panel-loving, killyour grandma-and-your-precious-baby storm troopers. Yet a fetus can be a human life without having the same rights as the woman in whose body it resides. She’s the boss. Her life and what is right for her circumstances and her health should automatically trump the rights of the non-autonomous entity inside of her. Always.” I could comment on those assertions for hours but have run out of space. What do you mean “lest” you wind up looking as if you love death panels? That’s exactly what you look like, as cold and heartless as your words on the page. LEFTIST ADVOCATES will applaud such amoral muscle flexing, but I appeal to less extreme liberals, Democrats and never-Trumpers to understand the depth of the depravity of this mindset and understand that if you help elect Clinton, you are, among many other frightening things, empowering this evil worldview. Should I refrain from calling it “evil” for fear of offense or being labeled intolerant or an extremist? I think not. You can take that up with the babies whose lives are hanging in the balance.

November 16, 2016

The corruption of the public conversation

he political conversation had gry schoolboy throwing rocks at recess. been deteriorating long before Most of what he says is reactive, spontaHillary Clinton and Donald neous, uninhibited and unreserved. Most Trump opened their remarkable slang- of what she says is practiced, rehearsed ing match. But in the past few weeks the and calculated to manipulate. Their differing rhetorical styles have campaign has hit rock bottom in both developed over a long period of time, style and content. The nature in human nature is ul- and they evoke visual images with strong timately revealed in a long, grueling contrasts, with snark and insult coloring campaign season. Personality becomes the conversation. Character builds over personal and public dominant in a variety of settings, expos- time from experience. By now ing candidates’ we know that what character while we see is what we’ll they try to craft get when the winner salable policies. In assumes the Oval this campaign, the (c) 2016, Creators Syndicate Office. personal has overClinton entered the arena shortly after whelmed the political. Neither candidate has shown a flair for persuasive rhetoric law school, ambitious but cautious. In in the classical sense, which was obvious seeking a path to the White House, she knew she would need a man to pave the in the debates. way. In her gradual and circuitous climb SO THE campaign became an unruly to power she learned to carefully evalumess for both the candidates and every- ate the changing climate around her, liftone trying to make sense of it. Over the ing her finger aloft to see which way the past few days — when we imagined we wind was blowing, trimming her sails were entitled to a natural clarification no matter how humiliating some of the of issues — dark innuendo, angry re- trims had to be. The Donald, playing for big money crimination and mean-spirited nastiness has accelerated into chaos. FBI Director stakes in real estate, chose a more aggresJames Comey’s 11th-hour resurrection sive and risky route, which served him of the FBI investigation into Clinton’s well on his way toward a television reality show. By the time he tried his hand emails added a touch of the unknown. Clinton memorizes sentences and at politics he was a hurricane, blowing speaks deliberately, often tediously with- down everything in his path, changing out much emotion. Trump is an undisci- course without notice. If he seemed to plined torrential force of words. He hurls get a little too much pleasure in saying, short sentences into the air like an an- “You’re fired!” on The Apprentice, it fed

Suzanne

Fields

an audience waiting like the Romans to watch the lions eat the Christians. He relishes the political attack in the same way, and the television networks happily oblige him with free exposure. Ratings rule. CLINTON OCCUPIES the other end of the publicity spectrum, with a nature uncomfortable in the game of politics or celebrity. As first lady, in charge of reforming the nation’s health care, her stealth approach brought her early public failure. She paid heavy dues while learning the political trade from a husband who played by male rules. Only her clos-

est friends say that she can be spontaneous. Her public face has become a practiced mask of acceptable expressions. If the two candidates were landscapes, Clinton would be a cultivated garden with few surprises, staying within formal — if unimaginative — lines of design, even as poisonous weeds ruin her flowerbeds. The Donald would be the windswept dunes on a coastline, a mess of swirling sand blowing through a night of shifting shapes accompanied by the discordant music of an angry wind. “We think of ours as the age of digital information, and so it is,” writes Mark Thompson, president of the New York Times Company. “But we sometimes forget how much of that information is conveyed in human language that is doing what it has always done in human societies: Alerting, frightening, explaining, deceiving, infuriating, inspiring, above all persuading.” In his book, Enough Said: What’s Gone Wrong With the Language of Politics, Thompson urges a pause to analyze the transformation of public language in the digital age. It’s too late to change the rhetoric for the campaign of 2016, but somebody will have to deal with the changes wrought by the present-day chaos. “Rhetoric, the study of the theory and practice of public language,” he says, “was once considered the queen of the humanities.” But it has been dethroned by contemporary revolution of the politically correct, ideological polarities and social media. LOOKING AHEAD, a counterrevolution will be necessary to restore even a semblance of sanity. Writers and speakers of the future must persuade not by pressing the various buttons in the audience but by demonstrating merit in argument. Otherwise, chaos reigns. November 4, 2016

This Week’s Conservative Focus

2016 Election

Post-election strategy: Once this campaign is over ...

ORLD’s cover story in the Nov. 12, 2016 issue: Our National Editor Jamie Dean’s personal account of the worst presidential campaign in American history, which she has covered for more than a year. From the primaries through the present, the 2015-2016 campaign has brought us not only egomania and low blows but civil war in many households and organizations: Brother against brother, child against parent, friend against friend.

TWO KEY questions for many conservative evangelicals: If we don’t support Donald Trump, are we empowering Hillary Clinton? My friend Bill Newton thinks so — see “Less unfit for power.” And, if Clinton wins, is “the country’s

chance to have a Supreme Court that Reaper “I’m with her” cover.) We said values the Constitution ... gone. Not for Clinton also is unfit, and for years we’ve four years, or eight, but forever?” That provided evidence of that: See wng.org/ was the contention of my friend Eric clinton_coverage for some recent arwould have relished her Metaxas in an Oct. 12 Wall Street Jour- ticles. We stepping aside, but we knew nal column. that would not hapLots of people, pen. We hoped including some more pressure on of WORLD’s subTrump might force scribers, agree his hand, and exwith Bill and Eric. (c) 2016, God’s World Publications plained on our WORLD’s editors do not. We value our editorial indepen- website how the Electoral College’s role dence and hope readers do also. But I made a substitution possible: See wng. do want to clear up one matter and then org/not_too_late. look to the future. THE FUTURE: As we go to press, The matter: When we proposed on Oct. 11 that Trump step aside, we did this worst campaign is almost over. Unnot expect some subscribers to think less Trump pulls millions of rabbits out we like Clinton. (See our Sept. 17 Grim of hats, all of us need to discern how to

Marvin

Olasky

Painful choices — hard facts

et’s talk sense about the election. Nothing is to be gained by refusing to face the hard facts. What are those facts? First of all, neither Hillary Clinton nor Donald Trump has the qualifications, the track record or the personal character to be President of the United States. Most of us could probably think of a number of people who would be better in the White House. But here, as elsewhere in life, we can only make our choices among the alternatives actually available.

THOSE OF us who have been disgusted by some of the things that Donald Trump has said and done need to face the fact that he is not running against Mother Teresa. His sins have been matched and exceeded by Hillary Clinton and her husband. As for accomplishments, Trump has none in politics, and business accomplishments do not automatically transfer into government. Hillary Clinton has been in politics for decades. But does she have even a single serious accomplishment to show for it? In the Senate, she accomplished nothing, and as Secretary of State far worse than nothing. Secretary Clinton carried out the foreign policy that destroyed two governments of countries which posed no threat whatever to America or to American interests in the Middle East. Each country is now moving in the direction of one of our two most dangerous enemies, Iran and Russia. Egypt is now planning joint military exercises with Russian forces. Libya has already seen the rise of Islamic ter-

rorists who killed the American ambassador whom the Clinton State Department refused to provide the security he asked for repeatedly. So much for track records. As for personal character, would you want either of them living next door to your family? Donald Trump seems to think that it is OK for the government to seize someone else’s home and turn the property over to him, so that he can build something — without having to pay what it would cost him to buy the home. We can’t even discuss what he has said about women in a family newspaper. Add an almost childish egomania and you have a 70-year-old adolescent.

Thomas

HILLARY CLINTON is fundamentally very similar. But, having spent decades in the political limelight, she is far more experienced at concealing her ruthless and cunning contempt for anything and anybody that gets in the way of her personal enrichment and power. That includes contempt for the law. Long before her emails became an issue, Mrs. Clinton was evading subpoenas for records she had somehow “lost” in the White House when she was first lady. Both she and her husband perfected the tactic of stalling and stalling, until enough time had passed that they could say that an issue was now “old news” and that it was time to “move on.” The issue before the voters, however, is not which of the two is the worse per-

son. The issue is which is more dangerous to the future of America. Nor is this just a question of what will happen in the next four years. Whoever becomes President of the United States can appoint Supreme Court justices able to destroy the Constitution by “interpreting” its protections of freedom out of existence — not just for the next four years, but thereafter. Hillary Clinton is already on record as wanting a Supreme Court that will overturn recent decisions protecting free speech and upholding the right to bear arms. Everything in her past shows a contempt for law that makes her a very credible threat to dismantle the Constitution, whenever it gets in the way of her agenda. All it takes is a Senate controlled by fellow Democrats to let a President Clinton’s judicial nominees be confirmed automatically, no matter how little regard for the Constitution those nominees have demonstrated. Donald Trump shows no such ideological agenda and has no such automatic support from Congressional Republicans as to have them rubber stamp either his judicial nominees or whatever other agenda he has. More than that, Trump can be impeached if he oversteps the bounds, without either the Republicans or the media screaming loud protests. TRUMP SEEMS to pose much less danger — which, unfortunately, is the most we can expect this particular election year. November 8, 2016

oppose the new attacks on unborn children, religious liberty and much besides that will soon come. If we have a Clinton administration, we’ll examine in future issues three possible political ways to keep it and the Supreme Court from ruining America forever. First, the president nominates judges, but the Senate says yea or nay. We don’t know who will control the Senate after this election, but in 2018 only eight currently GOP-held Senate seats will be at stake, compared with 25 now in the Democratic caucus. Given the revulsion a Clinton presidency will produce, it should be hard to get radical judges approved if conservatives dominate the Senate. The window of opportunity for court-packing may be small. Second, Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution states that “the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations, as the Congress shall make.” An angry conservative Congress could make “exceptions.” How far Congress could go in limiting Supreme power is not clear, but Abraham Lincoln defied judicial supremacy and said elected officials had a constitutional responsibility to resist court decisions that harmed the nation. Third, one big proposal that will probably get more traction is the idea of a convention of the states, as allowed by Article V, Section 2 of the Constitution — not a constitutional convention, because we can’t do better than Madison and Co. did in 1787, but a way to let state legislatures promote specific changes. Eight states have already called for such a convention, and many more are likely to do so once activists turn their attention from the presidential drama to next steps. Other political options also exist. And, as more Christians see the limitations of politics, we might see a new focus on cultural change. Example: While the Supreme Court hasn’t budged in the 43 years since its tragic “Roe v. Wade” decision, Christians have saved millions of lives through the provision of compassionate alternatives to abortion. Some worry about the politics of millennials, but Americans in their 20s are more prolife than Americans in their 50s. It’s time to go further to create a culture of life. TWO MORE even bigger questions: Upstream from both politics and culture lies theology. How do we strengthen the teaching in our churches? As this worst campaign ends, will Christ be first in our hearts? Reprinted with permission of WORLD. To read more news and views from a Christian perspective, call 800-951-6397 or visit WNG.org. November 7, 2016

Conservative Chronicle

2016 ELECTION: November 6, 2016

What to watch for on election night

uesday evening, after Election Day’s tranquility, new clamors will erupt as analysts with agendas tickle portents and lessons from the torrent of election returns. Herewith some developments to watch. — In the 17 elections since World War II, the winner has averaged 385.4 electoral votes, the loser 145.1. In six elections (1952, 1956, 1964, 1972, 1980, 1984), a major-party candidate won fewer than 100. In the seven elections after 1984, no Democrat has received fewer than 111 (Michael Dukakis in 1988) and no Republican fewer than 159 (Bob Dole in 1996). Measure Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump accordingly. — Republican nominees’ popularvote totals this century are: 2000 (Bush) 50,455,156; 2004 (Bush) 62,040,610; 2008 (McCain) 59,934,814; 2012 (Romney) 60,932,152. Measure Trump’s total accordingly, bearing in mind that there are 10 million more eligible voters in 2016 than in 2012 and nearly 20 million more than in 2008. — In 2012, Romney’s totals in 10 swing states were: Texas 4,569,843 (57 percent); Fla. 4,163,447 (49 percent); Pa. 2,680,434 (47 percent); Ohio 2,661,407 (48 percent); Mich. 2,115,256 (45 percent); Va. 1,822,522 (47 percent); Ariz. 1,233,654 (54 percent); Colo. 1,185,243 (46 percent); Nev. 463,567 (46 percent); N.H. 329,918 (47 percent). Use these numbers to measure Trump’s success at enlarging the Republican electorate. — In 1976, when Jimmy Carter narrowly defeated President Gerald Ford, 20 states were won by five points or less; in 2012, just four were. In 1976, Ford won Calif. and Ill. with 49.3 percent and 50.1 percent, respectively. Carter won Texas with 51.1 percent. Tuesday will show how much has changed in four decades. — In nine consecutive elections (1980-2012), Florida has been more Republican than the nation. Is it still? — In 1976, a majority of House seats were won by 10 points or less. In 2012, most were won by at least 20 points. Watch Tuesday night for further evidence of the extent to which representatives now pick their voters rather than voters picking representatives. And for how many incumbents are defeated by an electorate supposedly seething against “insiders.” — The “blue wall” consists of 18 states and the District of Columbia (totaling 242 electoral votes) that have voted Democratic in at least six consecutive elections: Calif., Conn., Del., Hawaii, Ill., Maine, Maryland, Mass., Mich., Minn., N.J., N.Y., Ore., Pa., R.I., Vt., Wash., Wis. Will Trump, who vowed to expand the battlefield, carry any of these?

— The Republican’s “red wall” (in year, will it be, for the fourth consecuat least six consecutive elections) con- tive election, the most Democratic? — A large and growing portion of sists of 13 states with 102 electoral votes: Ala., Alaska, Idaho, Kan., Miss., voters acknowledge no religious tradiNeb., N.D., Okla., S.C., S.D., Texas, tion. They were 12 percent of the 2012 Utah, Wyo. Will Clinton come close to turnout and Democrats carried this carrying Texas? Will she lose any age secular cohort by 44 points. How much cohort there other than voters over 65? support did such voters give Trump, vowed to “spiritize” — Will Trump’s louche lifestyle who has America? cost him cultur— In 1928, a ally conservative Brooklyn DemoUtah, which last cratic boss exvoted Democratplained why he ic in 1964, and (c) 2016, Washington Post Writers Group was funneling which since then political funds to has voted Repubthe candidate for New York’s goverlican by an average of 36.1 points? — The only Democrat to carry Ari- nor, Franklin Roosevelt, rather than to zona since 1948 was Bill Clinton in down-ballot candidates: As the Staten 1996. If his wife duplicates that feat, Island ferry enters its slip, he said, it will this be because the state’s Mormon drags in “all the crap in the harbor behind it,” adding, “FDR is our Staten community recoiled from Trump? — In 1984, when Ronald Reagan Island ferry.” Trump might be the carried 49 states, under-30 voters were opposite. Watch whether his underthe most Republican age group. This tow drowns Reps. Barbara Comstock

George

Will

and Mike Coffman, Republicans with chilly relations with Trump, both representing similar districts — Northern Virginia and suburban Denver, respectively. — Will Trump become the first Republican in 60 years to lose whites with college educations? — Will Trump achieve even Mitt Romney’s 17 percent of the nonwhite vote? — Will Trump hold Clinton in Georgia below the 46 percent that Barack Obama won in 2012? — Finally, Winston Churchill enjoyed the story of the man who, upon receiving a telegram reporting his mother-in-law’s death and asking for instructions, replied: “Embalm, cremate, bury at sea. Take no chances.” What instructions will Tuesday evening’s returns give to Republicans about what to do with Trump’s approach to the electorate?

POLITICS: November 8, 2016

Beyond November 8, 2016

he safe thing to say on an Election Day is that whoever wins, the sun will come up next day. Which it will — on the way to rising on another Election Day, such is our present habit of living and dying by elections. The just concluded campaign should suggest to us why such a habit is deadlier than a carton-a-day cigarette addiction. You have to have politics. You just don’t need to give the political enterprise the daily centrality it has come to enjoy in our affairs. When you do, it raises up less-than-salubrious people offering to make everything salubrious in return for our vote — a promise that, if kept (which it never is), would abolish the need for further promises. We’d all be happy as clams. We never are. Witness 2016. WHAT’S THE point? The point is, we’d all likelier be happy if the voteseekers would just let us alone most of the time: Leave us to find our ways through life’s tangles with the help of family and friends and community. Jefferson’s arguments for small, non-intrusive government have never, it seems to me, seemed more trenchant. The Affordable Care Act comes to mind, as it made so many lavish promises about singlehandedly improving the insurance system. And then there was the idea that if we just ripped down the all the Confederate battle flags, voila: We’d have racial understanding. And then there was the movement to compel — look

here, you dumb, beer-guzzling college riffraff, look here! — mutual consent for sexual relations at beer-guzzling frat parties! Of the two major political groupings, Republicans show the lesser inclination to boss people around in the name of some greater good. Democrats remind me of the old-time schoolmarms who, with a steely glare, cracked rulers across the knuckles of the refractory. Not that that lets Republicans off the

William

hook for their too-frequent encouragement of centrally conceived, centrally managed projects intended to upstage the Democrats: No Child Left Behind, for instance. Politics is a profession, and professions need objectives, and objectives need to be enforced for the general good. No politician is innocent of the willingness to compel: “Stop what you’re doing! Do this instead!” THE CURRENT obsession with Title IX rules governing sex on college campuses shows how political types seem to benefit by drawing up rules and regulations. That’s what we used to have the moral law for: Defining what we did and what we didn’t do. Your mom told you. Your dad told you. They not only told you what to do; they told you why and how come. It was because

(when the telling was accurate) God and the community had defined, or tried to, the relationship between men and women and the reasons for decency, kindness, respect and honor. And it didn’t always work. But it provided a basis for the discourse that civilized societies are regarded as favoring. You see, it was about character. About who you were. Who you were was supposed to bear strongly on the question of personal conduct. There’s something to put to the bureaucracy: Oh, please, sirs, who do you want us to be? And how shall we become such? By attending seminars for the wayward? Certainly not through the ministrations of family. And certainly not through those of the church: An entity intended, so you gather from the media, to effect obedience to authoritarian jerks (distinguished from bureaucrats by their ministerial robes). ENOUGH OF that for now. There will be more. There has to be. The politicians have us coming and going, and they won’t let go, no matter who prevails in the soul-searing contests of 2016. They won’t let go, that is, until their subjects compel them to do so, by dogged assertion of the true role of a democratic society. That role is to protect the inborn right to be ever so much more than the political regulators would have us become. That right — once familiar to Americans but, alas, less so now — is the right to a life of freedom, of virtue and, in the end, contentment.

November 16, 2016 2016 ELECTION: November 8, 2016

Painful choices — hard facts: Part II

n most Presidential election years, the most important vote is the vote for President of the United States. This year, the most important vote looks like the vote for control of the Senate. Regardless of who wins the White House, the freedom that Americans have taken for granted — taken too much for granted, for far too long — can be destroyed by whomever the next President puts on the Supreme Court. Since the Senate has the power to approve or disapprove whatever nominee any President wants to put on the High Court, that makes the Senate this country’s last line of defense against any headstrong President who puts his or her own power ahead of the freedom of more than 300 million Americans and of future generations. THE SENATE is also the last line of defense against any President who exceeds his or her own authority, and thereby destroys the Constitution’s balance of power among the three branches of government that has kept this country free for more than two centuries. If either party — whether Democrats or Republicans — unites behind a President with no regard for the Constitution, that party can change the fundamental nature of American government, leaving not only the incumbent President, but future Presidents as well, able to rule virtually by decree. When the Democrats controlled both Houses of Congress, as well as the White House, we came dangerously close to that, with President Obama virtually repealing the immigration laws passed by Congress and issuing executive orders

on this and other issues that simply took over the legislative power from Congress. Fortunately, there was still a third branch of government — the federal judiciary — which put a stop to some of these illegal actions. But, if that third branch of government is also taken over by one party, there is nothing left as a barrier against unbridled power. The Democrats are united behind Hillary Clinton in a way that the Republicans are by no means united behind Donald Trump. Mrs. Clinton also has overwhelming support by the media in a way that Mr. Trump never has and never will have.

Thomas

IF EITHER of these headstrong and self-centered individuals were to overstep the Constitutional boundaries as President of the United States, and endanger the freedom of Americans, only Donald Trump faces any real danger of being impeached by the House of Representatives and then being removed from office by the Senate. This is not to predict that either of them will in fact be impeached by the House and removed by the Senate. But penalties exist in the law not just to punish people, but to deter them from doing things that the penalties are there to prevent. Trump would be on a shorter leash, even if the Republicans controlled the Senate. And there is no way that he

doesn’t know that fact, with some Republicans already refusing to endorse his candidacy and some even announcing that they plan to vote for Hillary Clinton. But, with the Democrats controlling the Senate, Mrs. Clinton would know that she had a blank check, instead of a Constitutional check on her powers. With the Senate and the media on her side, there would be virtually nothing she could not get away with. Control of the Senate matters hugely, no matter who gets into the White House. It matters for the future of the Supreme Court, on which the rule of law depends, and it matters for keeping any President from running this country like a banana republic. The politically divided government, which the media so often and so loudly lament, may be all that can keep the next four years from being the last four years for Constitutional government and the freedom that depends on it. Republican control of the Senate is a necessary, but by no means sufficient, precondition for keeping a headstrong President within bounds. There are still painful memories of the pre-emptive surrender when Senator Lindsey Graham announced that he was going to vote to confirm Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court, even before she had been examined by the Senate. REGARDLESS OF who wins the White House or the Senate, the voters are going to have to keep their feet to the fire, to make sure that Senators do not simply take the path of least resistance. That path usually leads downhill, sometimes very far downhill.

CONTACT INFORMATION Individual Contact Information Fields - suzannefields2000@gmail.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 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, Suzanne Fields, David Harsanyi, Laura Hollis, Terry Jeffrey, Larry Kudlow, David Limbaugh, Stephen Moore, Dick Morris, William Murchison, Dennis Prager, Ben Shapiro, Thomas Sowell 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) Nintendo originally made and sold playing cards. 2) The Guiding Light ran for 72 years, first on radio and then on TV. It was cancelled in 2009. 3) Pinky and the Brain were recurring characters on Animaniacs. 4) New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island are Canada’s Maritime Provinces. 5) President Jimmy Carter was a member of the U.S. Naval Academy class of 1947. 6) Sixteen pawn moves plus four knight moves equals 20 possible first moves for a chess player.

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

Conservative Chronicle

2016 ELECTION: November 8, 2016

The choice, not an echo: Framing the issues

n the last days of the presidential campaign, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump held a series of last-minute rallies in the battleground states. The huge differences between those events reveal the stark differences between the two candidates who seek our nation’s highest office. Since Hillary can’t draw a large crowd on her own, she depended on appearances by famous entertainment personalities such as Lady Gaga, Bruce Springsteen, Jon Bon Jovi, Katy Perry, Beyoncé and Jay-Z. Despite the free tickets given away by her campaign, many in the audience left before Hillary even took the stage.

SOME OF those entertainers include vulgar and obscene lyrics as part of their act, but that didn’t stop Hillary from hypocritically hugging them on stage. Besides embracing the worst elements of the entertainment industry, Hillary’s own use of coarse language has been widely reported by the Secret Service and military aides assigned to protect her. Following the vulgar entertainment, Hillary’s brief remarks consisted mostly of politically correct platitudes, such as claiming to be “inclusive” while attacking her opponent as “divisive.” Of course, the real Hillary was when she said “you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables — the racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic, you name it.”

Donald Trump has proved that those epithets just don’t work anymore. Most Americans are tired of being told that common-sense, traditional views are outside the bounds of acceptable conversation. Trump had been doing two or three rallies per day, but he stepped up the pace to four or five per day during the week before the election. His seven-day schedule included several stops each in the states of Fla., Pa., N.C. and Mich., plus visits to Iowa, Colo., Ohio, N.H., and Minn. There’s no need for extra entertainment at a Trump rally, because Donald Trump himself is who the people came to see and hear. Most of Trump’s rallies drew crowds of 5,000 to 25,000 people, often with thousands more lined up outside waiting to get in. Unlike Hillary’s substance-free remarks to people who mainly came for a free concert, Trump gave a full-length speech at each of his rallies. Unlike Hillary, Trump never loses his voice, his energy and incredible stamina, his humor, or his authenticity. At every stop, Trump reinforced the signature issues of his campaign: Build a wall on the southern border, stop illegal immigration and sanctuary cities, stop the influx of refugees and Muslims (unless they can survive “extreme vetting”), repair trade agreements that encourage companies to shift jobs overseas, rebuild our badly depleted military while staying out of unwinnable wars in the Middle East, repeal and replace

Obamacare, end Common Core and restore local control of education. Each of these issues is linked to the corrupt bipartisan cartel that has run our national government since Ronald Reagan left office in 1988. Imagine if this election had come down to Clinton versus Bush, as many predicted last year. The Clinton and Bush families agree on most issues, so it’s no surprise that several Bushes are publicly supporting Hillary.

again, after decades of losing to foreign rivals. Trump understands that the world is filled with enemies, adversaries and competitors, not friends, allies and partners. The stakes in this election were illustrated by an article the Wall Street Journal chose to publish the Friday before the election. Entitled “A President Clinton Would Be Good for India,” the article by someone named Sadanand Dhume endorsed Hillary because Trump’s “antitrade tirades are dangerTHE THEME that runs through any ously kooky.” Donald Trump speech is his instinctive It’s sad that the traditional voice of desire for Americans to start winning American business apparently wants the next President to be “good for India” instead of good for Americans. Too many of the Journal’s readers profit from the global trading system that has outsourced millions of American jobs to India, China and Mexico, allowing those countries to grow rapidly while America stagnates. Americans left behind by the global economy have been attracted by Trump’s promise to return our country to world dominance in every field of human activity. That means employing our own citizens to help make America strong again, safe again, rich again, and great again. TO GIVE Hillary Clinton her due, she made one statement with which all Americans can agree: “I believe this may be the most important election of our lifetimes.” But the real credit should go to Donald Trump, for framing the issues of this election, standing up for American workers, and providing voters with a real choice, not an echo. John and Andy Schlafly are sons of Phyllis Schlafly (1924-2016) whose 27th book, The Conservative Case for Trump, was published posthumously on September 6.

November 16, 2016 2016 ELECTION: November 4, 2016

Is Team Clinton booting the election?

n my Nov. 1 column, I looked at the presidential election through the lens of the old children’s radio show Let’s Pretend — examining how things would look if it turned out that Donald Trump ends up winning. That would have required lots of pretending until recently. Two weeks ago, Hillary Clinton led Trump by six percent in the RealClearPolitics average of recent polls. That lead is now 1.9 percent. RCP state polling averages then had Clinton ahead by 128 electoral votes. Now the estimated count is 273 to 265.

THESE NUMBERS may overstate the closeness of the race. Nate Silver’s FiveThirtyEight, which weighs poll results by various factors, gives Trump a 31 percent chance of winning. Other polling websites peg his chances as significantly less. But obviously, something has changed. FBI Director James Comey’s announcement Oct. 28 that the in-

vestigation into Clinton’s non-secure typical executive branch practice, to emails as secretary of state was resum- the appropriate committee members of ing undoubtedly contributed to it. And both parties. An unforced error or, as the race may already have been tight- the British would say, an own goal. Then came an attack on Comey for ening after the announcement of what Trump might call yuuuuuge Obam- violating Justice Department “protocol” — a word used a dozen times by acare premium increases. After all, Clinton is seeking a third vice presidential nominee Tim Kaine Democratic term, though the signa- in one interview. But of course, Team Clinton didn’t ture policies of the current Democratic president — Obamacare, the Iranian object to Comey’s violating protocol when he announced nuclear deal — have always been un- July 5 he wouldn’t recpopular. ommend criminal The response charges against to the Comey anClinton for vionouncement of lating email rules those on Team (c) 2016, Creators Syndicate and lying repeatClinton — which edly about it. He includes many of the mainstream media, as well as the said that “no reasonable prosecutor” Clinton campaign — reeked of panic. would bring such a case, even though no reasonable judge would quash an They clearly didn’t see this coming. The first response was to attack indictment under Title 18, Section Comey for addressing his letter only 793(f) of U.S. Code based on the facts to Republican members of Congress. he alleged. My theory is that Comey was In fact, it was addressed, in line with

Michael

Barone

JUSTICE: November 7, 2016

Rules of the game: Impartiality

he underpinnings of a decent society are neutral laws — laws that favor no particular individual or group — and the impartial enforcement of those laws. The U.S. Supreme Court’s job is to ensure the impartial enforcement of our laws. But our two presidential candidates differ in their visions of court appointees. Hillary Clinton says that she would “look broadly and widely for people who represent the diversity of our country” and that “we need a Supreme Court that will stand up on behalf of women’s rights (and) on behalf of the rights of the LGBT community.” In contrast, Donald Trump says, “I will appoint justices who, like Justice (Antonin) Scalia, will protect our liberty with the highest regard for the Constitution.” Limited government and rule of law are conflict-reducing, whereas diversity-oriented justices who stand up for the rights of particular individuals are conflict-enhancing. Let’s look at a simple example of the benefit of neutral rules and their impartial enforcement. FOOTBALL TEAMS spend four quarters battling each other. After the conflict, players and coaches shake hands and often hug one another. Their competitive struggle ends peacefully, as well as on friendly terms, because the referees, whom we can think of as justices, enforce neutral rules impartially. There would be a different outcome if referees exercised compassion instead

of impartial rule enforcement. Let’s be specific. On Nov. 20, the Pittsburgh Steelers and the Cleveland Browns will play. So far this season, the Browns have not won a single game; their record is 0-9. On top of this sad record, the Browns have not had a winning season since 2007. By contrast, the Steelers haven’t had a losing season since 2003. In anyone’s book, this is a gross disparity. On Nov. 20, should the referees have the empathy to understand what it’s like to be a perennial loser? What would you think of a referee whose decisions are guided by empathy? Let’s be explicit.

Walter

IN THE NAME of compensatory justice, referees might stringently apply pass interference or roughing the passer violations against the Steelers and apply the rules less stringently against the Browns. Another question is: Would you support a referee who refuses to make defensive pass interference calls because he thinks it’s a silly rule? You’d probably remind him that the league makes the rules, not referees. Most people would agree that football justice requires that referees apply the rules blindly and independent of the records or any other characteristic of the

two teams. They would also agree that referees should impartially apply the rules of the game even if they personally disagree with some of the rules. If referees exercised compassion, football games would not end so peaceably. Losing coaches and players would not feel a need to go back to the drawing board and figure out how they could improve themselves. Instead, they would focus their energies on choosing sympathetic referees. THE ESSENCE of a Supreme Court justice’s job is just like that of a referee — namely, impartially enforcing the U.S. Constitution, our rules of the game. The status of a person appearing before the court should have absolutely nothing to do with the rendering of a decision. That’s why Lady Justice, often appearing on court buildings, is shown wearing a blindfold. It’s to indicate that justice should be meted out impartially, regardless of identity, power or weakness. Also, as Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes said, “men should know the rules by which the game is played. Doubt as to the value of some of those rules is no sufficient reason why they should not be followed by the courts.” In other words, the legislative branch makes the rules, not judges. True justice must be settled by process questions, such as: Were the rules unbiased and evenly applied? If so, any outcome of the game of life is just. Decisions based upon empathy would make it unjust.

placed in an impossible position by the June 27 Phoenix tarmac meeting between former President Bill Clinton and Attorney General Loretta Lynch, a meeting that was surely intended to be secret but was revealed apparently because a TV reporter had a good source in the private jet terminal. BY MEETING with the spouse of a candidate under criminal investigation, Lynch revealed herself to be a political hack. Her Justice Department’s refusal to summon a grand jury and sweetheart deals with key witnesses strengthen that view. So Comey, head of an investigative agency, was obliged to make a decision that would ordinarily be made by a prosecutor. Like a local judge asked to enjoin a party’s national convention delegates, he evidently didn’t consider it his job to determine who should be a presidential nominee. Team Clinton cheered that violation of protocol. The Oct. 28 letter required a 1984-style flip-flop from those in the Clinton camp. They said, in effect, “We have always been at war with the protocol-violating James Comey.” The repeated attacks on Comey by Clinton and the mainstream media were out of the 1990s Clinton playbook. Similar attacks worked when Bill Clinton was the incumbent president with high job approval. But Hillary Clinton isn’t the incumbent president and has sub-50 percent approval. Did Team Clinton think its candidate would win a contest over honesty and integrity with an FBI director it had recently praised? That looks like political malpractice. Media members of Team Clinton chimed in with articles claiming that Clinton was being criticized only because she is a woman — an absurdity because the criticisms pertain to her specific acts. It’s a Clinton thing, not a female thing, to violate email rules and lie repeatedly about it. In response, Trump uncharacteristically has campaigned on substantive issues, rolling out an arguably serious plan to repeal and replace Obamacare. Polls still show Clinton ahead — but by margins similar to the British polls showing Brexit losing and smaller than those in 2015 polls showing Conservatives wouldn’t win a majority in Parliament. Those elections came out the other way. SO MAYBE we’re in my pretend world. If so, a Clinton loss would validate my old rule that nothing is free in politics; there is just some question about when you pay the price.

Conservative Chronicle

2016 ELECTION: November 4, 2016

Final days, awful choice, high price to pay

ule of thumb for a presidential campaign where the two candidates have the highest unfavorable ratings in the history of polling: If you’re the center of attention, you’re losing. As Election Day approaches, Hillary Clinton cannot shake the spotlight. She is still ahead in the polls, but you know she’s slipping when she shows up at a Florida campaign event with a week to go accompanied by the former Miss Universe, Alicia Machado.

THE ORIGINAL plan was for Clinton to pivot in the final week of the campaign from relentless criticism of Donald Trump to making a positive case for herself. Instead, she reached back for a six-week-old charge that played well when it first emerged back then but now feels stale and recycled. The setback and momentum shift came courtesy of FBI Director James Comey. Clinton’s greatest hurdle had always been the Comey primary, which the Democrats thought she’d won in July when he declined to recommend prosecuting her over classified emails. This engendered an outpouring of Democratic encomiums about Comey’s unimpeachable integrity and Solomonic wisdom. When it was revealed last Friday that there had been a Comey recount and Clinton lost, Solomon turned into Torquemada. But, of course, Comey had no choice. How could he have sat on a trove of 650,000 newly discovered emails and kept that knowledge suppressed until after the election? Comey’s announcement brought flooding back — to memory and to the front pages — every unsavory element of the Clinton character: Shiftiness, paranoia, cynicism and disdain for playing by the rules. It got worse when FBI employees began leaking stories about possible political pressure from the Department of Justice and about parallel investigations into the Clinton Foundation. At the same time, Clinton was absorbing a daily dose of WikiLeaks, offering an extremely unappealing tableau of mendacity, deception and the intermingling of public service with private self-enrichment. It was the worst week of her campaign, at the worst time. And it raises two troubling questions: — Regarding the FBI, do we really want to elect a president who will likely come into office under criminal investigation by law enforcement? Congressional hearings will be immediate and endless. A constitutional crisis at some point is not out of the question. — And regarding WikiLeaks, how do we know it will have released the most damning material by Election Day? A hardened KGB operative like Vladimir Putin might well prefer to hold back

whatever is most incriminating until ing for a presidential candidate. As final a Clinton presidency. He is surely not evidence of how bad are our choices in above attempted blackmail at an oppor- 2016, Trump’s liabilities, especially on foreign policy, outweigh hers. tune time. We are entering a period of unprecThere seems to be a consensus that Putin’s hacking gambit is intended only edented threat to the international order to disrupt the election rather than to deny that has prevailed under American leadsince 1945. After eight Clinton the White House. Why? Putin ership years of President harbors a deep Obama’s retreat, the animus toward three major revisionClinton, whom he ist powers — Rusblames personally sia, China and for the anti-Putin (c) 2016, Washington Post Writers Group Iran — see their demonstrations that followed Russia’s rigged 2011 par- chance to achieve regional dominance and diminish, if not expel, American liamentary elections. influence. At a time of such tectonic instabilMOREOVER, PUTIN would surely prefer to deal with Trump, a man who ity, even the most experienced head of has adopted the softest line on the Krem- state requires wisdom and delicacy to maintain equilibrium. Trump has neilin of any modern U.S. leader. In a normal election, the FBI and ther. His joining of supreme ignorance WikiLeaks factors might be disqualify- to supreme arrogance, combined with a

Charles

Krauthammer

pathological sensitivity to any perceived slight, is a standing invitation to calamitous miscalculation. Two generations of Americans have grown up feeling that international stability is as natural as the air we breathe. It’s not. It depends on continual, calibrated tending. It depends on the delicate balancing of alliances and the careful signaling of enemies. It depends on avoiding self-inflicted trade wars and on recognizing the value of allies like Germany, Japan and South Korea as cornerstones of our own security rather than satrapies who are here to dispatch tribute to their imperial master in Washington. IT TOOK seven decades to build this open, free international order. It could be brought down in a single presidential term. That would be a high price to pay for the catharsis of kicking over a table.

JAMES COMEY: November 3, 2016

Open season on James Comey James Comey surely had no idea what he was in for. The FBI director knew that his decision to notify Congress of the reopening of the Clinton email investigation would cause a firestorm. But even he must be taken aback by the tsunami of obloquy that reaches all the way up to the president of the United States. The day before yesterday, James Comey was the ultimate argument from authority, cited by every Democrat for the proposition that Hillary Clinton’s private email setup was no big deal. Now, he is accused of violating the law, of being tantamount to a sex offender, and of returning the specter of J. Edgar Hoover to Washington, D.C.

Obama said in an interview, “we don’t operate on incomplete information, and we don’t operate on leaks.” There’s also a norm against a president publicly slamming his FBI director. But now it’s open season on Comey. The New York Times ran a frontpage story headlined “James Comey Role Recalls Hoover’s F.B.I., Fairly or Not.” The “fairly or not” construction is a warrant to publish anything. Why not “Obama Accused of Being

PERHAPS COMEY’S letter was ill-advised; it certainly wasn’t ill-intentioned. Any reasonable critic of Comey should concede that — coming unexpectedly into possession of 650,000 more emails possibly relevant to an investigation that he had told Congress was closed — he was in a tricky spot. But most of Comey’s detractors aren’t interested in his dilemma or in the Department of Justice protocols they claim to hold so dear. No, Comey’s sin was putting at risk Clinton’s electoral prospects, and he is consequently the object of a campaign of personal destruction whose motive is nakedly political. President Barack Obama’s spokesman said the other day that he wouldn’t criticize or defend Comey. That Olympian detachment quickly became inoperative. “I do think that there is a norm that when there are investigations,”

Born in Kenya, Fairly or Not.” Or “The Clintons Accused of Murdering Political Opponents, Fairly or Not.”

Rich

THE MAIN supporting quotation in the piece is from Georgetown University’s Sanford Ungar. Even he stipulates, “I don’t mean to smear Comey, and it may be an unfair comparison.” Then why make it? According to Ungar, the connection between Hoover and Comey is that the notorious 20th-century FBI director “would weigh in on issues without warning or expectation.” Really? Hoover’s problem was that he occasionally popped off? Not the domestic spying, the political blackmail and the attempts to destroy Martin Luther King Jr.? Harry Reid accused Comey of violating the law — specifically the Hatch Act — which is stupidly malicious even

for Reid, who doesn’t have an ounce of Comey’s integrity even on one of the FBI director’s worst days. The teenager who says she sexted with Anthony Weiner told BuzzFeed that she felt re-victimized by Comey. Weiner’s alleged victimization of her consisted of sending her lewd messages and trying to exploit her; James Comey’s victimization consisted of finding emails related to another investigation on Weiner’s computer. How can he sleep at night? Ian Millhiser of Think Progress argues that Comey should be fired because his notification to Congress is the first step on a slippery slope toward the FBI violating the civil liberties of all Americans. First, they came for Hillary Clinton ... The Democrats portray themselves as the institutionalists in this election, protecting all that is good and decent from the onslaught of Donald Trump. But the Comey episode shows that their commitment to our institutions is coterminous with their political interest. As soon as Comey crossed them, they turned on him viciously and didn’t care if the FBI was collateral damage. The lock-step attack, from the cable TV talking heads to the president, is something to behold. It’s not just that the Clintons will bend every rule and try to destroy anyone who gets in their way; they will enlist everyone on their side to do the same. THIS IS how a Clinton administration will work. Consider yourself warned — again.

November 16, 2016 JAMES COMEY: November 3, 2016

J. Edgar Comey: His effort to redeem himself

had intended to use this final col- backed up all her emails onto the laptop umn before the presidential elec- that she and her husband shared. At the time he sent his Friday letter, tion to explain at length why I cannot vote for either Hillary Clinton or Comey had not yet seen the contents of Donald Trump and plan to vote for Gary the Weiner laptop because the search Johnson for president. In a nutshell, big warrant authorizing FBI agents to accontents was not signed government is our biggest problem. It cess its Sunday. If he saw thrives on more debt, more taxes, more u n t i l something incrimiregulations, more nating before he war, a secretive wrote his letter, he deep state and saw it unlawfully; less personal free(c) 2016, Creators Syndicate yet his duty was to dom. Both Clinton bring what he saw and Trump would grow the government. Only Johnson to the Department of Justice, for which he works, not to hint about it publicly to would shrink it. One of the most dangerous tenden- Congress. Comey’s progress report to Congress cies of big government is the generation of a police state — wherein laws, rules is prohibited by the internal regulations and procedures are primarily written and of the DOJ and the FBI — and by the can often be bent to aid law enforcement canons of legal ethics that regulate lawwhen it is encroaching on our personal yers. Comey had no obligation to send freedoms. We saw a terrifying example the letter at any time; moreover, sending of that last week when FBI Director it last week was a direct violation of DOJ James Comey behaved as if he were his and FBI rules that prohibit all public anmost infamous predecessor, J. Edgar nouncements about candidates for public office within 60 days of Election Day. Hoover. Comey told FBI staffers early this week that he sent the letter because he HERE IS THE back story. Late last week, in an effort to redeem felt duty-bound to members of a conhimself from the consequences of hav- gressional committee to whom he had ing ignored a mountain of evidence of given a promise that he would keep them guilt against former Secretary of State informed of the status of the email invesHillary Clinton last summer, Comey told tigation. That was a troublesome promCongress in a cryptic letter that the FBI ise because its compliance violated other would resume investigating her emails duties imposed upon Comey. Worse than based upon the belief that more of them making a promise and not keeping it is may be located in the laptop of disgraced making a promise that should not be former Rep. Anthony Weiner. Weiner is kept. The genesis of all this was Comey’s the alleged sexual predator who remains the estranged husband of Huma Abedin, unprecedented news conference on July one of Clinton’s closest aides. Abedin 5, at which he announced that no charges

Andrew

Napolitano

would be filed against Clinton because no prosecutor would take the case. That was not an announcement for him to make. The FBI’s job is to gather facts and present them to the DOJ, not to make legal evaluations. He made his announcement when he did to head off the behavior of some of his agents who were seeking Clinton’s medical records, unlawfully, from the National Security Agency to ascertain the gravity of her head injury — an injury she posited during her FBI interrogation as the reason for her professed memory loss. I HAVE argued that Comey’s July 5 decision was dead wrong; there is a mountain of evidence with which to indict and convict Clinton on espionage charges. Yet it should have been presented to a grand jury — it was not — rather than at a news conference. The July 5 announcement was bizarre in that it not only

exonerated Clinton but also described the quantity and quality of the evidence against her. This insulted the agents who worked on the case and produced the lowest collective FBI morale since Watergate. If Comey sent his Friday letter to address the problems he caused by his July 5 announcement, he did the wrong thing for the wrong reasons. But perhaps the gravest of Comey’s violations is that of the constitutional guarantee of due process. The essence of due process is notice and fairness. How exquisitely unfair of Comey to say, in effect, “We have something that warrants investigation of you, yet we don’t know its significance, so we can’t say what it is.” This is reminiscent of Franz Kafka’s The Trial, in which the lead character is being pursued for a year on unnamed charges, against which he cannot defend himself. In his play A Man for All Seasons, Robert Bolt shows Sir Thomas More arguing with William Roper, a colleague, who suggests that government lawbreaking can be justified for the greater good, particularly if the target is the devil (which Trump has called Clinton). More demolishes that argument in a few now iconic lines: “And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you — where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country’s planted thick with laws from coast to coast — man’s laws, not God’s — and if you cut them down, and you’re just the man to do it, d’you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I’d give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety’s sake.” TO MY FRIENDS who have rejoiced in James Comey’s letter, please take warning that, as More accurately predicted, the tables can be turned. If there is any moral lesson in all this, it is that the history of human freedom consists of paying careful attention to constitutional guarantees and legal protections, no matter the reputation of the accused.

Conservative Chronicle

HILLARY CLINTON: November 4, 2016

Hillary’s high crimes & misdemeanors

f Hillary Clinton is elected presiIf this is so, Hillary Clinton as security dent on Tuesday, and if what risk ranks right up there with Alger Hiss Bret Baier is reporting from FBI and Harry Dexter White, though they sources on Fox News is true, America is acted out of treasonous ideology and she headed for a constitutional crisis. out of Clintonian hubris. What do these Indeed, it would seem imperative that foreign intelligence agencies know about FBI Director James Comey, even if it Clinton that the voters do not? violates protocol and costs him his job, The second revelation from Baier is should state publicly whether what Bai- that the Clinton Foundation has er’s FBI sources are telling him is false b e e n under active investior true. gation by the whiteThe people collar crime divihave a right to sion of the FBI for a know — before year and is a “very Tuesday. high priority.” (c) 2016, Creators Syndicate For, if true, Specifically, the Clinton could face charges in 2017 and FBI is looking into published allegations impeachment and removal from office in of “pay-to-play.” This is the charge that 2018. the Clinton State Department traded acAccording to Baier, FBI agents have cess, influence and policy decisions to found new emails, believed to have orig- foreign regimes and to big donors who inated on Clinton’s server, on the com- gave hundreds of millions to the Clinton puter jointly used by close aide Huma Foundation, along with 15 years of sixAbedin and her disgraced husband, An- figure speaking fees for Bill and Hillary. thony Weiner. According to Baier’s sources, FBI agents are “actively and aggressively” ABEDIN’S FAILURE to turn this pursuing this case, have interviewed and computer over to the State Department re-interviewed multiple persons, and are on leaving State appears to be a violation now being inundated in an “avalanche of of U.S. law. new information” from WikiLeaks docuMoreover, the laptops of close Clinton ments and new emails. aides Cheryl Mills and Heather SamuelThe FBI told Baier that they anticipate son, thought destroyed by the FBI, were indictments. apparently retained and are “being exIndeed, with the sums involved, and ploited” by the National Security divi- the intimate ties between high officials sion. of Bill’s foundation, and Hillary and her And here is the salient point. His FBI close aides at State, it strains credulity to sources told Baier, “with 99 percent” cer- believe that deals were not discussed and titude, that Clinton’s Chappaqua server cut. “had been hacked by at least five foreign Books have been written alleging and intelligence services ...” detailing them.

Pat

Buchanan

ALSO, NOT only Fox News but also the Wall Street Journal and other news sources are reporting on what appears a rebellion inside the FBI against strictures on their investigations imposed by higher ups in the Department of Justice of Attorney General Loretta Lynch. Director Comey has come under fire from left and right — first for refusing to recommend the prosecution of Clinton, then for last week’s statement about the discovery of new and “pertinent” emails on the Abedin-Weiner computer — but retains a reputation for integrity. And he knows better than any other high official the answer to a critical question that needs answering before Tuesday: Has Baier been fed exaggerated or false information by FBI agents hostile to Clinton? Or has Baier been told the truth?

In the latter case, we are facing a constitutional crisis if Clinton is elected. And the American people surely have a right to know that before they go to the polls on Tuesday. What is predictable ahead? Attorney General Lynch, whether she stays or goes, will be hauled before Congress to explain whether she or top aides impeded the FBI investigations of the Clinton scandals. And witnesses from within her Justice department and FBI will also be called to testify. Moreover, Senate Republicans would block confirmation of any new attorney general who did not first promise to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the email and pay-to-play scandals, and any pressure from Lynch’s Justice Department on the FBI. Even Democrats would concede that a Department of Justice, staffed by Hillary Clinton appointees, could not credibly be entrusted with investigating alleged high crimes and misdemeanors by former Secretary of State Clinton and confidants like Abedin and Mills. An independent counsel, a special prosecutor, appears inevitable. And such individuals usually mark their success or failure by how many and how high are the indictments and convictions they rack up. However, these processes proceed at a torpid pace. First comes the setting up of the office and the hirings, then the investigations, then the grand jury appearances, then the indictments, then the prosecutions, then the horse-trading for the testimony of the accused and the convicted in return for immunity or leniency. Steadily, it moves up the food chain. And when a head of state is involved, it is a process deeply debilitating to the nation. WE HAVE gone through this before, twice. Do we really want to go through it again?

November 16, 2016 REPUBLIC: November 8, 2016

2016: The demise of the small-r Republican politics

Clinton family, the Bush family and plenteous signs that neither Republicans nor voters generally were hungerthe Trump family. The Clintons, by deciding that Hill- ing for another Bush presidency. Jeb Bush had an admirable record ary Clinton would run for president at age 69 despite possibly significant as governor of Florida and could speak health problems, effectively foreclosed knowledgeably on foreign and military But his candidacy overthe Democratic nomination and pre- p o l i c y . owed younger Revented a younger generation of Demo- s h a d publicans in the first cratic politicians half of 2015 and from competing. provided a perfect That gave foil in the second an opening to for the insurgent 74-year-old self(c) 2016, Creators Syndicate Donald Trump, avowed socialist Bernie Sanders, her one visible oppo- who ousted Bush from his poll lead nent, to foist a left-wing agenda on the within a month after his ride down the world’s oldest political party. Sand- Trump Tower escalator. In the meantime, Jeb Bush’s super ers won all but two caucuses and held Clinton to 56 percent of the primary PAC spent something like one-third and caucus votes. Exit polls suggest of its $100 million on deconstructing she trailed Sanders among white voters his onetime Florida ally Marco Rubio, with incomes under $150,000 — once who might have been a much stronger nominee than Trump. THE COURSE of this election can the Democrats’ core constituency. The Trump family banked on the The Bush family insisted on running be seen as more familial than institutional, with key roles played by the a third member for president despite notion that a highly publicized billionmong the many complaints I have seen about this squalid presidential election — the most dismal choice of major-party nominees since 1856 — there’s one that I find missing: That it shows how our politics have become less republican. That’s republican with a small r, in contrast to royalist. This is not an entirely new trend, but it is one that has reached a dismal culmination. In his magisterial book The Origins of Political Order, Francis Fukuyama shows how the progress toward good government — “getting to Denmark” is his phrase — involves a change from the familial to the institutional. Progress comes when a nation has a competent state, the rule of law and public accountability.

Michael

Barone

HILLARY CLINTON: November 3, 2016

Hillary Clinton’s final days

s it just me, or are there others out there in my audience who find it odd that Hillary Clinton, the inevitable presidential candidate of the Democratic Party, would continue to have at the highest level of her staff a woman married to a man who has repeatedly embarrassed himself, his wife and the Democratic Party? Anthony Weiner is a pervert. As to how perverted he might be we can only speculate, but we did see the picture of him sexually aroused in his underpants with his infant son lying next to him. Presumably, Weiner was sending that picture to one of his digital sweethearts. YET HUMA Abedin remained his lawful wedded wife even after his first and second scandals — those in which he left Congress and lost his bid for mayor of New York. Well, Hillary is happily married to Bill Clinton, so she is accustomed to weird marriages and weird guys. In fact, Bill officiated Weiner and Abedin’s wedding. But still, Hillary’s longest-standing boast in her long and boastful life is that she is on a special mission for children. Did she not, with years of child advocacy behind her, think that Weiner was a bizarre choice of a husband and an inappropriate father? Could she not after his Congressional scandal approach Abedin with an ultimatum: “Ditch that creep or you’re fired”? He was going to cause other problems, and he did. Somehow he — or maybe Abedin — got 650,000 emails,

some of which may deal with classified information, onto his laptop. Former FBI agents have told me that classified documents are now in the hands of America’s enemies. The Russians were mentioned. Why would Clinton have people like this around her? Well, again, she had Bill Clinton around her, and former national security advisor Sandy Berger, and God only knows how many other creeps. As her competitor for the presidency, Donald Trump,

R. Emmett

never tires of saying, “She’s got bad judgment.” She should not be running for president. I think the majority of the American people will come to that realization by next Tuesday. HER ENTIRE public life has been a hoax camouflaging real incompetence, and it is ironic that in the end her real nemesis is not her imagined “vast rightwing conspiracy” but the FBI. As I have written so many times before, her problem is not with her political opponents but with what the public calls “the authorities.” If you have followed her career with the enthusiasm and care that I have, you would have seen the FBI popping up repeatedly in Clinton’s scandals. Back in the 1980s, it began in Arkansas with FBI agent I.C. Smith questioning her role in

fundraising for then-Gov. Bill Clinton. It continued into the 1990s, coming to a boil in 1997 when then-FBI Director Louis Freeh responded to a Congressional query asking him whether he had ever experienced anything like the FBI’s trials with the Clintons. Freeh responded, “Actually I have,” and likened his experiences with the Clintons to his “16 years doing organized-crime cases in New York City.” Perhaps her run-ins with the FBI reached a climax this summer with its director, James Comey. Comey may not have recommended Clinton’s indictment in July, as many observers thought he would, but he most emphatically told Congress she had lied to the bureau in her testimony — a point many Democrats overlooked — and said that her handling of classified information on her server was “extremely careless.” That statement, coupled with his letter to Congress this past Friday, leaves me thinking the director has performed a difficult task admirably. Finally, former FBI Assistant Director James Kallstrom returned to the FBI’s favored theme for the Clintons. Last week, he described them as Director Freeh did back in 1997, as acting as a “crime family.” I HAVE been saying in this column for months that the FBI’s investigation of Hillary Clinton’s server would be a turning point in the Clintons’ 35-year career of skirting the law. Now that is becoming obvious even to the blasé members of official Washington, D.C.

aire and reality TV star would dominate free media coverage and shut off information about his 16 Republican opponents. A good bet. Trump got $2 billion worth of free TV time, including full coverage of rallies and phonein cable news interviews, to save him the trouble of traveling more than the several hundred yards from Trump Tower to networks’ Manhattan studios. THERE IS a royalist, rather than republican, undercurrent in all this. “Is it nice to trace how the actions of a retired widow and an unemployed youth become of such importance?” Walter Bagehot wrote in The English Constitution in 1867, referring to Queen Victoria and Edward, Prince of Wales. His point was that the public’s curiosity centered on the “dignified part” of government, while it had little interest in the personal lives of leaders of its “efficient part,” Parliament, such as William Gladstone and Benjamin Disraeli. Now we have Hillary Clinton complaining about Donald Trump’s groping women and Trump complaining that Clinton trashed women assaulted by her husband, both with some basis in fact. In the meantime, royalist politics are taking us further from Fukuyama’s Denmark. Government has been growing less competent. Look at Obamacare, veterans hospitals and immigration authorities failing to deport some 100,000 immigrants here illegally, including some who committed other crimes. The rule of law is under continued attack. Hillary Clinton was not indicted for violating criminal laws by setting up her private email system and repeatedly lying about it, and the Justice Department has hampered the FBI investigation into the pay-to-play operations of the Clinton Foundation. Trump repeatedly criticized a federal judge and has called for changing libel law — i.e., for revising a 50-yearold Supreme Court interpretation of the First Amendment — so he can sue reporters who write stories he doesn’t like. Each candidate has argued, persuasively, that the other should be disqualified from the presidency. Under a proper republican standard of accountability, both candidates would be. Unfortunately, elections are a zero-sum game; all but one candidate must lose, but one must win. AT THE END of the Constitutional Convention, a bystander asked Benjamin Franklin what kind of government it would produce. “A republic, if you can keep it,” he said. We’re not doing a very good job of that this year.

Conservative Chronicle

HILLARY CLINTON: November 8, 2016

Hillary Clinton’s five worst ideas on the economy

he latest spin out of Washing- is more than it cost to put a man on the ton is that stock-market de- moon. Solar energy already receives clines over the last 10 days are more than $100 of taxpayer subsidy per due to Donald Trump’s surge in the polls. kilowatt of energy produced for every Well, it is true that Wall Street tends to dollar that goes to oil and gas or coal. Let hate change — even when it’s positive. the free market pick the next great enerAnd if Donald Trump is anything, it is a gy source, which may be clean-burning change agent that will rattle the cages in n a t u ral gas. Washington, D.C., 4. Offer Free Coland perhaps on lege Tuition: It’s Wall Street. Invesone of the greatest tors didn’t respond financial scandals every school to freeze tuition for four at all well to Ronin America today or five years as a condition of receiving (c) 2016, Creators Syndicate ald Reagan until — the exorbitant any federal aid. Purdue University has his policies were put in place and the fees that universities and colleges are done this. Why not require schools with economy rocketed forward. Only then, in charging students. Some colleges now billion-dollar-plus endowments to use 1982, did the greatest bull-market expan- cost an annual $60,000 for room, board some of that money to lower the tuition sion in American history launch. and tuition, and the average cost is near for families? Something else is being missed here: $30,000. But if the students and the fami5. Increase Social Security Benefits: Hillary Clinton’s agenda on the economy lies aren’t paying these costs, taxpayers Clinton wants to fatten benefits to certain and the financial markets. Clinton says will, and costs will spike even higher. senior citizens, and she wants to raise the she has a cabinet full lot of new ideas Universities will raise their tuitions, as tax on Social Security to “pay for it.” Reon the economy. Unfortunately, most of they have every time the government ally? The system is already tens of trilthem are really dimwitted. provides more subsidies through Pell lions of dollars in the red, according to Grants. A better idea would be to require the Social Security Administration’s own I’VE IDENTIFIED five of Clinton’s lousiest ideas that could hurt employDONALD TRUMP: November 3, 2016 ment, growth and stocks. 1. Raise the Minimum Wage to $12 or Even $15 an Hour: She might as well call this the Teenage Job Elimination Act. Even using the methodology of the liberal Congressional Budget Office shows f Donald Trump wants to win this that cause so much pain and financial that a $12 minimum wage would reduce election and thwart the attempt hardship to victims and their families. the number of starter jobs by as many as by the corrupt Clintons to acquire Cures will drive down the cost of care. 770,000. Seattle recently raised its mini- the White House again, he must close Immigration will again be controlled mum wage to $11 and is headed to $15. the deal with persuadable voters in a na- and our laws enforced. An independent assessment by the Uni- tionally televised address. By cutting taxes for individuals and versity of Washington finds that so far corporations — like John Kennedy and Here is how it might go. the law has had the “negative unintended Ronald Reagan did — companies and consequence” of fewer hours worked MY FELLOW Americans, running start-ups will create millions of jobs and fewer jobs. Is this what we want for for president of this country I love and for a 21st-century economy, providing the nation? that has been so good to me is the great- more tax revenue for the government. 2. Hike Income Tax Rates: There is est privilege I have ever known. Only My administration will reduce waste virtually no economic philosophy that being elected president would be a and fraud, returning the government to holds that raising taxes will help the higher honor. its constitutional boundaries. economy. But Hillary Clinton is going to I know the concerns many of you give it a try — to the tune of $1.5 trillion have about me. I am far from perfect and sucked out of the economy. have made mistakes, but I have learned Under Clinton’s plan, for the very rich from those mistakes and I promise you the income tax rate would rise to above a presidency that will make you proud. (c) 2016, Tribune Media Services 45 percent and the death tax would rise I chose the slogan “Make America to as high as 65 percent. Capital gains Great Again” because I know it is postaxes would nearly double. sible. It is less up to me than it is up to We will cut the size and cost of govyou. That was Ronald Reagan’s great ernment by making every program and IRS STATISTICS indicate that most gift. He would have been the first to say agency justify its existence and elimiof the people who fall into the top one or it was the American people who make nate those that don’t work. We will retwo percent of income are small-business this country great. form entitlements, protecting those now owners — and they are America’s major If you give me the honor of serv- benefitting from them and strengthening employers. In the 1980s, when income ing as your president, I promise you them for future retirees. tax rates were slashed from 70 percent to that Mike Pence and I will chart a new 28 percent, the amount of tax revenues course for this nation. We will rebuild FEDERAL JUDGES I nominate over the decade doubled and the share of our military so that nations and terror- will decide cases based on what the taxes paid by the rich increased. ists will be reluctant to challenge us. We Constitution says, not on their personal 3. Subsidize 500 Million Solar Panels: will care for our veterans so that not one preferences. We tried these green-energy handouts of them has to die while waiting in line In foreign policy, I will work with under Barack Obama and they were a for treatment. We will construct a new Democrats and Republicans to decide failure. (Remember Solyndra?) health care system, replacing Obam- where our interests lie. In places we The Institute for Energy Research acare and the skyrocketing premiums it should not be, we will ask other naestimates a price tag of $200 billion for has spawned, and we will focus on find- tions to defend themselves, especially the solar panels Clinton proposes. That ing cures for diseases like Alzheimer’s those with the resources to do so. When

Stephen

Moore

actuaries. Are we now going to increase the outflow and make even bigger benefit promises? Clinton would also apply the payroll tax of 12.4 percent on wages of up to $250,000 (up from about $110,000 today), which would be one of the biggest tax increases of all time. Let’s rein in the entitlement programs, not expand them. IF WALL STREET really thinks Clinton’s agenda is good for stocks, the country is in even worse shape than I thought.

The final speech Trump should make

Cal

Thomas

America enters a war our goal will be victory, and those nations that ask for our help should be expected to pay for at least part of the cost. We will liberate poor and minority children from failing public schools, giving them the choice of a better public, charter or private school. We will restore law and order to cities like Chicago, which has become a shooting gallery, by removing gang members from the streets and placing them in rehabilitation programs run by organizations with a track record for helping people turn their lives around. Those here illegally will be deported. I will ask the hundreds of thousands of churches and other religious institutions to “adopt” people now on public assistance, equipping them with everything from education, to child care and especially optimism and motivation so that they can find jobs and become independent of government. This is a calling churches already have. We will help them fulfill it. Mike Pence will be in charge of making it happen. MY FELLOW Americans, Ronald Reagan always said America’s best days are ahead. I believe that, too. If you give us the privilege of serving as your president and vice president, we pledge our best efforts to follow Reagan’s example. And it is you, more than us, who will make America great again. May we have the honor of your vote Nov. 8? Good night, and may God make America worthy of His blessing again.

November 16, 2016 DONALD TRUMP: November 8, 2016

A final plea to all the Never-Trumpers

t is very hard to publicly affirm a position for nearly a year and to then, at the last minute, change one’s mind. Nevertheless, even as late as Election Day itself, I wish to address those conservatives and Republicans who have declared themselves Never-Trumpers. I was one of you in vigorously opposing Trump’s nomination — on my national radio show and in my syndicated column. And I paid a price, as you have, in losing longtime supporters — in my case any number of listeners who supported Trump from the outset and found my strong opposition to him disappointing and worse.

UNLIKE YOU, however, I did say from the beginning that if he were to be the nominee, I would vote for him. On this Election Day, I am more convinced than ever that this was the right position. I even have to believe that in the wee hours of the night — when worrying about the current and future state of our beloved country keeps you awake — many of you have at least wondered whether you have taken the right position. Most of you are simply too intelligent, too idealistic and too self-questioning not to have at least on occasion had second thoughts. If you understand — and I cannot believe that most of you don’t — how destructive another four years of any Democrat in the White House, let alone the truly corrupt Hillary Clinton, would be, it is inconceivable that

you have never questioned your Never- tween left and right five of minutes of Trump position. Never-Trump, after all, serious thought (nor, if we are to be honest, did Republican presidential nomiis not the same as Never-Question. To prove my point, one of my favor- nee John McCain, whom I also worked ite Never-Trumpers, Jonah Goldberg, hard to elect). But Trump and Mike wrote in May: “If the election were a Pence and his top political advisors are perfect tie, and the vote fell to me and well to the right of Hillary Clinton and me alone, I’d probably vote for none the Democratic Party. As Victor Davis Hanson wrote last week, in his plea to other than Donald Trump.” Trumpers: In that moment of exquisite honesty, N e v e r “On the SuJonah acknowlpreme Court, edged one of the Obamacare, the most important debt, rebuilding moral arguments the military, the to be made for vot(c) 2016, Creators Syndicate Second Amending for Trump — ment, school choice, abortion, reformthe Lesser of Two Evils argument. To which conservatives who won’t ing the tax code, re-examining regulavote for Trump often respond: “The tion, energy exploration and production, illegal immigration, sanctuary cities, lesser of two evils is still evil.” Now, forgive me, but that it is a com- and a host of other issues, the Repubplete non sequitur, morally and intel- lican ticket is the antithesis of Clinton/ lectually unworthy of any conservative, Kaine — and is recognized as such by religious or secular, who makes it. The nearly all progressives.” Why isn’t all that enough to vote for only relevant moral lesson here is not that the lesser of two evil is still evil; it Trump? is that choosing the lesser of two evils, THEN THERE is the argument that by definition, increases good. Would you amputate your leg if it might save electing Trump means that in the eyes your life? Or would you say that be- of many Americans, especially young cause losing your life and losing your Americans, Trump will embody conleg are both evils, you won’t amputate servatism and Republicanism, and that your leg because the lesser of two evils would be a calamity. On that noble concern, I am not willis still evil? Then there is the Never-Trump arguing to turn America over to four more ment that Donald Trump isn’t a conser- years of leftism. First of all, the damvative. I agree that he hasn’t been his age the left will do, if not permanent, whole life, because he probably never will almost certainly last a generation. gave the subject of the differences be- And I happen to think it could very well

Dennis

Prager

be permanent. Can you name a country outside of some formerly Communist countries (which had Communism forced on them), that chose to go left and has fully recovered from a generation of leftism? Given the arguments in favor of voting for Trump, I see only three possible explanations for conservatives helping to elect Hillary Clinton. One is that they are certain Donald Trump is so psychologically imbalanced that he will jeopardize America and the world. But they have to be certain of this. If they have any doubts, they have to vote for him — because they are certain about Hillary Clinton and the Democrats. And between certitude and incertitude, one must always act on what is certain. The second is their self-image: How can they, truly decent people, vote for someone who has exhibited the uncouth speech and behavior that Trump has? Or, as some have expressed it, “How can I explain to my daughter that I supported Donald Trump?” As someone who also thinks of himself as decent, I think that saving America from Hillary Clinton, the Democrats, and the left is the most decent thing I can do. And as for your daughter, just have her speak to any of the millions of wonderful women who are voting for Donald Trump. They will provide your daughter with perfectly satisfying moral and woman-centered answers. And the third explanation for the Never-Trump conservatives is they that they believe we will survive four more years of left-wing rule, and that America is really not in such bad shape anyway. That argument was made this weekend by a writer for National Review. “The United States of America is not a wreck,” he reassures us. “The people who are telling you that it is — on both sides — are trying to sell you something. Don’t buy it.” Question: What exactly am I, or Victor Davis Hanson, or Thomas Sowell, or at least half of the Wall Street Journal columnists, or millions of religious Jews, Protestants, Catholics and Mormons trying to “sell you?” And second, that writer and others who think like him seem to be living in a different country than I am. Because compared to America at any time in its history except for the Civil War years, the country I am living in is indeed a wreck — and getting worse each day, and in every way. After another four years of a Democrat in the White House the country called the United States will still be here, but America as envisioned since its founding — as the world’s beacon of individual liberty, Lincoln’s “Last Best Hope of Earth” — won’t. TO THINK otherwise is willful selfdelusion.

Conservative Chronicle

IRAQ: November 9, 2016

Iraqis discover more Islamic State war crimes

t one time ISIS made vid- against air strikes and artillery attacks. Reports of the discovery of mass eos extolling its grotesque executions. ISIS command- murder in Hammam al-Alil broke ers used these YouTube horrors as re- near-simultaneously on internet webcruiting advertisements. In their sick sites. Reporters and stringers for minds, the executions demonstrated western news services and Iraqi media accompanied the advancing Iraqi that ISIS had God’s divine sanction. YouTube still runs clips from these Army unit that discovered the mass gravesite. Via smart videos. Each one documents premediphone they rapidly retated crime, like ported what they saw the one where and what the soldiers masked ISIS exsuspected. ecutioners march So ponder that Christian men to (c) 2016, Creators Syndicate for a moment. the MediterraIraq is still a ponean Sea and behead them, en masse. I think the most litical mess. It is threatened by Iranian terrifying video is the one where ISIS intrigue and domestic ethnic and reliburns captured Sunni Muslim Jordani- gious conflict. However, an Iraq where an Air Force officer Muath Al-Kasas- reporters and stringers for independent beh alive. It is evidence of a vicious news services accompany Iraqi troops crime — and perhaps that is the ulti- is a far different political mess than it was when Saddam Hussein ruled the mate value of their hideous imagery. country. Saddam killed with ISIS-like AS FAR AS I can tell, there is no brutality and terror. That is a fair statement. In fact, internet imagery of ISIS thugs raping Yazidi women. ISIS thugs committed several senior ISIS commanders were that crime in 2014, after they invaded once Saddam loyalists. northern Iraq and seized Mosul. HowTHE BATTLE for Mosul will be ever, several websites present interviews with Yazidi survivors — the sur- long and bloody. The aftermath will vivors who escaped enslavement. The likely produce confrontations among women describe the brutal attacks they suffered. Their testaments are personal THE PAST: November 7, 2016 statements, though several of the victims bear physical scars. Every single woman bears psychological scars. The long-awaited offensive to take Mosul once again is now producing hideous physical evidence of other he light shines bright on my ISIS crimes. old Arkansas home. October Hammam al-Alil, 15 kilometers was brilliant, something else south of Mosul, was a tourist town we in Arkansas tend to take for granted with a spa fed by hot springs. ISIS about this small, wonderfully interwoturned it into a graveyard. After Iraqi ven state. Let Texans brag about how Army soldiers liberated Hammam al- big their state once was in comparison Alil have they found 100 beheaded to all the others — before Alaska becorpses. came an empire of its own based on the UN investigators and forensic pa- same claims Texans once made about thologists have reached the gravesite their state: Oil and sheer size. Size may but have yet to determine if the be- make indeed make an empire but never headed are “fresh bodies” or prior a home. murders. Iraqi police say they are receiving numerous missing persons reIT’S ALL enough to give this oldports. The missing people disappeared timer a severe case of nostalgia, which within the last three weeks. someone once defined as homesickness for the past. Oh, for the glory that was IT SEEMS that retreating ISIS Greece, the grandeur that was ... Grady. fighters committed mass murder as Yes, Texans might once have gloried in they fled. Mass murder, however, isn’t the oil derricks that sprouted from Midthe only crime. Residents say ISIS land in the west to Kilgore in the eastern fighters forced over 1,000 people to part of their vast domain, but Arkies can board trucks. The trucks then drove to take pride in simpler, better things, like the town of Tal Afar. our close ties. For if nobody you know This tracks with past ISIS actions. may have gone to the same college or ISIS routinely employs so-called “hu- law school you did, then it’s a safe bet man shields.” Human shield? The term he or she went to the same barber or is a feckless euphemism for taking beautician. (“Remember old Speed at hostages. ISIS, like now deceased Iraqi the Town & Country shopping center? dictator Saddam Hussein, uses civilian He could always squeeze you in at the hostages as flesh and blood protection last minute and throw in a good story on

Austin

Bay

Iraqi Kurds, Iraqi Shia Arabs and Iraqi ISIS will have either fled — or they, Sunni Arabs. Iran and Turkey will at- like Saddam, will be dead. It may not tempt to influence the struggle. But the seem like progress, but progress it is. brute Saddam is gone and the brutes of

At the end of the day

top of it as an extra added bonus. And that old .38 caliber Smith & Wesson he kept handy testified to his firm belief in the Second Amendment and all rights and privileges pertaining thereto.”) Me, the best I can do is carry my concealed weapon permit with me and prepare to wave it menacingly at anybody who dares confront me. Fat lot of good that should do. It’s been better than half a century since I qualified with a .45 at Fort Sill and walked away with relief, my poncho draped over my fatigues. Serving in the U.S. Army may have been the sec-

Paul

ond most educational experience of my life, the first being helping to rear teenagers, which doubtless hasn’t become any easier since. EVEN BACK then, helping to rear a teenager was enough to send me for a consultation with my friend, neighbor and spiritual counselor, the Venerable Reverend Richard Milwee. He just smiled understandingly. For he doubt-

less had heard the same sad story about the travails of what was then considered modern-day parenting from many of his congregants. They had no way of anticipating what concerns awaited today’s postmodern, post-manners moms and dads. For each generation seems to operate under the delusion that theirs is the first to encounter such an experience. I can still remember the only time my own father laid a hand on me, just as I remember the only time I gave my own son a firm kick to the backside for taunting his sister one too many times. The more things change, as the French say, the more they remain the same. From generation unto generation. SO HOLD on for still another trip on this carousel. The faster it goes, reducing time itself to just another blur, the sooner it will be before we all leap off into eternity. Even now I can see the assemblage of ghosts there waiting for a happy reunion. As I’m sure you can, too, as you grow older. Everybody has his own favorite vision of the bucolic, beatific last day. And what a happy day that will be! See you there. You can count on me, if for nothing but memories and everlasting hopes.

November 16, 2016 JAMES COMEY: November 6, 2016

Comey: Clinton’s avoid-prosecution card

n October 28, FBI Director Comey announced in a letter to Congress that he was reopening the investigation into the Hillary Clinton email case. And from the moment we were alerted shortly after 1 pm that day, my first thought and comments were that the reopening of the case didn’t pass my smell test. As of November 6, it can be argued that I was proven right. Comey in a letter to Congress announced: “Based on our review, we have not changed our conclusions that we expressed in July with respect to Secretary Clinton.” In other words nothing in the 650,000 emails discovered on Huma Abedin’s estranged husband, Anthony Weiner’s computer, convinced the FBI, i.e., Comey, that Clinton had acted in a way worthy of prosecution.

I also hypothesized that it wasn’t out NOTHING HAPPENS in Washington, D.C. by accident. At the time of the realm of possibility that ErebuComey announced his reopening of the sic marplots and the Clinton minions email case I offered three possibilities would use Comey’s reopening of the pursuant to why the so-called investiga- investigation to claim that he knowingtion was reopened. I said they were: 1) ly released information that led to the mining of the election The reopening was nothing more than u n d e r process. They would a veiled attempt to then orchestrate a further exonerate way to subvert the Clinton; will of the people 2) The reopenunder the guise of ing was an at(c) 2016, Mychal Massie doing what is in tempt by Clinton the interest of the and her minions to get out in front of whatever they either American people. It can now be argued that the first knew or suspected Julian Assange and WikilLeaks were going to release in the of my possibilities was closest to the truth. Followed closely by the second days just prior to the election; 3) The reopening was a clandestine reason I offered. I am convinced that Clinton knew attempt to undermine the presidential ahead of time the case was going to be election.

Mychal

Massie

2016 ELECTION: November 3, 2016

It’s all in the emails

t’s less than a week before the election, and many of us are continuing to count down the days until this seemingly never-ending campaign is over. As the days dwindle, the chaos and carnage of the campaigns have seemingly accelerated. The race coverage has taken on a frenzied and frantic quality, which will accelerate and intensify until all the votes are counted (and possibly recounted) and the election is complete. I’m exhausted, you’re probably exhausted, and the campaigns are running on adrenaline, but we are not quite done. THESE PAST few days, new revelations have come to light. FBI Director James Comey sent a letter to Congress Friday to notify them that FBI agents had “learned of the existence of emails that appear to be pertinent to the investigation” of Secretary Clinton’s personal email server. On Monday, due to a new dump of emails from WikiLeaks, it came to light that Donna Brazile, current interim Democratic National Committee Chair (who was at that time a CNN commentator), had emailed Clinton campaign chair John D. Podesta and Clinton Campaign Communications Director Jennifer Palmieri during the Democratic nomination process information to give Clinton a leg up during her debate with Bernie Sanders. The subject line, “One of the questions directed to HRC tomorrow is from a woman with a rash.” At the next Democratic primary debate, both Clinton and Sanders were asked a similar question. At the time of the email, Debbie Wasserman Schultz was the DNC chair.

Wasserman Schultz resigned in July after leaked emails showed that top DNC operatives worked to ensure that Sanders failed at his bid to become the Democratic nominee. It will be interesting to see if Brazile resigns as well, or if the fact that she too was working to secure Clinton the nomination will be glossed over due to the tight timing of the general election. Brazile and CNN have severed ties. In response, the Clinton campaign is attacking Comey for his timing and noting that Brazile’s emails were hacked. Attacking the FBI might not be the best way to persuade the public that your candidate is worthy

Jackie

of their votes. And the Clinton campaign’s response that the emails were private does not address the issue — that the former first lady’s campaign sought to rig the primary process. So where are we now? We are down to the voters. The question boils down to this: Who will actually go out, take the time and vote in the 2016 election. ACCORDING TO the Real Clear Politics website, states that are safe, likely or lean toward Clinton add up to 259 electoral votes, while states that are safe, likely or lean toward Trump add up to 164 electoral votes. This is their theoretical floor. Clinton 259, Trump 164. Remember it takes 270 to win.

The 10 states in the toss-up category add up to 115 electoral votes. These states and their electoral votes are: Ohio (18), Fla. (29), N.C. (15), Nev. (6), Iowa (6), N.H. (4), Ga. (16), Colo. (9), Ariz. (11), Maine (1). In the race for the Senate, there are 47 safe or not-up-for-election seats for Republicans and 47 safe or not-up-for-election seats for Democrats. The six seats in the toss-up category are Indiana, where Evan Bayh, D, is running against Todd Young, R; Pennsylvania, where Katie McGinty, D is running against incumbent Pat Toomy, R; Nevada where Joe Heck, R, is ramming against Catherine Cortes Masto, D; North Carolina, where Deborah Ross, D, is running against incumbent Richard Burr, R; New Hampshire, where Maggie Hassan, D, is running against incumbent Kelly Ayotte, R; and Missouri, where Jason Kandor, D, is running against incumbent Roy Blunt, R. Three states show up on both lists: Nev., N.C.a and N.H. The voters in these states will be bombarded with advertisements and commercials from now until Election Day. All four are in the eastern time zone, but the counting in these states might last until late on election night. Though new November surprises might follow this week’s, the election will likely come down to a few states and the voting (and recount) might not be in until the next morning. MORE THAN a year ago, during the first Democratic debate, Sanders said people were sick of hearing about Clinton’s “da-- emails.” My guess is that Sanders might have a different response if he knew then what we know now.

reopened. I also remind those who having been listening to the pundits fawning over Comey and calling him a man of integrity his entire career, until he as many believe, conspired to not indict Clinton last July, that he is a man of highly questionable integrity at best. The word “integrity” has a different meaning to those inside the Beltway and in the mainstream media than it does to you and me. IT SHOULD be noted that Comey was the Deputy Special Counsel to the Senate Whitewater Committee when Bill Clinton was president. Comey reached conclusions that sound eerily familiar. Comey found that: Hillary Clinton was personally involved in mishandling documents and had ordered others to block investigators as they pursued their case. Worse, her behavior fit into a pattern of concealment: She and her husband had tried to hide their roles in two other matters under investigation by law enforcement. Taken together, the interference by White House officials, which included destruction of documents, amounted to “far more than just aggressive lawyering or political naiveté,” Comey and his fellow investigators concluded. It constituted “a highly improper pattern of deliberate misconduct.” (Inside the FBI Investigation of Hillary Clinton’s E-Mail; Massimo Calabresi; time.com; 3/31/2016) It is eerily similar because despite such a damning indictment, Clinton faced no consequences for her alleged actions. This past July, just as with Whitewater, Comey issued a damning indictment of Clinton before a Congressional Committee in which he carefully, and some might say methodically, laid out the FBI’s findings against Clinton’s actions pursuant to her email server investigation — only to conclude by saying that he was unable to find evidence that she intentionally acted in way that was worthy of prosecution. Many will remember Clinton glibly boasting that she would never be indicted for her email server. Ben Kew noted the braggadocio when he wrote: “The makers of the app responsible for clearing Hillary Clinton’s private server of potentially damaging emails has bragged that it managed to stop the FBI from accessing them.” (Makers Of App Used To Destroy Clinton Emails Boast About Hindering FBI Investigation; Breibert.com; 8/27/2016) BUT DESPITE the mountain of evidence against Clinton, she remains free and unindicted, while being toasted as “really, really qualified to be president.”

Conservative Chronicle

MEDIA BIAS: November 9, 2016

The year of the fact-checker? Grading on a curve CNN’s Brian Stelter sent around an cians “True” and conservatives of every Election Day email declaring “This is faction “False.” Take the vice presidenthe year of the fact-checker.” He joked, tial candidates on the PolitiFact “Truth-o“Trump made fact-checking great again.” Meter” in this campaign. Tim Kaine was “It’s really remarkable to see how big rated “True” or “Mostly True” 26 times, news operations have come around to and Mike Pence drew those positive ratchallenging false and deceitful claims di- ings only eight times. Pence was “False” rectly. It’s about time,” said Brooks Jack- or “Mostly False” 18 times, and Kaine marks only 11 times. son, the director emeritus of FactCheck. drew those Since Sept. 1, conorg. servatives and PolitiFact ediRepublicans have tor Angie Drobnic been scolded as Holan said, “All of “Pants on Fire” 28 the media has em(c) 2016, Creators Syndicate times (fully 14 of braced fact-checkthose tags were for ing because there was a story that really needed it.” She was Trump). Liberals and Democrats? Only singling out Trump: “(T)he level of inac- four (and only one for Clinton). That’s a curacy is startling.” PolitiFact founder 7-to-1 tilt, and an obscene 14-to-1 tilt for Bill Adair boasted: “Is this the post-truth the presidential candidates. election, as people have claimed? No. It’s POLITIFACT FOUNDING editor actually the thank-goodness-there-areBill Adair recently admitted this was an fact-checkers election.” awfully subjective racket. (Ya think?) THE RISE of “fact-checking” in the When a supportive interviewer suggested American media is now honored in a their measurements contained some pernew book called Deciding What’s True. sonal opinion, Adair admitted, “(Y)eah, Unsurprisingly, the author, University of Wisconsin professor Lucas Graves, foBAIL SYSTEM: November 8, 2016 cused first on how journalists challenged President Reagan’s “well-established reputation for error and exaggeration.” From the Reagan years to today, conservatives have been dismissed by the hen San Francisco City Atpress as the “poor, uneducated and easy torney Dennis Herrera anto command” types. Thirty years later, nounced that he would not nothing’s changed. It’s precisely this long-standing ideo- defend the city in a federal lawsuit challogical arrogance — that conservatives lenging state bail laws, he said, “Keepare both intellectually challenged and the ing people locked up for no reason other most resistant to what “objective” jour- than they can’t afford to post bail can nalists define as reality — informing the have far-reaching consequences. People fact-checkers. Throughout this election lose their jobs and their homes. Families cycle, liberal journalists have touted the fall apart. Taxpayers shoulder the cost of honesty and factual accuracy of Hillary jailing people who don’t need to be there. Clinton by grading her on a curve with In other words, the current bail system is Donald Trump based on the verdicts of not just unconstitutional, it’s bad public policy.” these biased fact-checkers. Phil Telfeyan, who filed the suit for Trump can be careless with facts, and resistant to media shaming. But for Washington-based Equal Justice Under these fact-checkers to claim Clinton is far Law, said his group is pressing for an more honest is preposterous. PolitiFact end to “the current money bail scheme, awarded its “Pants on Fire” tag to Trump which is purely wealth-based.” No ac57 times to Clinton’s seven. Likewise, cused person should have to spend the Washington Post Fact Checker Glenn night in jail solely because he or she canKessler reported that “Trump earned sig- not afford bail. “Money bail can’t be imnificant more four-Pinocchio ratings than posed for someone who’s unable to make Clinton — 59 to seven, and “The num- that payment.” bers don’t lie.” THANKS TO San Francisco Public Well, yes, they do. Just ask the parents of the brave men murdered in Benghazi Defender Jeff Adachi, Telfeyan told me, if Clinton lies. Ask the FBI — even Di- the group found two strong plaintiffs in rector Comey, who exonerated her. Ask the narrow window between arrest and those who held hearings in the House and release available to file suit. Riana BufSenate and listened to her testimony. Ask fin, 19, and Crystal Patterson faced hefty those who have investigated the Clinton bail requirements — $30,000 for grand Foundation. They and so many others theft of property from a department store, will speak to her endless lies. But not so and $150,000 for assault with force causing great bodily injury. Buffin could not the “fact checkers.” It is a given that the default position pay. She spent two days in jail and lost for the media elite is to rate liberal politi- her job. Patterson posted bail through a

Brent

Bozell

we’re human. We’re making subjective decisions. Lord knows the decision about a Truth-O-Meter rating is entirely subjective. As Angie Holan, the editor of PolitiFact, often says, the Truth-O-Meter is not a scientific instrument.” In a review of the Graves book in the Washington Post, Heidi Moore asserted that Graves “shies away from branding any politician a liar, noting that factcheckers never use the term.” Are these analysts so dim as to think a “Pants on Fire” rating doesn’t strongly imply “liar?” Or the Washington Post Fact Checker’s “Four Pinocchios” doesn’t imply a falsehood?

It’s time to fact-check the fact checkers. In fact, it’s already been done. According to a recent Rasmussen poll, just 29 percent of likely voters trust media fact-checking of the candidates, while 62 percent believed the media “skew the facts to help candidates they support.” DON’T YOU just love the American people? They have awarded on big, fat “Pants on Fire” to the entire national news media for their fact-checking arrogance and plain old dishonesty. And that’s a fact.

Goodbye to government by the people

private bond company. Within 48 hours of both arrests, District Attorney George Gascon dropped the charges. Of course, $30,000 seems like an excessive bail amount for shoplifting. But it is Superior Court bail, mandated by state law. Hence, San Francisco’s City Attorney has a duty to defend the system. San Francisco attorney Harmeet Dhillon, who represents the California Bail Agents Association, scoffs at Herrera’s claim that the bail system is unconstitutional. The Eighth Amendment, she noted, expressly prohibits “excessive bail” — not cash bail.

Debra J.

DHILLON ASKED: How do you make sure people show up for their trials without a bail system? Poor defendants can seek lower bail amounts if they cannot meet the requirements of a Superior Court’s bail schedule, she added. Replacing cash bail with another system will be pricey. The path Herrera has taken closes the door to sensible reform. Equal Justice for All could win its bid to get rid of the “current money bail scheme.” Money “bail can still play a role in a reformed bail system,” Herrera spokesman John Cote told me. But reform won’t happen if no one defends San

Francisco. Attorney General Kamala Harris has not made it clear if she will intervene. Herrera could name someone to represent the city. But he hasn’t. “It’s highly unlikely there’s going to be nobody to defend the law,” quoth Cote. That probably means Herrera is counting on federal court to allow the bail bondsmen’s lawyers to do his job. This is no profile in courage. Even if you agree with every tenet of Equal Justice for All’s case, you should be incensed at Herrera’s decision to sit this one out. If Equal Justice for All succeeds, that could spell the end to reasonable cash bail and put San Francisco Superior Court under a federal consent decree. In that event, elected officials and San Francisco voters will have no say. Sheriff Vicki Hennessy, who is named in the lawsuit, opposes the bail system and supports Herrera’s refusal to defend her. At least voters can chuck Herrera and Hennessy if they don’t like their views. But if federal court is put in charge of bail in San Francisco, the people have no say. SAN FRANCISCO already is a oneparty town. Herrera’s move pushes the city into a smaller corner, where activists can do more than just pressure City Hall — they can own policy. First, the reform du jour pops up, and then the city attorney folds. Ask yourself: What does that do for public safety?

November 16, 2016 CONGO: November 2, 2016

Congo’s crooked president risks a new civil war

ongo is on the verge of an- tactics of an outright dictator: Using other brutal civil war. That’s police power to brutalize and kill his bad news. Its last civil war, political opponents. Limiting the president to two terms which had two phases and lasted seven years, killed between two and three was a key component of the peace million people. Some responsible agreement that ended Congo’s civil The limitation was insources say the death toll was five w a r . porated in the constimillion. In comparison, Syria’s civil cortution. This means, war (an acknowlat the moral bottom edged tragedy) line, Kabila decided has lasted five and that his grip on a half years and (c) 2016, Creators Syndicate power is more killed 400,000. important than Congo’s current peril is one of those rare circum- peace. To remain president, he is willstances where one person bears re- ing to risk a bloody war that will result sponsibility for the explosive political in another million dead. For the moment, Kabila has cowed tension: Congo’s president, Joseph and fragmented his domestic political Kabila. opposition. However, he has a problem. Though KABILA HAS decided his grip on executive power is more important he controls the best-equipped and bestthan Congo’s constitution, so he has trained Congolese police and military violated constitutional mandates that forces, he does not command the military force in the Congo, and authorities limit him to two terms. His second term ends this coming controlling that force are extremely December. But Kabila has slickly upset that his selfishness and callouspostponed the presidential election to ness could reignite the civil war. The best military outfit in Congo choose his successor. The election was scheduled for November 27. In early belongs to the UN. It’s MONUSCO 2015 Kabila began scheming to dis- acronym for the awkwardly named rupt the election timetable. “Slippage” United Nations Organization Stabilihis opponents called it. Slippage em- zation Mission in the Democratic Reployed the classic tactics of a crooked public of Congo. At the moment, the MONUSCO politics: Delaying logistical preparation, corrupting the courts and bam- peacekeeping operation has around boozling an incompetent bureaucracy. 18,000 troops and armed police (slightKabila also employed the murderous ly below its peak strength of 20,000).

Austin

Bay

Some UN soldiers are of questionable quality, some are cracked (South African and Tanzanian, for example), but even questionable UN units are superior to units the Congolese Army can field. The possible exception is Kabila’s Presidential Guard. THE UN SECURITY Council has invested heavily in bringing peace to the Congo. Since 1999, the UN has had a monitoring mission or peacekeeping force of some type in the country. Es-

timates on how much the mission has cost vary, but the estimation is around 10 to 12 billion dollars. Initial troop commitments were small, but the Congo effort became the UN’s largest and most complex peacekeeping operation. Rogue militias in eastern Congo tested peacekeepers to the point that UN prestige was on the line. The Security Council responded by doing something highly controversial: It created a brigade with a mandate to wage offensive war, the Intervention Brigade (also called the Force Intervention Brigade). The UN and donor nations (European and North American nations) also invested hundreds of millions of dollars in training Congolese police and administrators. In order to stabilize, Congo had to modernize. Kabila’s decision puts the entire UN and international aid and development effort at risk. UN administrators argue that upholding the constitution and conducting an on-time election are essential to keeping the peace. So MONUSCO is directly challenging Kabila, politically and economically. The European Union is mulling political and economic sanctions tailored to penalize Kabila and his inner circle. MONUSCO has offered to provide logistical support to insure the elections are held this month. MONUSCO’s military edge is a capability that creates a possibility. If civil war erupts, would MONUSCO peacekeepers confront an unconstitutional Congolese government if that audacious act helps restore peace? AN UNLIKELY scenario? Yes, but one Joseph Kabila cannot dismiss.

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, Joseph Farah, Suzanne Fields, 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 11/16/16 Periodicals Postage Paid Mailed 11/10/16

Read Suzanne Fields, Marvin Olasky & Thomas Sowell on Pages 16-17

2016 Election

This week our CONSERVATIVE FOCUS is on:

Read Debra J. Saunder’s Column on Page 1

Trump and Republicans Win Big

All Trump

Wednesday, November 16, 2016 • Volume 31, Number 46 • Hampton, Iowa