Archive for 2016

PAUL MIRENGOFF: A Bad Day For Hillary Clinton In Federal Court. “A federal district court judge today granted a motion by Judicial Watch for discovery into whether the State Department and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton deliberately thwarted the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Judge Emmet Sullivan, a Bill Clinton appointee, issued the ruling in a FOIA case seeking records about the controversial employment status of Huma Abedin, former Deputy Chief of Staff to Clinton. In granting the motion, Judge Sullivan explained that months of piecemeal revelations about Clinton and the State Department’s handling of the email controversy created ‘at least a “reasonable suspicion”’ that public access to official government records under the federal Freedom of Information Act was undermined.” Ya think?

Plus: “So, while the FBI continues to investigate whether the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee committed felonies, discovery will proceed in federal court as to whether she deliberately thwarted federal law pertaining to document production.”

REWARD FOR SCREWING UP A MAJOR VA HOSPITAL? PLUSH JOB, FREE HOUSE IN THE PHILIPPINES: “Rima Nelson disappeared from public view after the St. Louis Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) hospital she managed potentially exposed 1,800 patients to HIV, was closed twice for serious medical safety issues and ranked dead last in patient satisfaction,” reports the Daily Caller News Foundation Investigative Group’s Luke Rosiak.

Nelson wasn’t fired, she was transferred to the Philippines capital of Manila to run VA’s only foreign facility. It’s a small staff that provides outpatient care to the few remaining U.S. and Filipino WWII veterans. She kept her $160,ooo a year salary and lives in a government-provided condo in a country in which the average person makes about $2,500 annually.

Nelson is just one of nearly 100 highly paid VA executives the department has transferred three or more times in eight years, often leaving management dysfunction and chaos behind. The reality of the federal government’s workforce is that it’s easier and less time-consuming to transfer poor performers than to fire them. And VA isn’t the only federal department that does it; the problem is government-wide.

 

ANALYSIS: TRUE. The Week: Twitter’s new Trust and Safety Council is an Orwellian nightmare. “What’s striking isn’t just that there may be a political bias in those decisions. The more serious problems are a lack of due process and explanation, and a striking imbalance between what happens to semi-prominent Twitter personalities and the countless run-of-the-mill Twitter trolls who are still at large.”

ASHE SCHOW: Education Dept. tries and fails to justify Title IX overreach.

Earlier this year Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., sent a letter to the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights demanding justification for the department’s overreach on college campuses.

In the letter, Lankford notes that OCR “guidance” from 2011 — which prompted colleges and universities to begin forcefully pursuing accusations of sexual harassment and sexual assault — never went through a notice-and-comment period yet imposed harsh financial penalties on schools that did not comply. This guidance document has led to more than 100 expelled accused students suing their universities for discrimination and due process violations, and many, many more expelled students who cannot afford to sue.

OCR missed the initial deadline Lankford set for a response, and requested an extension. When OCR finally did come up with an explanation for how forcing schools to drop the presumption of innocence or face funding cuts was legal, it was unsurprisingly underwhelming.

Catherine Lhamon, OCR’s assistant secretary for civil rights, spent several pages recounting earlier guidance documents that had gone through the notice-and-comment period as justification for the 2011 “Dear Colleague” letter. But the 2011 letter included noticeable changes that vastly expanded OCR’s authority while sending a clear message to schools that if they don’t begin holding accused students accountable (which has come to mean, in practical terms, suspend or expel anyone accused) they will lose federal funding. These changes did not go through the notice-and-comment period.

As Lankford pointed out in his initial letter, it seemed like OCR deliberately tried to avoid the notice-and-comment period in the 2011 Dear Colleague letter because it was afraid “education officials and other interested groups would have voiced substantive objections to the letters’ policies if given an opportunity.”

The avoidance question still stands in OCR’s response to Lankford.

They didn’t want it to come up as a public issue before the 2012 election.

Related: Judge OKs Male Ex-Student’s Gender Bias Suit Vs. Brown U.

A judge says a former Brown University student can sue the Ivy league school over claims that he was wrongly accused of sexual misconduct and suspended for 2 ½ years.

The former student filed the lawsuit anonymously as “John Doe.” He says Brown’s disciplinary process is stacked against men accused of sexual misconduct.

The encounter for which he was suspended happened in 2014.

U.S. District Judge William Smith on Monday said gender discrimination, breach of contract and other claims can go forward.

Here’s the full opinion.

DER SPIEGEL ON OBAMA — AND HILLARY’S, AND JOHN KERRY’S — SYRIAN DEBACLE:

The war has long since ceased being solely about Syria. The country has become Ground Zero of global geopolitics, an unholy mixture of Russia’s desired return to superpower status, an increasingly authoritarian Turkey, tentative US foreign policy, the Kurdish conflict, the arch-rivalry between Iran and Saudi Arabia, Islamist terror and the inability of a divided, crisis-ridden EU to do much of anything.

The war in Syria has transformed from a civil war into a world war.

It has long since reached Europe in the form of millions of refugees, terror attacks in Paris and attacks on tourists in Tunisia and Istanbul. And America, which has long been the leader of the West and guarantor of security in Europe, has refused to get involved. . . .

The man who could answer many of these questions is saying very little these days about Syria, despite the recent drama. In the past, Barack Obama has said that Assad must step down and he still refers to him as “a brutal, ruthless dictator.” At the same time, though, Obama is doing nothing to counter him and there are no signs that he has anything up his sleeve either.

The New York Times recently wrote that it is difficult to distinguish between Putin’s and Obama’s Syria strategies. Meanwhile, historian and journalist Michael Ignatieff and Brookings Institution fellow Leon Wieseltier lamented in the Washington Post, “It’s time for those who care about the moral standing of the United States to say that this policy is shameful.”

It is very clear at this point that the US has no strategy beyond its half-hearted efforts to provide training and arms to rebels — and to otherwise rely on negotiations. But none of this has born any fruit, as events in early February demonstrated.

Secretary of State Kerry worked for three months to get the warring parties to a negotiating table under the auspices of the United Nations — moderate rebels, representatives of the regime, Iranians, Saudi Arabians and Russians. But Moscow then turned around and launched its offensive right as the talks began. Within 48 hours, the Russian air force carried out 320 airstrikes in northern Syria alone. It was no coincidence that the storm on Aleppo began at that exact moment. The aim was that of destroying any possibility that the opposition would have a say in Syria’s future.

“All sides were aware that a continuation of the talks would become increasingly difficult for the opposition as the regime intensified its military offensive,” diplomats in Geneva said. After two days, the UN mediator Staffan de Mistura suspended talks. Right now, it doesn’t look as though the opposition will be prepared to return to Geneva on Feb. 25 as planned. And why should they?

Remember when they told us they’d be smart and sophisticated, not like that dumb cowboy Bush? Yeah, not so much.

GOOD: GOP Judiciary: No hearing on Obama court nominee.

Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee have come to a consensus decision to not have hearings or a vote on a Supreme Court nominee in 2016.

“We believe the American people need to decide who is going to make this appointment rather than a lame-duck president,” Senate Republican Whip John Cornyn (Texas) told reporters Tuesday after a special meeting of the committee.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said members of the panel reached a “consensus” that there should not be hearings or a vote on President Obama’s nominee.

“My decision is that I don’t think we should have a hearing. We should let the next president pick the Supreme Court justice,” he said after emerging from a meeting in Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s (R-Ky.) office.

The committee Republicans left McConnell’s office and walked straight into a lunch with the party conference to brief their colleagues.

After the meeting, McConnell said the rest of the Senate Republican Conference backed the Judiciary Committee’s unanimous position.

Related: McConnell will not meet with Obama’s nominee.

PAUL STARR: Why Democrats Should Beware Bernie Sanders’ Socialism: He’s A Socialist, Not A Liberal — And There’s A Big Difference.

So, just what is Sanders’ socialism? As analogs to his own program, Sanders points to the policies of Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal and the social democracies of northern Europe. As a liberal, I find a lot to like about both of those. But Sanders’ portrayal of democratic socialism as nothing but the New Deal is a disingenuous sleight of hand that plays on foggy historical memories. And his comparison to Nordic social democracy is equally misleading: Much of Sanders’s platform ignores the economic realities that European socialists long ago accepted.

Many people may be inclined to interpret Sanders’ calls for a revolution as just a rhetorical flourish. I think we should take it seriously. His policies are rooted in a socialist framework rather than a liberal one. And despite what Republicans may say, there’s a big difference between socialism and liberalism. . . .

Since Republicans have been calling Obama a socialist for the past eight years, the label socialist may seem to many to be a synonym for progressive or liberal. But the differences between socialism and liberalism are fundamental. At its core, liberalism has a concern for liberty. While liberals have expanded public programs, they also have sought to strengthen rights that limit arbitrary power, both governmental and private. Liberals do not sanctify the free market, but they care about preserving the incentives that stimulate innovation and investment and make possible a flourishing economy.

Socialism and Sanders have their heart in a different place—economic equality before all else. Socialism is still the dream of those who don’t worry about concentrating power in the state or about the perverse effects of making goods and services available at a zero price. To bring socialism back from the dead wearing New Deal liberalism as a mask is no service to either. Socialists should know the difference, and liberals should too. After feverish right-wing accusations that every liberal proposal is tantamount to socialism, the last thing liberals need is a Democratic presidential candidate blurring that line.

Indeed.

ASIA PIVOT: China sends fighter jets to contested island in South China Sea.

In a move likely to further increase already volatile tensions in the region, China has deployed fighter jets to a contested island in the South China Sea, the same island where China deployed surface-to-air missiles last week, two U.S. officials tell Fox News.

The dramatic escalation came as Secretary of State John Kerry hosted his Chinese counterpart, Foreign Minister Wang Yi, at the State Department.

Ouch.

TRUMP SCORES BIG WIN IN NEVADA:

Donald Trump notched a resounding win in the Nevada caucuses Tuesday, channeling the roiling anger of Republican voters against the establishment and sweeping almost every category of the electorate to build his dominance in the delegate count.

It was a stunning show of momentum for his campaign, one that made it increasingly difficult to imagine a scenario where any other GOP candidate wins the Republican nomination.

“We love Nevada,” Trump said during his brief victory speech at his party in Las Vegas late Tuesday night. “We will be celebrating for a long time tonight.”

“We weren’t expected to win too much and now we’re winning, winning, winning the country,” Trump said. “And soon the country is going to start winning, winning, winning.”

He basked in his success across demographics.

“We won the evangelicals,” he said. “We won with young. With won with old. We won with highly educated. We won with poorly educated. I love the poorly educated.”

Plus:

Not only was it a win in the Silver State, but it was a win with a huge margin. With 96% of the expected vote in at about 7:30 a.m. ET, Trump was dominating the race with 45.9%. Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz were in a narrow battle for second with Rubio at 23.9% and Cruz at 21.4%.

The results in Nevada, a state where 30 delegates are at stake, demonstrated the power of Trump’s appeal in this anti-establishment year. It also underscored his ability to use his media savvy and enormous popularity to sweep a state with complex caucus rules and where rivals were far more organized.

Like Obama, Trump is upending the conventional wisdom.

UPDATE: Trump Won Big With Latinos And Women: Let That Sink In. This is less of a surprise to those who have actually been paying attention.

RESET: How the Syrian Conflict Could Lead to a Clash Between Russia and NATO.

The humanitarian crisis in Syria has gone on so long and is so devastating in its social impact — with a huge migration, some direct and some coming from people in the existing camps in the countries surrounding Syria — that we can lose sight of the military dangers that are now threatening the Middle East.

It has long been feared in NATO that the Syrian crisis would spill over into a wider war, but that moment is closer now than it has ever been before. Any serious analysis of the start of the First and Second World Wars reveals that a lack of clarity of intention is extremely dangerous.

Our last attempt at “clarity” in Syria resulted in an disastrously indistinct red line.

GALLUP: “Dishonest” and “Socialist” Lead U.S. Reactions to Dems. “The perceptions of Hillary Clinton as dishonest are not new. When Gallup asked the same question in 2008, ‘dishonest’ was Americans’ most frequent response. And, in a Gallup poll conducted in September 2015, Americans overwhelmingly referred to the email scandal when asked to mention what they had read or heard about Clinton. On the positive side, 8% of Americans say they like her, 7% describe her as capable and qualified, 5% as experienced, 3% as strong and 3% as a good politician. Smaller percentages consider her honest or smart.”