Displaying posts published in

June 2019

Why Clinton Got Impeached By Rich Lowry

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/06/bill-clinton-impeachment-case-stronge

The anti-Clinton case then was stronger than the anti-Trump case is now.

There’s been a cottage industry in accusing Republicans of impeachment hypocrisy.

They happily impeached Bill Clinton and now vociferously oppose the impeachment of Donald Trump, even though Clinton was accused of obstruction of justice — just as Trump is now.

Is this a legitimate point?

There are uncomfortable parallels. The Democrats most fervent about impeachment say that it is their duty to do it no matter what, politics be damned. They speculate that perhaps the polling on impeachment will improve once it’s under way. Republicans said the same thing in the 1990s, and the Clinton impeachment ended in a fizzle.

And it’s certainly true that both Clinton and Trump behaved appallingly when under investigation.

Given that the Clinton impeachment, as a practical matter, acted as a censure vote and Clinton’s misconduct didn’t involve his core presidential duties, there’s a good argument that a formal censure would have been the wiser course. In retrospect, Newt Gingrich doesn’t give himself high marks for how he handled it.

That said, the case for Clinton’s impeachment was still stronger than the case for Trump’s.

Poll: Trump More Popular in New York than Mayor DeBlasio By Rick Moran

https://pjmedia.com/trending/poll-trump-more-popular-in-new-york-than-mayor-deblasio/

A new Siena College Research Institute poll uncovers the embarrassing fact that more people in the state of New York have a favorable opinion of Donald Trump than of New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio.

Did we mention that de Blasio is running for president of the United States?

Washington Examiner:

Trump is by no means popular in his home state, as the new Siena College Research Institute  poll finds that just 34% of registered voters have a favorable view of him, compared with 63% who have an unfavorable view. But when it comes to de Blasio, just 29% have a favorable view, compared with 53% who view him unfavorably.

So far, the mayor’s 2020 presidential campaign has produced more mockery than actual support, which is undetectable in polling.

It may not be detectable, but the inference is clear; de Blasio is making a fool of himself running for president.

Case in point: hizzoner failed to gain any support whatsoever from Iowans in the new Des Moines Register poll that was released yesterday. Could it be because of his dismissive attitude toward rural voters?

Mediaite:

De Blasio and Miramar, Florida Mayor  Wayne Messam  were the only two candidates in the field of 23 candidates to not be listed as either a first or second choice for president by one of the respondents.

“I’ll tell you something, Iowans have consistently surprised the pundits and come out many, many times with a choice that was not expected,” de Blasio contended.

“Ana, it’s a poll of 600 Iowans, eight months before the caucuses. This is just the beginning of a very long process,” he said.

“I wonder if being New York City mayor might hurt you in a place like Iowa,” CNN’s Ana Cabrera asked.

“It’s a fair concern,” de Blasio said. “But I’m hearing about the same issues I hear from my constituents in New York.”

“I think the Democratic Party for decades formed a coalition, a rural-urban coalition. That’s what Franklin Delano Roosevelt did, it worked for Democrats. It was about working people, farmers, factory workers, every day people.” de Blasio said.

I don’t think those 600 Iowans — or many other Democrats in the state — appreciate being dismissed so cavalierly.

Realistically, it’s very difficult to see a successful path forward to the nomination for de Blasio, especially in the early primary and caucus states. By the time the California primary rolls around on March 17, de Blasio should be relaxing in his office, thinking up ways to make the lives of New Yorkers miserable and not in the midst of a battle for the presidential nomination.

So the question arises; why? If Sanders, Biden, or Warren eventually get the nod, de Blasio has zero chance of being named as any of those candidates’ vice president. The mayor is too urban, too northern, too prickly, and too “New Yorkish” to get the nod.

So you have to wonder if de Blasio isn’t setting himself up for a run for governor or, perhaps, Senator. When you consider that de Blasio is term limited and will be out of office in 2021, the possibility of a run for higher office is not out of the question. CONTINUE AT SITE

Is America Experiencing Europe’s Growing Anti-Semitism?By Melissa Langsam Braunstein

https://thefederalist.com/2019/06/10/america-experiencing-europes-growing-anti-semitism/

It all started on the campuses, and we did nothing because they were students. We did nothing when they joined the party because it was just the left-wing fringe, and now they’ve taken over.’

Is America experiencing Europe’s growing anti-Semitism? That was the central question at the Hudson Institute last Tuesday afternoon. As Hudson Institute CEO Ken Weinstein noted in opening remarks, it’s a question we never thought we’d have to ask.

Yet, in 2019, it’s an unavoidable, even urgent question. After deadly attacks in Pittsburgh and Poway, along with openly anti-Semitic rhetoric in the U.S. Congress and anti-Semitic imagery in The New York Times, the climate has clearly changed.

The world’s oldest hatred, which began a resurgence in Europe at the turn of the century, has begun rearing its ugly heads here. Heads plural because, as the various speakers agreed, contemporary anti-Semitism is a three-headed monster: it exists on the far-left, the far-right, and among Islamists.

Europe has long had a problem with anti-Semitism. For Jews, one of the best things about emigrating to the New World was leaving behind centuries of pogroms, forced conversions, and general mistreatment. In America, Jews have always been a tiny minority. But here, we’re free to practice (or not practice) our religion, and we can be treated like everybody else. So, should we expect things to follow a European-like trajectory?

Great Lakes Reveal a Fatal Flaw in Climate Change ‘Science’ John Merline

https://issuesinsights.com/2019/06/09/great-lakes-reveal-the-fatal-flaw-in-global-warming-science/

ake Erie and Lake Superior — two of the five that make up the Great Lakes — broke records for water levels this May. Lakes Michigan and Huron could follow suit.

Naturally, climate change is getting the blame. “We are undoubtedly observing the effects of a warming climate in the Great Lakes,” says Richard Rood, a University of Michigan climate scientist. 

But just a few years ago, climate scientists were insisting that a warming climate would cause water levels to decline. 

In 2008, Science Daily reported on a study that attributed the decline in Great Lakes water levels to global warming. The researchers who conducted the study said that the drop “raised concern because the declines are consistent with many climate change predictions.”

In 2009, Columbia University’s Earth Institute informed us that “most climate models suggest that we may see declines in lake levels over the next 100 years; one suggests that we may see declines of up to 8.2 feet.”

In 2011, the Union of Concern Scientists said that “scientists expect water levels in the Great Lakes to drop in both summer and winter, with the greatest declines occurring in Lakes Huron and Michigan.”

In 2013, the Natural Resources Defense Council said that “it’s no secret that, partially due to climate change, the water levels in the Great Lakes are getting very low.”

Reconciliation, or Grievance? Modern diversity training too often violates Martin Luther King’s vision of racial healing. Chloé Valdary

https://www.city-journal.org/diversity-training

Diversity training has become a standard feature of American corporate culture. Its origins date to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which codified protecting employees against discrimination and resulted in numerous lawsuits filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the agency created by the statute. In response, CEOs began holding diversity and inclusion classes and companies began to see such training as critical to good business—both as a defensive measure against liability and to foster a healthy and respectful office environment.

Not all diversity and inclusion models have been designed the same way or achieved the same goals. In 1990, Roosevelt Thomas Jr., the former executive director of diversity and inclusion at Morehouse College, argued that a business could measure the success of its programs by asking the following questions: “Does this program, policy, or principle give special consideration to one group? Will it contribute to everyone’s success, or will it only produce an advantage for blacks or whites or women or men? Is it designed for them as opposed to us?” Thomas concluded that “Whenever the answer is yes, you’re not yet on the road to managing diversity.”

If Thomas’s standards seem obvious, it’s because his ideas are rooted in Martin Luther King’s vision of the “beloved community.” Through this vision, conflicts are resolved peacefully and adversaries can reconcile. Racism and discrimination are recognized as evil philosophies “based on a contempt for life,” which promote “the absurd dogma that one race is responsible for all the progress of history and alone can assure the progress of the future.” King sought to defeat injustice by embracing love over hatred.

Underpinning King’s philosophy was his belief in the sanctity of the individual and the “amazing potential for goodness” within human beings. “We do not wish to triumph over the white community,” he wrote. “That would only result in transferring those now on the bottom to the top. But, if we can live up to nonviolence in thought and deed, there will emerge an interracial society based on freedom for all.”

Trump Wins One on Immigration By Edward Lulie

https://amgreatness.com/2019/06/09/trumps-wins-one-on-immigration/

Tariffs don’t work. Or so the talking heads kept saying. We watched for days as Democrats and Republicans lambasted President Trump’s threat to impose steeper and steeper tariffs on Mexico unless and until that country takes concrete action to stem the tide of illegal immigrants crossing into the United States.

“I think it’s both bad politically and bad economically and I don’t think it’s really going to help solve the immigration problem, either, which is what Mr. Trump said he’s trying to attack,” said John Negroponte, the former U.S. ambassador to Honduras, Mexico, the Philippines, the United Nations, and Iraq.

“This is a stunningly stupid idea on many levels,” wrote Eric Boehm at the libertarian Reason magazine. “Making it more expensive to import goods from Mexico is a pretty roundabout way to get Mexico to change its border policies.”

“Mr. Trump is blaming Mexico for a mess it can’t solve,” the Wall Street Journal editorialized

Well, now we know.

Late Friday, President Trump announced that an agreement was reached to suspend the threatened tariffs “indefinitely” in exchange for Mexico agreeing to house many of the illegal immigrants who are overtaxing America’s broken asylum system. Instead of releasing so-called asylum-seekers into the interior of the United States, often never to be seen again, tens of thousands will remain in Mexico while they await their court dates.

Clearly, the threat of tariffs works very well.

The 2020 News Cycle Will Look Very Different By Victor Davis Hanson

https://amgreatness.com/2019/06/09/new-narratives-in-2020/

The Russia collusion narrative and associated Robert Mueller hysteria are all but over.

Mueller’s obstruction of justice narrative involving the non-crime of collusion is ending, too.

Donald Trump’s tax-return psychodrama is going the way of the Emoluments Clause, the Logan Act, the 25th Amendment and the comical in-house coup attempt of former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe.

What takes the place of Mueller and “the noose is tightening” bombshells? Perhaps the new narratives involving Inspector General Michael Horowitz and FISA abuse, or Attorney General William Barr’s investigation into the origins of the Russia collusion probe—far quieter, far more serious.

The media for three years obsessed over a false “Trump did it” story. But in the next 17 months, the storyline may change from the myth of the “walls are closing in” on the president to the reality that Obama-era officials committed serial felonies—from perjury and lying to federal officials, to leaking classified documents, spying illegally on a political campaign, deceiving a FISA court, and obstructing justice.

As we have already seen with the flare-up between former Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein (who signed a FISA writ, who wrote the memo for Comey’s firing, who appointed his old boss Robert Mueller as special counsel, and who, McCabe says, joined him for a moment in contemplating removing Trump) and former FBI Director James Comey (who likely lied under oath, deceived a FISA court, leaked classified documents and ordered informants placed in the Trump campaign), at some point, these culpable grandees will start turning on each other, and it will be hard to stop.

How Palestinian Leaders Butcher the Truth by Bassam Tawil

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/14357/palestinian-leaders-butcher-truth

Yusef Wajih, the terrorist, came to Jerusalem armed with a knife to kill Jews. That was his only goal. He could have taken advantage of Israel’s easing of restrictions during Ramadan — a move that saw hundreds of thousands of Muslims to enter Jerusalem every Friday to pray at the Al-Aqsa Mosque.

The Palestinian Authority (PA) is also not concerned that two innocent Jews were stabbed by the terrorist. What the Palestinian Authority is disturbed about is the killing of the terrorist.

If the International Criminal Court ever looks into this incident, it should begin its inquiry by investigating the vicious incitement of Palestinian leaders, who use Jewish visits to a holy site in Jerusalem to butcher the truth, just as it whips up Palestinians such as Yusef Wajih to wake up in the morning and butcher the first Jew he meets. The blood of Wajih is on the hands of Palestinian leaders, and not the police officers who stopped a terrorist from stabbing yet more Jews.

The Palestinian Authority (PA) is up in arms because Israeli policemen killed a Palestinian who stabbed two Jews in the Old City of Jerusalem. The terrorist, 19-year-old Yusef Wajih, from the West Bank village of Abwain, near Ramallah, stabbed one of the men in the neck and head near the Old City’s Damascus Gate, leaving him in serious condition.

The second victim was a 16-year-old who was stabbed by the terrorist in the back a few hundred meters away from the scene of the first attack. The teenager sustained light to moderate injuries. Police officers shot and killed the terrorist, thus preventing him from harming more Jews.

Such stabbing attacks are not uncommon on the streets of Jerusalem. In the past few years, Palestinian terrorists have carried out several stabbing and shooting attacks against Israeli police officers and civilians, particularly ultra-Orthodox Jews who were on their way to or from prayer at the Western Wall.

Trump’s North Korea Policy Should Be Encouraged, Not Undermined by Peter Huessy

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/14356/trump-north-korea-policy

China is rarely called to task in Washington by US leaders for its role in proliferating nuclear-weapons programs in some of the world’s most notorious rogue states. Pressure is rarely placed on Beijing even by US arms-control groups.

The Chinese government made a deliberate choice in 1982 — in violation of its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty of 1968 — to disperse nuclear-weapons technology to its allies in the Third World. Through the A.Q. Khan nuclear smuggling network in Pakistan, China was able to help produce nuclear weapons in Pakistan and North Korea, and start nuclear programs of varying significance in Iran, Libya and Iraq, and later in Syria.

The Trump administration is doing more than its predecessors to meet the challenges and threats posed by North Korea, and therefore should be encouraged to continue the policy of employing a mixture of tough measures and diplomacy.

At a recent event on Capitol Hill — hosted by the Washington-based Mitchell Institute — the former China Country Director at the Office of the Secretary of Defense, Joe Bosco, defended U.S. President Donald Trump’s North Korea policy against critics who were accusing the White House either of leaning too far in the direction of diplomacy with Pyongyang, or too bent on imposing maximum economic and military pressure on it.

The criticism, according to Bosco, stems from two false narratives — emanating from Pyongyang and Beijing — which have been governing the debate.

The first is that North Korea is justified in having nuclear weapons, due to America’s long-standing “hostile policy” towards the regime in Pyongyang. The second is that China has had virtually no role in the establishment of North Korea’s nuclear program — and that Beijing seeks “denuclearization” and “stability” on the Korean peninsula.

Massive Crowds Take to Streets in ‘Last Fight’ for Hong Kong Natasha Khan

https://www.wsj.com/articles/massive-crowds-take-to-streets-in-last-fight-for-hong-kong-11560075915?mod=trending_now_1

HONG KONG—Demonstrators staged the biggest rally challenging China’s authority over the city since Britain ceded control in 1997, marching through streets for hours to protest a proposed law that would let Beijing take people across the border to stand trial in the mainland.

Organizers estimated more than a million people—almost one for every seven residents in the city—took to the streets to demand the city’s leaders and their political masters in Beijing shelve the law. Police estimated 240,000 protesters took part at the peak of Sunday’s march.A snaking crowd that included young families, students, professionals and the elderly streamed through the city, reflecting unprecedented and widespread opposition to the latest move by Beijing to bring the former colony to heel. Critics say the proposed law could be abused to target political dissidents and would expose citizens to the mainland’s more opaque legal system, where detainees could be unfairly jailed and abused.