Archive for 2018

BLADE RUNNER 2018: Is Erdogan’s Turkey on the edge of a crash? “The Turkish lira is falling, prices are rising. Experts warn that the Turkish economy is close to collapse, but President Erdogan wants growth at any price — and even more power.”

More:

The economic situation has not been this bad in years. Recently, the rating agency Fitch downgraded Turkey’s creditworthiness further into junk territory: the credit rating of the country is now BB with a negative outlook. This puts Turkey on par with countries like Guatemala or Costa Rica.

But President Recep Tayyip Erdogan seems to worry little about rating agencies. And after his reelection in June, he is now more powerful than ever. Now he is head of state, head of his party and head of the government — all in one person.

He is promising his country a glorious future. “Our economy is on the right track and everyone can see how we invest,” the Hurriyet newspaper quoted him as saying recently. Turkey will soon become “one of the ten largest economic powers in the world,” Erdogan promised after his swearing-in for his current term.

Sure thing. But first his wider powers are going to need wider powers.

BRAD SMITH: The IRS gives up power for once, and the Left goes nuts.

Finally, we might ask why, absent a very good reason, the federal government should ever be collecting data on our memberships and donations in the first place. What business of the government is it if you belong to a fishing club or the National Association of Realtors, or want to support Everytown for Gun Safety or the NRA?

Nonetheless, government agencies can be remarkably unwilling to surrender power or information. So praise is in order for Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and acting IRS Commissioner David Kautter for doing away with the requirement. . . .

Even more interesting, however, is the response of the progressive Left and the press. Because some of the organizations now exempt from filing donor information speak out about issues, or make some political expenditures (legally limited by tax law), this modest regulatory rescission is being portrayed as a victory for “dark money” in politics. Now, the Institute for Free Speech has pointed out repeatedly that “dark money” is the political bogeyman of our times — it amounts to a tiny percentage of political spending in the U.S., and attempts to completely end it intrude on the freedom of law-abiding people without providing any useful information to the public.

But let’s assume, for argument’s sake, that stopping “dark money” is an important goal. Here’s the thing: The information the IRS had been collecting was required by law to be kept private! So not reporting the information to the IRS has no legal effect at all on “dark money.” Think about that.

In short, what the progressive and media criticism of the IRS’s decision boils down to is some combination of the following:

They want to whip up hysteria about “dark money,” even when it is irrelevant to the policy at issue.
They want the IRS to illegally leak the data collected.
They hope that a database of donor memberships might be used by a future progressive administration for some unspecified purpose.
They simply don’t want to give up any potential power over Americans and perhaps hope, if the government is already collecting this information, it will be easier to pass more laws intruding on privacy in the future.

Yeah, I don’t trust them.

IN-DEPTH REVIEW: Bolshevik Hybrid Warfare.

Whenever one is reviewing a long book about a narrow subject, one must provide the reader with motivation as much as explanation. Laura Engelstein’s Russia in Flames: War, Revolution, Civil War 1914-1921 is a detailed but readable history of the collapse of the Russian Empire, the Russian Civil War, and the birth of the Soviet Union. It manages a clean structure, well-organized chronologically into six parts and, within those parts, into chapters laying out the course of events in different regions of the hemisphere-spanning Russian empire and giving voice to the mosaic complexity of the Eastern Front, the revolution, and the civil war. What the book has going for it, compared to projects of similar scope like Orlando Figes’ A People’s Tragedy: The Russian Revolution: 1891-1924 or classics by Shiela Fitzpatrick or Richard Pipes (both entitled The Russian Revolution),[1]is a relentless commitment to the geographic diversity within which the revolution occurred and the ever-shifting organizations and coalitions operating in that geography. This commitment to the sheer scale of the revolution gives the book enduring value and insight for those interested in strategy today, particularly in terms of political warfare.

This one has gone (near) the top of my ever-lengthening Kindle to-read list.

THIS SORT OF THING IS ONLY IMMORAL WHEN BUSINESSES DO IT: Bill Nelson Campaign Still Dodging Taxes by Employing No Full-Time Staffers.

Florida Democrat Bill Nelson’s reelection campaign was still not employing full-time staffers entering the final quarter of the midterm election cycle, it’s newest filing with the Federal Election Commission shows.

The Washington Free Beacon reported earlier this month that Nelson had been using independent contractors instead of employees, allowing it to avoid costly payroll expenditures every other campaign incurs.

Nelson’s latest filing, covering activity from April through the end of June, shows the campaign continued the structure throughout the quarter, making regular payments to contractors for campaign work including fundraising, research, communications, compliance, and strategic planning. There were again no reported disbursements for payroll tax or employee health insurance, costs directly associated with having full-time staffers.

The Nelson campaign criticized the Washington Free Beacon‘s initial report, telling local reporters it was based on “out-of-date information” even though it was based on the most recent information available. The campaign did not respond to a request for comment on the new filing, which further confirms the initial report and shows the practice continued through at least June.

Well, that doesn’t sound very forthcoming.

YOUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK — AND PLAY: Justice Department Wants Refund from Sheriff Who Bought a Dodge Charger Hellcat.

The U.S. Department of Justice is demanding that Georgia Sheriff Butch Conway reimburse the government for his procurement of a 707-horsepower Dodge Charger Hellcat, which it does not believe falls under the umbrella of reasonable purchases for a police department.

However, the DOJ isn’t questioning whether the department could make use of such a vehicle, as the federal government already approved its purchase. It just isn’t sure that Conway is being responsible with it, since it sounds like the Gwinnett Country Sheriff may be using it as his daily driver.

Related?

We have far more government than we need, and far less than we pay for.

STAY TUNED: Will New Jersey Send A Republican To The Senate?

Democrats are defending 26 Senate seats, Republicans only nine. Five Democratic incumbents are running in states that 21 months ago experienced Donald Trump swoons: He won Missouri by 18.6 points, Indiana by 19.2, Montana by 20.4, North Dakota by 35.7, West Virginia by 42.1. In New Jersey, which Hillary Clinton carried by 14.1 points, Menendez was supposed to be safe.

The Republicans’ most recent presidential victory in New Jersey was in 1988. In the subsequent seven elections, the Democratic presidential candidates’ average margin of victory was almost 13 points. This state last elected a Republican senator (Clifford Case) in 1972. This 46-year drought might end in November.

Robert Hugin, 63, grew up in blue-collar Union City, as did Menendez, with whom Hugin served as student representatives to the local board of education. Hugin became the first in his family to graduate from college (Princeton), served 14 years in the Marine Corps (his two sons are now officers), then went into business, rising to run a pharmaceutical company. This sin, although scarlet in the overheated public mind, might be less so than Menendez’s transgressions detailed in the letter.

With hilarious understatement, James Madison, who was not known for hilarity, said, “Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm.” A unanimous Senate ethics committee (three Republicans, three Democrats) in its April 26 letter to Menendez said: “By this letter, you are hereby severely admonished.” Menendez, the letter said, brought “discredit upon the Senate” by the following:

“Over a six-year period,” Menendez “knowingly and repeatedly accepted gifts of significant value” from a friend (an ophthalmologist who, the letter did not say, is currently appealing a 17-year sentence for $73 million of fraudulent Medicare billings). The gifts included air travel on private and commercial flights, a luxury hotel stay in Paris (the committee’s letter is demurely silent about Menendez’s accompanying girlfriend) and 19 visits to a Dominican Republic villa. He neither publicly reported, nor received written permission for, these gifts. In addition, the committee said, Menendez improperly intervened with federal agencies with “persistent advocacy” for his friend’s business interests.

Menendez got off light. The voters should turn him out. But it’s New Jersey, so. . . .

AND… FROM THE NAME IT’S ANOTHER VIOLENT METHODIST…  Toronto shooter named.

LET’S FACE IT, FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES THE DEMS HAVE BECOME THAT CRAZY GUY SCREAMING THE WORLD IS ENDING AND PEEING ON HIMSELF AT THE CORNER OF THE STREET:  Democrats: Treason!! Voters: Ho Hum.

IMPORTANT NEWS ON THE LAW OF SELF-DEFENSE: If a person shoves you, you can shove back. You don’t have the right to kill him. You can only use lethal force to meet reasonably anticipated lethal force. That can be unarmed force, under the right circumstances, but it usually isn’t. And “Stand Your Ground” laws don’t change that.

Note that the same rules apply to police, though that’s more theoretical than real in application.

But for much more detailed analysis, from an actual expert on the subject, see this post by Andrew Branca at Legal Insurrection.

Rather surprisingly, Pinellas County Sheriff Bob Gualtieri has announced that Drejka would not be arrested over the shooting, on the basis of Florida’s “stand your ground” self-defense law. The facts of this confrontation do not, however, involve any duty-to-retreat issues with respect to Drejka’s use-of-force–he was attacked without apparent warning, and immediately knocked to the ground, and thus placed in a physical position from which physical retreat with safety would have been difficult, if not impossible. . . .

Based on the video footage of this confrontation, I expect a reasonable argument could be made that Drejka’s initial presentation of his handgun was lawful–he’d just been shoved hard to the ground without warning, put in a physical position from which unarmed self-defense would be extremely difficult especially against an attacker nearly half his age who still loomed angrily over him. It’s not hard to see how Drejka could have reasonably formed a reasonable perception of imminent serious bodily injury, which would warrant deadly defensive force.

As often happens when a gun is presented in self-defense, however, here the initial aggressor (McGlockton) decided that he’d goofed in bringing his fists to a gun fight, and he immediately began moving backwards, distancing himself from Drejka. This ought to have been apparent to McGlockton during the two second pause between his pointing the gun and shooting. Had McGlockton maintained his position, and particularly if he had made any movement apparently consistent with continuing to attack Drejka, the fired shot may well have been warranted.

Given that McGlockton was backing up, however, this strikes me as a scenario that plenty of prosecutors would be happy to present to a jury, and argue that the fired shot was not lawful, and which I expect in this instance plenty of police officers would determine at least created probably cause to believe that the shot was not lawful.

Of course, there may well be facts not known to us that could have shaped the Sheriff’s conclusion to not arrest. That, of course, is not the end of this matter, either criminally or civilly. The evidence is being presented to local prosecutors, who will decide whether to take the matter to trial, and the girlfriend of McGlockton, with whom she had three children, has already announced her intention to seek civil compensation for the killing of her children’s father (even throwing out the legal term-of-art “wrongful death”).

If you shove someone to the ground and start kicking them in the head, you may be a candidate to be shot in self defense. If you shove someone to the ground and back away, not so much.

And here’s video of the Sheriff’s statement, with commentary by Branca. Excerpt:

For example, he appears to believe that the legal standard for reasonableness is strictly subjective, which is not the case. One must indeed be in subjective fear, but that fear must be objectively reasonable.

He also talks at some length about his belief that the Sheriff’s office can’t substitute their judgment for that of the shooter—but, of course, they can, and they do, routinely, when they conclude that the facts differ from the claimed judgment of a suspect. And at the same time he explicitly recognizes that now that he’s passed on the case to the prosecutor’s office, so the prosecutor can decide whether to charge, the prosecutor is in the position of substituting their judgment for that of the shooter.

Also, the Sheriff’s implication that the recent change in Florida self-defense immunity law that once a person claims self-defense immunity the law places the burden on the state to disprove immunity by clear and convincing evidence, “this doesn’t happen anywhere else, where one person raises a claim and the other person has to disprove it” (I’m paraphrasing) is nonsense.

In 49 states, when a person raises self-defense as a legal defense the burden of proof shifts to the state to disprove self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt (an even higher standard of proof). The Sheriff may be correct if the discussion is limited to pre-trial immunity hearings, but a burden shift to the state is the norm in self-defense generally.

Frankly, I can see reasonable arguments for either a lawful or an unlawful shoot here. A decision not to arrest is reasonable on these facts, and a decision to arrest would have been reasonable on these facts. But the idea that the Sheriff is obviously and explicitly prohibited by law from making an arrest on these facts is nonsense.

Well, at least it’s not Broward County, where the deputies would have run from an armed man.

SEVEN EPIC MOVIES THAT TURN 40 THIS YEAR.

I’m not sure if “epic” works for most of these films, but they’re all more watchable than 99% of Hollywood’s current product.

OPEN THREAD: Make me proud.