Trump plays it safe.
That seems a little out of character, but he is keeping a campaign promise. We could have gotten worse, and were guaranteed to, if Hillary had won.
Trump plays it safe.
That seems a little out of character, but he is keeping a campaign promise. We could have gotten worse, and were guaranteed to, if Hillary had won.
After all these years of advocating for it, I’m happy with how much traction the concept is finally getting.
Ummm…no thanks.
They were trained that they could bend or suspend the law.
This was for terror suspects, but once you believe you can suspend the law, it makes it easy to explain why they let Hillary and her minions off.
A roundup from legal bloggers, with three votes for Don Willett, including one from Instapundit.
[Tuesday-afternoon update]
An analysis of Amy Coney Barrett’s legal philosophy.
Based on this, I’d prefer Willett, but it looks like Trump is fascinated by the idea of nominating an actual conservative (and relatively young, for longevity, and attractive) woman. And the nomination would make the Left’s collective head explode, as well as making it more difficult for Murkowski and Collins to vote against.
[Bumped]
At some point, I think it will be important to distinguish between resource utilization for personal use (living off the land), for commercial use in space (e.g., selling propellant), and terrestrial use.
A reminder from David Bernstein that evangelicals supported the immoral candidate because the Left had put the fear of un-God into them. Many of those SCOTUS victories for were Pyrrhic for them.
Well, now we know why the DoJ and FBI have been dragging their feet for so many months on those subpoenaed documents. I’m guessing we’ll soon be seeing a lot more, and worse.
And then there’s this:
One of the reasons they couldn't charge her for all the felonies she committed was that they couldn't do so without implicating Obama. https://t.co/iuPCxJuDIO
— Rand Simberg (@Rand_Simberg) June 25, 2018
[Update a while later]
Not as much as he wanted to, but he did a lot of damage.
[Afternoon update]
Just got around to reading the whole thing at the first link:
On October 30, the Department of Justice finally got in gear to get a warrant — to include everything dealing during Mrs. Clinton’s tenure with the State Department and all devices — and especially the Comey-denominated “golden emails” from the BlackBerrys and all the messages sent to Abedin to be given to Mrs. Clinton, right?
Nope.
Shocker #1: Despite everyone’s recognition of the importance of the “explosive” “bomb,” and the “golden emails” on the Weiner laptop, the FBI never even sought to review the “golden” emails. FBI General Counsel Baker pushed hard to expand the application to include those, but Strzok and DOJ prosecutors shot it down.
Shocker #2: They deliberately ignored the emails between Huma Abedin and others — despite knowing she was a proxy for the Secretary and had lied to them in her interview.
Federal investigators knew people would email Abedin, and she would print things out for Clinton. Abedin admitted it was easier for her to print things from home in Brooklyn.
Logically then, it appears it was Abedin who deliberately stripped classified markings from emails to forward the information to Mrs. Clinton so she could then deny ever receiving anything marked classified. It’s called “plausible deniability,” and it was a deliberate and illegal scheme for handling classified information.
Shocker #3: Over analysts’ objections, the FBI never reviewed the Weiner laptop to determine if it had been compromised by foreign agents despite finding that Huma Abedin had forwarded classified information to it. Those were flagrant violations of 18 U.S.C. §793.
There are important conclusions from these facts in the inspector general’s report.
This is a much bigger cover up than Watergate, by orders of magnitude.
Neo-neocon has a link round up. And yes, I do think that a lot of the immigration outrage is a (successful) attempt to deflect attention from this.