Archive for 2016

MY USA TODAY COLUMN: A President Clinton would be out of control. “‘Someone somewhere should have told her no.’ Those are the words of a Clinton ally quoted in a roundup of Democratic reactions to Hillary Clinton’s FBI news by congressional newspaper The Hill. And, despite the fact that they come from a Clinton supporter, albeit an angry and disappointed one, they may illustrate the best reason for choosing Donald Trump instead of Clinton.”

ORIN KERR: Was it legal for the FBI to expand the Weiner email search to target Hillary Clinton’s emails? “Does expanding the FBI’s investigation from the unrelated case to the Clinton case violate the Fourth Amendment? We don’t know all the facts yet, so it’s somewhat hard to say. But here’s why the expansion of the investigation might be constitutionally problematic. Consider this a tentative analysis unless and until more facts emerge.”

WHY ARE DEMOCRAT-DOMINATED INSTITUTIONS SUCH CESSPITS OF AGEISM AND DISCRIMINATION? NYU Tells Surgeon He’s “Too Old” To Operate.

Stuchin acknowledges he’s had a “slight tremor” in his thumbs since 2013, but says it didn’t impact his work, and NYU took no action until Orthopedics Chairman Joseph Zuckerman and Richard Iorio, who heads the university’s Adult Reconstructive Surgery department, began zeroing in on his age in December 2014.

When Stuchin sought help from Dr. Steven Abramson, vice dean of the University’s School of Medicine, Abramson allegedly replied, “We just had a gender discrimination lawsuit, I guess now we will have an age discrimination lawsuit,” Stuchin claims in court papers.

NYU lawyers swore to “defend” the university against Stuchin’s claims.

I expect a lot more age discrimination suits are in the future.

EVERYTHING IS BROKEN:

screen-shot-2016-10-30-at-5-41-33-pm

UPDATE: By the way, I saw Webb Wilder do a hell of a cover of the Dylan song once, but I can’t find a video online. But here’s Bob Dylan sounding almost as good as Webb. But the strong bassline made the Webb version shine.

THOUGHTS ON PACIFISM AND PATRIOTISM FROM SETH BARRETT TILLMAN:

I want to focus on the widely shared moral intuition that the Quakers’ opposition to service in northern and southern armies was admirable. It strikes me that there are two possibilities. First, the Quaker position is seen as admirable specifically because it was religiously rooted. Or, second, it is seen in a positive light because, broadly speaking, principled pacifism is admirable, even if not religiously-rooted.

If our moral intuitions accord with the second view, if we credit the Quakers’ behaviour without regard to their religious inspiration, then why do our standard histories judge President James Buchanan and Chief Justice Taney so harshly?** Buchanan and Taney preferred the United States to go to pieces rather than maintaining it by war. They were unwilling to order or to support a war, and the deaths, which would undoubtedly follow. Yet very few today see Buchanan and Taney as heroes or as acting on moral principles akin to those of the Quakers. Why?

Perhaps, just perhaps, our society only sees pacifism as admirable if it is specifically motivated by religious scruples? Or are these two divergent moral intuitions rooted in a prudential judgment: we can only have reasonable confidence that pacifism is sincere if rooted in religious garb? In other words, secular pacifism might sometimes be real, but we suspect that it is more often than not used strategically, as opposed to sincerely. Or perhaps a third possibility: many hold divergent moral intuitions because they have not thought it all through sufficiently?

I suspect it’s that secular pacifism is often used strategically — just notice how the “antiwar movement” vanished the moment there was no longer a Republican in the White House.

BREAKING: FBI Obtains Warrant for Newly Discovered Emails in Clinton Probe — as Reid Accuses Comey of Hatch Act Violation.

The all-out war on Comey strikes me as a mistake. It reeks of desperation.

UPDATE: All-out war indeed. Unindicted Gun Criminal David Gregory Rips FBI’s Comey. “In making his case against Comey, however, Gregory did not mention that his lawyer wife has represented former Clinton aides involved in the scandal.”

ANOTHER UPDATE: Frank Niceley: If Comey’s so awful, Obama can always fire him.

MORE: From the comments: “Here is the important item to remember, either Huma or Weiner retained this trove of emails as an insurance policy against the Clintons, not because they are pack rats. There is some major S++t in there.”

STILL MORE: The Hill: Hillary’s emails matter: A retired CIA officer explains why.

MORE STILL: NPR’S Audie Cornish: “If Comey hadn’t said what he said to Congress and the rest of the world, it would have leaked. It would have leaked. That whole building was ready to leak that they had discovered this new source with Weiner and Abedin.”

Plus, Mike Pence weighs in: “In fact, Pence added, why doesn’t Huma Abedin just put her emails out? Why does the Hillary campaign think the missing information should come from the FBI? If they sincerely want transparency, why don’t they get transparent?”