The Patriot Post Digest 8-12-2016

________________________________________
The Patriot Post Digest 8-12-2016
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
________________________________________

Mid-Day Digest

Aug. 12, 2016

THE FOUNDATION

“To judge from the history of mankind, we shall be compelled to conclude that the fiery and destructive passions of war reign in the human breast with much more powerful sway than the mild and beneficent sentiments of peace; and that to model our political systems upon speculations of lasting tranquillity would be to calculate on the weaker springs of human character.” —Alexander Hamilton (1788.)

TOP RIGHT HOOKS

Obama’s Islamic State1

Barack Obama is “the founder of ISIS,” says Donald Trump. “I would say the co-founder would be crooked Hillary Clinton.” Thus began yet another opportunity for the Leftmedia to jump to Obama’s and Clinton’s defense, hollering, “That’s not true! Obama and Clinton didn’t found the Islamic State — they’re trying to defeat them!”

Conservative radio talk-show host Hugh Hewitt gave Trump the opportunity to hone his message, saying, “You meant that he created the vacuum — he lost the peace.”

“No, I meant he’s the founder of ISIS,” Trump insisted. “He was the most valuable player. I give him the most valuable player award. I give [it to] her, too, by the way — Hillary Clinton.”

Could Trump have said this (or a thousand other things) better? Definitely. He’s making it way too easy for Democrats and their media allies. Besides, his own history of various positions on the Iraq war makes him a compromised messenger, too.

But, like his point about Hillary’s contempt for the Second Amendment2, Trump’s core criticism is sound. Hewitt’s framing is the correct one: By cravenly abandoning Iraq to fulfill an ill-conceived campaign promise, Obama created the vacuum that allowed the rise of the Islamic State3. Conservatives have been arguing this for years. Trump’s framing, however, puts that in far stronger terms. Obama is not showing “Inherent Resolve” in fighting the Islamic State. On the contrary, he seems perfectly content to largely ignore the threat to prove he’s not Islamophobic. Technically, of course, Obama didn’t “found” the Islamic State, but he sure did everything he could to clear the way for it to flourish.

And he had blinders on while he did it. The House released a bombshell report Thursday confirming what we reported a year ago4: Obama was using cooked intelligence to paint a rosier picture of the Islamic State’s condition. Central Command was, almost surely to comport with his political narrative, giving reports that were “inconsistent with the judgments of many senior, career analysts.” Further, the House report found, “these products also consistently described U.S. actions in a more positive light than other assessments from the [intelligence community] and were typically more optimistic than actual events warranted.”

Obviously, Obama had a political narrative to tell — the Islamic State was the “JV team” and he had al-Qaida “on the run” because he killed Osama bin Laden. He needed the intelligence to undergird that story. Trump is merely highlighting in the most visceral terms that this is one of Obama’s biggest lies.

Hillary’s Economic Plan: Obama 2.05

Hillary Clinton delivered a highly touted speech Thursday in Michigan outlining her economic plan. And Hillary, like Donald Trump in his economic speech6 on Monday, highlighted Michigan and Detroit in particular. Clearly, however, Clinton set out to make a sharp contrast between the economic outlook of Trump’s speech and her own. For Clinton, Detroit isn’t the model of failed Democrat policies and leadership, it’s a great comeback story. “The auto industry just had its best year ever,” she crowed.

The trouble is, everyone knows that the economy has not been good over these past eight years. Clinton’s explanation for the slowness of the recovery is that there remains “too much inequality.” But why was this inequality not addressed during eight years of Barack Obama’s “leadership”? Political gridlock, she says — that’s right, Republicans are to blame.

Clinton then went on to paint herself as the champion of the American middle class. She would be the candidate to listen to both sides and then forge ahead with a fair plan. She chastised Trump for his plan to cut taxes, claiming that it would only benefit the wealthy and lead to another recession.

Hillary then proceeded to outline her vision for America’s economic recovery, which consisted of the usual call for increasing taxes on the rich, increasing taxes on capital gains, a corporate exit tax and new taxes on financial transactions. This was followed by yet more commitments to increase a smorgasbord of government programs, such as free college, paid leave, higher minimum wage and the Paycheck Fairness Act to name a few. Of course, let’s not forget about the unions. Hillary said there is a need to “restore collective bargaining rights,” by which she likely means an assault on right-to-work laws.

Clinton is standing on the same economic platform as Obama eight years ago. She’s touting that same old failed socialist ideological pipe dream that bigger government leads to less inequality and greater economic growth. But who wants four more years of Obama’s economic malaise, where the only things that will increase are government regulations and the national debt?

Vindication for Voter ID7

This week featured mostly good news on the voter ID front. We begin with Texas, where last month the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals criticized the state’s voter ID requirements8 — which they viewed as prejudice against minorities — and ordered a lower court to revise and remedy the law. On Wednesday, a compromise was reached. The words “soften” and “weaken” were almost universally reported in newspaper headlines — an accurate description, to be sure. But it’s equally important to note, as Heritage Foundation fellow Hans von Spakovsky does9, that this “is probably about the best deal Texas could expect to get given the circumstances and personalities in the case.” He explains:

“The parties have agreed that Texas voters who don’t have one of the acceptable photo IDs under the statute will still be able to vote if they: ‘present a valid voter registration certificate, a certified birth certificate, a current utility bill, a bank statement, a government check, a paycheck, or any other government document that displays the voter’s name and an address and complete and sign a reasonable impediment declaration.’ … Texas actually managed to get better terms than either North or South Carolina since, in addition to completing a ‘reasonable impediment’ declaration, the voter will have to show some kind of document such as a utility bill or bank statement with his name and address.”

Meanwhile, in Wisconsin, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals stayed a ruling by District Court Judge Lynn Adelman, who objected to and subsequently nullified that state’s voter ID mandate. The appeals court declared: “We conclude both that the district court’s decision is likely to be reversed on appeal and that disruption of the state’s electoral system in the interim will cause irreparable injury.” This case is independent of a similar one involving District Court Judge James Peterson10, but let’s hope Peterson is similarly berated.

Finally, for those wondering why we need voting laws, consider the case of Olivia Lee Reynolds of Dothan, Alabama, who along with two other people conspired to rig a municipal election11 by falsely tallying votes. A jury found Reynolds culpable last year and she was ultimately sentenced to probation. Despite pleading guilty, Reynolds went through the appeals court seeking to have her sentencing overturned. Last week, the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals denied her request.

Keep in mind, it’s almost impossible to convict of voter fraud. Prosecutors just happened to find one needle in a haystack. Last August, Barack Obama asserted, “Almost nobody wakes up saying, ‘I’m going to go vote in somebody else’s name.’ Doesn’t happen. So the only reason to pass [voter ID] laws, despite the reasonableness of how it sounds, is to make it harder for folks to vote.” Actually, it’s to prevent folks like Reynolds from rigging elections.

BEST OF RIGHT OPINION

Gary Bauer: Hillary’s Latest Scandal12
Erick Erickson: The Never Ending Politics of Truth13
Mona Charen: The Moral of the Simone Biles Story14

For more, visit Right Opinion15.

TOP HEADLINES

Ukraine Puts Army on Alert as Conflict With Russia Heats Up16
Congress Was Briefed Last Year on DNC Hacking17
College Offers Segregation for ‘Historically Marginalized’ Students18
For more, visit Patriot Headline Report19.

________________________________________
The Patriot Post Digest 8-12-2016
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
________________________________________

FEATURED RIGHT ANALYSIS
The U.S. Department of Clinton Foundation20

By Michael Swartz

Political favors are nothing new, so the allegation that Hillary Clinton greased the skids for a number of shady characters and hangers-on while she was running the State Department should not be surprising. (She is a Clinton, after all.) So when we learned that Judicial Watch uncovered more emails21 that provide hard evidence Hillary was engaged in buying and selling political favors as secretary of state — messages somehow missed when she insisted all of her private server emails were accounted for — well, it’s par for the course.

Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton says the emails reveal “the State Department and the Clinton Foundation worked hand in hand in terms of policy and donor effort.” And Obama’s Justice Department is happy to look the other way. Three FBI field offices sought an investigation earlier this year, but were rebuffed because of a preliminary finding last year. Then again, other reports are that there are multiple ongoing investigations, at least one based in New York City…

Of course, Americans already find Hillary to be untrustworthy, so the additional charge that the DOJ blocked a probe into the workings of the Clinton Foundation isn’t going to improve or worsen the perception of “Crooked Hillary.”

CNN’s Jake Tapper knows this. “This [email release] does feed into the narrative out there that the Clintons in general don’t think that the rules apply to them, and can’t understand why anybody would ever question their ethics or their integrity,” said Tapper. “This is exactly what the Obama transition team in 2008 wanted to avoid. They wanted a clear delineation between the foundation and the State Department.”

In fact, these emails prove an ongoing “pay-to-play” pattern22 at the Clinton Foundation State Department. The most recently revealed group of emails came from Hillary’s longtime associate Huma Abedin, and they showed that those who had access to the Clinton Foundation were quick to ask for assistance in a number of areas: securing employment23 for an associate of Clinton Foundation official Doug Band as someone who is “important to take care of,” as well as for a friend of Lana Moresky, who is described as a “major Clinton fundraiser”; arranging meetings between a high-dollar Nigerian donor24 named Gilbert Chagoury and former ambassador to Lebanon Jeffrey Feltman to advance Chagoury’s business interests; or helping to shape our policy with China25 to benefit the Wall Street firm Morgan Stanley, thanks to its Asian Chairman Stephen Roach, another major donor. While Hillary couldn’t come up with a proper “reset” button for the Russians, it appears she did have time to set up those connected with the Clinton Foundation — and keep her husband busy in a very lucrative manner.

Naturally, those with the most vested interest in a Hillary presidency shrugged this off26 as a “move on, nothing to see here” moment. Clinton surrogate and onetime Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm told CNN27, “I wasn’t in the State Department at the time. But I do know that she has abided by the ethics agreement she signed at the beginning, which was not to take any action on the part of the State Department that mixed [Clinton] Foundation business.”

Actually, it’s pretty clear that Hillary broke her pledge (i.e., she lied). But not to worry; State Department spokesperson Elizabeth Trudeau says, “I’d note that former Secretary Clinton’s ethics agreement did not preclude other State Department officials from having contact with Clinton Foundation staff.” Translation: Clinton’s pledge didn’t apply to her staff.

Not only was Hillary still involved with the Clinton Foundation, but, while acting as secretary of state, Clinton offered favors to big money foundation donors, effectively making the State Department an extension of her foundation.

More troubling, though, is what may have been revealed by the 30,000 emails Hillary deleted before they could be turned over for the various ongoing probes into her activities. That’s right — this smoking gun was either one she and her staff missed in their mass deletions, or it’s one they didn’t mind being found. (There’s also the possibility that the Russians or Chinese possess some of Clinton’s email28, or other shadowy groups that contribute to the WikiLeaks site.) Those in the know aren’t talking, perhaps mindful of the oddly numerous premature deaths29 among those in line to spill the beans on Hillary.

The fact that Clinton is the odds-on favorite to be our next president despite her history of lies, subterfuge and secrecy with a dose of incompetence is just as damning an indictment on our culture and her incredibly weak opponent as any criminal charges she’s so far avoided. Who can be blamed for wanting an electoral mulligan this time around?

MORE ANALYSIS FROM THE PATRIOT POST

How Ready Is Our Military?30
Obama Sits By as China Continues Its Sea Bullying Ways31
Can the Government Run the Economy?32
NFL Denies Cowboys' Dallas PD Support33

OPINION IN BRIEF

Erick Erickson: “I know of no one who disputes that the climate changes. After all, we have seasons. Likewise, I know few people who are unwilling to admit that mankind might be affecting the environment. But I find it remarkable that whether the political left in America, of which the environmentalist movement is a part, thinks the world is cooling or warming, the solutions are always the same. Poor countries must stay poor and rich countries must become poor countries. In the ongoing quest to politicize everything, it becomes more and more difficult to build consensus and acknowledge facts because many of the people championing ‘facts’ are really championing their own version of a fact, not the actual fact. The environmentalist movement tells us we are past the precipice and a warming planet is unavoidable, but instead of embracing nuclear power or encouraging adaptation, the environmentalists bitterly cling to wind and solar power and demand we reverse a course they say cannot be reversed. The last time we relied exclusively on wind and solar power, by the way, we called it the Dark Ages.”

SHORT CUTS

Insight: “No man who has not occupied my position in Washington can fully realize the constant battle which must be carried on against incompetence, corruption, tyranny of government expanded into business activities… Free speech does not live many hours after free industry and free commerce die.” —Herbert Hoover (1874-1964)

Braying Jenny: “We witnessed the latest in a long line of casual comments from Donald Trump that crossed the line. His casual cruelty to a Gold Star family, his casual suggestion that more countries should have nuclear weapons and now his casual inciting of violence34. Every single one of these incidents shows us that Donald Trump simply does not have the temperament to be president and commander in chief of the United States.” —Hillary Clinton, continuing her “unfit35” argument

Hypocrisy alert: “[It] is so bizarre. It’s reminiscent of demagogues who want to be in the press no matter what they have to say. They make their verbal poo-poo anyplace to get attention.” —Nancy Pelosi on Donald Trump, though few have as much experience at “verbal poo-poo” as Pelosi

Non Compos Mentis: “JetBlue turbulence puts 24 in hospital” —headline of a CNN article, which concludes: “It’s believed that weather played a role in creating the bumpy flying conditions.” (In other news, water is wet.)

The truth slips: “We couldn’t help [Hillary Clinton] any more than we have. I mean, she’s got just a free ride so far from the media. We’re the biggest ones promoting her campaign.” —CNN’s Chris Cuomo

Gun grabbers: “We are facing at least four major public health crises in this country and … Congress hasn’t done anything about it.” —Rep. Donna Edwards, who describes “the scourge of gun violence” as one of those crisis

And last… “I have never made and will never make the argument that it is immoral for people to vote for Trump to stop Hillary. I understand that argument completely, and sympathize with it. But lying for Trump is immoral. Pretending his boo-boos aren’t boo-boos is immoral. Pretending he’s something he’s not, and lying to your audience about it — that’s immoral. And most of all, pretending that those who make a different risk-reward calculation from yours are immoral — even while those people hold supposedly similar principles — is immoral.” —Ben Shapiro

Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis!
Managing Editor Nate Jackson

Join us in daily prayer for our Patriots in uniform — Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen — standing in harm’s way in defense of Liberty, and for their families.