Archive for 2016

JONAH DOES POLITICAL JIU-JITSU: The conservative principle behind Black Lives Matter, as explored by Jonah Goldberg in the L.A. Times:

Liberals have seemingly boundless faith in the power and nobility of government, but many draw a line around cops, creating one of the strangest ironies of modern liberalism: Many of those most eager to support new laws and new regulations suddenly lose faith when it comes to the government employees charged with enforcing them. It’s particularly amazing given that law enforcement personnel typically receive far more training than your typical bureaucrat or legislator.

Just as conservatives need to recognize the ills of police abuse, liberals need to acknowledge that the first obligation of the state is to defend the safety and property of its citizens, and that nothing undermines the legitimacy of the law more than vilifying those sworn to uphold it.

As lots of people have pointed out, the modern left has devolved down two opposing statements: All cops are potential racists and can’t be trusted. But only the police should have guns.

So which is it?

SURPRISED? HOLDER BLOCKED PROSECUTION OF HSBC IN DRUG CARTEL MONEY LAUNDERING: Former Attorney General Eric Holder blocked filing of charges against financial industry giant HSBC that were recommended by career Department of Justice attorneys. That’s just one of the findings of a majority staff report by the House Financial Services Committee.

Holder “and his senior staff allowed HSBC to settle over the bank’s money laundering oversight failures rather than face criminal charges. They then ‘misled’ Congress as to why the DOJ failed to prosecute HSBC” in 2012, reports the Daily Caller News Foundation Investigative Group’s Katie Watson.

The report was titled “Too Big To Jail: Inside the Obama Justice Department’s Decision Not to Hold Wall Street Accountable.” As Glenn Reynolds would say, they told us “too big to fail” banks would be above the law if Barack Obama wasn’t elected President in 2008 and re-elected in 2012.

CHANGE: How the Revolutionary Guard is trying to tighten its grip on Rouhani.

The listing of the IRGC as one of three organs that must vet appointees to sensitive positions, alongside the judiciary and the Intelligence Ministry, is among the other key criticisms directed at the parliamentary bill. Nikbakht told Al-Monitor, “Iran’s Constitution accepts the formation of a body known as the IRGC, and the Intelligence Organization is one of the subgroups of this body. The ratification of this bill in a way limits the powers of the government, meaning that in addition to acquiring permission from other organizations, another intelligence entity that has no links to the government in terms of duties can now play a role [in the hiring of people]. Nonetheless, the [IRGC Intelligence] Organization does have a legal mandate and was for instance, in relation to the arrests after the 2009 presidential election, in charge of pursuing misconduct.”

According to Nikbakht, the involvement of the IRGC’s Intelligence Organization in the hiring process for some government positions could lead to conflicts in the management of the country, given that it is a military organization that operates under the supervision of the supreme leader.

We had been assured by no less than Barack Obama and John Kerry that the nuclear deal would empower Iranian moderates.

SOMALIA: The Cellphone Effect.

The cell phone is itself a key player in the two decades of civil war in Somalia. By 2000 clan militias and warlords had created enough stability to enable growth in commercial activity. For example, by 2004 three cell phone companies competed to provide service ($10 a month for free local calls, 50 cents a minute for international calls and 50 cents an hour to get on the Internet.) Each new cell phone transmitter installed required that the local clan chief or warlord get a payment. Everyone recognizes the value of the new phone service, after having gone without for years after the old government run phone company was looted and destroyed. As a result, phone company equipment really is protected by the clans and warlords, who do not want to lose their dial tone. The new phone service is cheaper and more reliable than the old government owned landline phone network. This is because there is competition, no government bureaucracy and no taxes (other than the necessary bribes and security payments). There is some fear that if a new government gets established well enough regulations and taxes will greatly increase the cost of service, and reduce reliability. Not yet and for years all of Somalia had better, and cheaper, phone service than any of the other nations in the region. But that’s another story. Even al Shabaab had to respect the cell phone network, even though they tried to shut down cell towers some of the time to avoid detection. Al Shabaab lost that battle. Cell phone service became one of the things nearly all Somalis would fight for.

Heh.

NOBEL PEACE PRIZE UPDATE: More U.S. troops to Iraq seen as tipping point, Pentagon sources say.

Tipping points are usually only clear after the fact. But Pentagon officials who just a few months ago were openly pessimistic that Mosul could be liberated this year now see more fight in the Iraqi Army.

And in his remarks in Baghdad, [Defense Secretary Ash] Carter made it clear he would not hesitate to ask for even more troops if it would speed the defeat of the Islamic State.

“At every step in this campaign, we have generated and seized additional opportunities to hasten ISIL’s lasting defeat,” Carter said. “These additional U.S. forces will bring unique capabilities to the campaign and provide critical support to Iraqi forces at a key moment in the fight.”

It’s always reassuring to see President Ash Carter on the scene.

UNEXPECTEDLY: Iran Violates the Deal. Now What?

The report from the German FBI—the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution spoke of Iran’s support for terrorists inside Germany including Hezbollah and Hamas. But just as alarming was the finding that Iran made at least nine recent attempts to acquire technology for nuclear arms development. Though it claimed the majority of those attempts were thwarted by German intelligence, the agency said there was no doubt the Islamist regime would continue “its intensive procurement activities in Germany using clandestine methods to achieve its objectives.”

The implications of this report cannot be overestimated.

This means that despite all the happy talk from the United States and its Western allies about compliance with the terms of the nuclear pact, their confidence is unfounded. Instead of merely reaping the enormous benefits that have accrued to it from the ending of sanctions and waiting patiently for the pact to expire in ten years before resuming their push for a weapon, Iran has never stopped working to achieve its nuclear ambition.

A nuclear-armed Iran seems to have been Obama’s goal all along. The US, not so much.

PRESSURE GROWS FOR PUBLIC CORRUPTION PROBE OF “LAWLESS, PAY-TO-PLAY” CLINTON FOUNDATION: Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-TN, is circulating a draft letter from GOP colleagues in the House of Representative to investigate a “pattern of dealing that personally enriched the Clintons at the expense of American foreign policy,” according to Richard Pollock of the Daily Caller News Foundation Investigative Group.

The letter will go when completed to FBI Director James Comey, IRS Commissioner John Koskinen and Federal Trade Commission Chairman Edith Ramirez. A major focus of the letter is the relationship of the Foundation to for-profit giant Laureate Education.

“Laureate paid Bill Clinton $16.5 million for a part-time job as ‘honorary chancellor’ beginning in 2010, a year after Hillary Clinton joined the Department of State. Laureate also contributed between $1 million to $5 million to the Clinton Foundation, according to the foundation’s web site.

“During that same time, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) awarded $55 million to the International Youth Foundation, a unit run by David Becker, Laureate’s founder. The USAID is part of the State Department,” Pollock reports.

Blackburn’s effort comes hard on the heels of another House GOP missive in which 200 signers demand that Comey explain why he opted not to recommend prosecution of Hillary Clinton for violating anti-espionage and classification security laws by using a private email and server to conduct official U.S. government business while Secretary of State.

THE TRUMPEN PROLETARIAT: Barack Obama’s presidency of moral condescension has produced an electoral backlash, Dan Henninger writes in the Wall Street Journal:

Political correctness added something new to the cultural divide: moral condescension.

What has really “angered” so many more millions who now feel drawn into the Trump camp isn’t just PC itself but that its proponents show such relentless moral contempt and superiority toward everyone else. People in America can take a lot, but not that. Marx would have a field day with how progressivism’s cultural elites have reordered social classes between the right-minded and everyone else.

Despite years of winning Supreme Court assent to their views, the left insists that the other side must remain on the moral hook. On race, sex or the environment the moralistic left seems to think it can keep the population incarcerated forever on vague, unproven charges of cultural guilt. For what?

In nearly eight years of presidential speeches, Barack Obama, by explicit choice, has come to embody the holier-than-thou idea of showing secular moral contempt for those who disagree with him.

And he’s far from alone in that department on the left, which openly wears its smug on its sleeves. As Glenn noted yesterday, “After anti-Trump remarks, Ruth Bader Ginsburg would have to recuse herself. And some say she’d have to recuse on any cases involving Trump if he were elected. Or, I suppose, maybe even if he weren’t.”

DEMS IN DISARRAY: Anti-abortion Democrats fire back.

Anti-abortion Democrats are firing back at members of their party’s platform committee for supporting language that would call for repealing a law preventing the use of federal funds for abortion.

The language inserted in the “reproductive health” section of the Democratic Party’s draft platform for the first time calls for the repeal of the Hyde Amendment, a pillar of the anti-abortion movement.

Sen. Bob Casey Jr., a Democrat from Pennsylvania who opposes abortion, was concerned enough about the change to write a letter to the DNC platform committee urging them to reconsider.

“This is a consensus-based policy that has, for many years, prohibited the use of federal funds to pay for abortion,” Casey wrote in a letter sent Friday to the platform committee and obtained by The Hill.

He said the Hyde Amendment recognizes “that many Americans remain morally opposed to abortion, and do not wish to see their tax dollars go to pay for abortion.”

The Hyde Amendment bans the use of federal funds to pay for abortions for Medicaid recipients except in cases of rape, incest or when the pregnancy endangers the life of the mother.

Another anti-abortion Democrat, Sen. Joe Manchin (W.Va.), has also criticized the proposed change.

They’re “anti-abortion Democrats,” but they’ll fully support Hillary.

LARRY SUMMERS NOT SOUNDING FULL-THROATEDLY GLOBALIST HERE: Voters deserve responsible nationalism not reflex globalism.

It is clear after the Brexit vote and Donald Trump’s victory in the Republican presidential primaries that voters are revolting against the relatively open economic policies that have been the norm in the US and Britain since the second world war.

Populist opposition to international integration is on the rise in much of continental Europe and has always been the norm in Latin America. The question now is what should be the guiding principles of international economic policy? How should those of us — who believe that the vastly better performance of the global system after the second world war than after the first world war is largely due to more enlightened economic policies — make our case? . . .

A new approach has to start from the idea that the basic responsibility of government is to maximise the welfare of citizens, not to pursue some abstract concept of the global good. People also want to feel that they are shaping the societies in which they live. It may be inevitable that impersonal forces of technology and changing global economic circumstances have profound effects, but it adds insult to injury when governments reach agreements that further cede control to international tribunals. This is especially the case when, for reasons of law or practicality, corporations have disproportionate influence in shaping global agreements.

Many ordinary people see that their incomes are stagnating, or declining, while the people who say “free trade is good for everyone!” have gotten staggeringly rich. A certain skepticism is engendered thereby.