Displaying posts published in

February 2019

Fever Dream: Mueller’s Collusion-Free Collusion Indictment of Roger Stone There was no crime until the investigations started.By Andrew C. McCarthy

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/02/roger-stone-indictment-proves-no-evidence-of-collusion/

S pecial Counsel Robert Mueller’s indictment of Roger Stone may be the most peculiar document to emerge from the Trump–Russia “collusion” saga. It is an instant classic in the Mueller genre: lots of heavy breathing, then sputtering anti-climax.

After a 20-page narrative about Russian cyber-ops, WikiLeaks’ role as a witting anti-American accomplice, and Trump supporters enthralled by thousands of hacked Democratic emails and visions of the Clinton campaign’s implosion, Stone, a comically inept hanger-on, ends up charged with seven process crimes. No espionage, no conspiracy, no commission of any crime until the investigations started.

This is not to say that obstruction of congressional investigations is trifling. Nor is it to say the accused has a good chance of beating the case. Some of Stone’s alleged lies were mind-bogglingly stupid. Why deny written communications with people you’ve texted a zillion times? Why deny conversations with interlocutors (such as Trump-campaign CEO Steve Bannon) who have no reason to risk a perjury charge to protect you? And don’t even get me started on the witness-tampering count, which, if I were Mueller, I’d have hesitated to include for fear of suggesting an insanity defense. (Do it for Nixon? Pull a “Frank Pentangeli”?)

That said, the case is overcharged. The tampering count carries a 20-year penalty. Adding an obstruction or false-statements count (five years each) would have given Stone (who is 66 years old) prison exposure of up to 25 years. The most central “colluder” in the Mueller firmament to be bagged so far, George Papadopoulos, was sentenced to a grand total of two weeks’ imprisonment. Surely a quarter-century of “potential” incarceration would have sufficed to give prosecutors the “this is serious stuff” headline they crave while allowing for the more representative sentence Stone will eventually receive — who knows, maybe three weeks? But true to form, Mueller instead included six of these five-year counts — so the press can report that Stone faces up to 50 years in the slammer.

China Caves to President Trump in U.S. Trade War By Chriss Street

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/02/china_caves_to_president_trump_in_us_trade_war.html

China caved to President Trump’s Trade War demands as state-media published plans that foreign investors will no longer be subject to compulsory technology transfers.

As China’s Vice Premier Liu He was holding a televised meeting with President Trump in the Oval Office to announce big increases for U.S. agricultural exports to China, its Xinhua News Agency announced that China’s President Xi Jinping hopes to meet with Trump just before a March 5 vote by China’s National People’s Congress to ratify elimination of rules for foreign investment mandatory foreign technology transfers.

With the clock running down on Trump’s threat to increase a 10 percent tariff on $200 billion of Chinese exports to a 25 percent tariff on March 1, China is agreeing to meaningful structural trade reforms that the U.S. has been demanding for over a decade.

The move will open a wide swath of China’s internal markets that have been closed to U.S. service industry firms. The breadth of China’s “reform” regime supposedly includes elimination of non-tariff trade barriers such as eliminating state-sponsored cyber-intrusions and converting U.S. intellectual property rights, according to the Epoch Times.

With the draft legislation supposedly setting a goal of guaranteeing equal treatment of foreign companies already reviewed by the National People’s Congress Standing Committee in December, Xinhua stated: “Once adopted, the unified law will replace three existing laws on Chinese-foreign equity joint ventures, non-equity joint ventures (or contractual joint ventures) and wholly foreign-owned enterprises.”

Who Do Our Intelligence Agencies Think They Work For? By Sebastian Gorka

https://amgreatness.com/2019/02/01/who

It was a mistake to disband the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) in 1945, just months after we had won World War II.

Within just two years, President Truman realized he had to have a permanent intelligence capability and so in 1947 he signed the National Security Act, which, in addition to creating the National Security Council as the highest national security policymaking body in the U.S. government, created the Central Intelligence Agency out of the ashes of the OSS.

Since 1947, the U.S. Intelligence Community has grown and grown. Originally it was given the task of collecting intelligence on our Cold War adversaries. After the September 11 attacks, it was expanded and reorganized to include today’s 17 agencies.

But whether it was just the OSS during the war, or the 17 federal agencies we have today, the mission of the American intelligence was always the same: to provide its sole client with raw intelligence and analysis so that he can make his decisions on how best to secure America and her citizens. That end-user, of course, is the incumbent president.

This week’s “Fake News” swirling around the Director of National Intelligence’s (DNI) testimony before Congress on his annual “National Worldwide Threat Assessment” isn’t simply dishonest. It is dangerous.

Virginia’s ‘Moderate’ Governor Why are some Democrats so eager to demonstrate pro-choice absolutism? By James Freeman

https://www.wsj.com/articles/virginias-moderate-governor-11549063724

This column is trying to understand the current fad among Democratic state officeholders for enabling abortions right up until the moment of birth. Since the abortion market generally has been in historic decline and the demand for such procedures at the end of a pregnancy is extremely small, it’s as if politicos like New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo are determined to demonstrate a sort of ideological zealotry. Perhaps somewhere there is a misguided Republican seeking to affirm his love for the 2nd Amendment by supporting the purchase of bazookas without a background check, but it would hardly represent a strategy for winning elections.

Perhaps most striking about this new Democratic fad among state officeholders is that it is not confined to people considered on the fringe of the party. Take Virginia’s Gov. Ralph Northam. When he ran for the Democratic nomination in 2017, he was presented as the bland alternative to the real “progressive” in the race, former Rep. Tom Perriello.

Columnist E.J. Dionne of the Washington Post wrote that then-Lt. Gov. Northam’s “reputation is that of a temperate, well-liked public servant.”

After Dr. Northam, a pediatric neurologist, secured the Democratic nomination, former Al Gore campaign staffer Carter Eskew wrote in a Post op-ed that “Northam is cut from the same moderate Democratic cloth that Virginians have favored recently.”

Shortly before the November 2017 election, James Hohmann wrote in the Post about the concern on the left that Dr. Northam was “too low key and too moderate.”

Dr. Northam’s “moderation’ was on display this week when he was asked in a radio interview about possible legislation to lower the barriers to abortions conducted while the mother is already in labor. His response suggested that he’s open to the adults involved exercising choices even after delivery: CONTINUE AT SITE

Bill de Blasio and the Return of Disorder Public spaces are the lifeblood of New York City, but they’re under assault. Craig Trainor

https://www.city-journal.org/ny-public-disorder-growing-under-de-blasio

Gotham is in the throes of disorder. Law-abiding New Yorkers, no matter their race, ethnicity, sex, or socioeconomic strata, find themselves harassed by growing vagrancy, petty criminality, and social decay. Nowhere is this more evident than in New York City’s public and quasi-public spaces.

I wrote this from a Starbucks on the Upper West Side, where the average price for an apartment is $1.2 million. Just to your right as you enter is an area with five small tables, each with two accompanying seats. On the afternoon I came in, vagrants—not a Starbucks cup or pastry between them—had seized three of these tables. The most assertive of the lot had four paper and plastic bags filled with various items. She was slipping in and out of consciousness. A “crust punk” was harassing some of the paying customers, and was told to leave, apparently for the second time that day.

Starbucks is a private business, of course, and is free to serve as a tacit adjunct to New York’s and other cities’ shelter systems. (And it has set itself up to do so, after facing criticism last year for evicting some non-paying customers.) But in Bill de Blasio’s New York, the air of menace and disorder is palpable, whether one is in a café, on the streets, in a park, or riding the subways. Today’s New York is dramatically different from the New York of Michael Bloomberg or of Rudolph Giuliani’s second term. Under their leadership, public safety and public order were the top priorities. When citizens claimed police officers violated their rights, civil rights attorneys litigated these constitutional claims in federal and state courts. No responsible civil libertarian, though, would advocate surrendering public order wholesale because of individual instances of police misconduct.

Cuomo’s Green New Deal Paddles Offshore Building wind turbines in the water will not power New York. Robert Bryce

https://www.city-journal.org/cuomo-green-new-deal-wind-energy-new-york

In his State of the State speech earlier this month, New York governor Andrew Cuomo declared that he was launching “the next phase of the Green New Deal.” New York, Cuomo said, will mandate that the state’s utilities produce 100 percent “carbon-neutral” electricity by 2040. As a step toward that goal, Cuomo announced plans to deploy 9,000 megawatts of offshore wind capacity by 2035, a move he touts as “the most aggressive offshore wind goal in U.S. history.”

Cuomo’s move is the latest version of what appears to be a competition among east coast states to see which one can set the most ambitious offshore wind-energy goals. New Jersey has a goal of 3,500 megawatts, Massachusetts plans for 1,600, and Rhode Island is aiming for 1,000. Building offshore wind projects is contentious—the battle over the 468-megawatt Cape Wind project in Massachusetts, which was finally scuttled in 2015, lasted more than a decade—and expensive. That’s why relatively little offshore wind capacity has been built around the world.

Cuomo and his renewable-energy allies are aiming to take their projects offshore because of fierce local upstate opposition to proposed onshore wind projects. But even if Cuomo’s target of 9,000 megawatts of new offshore wind gets built over the next 16 years (and I’m willing to bet that it won’t be), nearly half of that capacity will be needed merely to replace the zero-carbon electricity now being produced by the Indian Point nuclear plant. For years, Cuomo pushed for the premature closure of the 2,069-megawatt nuclear facility in Westchester County. Two years ago, the governor announced that the plant will be permanently shuttered by 2021.

The Bolivarian God That Failed written by Clifton Ross

https://quillette.com/2019/02/01/the

The day after Venezuela’s National Assembly voted to declare its president, Juan Guaidó, interim President of the Republic, I received a text from a former friend. “If the U.S. topples Vz [Venezuela],” he wrote, “I will hold you responsible.” I would have been happy to accept this responsibility had I done anything important enough to deserve it. But the idea was absurd and he knew it. If the Venezuelan regime falls—and I hope that it does—it won’t even be possible to credit (or blame) the United States. It is the Venezuelan people who finally are taking their destiny in hand and rejecting an intolerable status quo.

The message was not a serious attempt to apportion responsibility for Venezuela’s current upheaval; it was an attempt to shame me for my treacherous betrayal of the Bolivarian cause. An early supporter of the Revolution, I had traveled to Venezuela in 2013 to cover the April presidential elections. By the time I returned to the US, I was disillusioned and depressed. I decided I needed to start writing and speaking about what I had seen there. In an article I wrote for the radical magazine Counterpunch around that time, I argued that “the so-called ‘Bolivarian Revolution’ is bankrupt: morally, ideologically, and economically,” and I asked what we, as leftist solidarity activists, should do in response. “Should we continue to make excuses for incompetence, corruption, and irresponsibility and thereby make ourselves accomplices?” I asked. “Or should we tell the truth?”

Hugo Chavez, 45th President of Venezuela

I had resolved to tell the truth. Having been so wrong about something so consequential, I felt it was the least I could do. By then, Venezuela was already in a terrible mess. Many of those I had helped to convince of the possibilities offered by Bolivarian socialism were deeply suspicious of the mainstream media and deserved to hear what was going on from a writer they trusted. But, as it turned out, the people I wanted to reach didn’t want to hear such things. And the people I asked to publish my articles didn’t much want me to write about them either. As a result of my voltafaccia, former comrades and friends contacted my editors and publishers in (occasionally successful) attempts to have my articles spiked. I was denounced and slandered online and in print. Phone calls and emails to people I had thought of as friends now went unanswered. On those occasions when I encountered one of them in public, they looked the other way. Abruptly, I found myself excommunicated, and people I’d known for 30 or 40 years made it clear that they no longer wanted to be part of my life.

The Fight for Venezuela’s Soul By Annika Hernroth-Rothstein

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/02/venezuela-crisis-people-want-country-back/The people — the victims of this twisted socialist dream — just want their country back.

Caracas, Venezuela — “There are colectivos on every corner.”

My bodyguard points them out to me, the seemingly inconspicuous men standing a few feet away. The men belong to the colectivos, the heavily armed Maduro-loyalist gangs policing this city, always ready to intimidate and attack anti-government protesters.

Just after he points them out, one of them walks up to me and asks for my phone and passport. I hand him a copy of my passport and show him my phone. Without even bothering to search it, he tells me to delete whatever is on there.

I do as he says while he watches me, and when I am finally allowed to go I realize he didn’t think to check my phone’s trash. So I post the videos and photos, all in succession, while my bodyguard drags me away.

It’s only my second day in Caracas but already my third run-in with the alternative law in this city. There’s a growing sense of unease in me as I realize how truly totalitarian this country has become, creating a culture of desperation and fear. You fear everyone, not just the regime, but also all those who are on its payroll, wielding weapons in the name of this twisted socialist dream.

We are headed to the National Assembly where the self-appointed interim president, Juan Guaidó, is rumored to be making an appearance. Ever since the uprising against President Nicolás Maduro started almost two weeks ago, the country has been waiting for the other shoe to drop and for the nation’s fate to be determined through either violence or legislation, or both. Guaidó represents hope, but the path to freedom for Venezuela is paved with blood, tears, and radical uncertainty. Every other day here there are protests from both sides that result in riots and massive regime-led pushback, and it seems as if the people of Caracas are waiting for that final straw that will break the camel’s back.

Rep. Ilhan Omar Likens Israel to Jim Crow South By Jack Crowe

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/rep-ilhan-omar-likens-israel-to-jim-crow-south/

Representative Ilhan Omar (D., Minn.) continued her public campaign against Israel on Twitter Thursday night, comparing the state and its policies to the Jim Crow South of mid 20th century America.

In citing the “millions of people under Israeli control,” liberal activist Max Berger, whom Omar was responding to, was likely referring to the Palestinian residents of the West Bank, who are governed by the Palestinian Authority, and, as such, cannot vote in Israeli elections.

Since being elected in November to represent Minnesotans in the House of Representatives, Omar has prioritized the promotion of Palestinian rights in numerous media appearances and public statements. Earlier this week, she told Yahoo News that she “almost chuckles” when she hears Israel referred to as a “democracy” and compared the country to Iran, the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism.

“I mean just our relationship with the Israeli government and the Israeli state. And so when I see Israel institute laws that recognize it as a Jewish state and does not recognize the other religions that are living in it and we still uphold [Israel] as a democracy in the Middle East, I almost chuckle because I know that if we see that [in] any other society we would criticize it, call it out,” Omar said. “We do that to Iran, we do that to any other place that sort of upholds its religion. And I see that now happening with Saudi Arabia and so I am aggravated, truly, in those contradictions.”

Omar was also forced to apologize earlier this month after initially defending a years-old tweet in which she accused Israel of “hypnotizing the world.”

The Democrats Will Do Everything to Stop Trump Except Compromise By David French

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/02/democrats-will-do-everything-to-stop-donald-trump-except-compromise/

If their headlong lurch to the left costs them their one shot at beating Trump next year, they’ll only have themselves to blame.

Perhaps the most common left-wing critique of Donald Trump is that he represents an extraordinary threat to American democracy. He’s not a normal Republican, or even a normal Republican with a bad Twitter habit; he’s something else entirely. He’s a threat to American norms and values, a mendacious wannabe authoritarian who’s unlocking the darkest forms of white-identity politics and straining the unity of an already polarized nation. He’s the man who could destroy the post-war international order and ultimately bring ruin to the network of alliances and trading relationships that has kept the United States safe and prosperous for generations.

These are desperate times for the nation, Democrats say. This is a moment when patriotic Americans should put aside their differences, rally behind a message of national unity, and defeat Trump to — at the very least — restore basic respect for the rule of law and the American constitutional order. The 40 percent have chosen their man. Now liberals must extend their arms to the 60 percent and sweep Trumpism from the land.

Or not. Judging from the last month, now is the time for Democrats to sprint to the left, countering Trump’s base politics with base politics of their own. In just the last few days we’ve seen Kamala Harris propose the abolition of private health insurance, Elizabeth Warren propose a plainly unconstitutional wealth tax, and Democratic bills in New York, Virginia, and Vermont seeking to expand access to third-trimester abortions — procedures that even a majority of Democrats dislike. At the same time, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has proposed a 70 percent tax rate on top earners, and Nancy Pelosi has called a border wall an “immorality” — even as Democrats in the past have voted for and funded hundreds of miles of border barriers.