|
nChrist
|
 |
« on: July 08, 2016, 06:52:27 PM » |
|
________________________________________
The Patriot Post Digest 7-8-2016
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
________________________________________
Mid-Day Digest
Jul. 8, 2016
THE FOUNDATION
“Without virtue there can be no liberty, and liberty is the object and life of all republican governments.” —Benjamin Rush (1806)
TOP RIGHT HOOKS
Obama and the Cop Killers1
The horrific news from Dallas this morning is that five police officers were murdered at a “Black Lives Matter” protest. As we go to press, the only officer to be identified is Brent Thompson of Dallas Area Rapid Transit, who had just married another officer two weeks ago. Seven more officers were wounded, as were several other people. The protesters were gathered to object to two fatal police encounters2 this week, in which black men were killed. With Dallas police serving as crowd control, four suspects opened fire on them, at least two reportedly from “ambush-style” sniper positions. One suspect was killed after a standoff, and three others have been detained. Dallas Police Chief David Brown said one assailant told authorities “he was upset about the recent police shootings” and “wanted to kill white people, especially white officers.”
While in Warsaw for a NATO summit, Barack Obama weighed in, offering condolences, praising police and Black Lives Matter protesters. He then pivoted to — what else — gun control, saying, “When people are armed with powerful weapons, unfortunately it makes attacks like these more deadly and more tragic and we’re going to have to consider those realities as well.”
If bad guys killing cops is a “gun problem,” why is police shooting too many people racism? Regarding Obama’s predictable political pivot shifting blame to “powerful weapons,” the most powerful weapon is his political rhetoric, dividing instead of uniting America on every issue.
Indeed, in his remarks about Dallas, Obama echoed his “racial disparity in the justice system” diatribe from just hours earlier, when Obama called police shootings earlier in the week “symptomatic of a broader set of racial disparities that exist in our criminal justice system.” He rattled off some horrible-sounding statistics to prove his point.
Only then did he offer faint praise. “Now let me just say that we have extraordinary appreciation and respect for the vast majority of police officers who put their line on the lives every day.”
And as soon as he’d said that, he reiterated that he put together a “task force” to look into racist policing practices. He slammed jurisdictions that had not yet adopted its recommendations.
That was the stage he set when it came time to express condolences after Dallas. We’re sure police would welcome his support if it was authentic. But Obama, Hillary Clinton and their fellow NeoComs perpetuate the urban poverty plantations3 where 95% of our nation’s violence occurs, then paint all cops as “racist”4 after there are deadly confrontations with the Demos' gang-banger constituency. In turn, that results in the murder of law enforcement officers. And by the way, we’re waiting on Obama’s order to lower flags to half-mast.
A final thought and the bottom line: The people responsible for these murders are the murderers themselves.
Fireworks in June’s Jobs Report5
After a harrowing week, we could use some welcome news. Thankfully, Friday dawned with an encouraging development on the economic front. But first, recall that May’s jobs report was abysmal6. The government originally reported the economy posted a measly 38,000 jobs, representing an exceedingly low quota. However, newly modified figures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) are even worse. Just 11,000 jobs were created in May. Fortunately, that was somewhat negated by the fact April came in at 144,000, or 21,000 more than originally reported. Better, but both months were lacking nevertheless.
June was far more respectable. This morning BLS reported the addition of 287,000 jobs last month. That both dwarfed April and May and defied expectations. Just 170,000-175,000 jobs were anticipated. Meanwhile, the unemployment rate rose to 4.9%, a few tenths higher than May’s 4.7%. That’s not necessarily bad, however, because labor participation also increased. As American Enterprise Institute’s James Pethokoukis tweeted, “If labor force participation rate had held steady, jobless rate would have been 4.7%. So higher 4.9% rate for good reason: larger workforce.”
The question remains: What the heck happened in May? Moreover, as CNBC notes, “Over the last three months, job gains have averaged about 147,000 per month.” We should note too that, as with every jobs report, the true unemployment figure is higher than 4.9% when everything is taken into account. All that being said, June’s jobs report was positive, and it’s good to see at least something going in the right direction this week. Let’s hope it lasts.
BEST OF RIGHT OPINION
Charles Krauthammer: Comey: A Theory7
Mona Charen: Orgy of Guilt8
Brent Bozell & Tim Graham: Now Controversial: ‘God Bless America’9
For more, visit Right Opinion10.
TOP HEADLINES
State Department Reopens Clinton Probe11
Democrat Rep. Indicted on Corruption Charges12
New Data Reveals 20 Veterans Commit Suicide Every Day13
For more, visit Patriot Headline Report14.
FEATURED RIGHT ANALYSIS
Keeping Clinton on the Ropes15
By Michael Swartz
Most Americans who’ve followed the investigation into Hillary Clinton and her private email server fall into one of two camps. The first — those who believe the system is rigged and that she engaged in criminal acts but got away with them simply because her last name is Clinton. And the second — those who feel Hillary was the victim of yet another partisan witch-hunt that ended up being much ado about nothing, and that she’s being harassed simply because she’s a woman intent on breaking the highest “glass ceiling” of all.
Undoubtedly congressional Republicans fall into the former group, so it was no surprise once the news broke that no criminal charges would be brought against Clinton16 that their first act would be to haul FBI Director James Comey in front of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee to ask him for an explanation. Comey essentially argued that the applicable law — a 1917 statute based on “gross negligence” in mishandling classified information — wasn’t actually applicable.
“No reasonable prosecutor would bring the second case in 100 years focused on gross negligence,” testified Comey, a former U.S. attorney. “That’s just the way it is. I know the Department of Justice, [so] I know no reasonable prosecutor would bring this case.” The case against Clinton, Comey added, did not meet the “mens rea” legal standard of criminal intent.
Yet one has to ask: What, then, was Hillary’s intent? Perhaps it wasn’t necessarily criminal intent, but there certainly was a lot of shady dealing going on between the Clinton Foundation, foreign leaders and others in the private loop with Hillary at the center. Even aside from the likelihood of hackers accessing the classified information on her private server, the reality that the Clintons used the secretary of state’s office to peddle influence and thereby enrich themselves is outrageous. The personal email setup likely helped her cover-up Benghazi, too.
Instead, the whole affair is chalked up to “carelessness.” As Comey pointed out: “I see evidence of great carelessness, but I do not see evidence that is sufficient to establish that Secretary Clinton or those with whom she was corresponding both talked about classified information on email and knew when they were doing it that it was against the law.” While Comey claims no “reasonable” prosecutor would bring charges, it’s also true that one can indict a ham sandwich. Indeed, frivolous and politically motivated charges have often come from an overzealous prosecutor and a stacked grand jury bent on political mischief. (Former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy picks apart this defense17 from Comey by comparing it to a similar type of case where criminal negligence is often determined.)
Or, taken the other way, how many who are accused of similar acts will now be using the “Hillary defense”18 to imply that they were only careless and had no criminal intent? One certainly could have lumped David Petraeus into that group had he been investigated post-Hillary. |
