Bad Optics

Headline on Drudge Report, linked to a Daily Mail (U.K.) story concerning the Dallas shootings and the President:

OBAMA GRINS AS NATION MOURNS . . .

Photo of Obama with Cameron at NATO summit in Poland, run with the Daily Mail story, proves the point. Why not grin? Most cops are Republicans, most perps are Democrats.

New PM a Woman

The BBC reports the next Prime Minister of the United (for now) Kingdom will be a woman. The two finalists are Home Secretary Theresa May who favored Remain and Energy Minister Andrea Leadsom who was a strong advocate of Brexit.

Is it too much to hope for another Margaret Thatcher?

Racial Battle Lines

Politico writes that Clinton and Trump are on opposites sides in the police vs. Black Lives Matter activists conflict. Two Trump comments show where his sympathies lie:

I saw them with hate coming down the street last week talking about cops and police and what should be done to them, and that was not good. And I think it is a disgrace they are getting away with it. I think it’s disgraceful the way they are being catered to by the Democrats.

Anyone killing a policeman, policewoman, police officer, anybody killing a police officer — death penalty. It’s going to happen, OK? We can’t let this go.

Executive Director of the National Association of Police Organizations William Johnson doesn't mince words:

It’s a war on cops, and the Obama administration is the Neville Chamberlain of this war.

Clinton has chosen a side, too:

I will call for white people like myself to put ourselves in the shoes of those African-American families. We’re the ones who have to start listening to the legitimate cries from our fellow African-American citizens.

The tribal politics COTTonLINE has predicted are certainly coming to pass.

Can't Stop vs. Can't Do

It's the end of the week and Peggy Noonan has a Wall Street Journal column that, among other things, makes a stylistic comparison of Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton:

He unselfconsciously shares a lot of his internal dialogue, and how he’s experiencing things.

There is something scatty in this but also something interesting, possibly potent.

This dynamic—that he personally connects and entertains, and she doesn’t—will continue, because he can’t stop it and she can’t do it.

In his very personal fashion, Trump is a "great communicator" - Hillary is not. So ... which would you rather listen to on the evening news for the next 4-8 years?

A Risk of Police Abdication

How many shootings like those last night in Dallas before American police officers, like their counterparts in France and Britain, refuse to enter minority neighborhoods? Doing so makes those neighborhoods, more so than today, essentially lawless zones, free-fire zones where anything goes.

Who will be the main sufferers of that refusal? The minority residents of those zones, residients who will be victimized by their neighbors essentially with no recourse except revenge via their local "godfather."

Who will be the main beneficiaries of police abdication? Gangs and gangsters, sellers of "protection." How does this benefit the minority community? Fewer will end in prison but far more will end up mutilated and dead, victims in Thomas Hobbes' "war of all against all."

As Heather MacDonald and others have pointed out, the primary beneficiaries of "broken window" policing have been the law-abiding members of minority communities. Many are alive today because "stop and frisk" enforcement has taken, or kept, guns off the street. Now the "Ferguson effect" is reversing those gains and police abdication would make it much worse.

A Bad Omen

Two (or more) snipers shoot eleven police in Dallas, as they attempted to maintain order at a Black Lives Matter-type demonstration. According to various news sources, at this hour 4 of those have died, others are in serious condition.

Supposedly the two shooters are in custody. I'm surprised they allowed themselves to be taken alive.

The snipers were armed with rifles. At least some sources suggest police-style body armor (so-called "bullet-proof vests) will not stop rifle bullets, particularly if rounds are jacketed or armor-piercing.

If this becomes a pattern, we will see police refusing to turn out for future crowd control duty. Then riots will turn into insurrections followed by military attacks on rebel-held areas, if our leaders have courage. Alternatively, those areas will become no-go zones for police, much like the favelas of Brazil or the banlieues of France.

Update: A fifth Dallas police officer has died of gunshot wounds.

Decline and Fall of California

Edward Gibbon chronicled The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire long after it happened, the books first appeared in the latter 1700s. Modern technology speeds up the process, Victor Davis Hanson is chronicling the decline and fall of California in real time, as it happens.

His latest installment appears in National Review, and he summarizes the CA mess very well.

Some 62 percent of state roads have been rated poor or mediocre. (snip) One-third of Bay Area residents were polled as hoping to leave the area soon.

The basket of California state taxes — sales, income, and gasoline — rates among the highest in the U.S. Yet California roads and K-12 education rank near the bottom.

After years of drought, California has not built a single new reservoir. Instead, scarce fresh aqueduct water is still being diverted to sea.

One in three American welfare recipients resides in California. Almost a quarter of the state population lives below or near the poverty line. Yet the state’s gas and electricity prices are among the nation’s highest.

One in four state residents was not born in the U.S. Current state-funded pension programs are not sustainable.

One-third of California residents admitted to state hospitals for any causes suffer from diabetes, a sometimes-lethal disease often predicated on poor diet, lack of exercise, and excessive weight.

Nearly half of all traffic accidents in the Los Angeles area are classified as hit-and-run collisions.

Ugly outcomes for an originally lovely place. The problems: politics and immigration.

Rasmussen: A Majority Favored Indictment

The guys at Power Line provide a link to a Rasmussen Reports poll taken after FBI Director Comey made his recommendation. The main question was this:

The FBI has concluded that Hillary Clinton potentially exposed top secret information to hostile countries when she used a private e-mail server as secretary of State, but the agency has decided not to seek a criminal indictment of her. Do you agree or disagree with the FBI’s decision not to seek a criminal indictment of Hillary Clinton in this matter?

The findings are more negative than one would expect.

A Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey – taken last night - finds that 37% of Likely U.S. Voters agree with the FBI’s decision. But 54% disagree and believe the FBI should have sought a criminal indictment of Clinton. Ten percent (10%) are undecided.

Sixty-four percent (64%) of Democrats agree with Comey’s decision not to seek an indictment of their party’s presumptive presidential nominee. Seventy-nine percent (79%) of Republicans, 63% of voters not affiliated with either major political party and 25% of Democrats disagree with the decision.

Sizable majorities across nearly every demographic category agree that powerful people get preferential treatment when they break the law.

A quarter of Democrats think Clinton should have been indicted. They'll be Sanders supporters. Independents are trending away from Clinton, too.

Mid Week Snickers

Steven Hayward, who collects cartoons, recaptioned photos, and snarky sayings for Power Line, has a mid-week collection about the Clinton 'pardon' posted. Some favorites:

Photos of Edward Snowden and Hillary Clinton, side by side. Snowden captioned:

Publicly exposed classified information
Wanted for TREASON

Clinton captioned:

Privately exposed classified information
Wanted for PRESIDENT?

A photo of Bill Clinton speaking, while pointing a finger. His words:

I did not have inappropriate discussions about Hillary with that woman, Loretta Lynch.

A photo of a grinning Scarface Al Capone, cigar in mouth, captioned:

The Clinton "Foundation"!
I wish I'd thought of that. 

A photo of a smiling Hillary giving the Nazi salute, captioned:

Sometimes she just can't control it...

A photo of FBI Director James Comey, captioned:

She's guilty as hell
But I don't want to die
Suddenly and Mysteriously

A photo of Hillary giving two thumbs up, captioned:

#Too Big To Jail 

A photo of Hillary's face Photoshopped onto the (elegant) body of Charlise Theron playing the truly evil queen in Snow White and the Huntsman. The voice balloon says:

Yes, I stole the throne.
That's what evil queens do!
Got a problem with that? 

A cartoon American flag with the white stars in the blue field replaced with a single yellow banana.

Think of It As a Trial

FBI Director James Comey told us in clear, unambiguous language that Hillary Clinton is a sleaze, a liar, and careless with the security of these United States. Think of that as her indictment.

As the Democrat's nominee for president, Clinton faces a trial between now and November 8, 2016. We call that trial "a presidential campaign." Because we don't call it a trial, she will be required to testify on her own behalf, albeit not under oath.

Witness Comey has testified. GOP nominee Donald Trump will, I believe, mount a vigorous prosecution. Clinton can mount whatever defense she wishes. Come November 8, she will learn the verdict of an enormous jury of her 'peers' - the voters.

If elected, Clinton can and will treat that as a vindication, a repudiation of the charges against her. If she loses, the public has judged her unworthy, unpresidential and unrepresentative of American values. At that point, we probably have no further need to punish her, although a Trump DOJ might give it a shot.

Paradigm Shift? Maybe Not

George Friedman writes at Geopolitical Futures. Today his topic is the origins and continued usefulness or otherwise of the right vs. left distinction in domestic politics. He believes that distinction is no longer useful, and proposes a new one.

In today's politics, Friedman believes the appropriate distinction is between nationalists and internationalists. In the former group he lumps Trump and Sanders, in the latter Clinton. In Britain one supposes Brexit supporters are nationalists and EU supporters internationalists.

Let's understand something; Friedman's field is foreign policy. Those who study it can usefully be arrayed along a nationalism-internationalism dimension.

However, a typology that lumps Trump and Sanders into the same category does have problems. While they agree about nationalism, they likely disagree about much more.

I begin to conclude a single continuum is not adequate to array all political positions upon. Perhaps a two dimensional space or even a three dimensional space might be more accurate, if also more confusing and difficult for the casually interested to grasp.

Friedman's nationalist/internationalist dichotomy works for the Trump/Clinton contest. How would you use it to distinguish between, say, Donald Trump and Ted Cruz? Or between Trump and Rand Paul?

Character Indictment

Writing at USA Today, James S. Robbins draws the following conclusions from the comments of FBI Director Comey about Hillary Clinton's email mess:

In the view of the FBI, Hillary Clinton is a blundering fool who compromised national security but not a provable arch-criminal. This is not what the country needs in a president. “Dangerously negligent but never indicted” is an extremely low bar to set for the leadership of the free world. And it kills Hillary’s argument that she would be a highly skilled chief executive.

Today’s findings did not put the issue of Hillary Clinton’s ineptitude and possible criminal mishandling of documents to rest by any means. The FBI spared Clinton a criminal indictment, but it did indict her character.

Ironic homage to TV's Mr. Rogers: "Can you say 'unpresidential?'"

Emailgate Postscript

FBI Director James Comey has spoken. Before we decide the Clinton email investigation is over and done, let's see whether the FBI agents who did the investigation are happy with the boss's decision to recommend "no prosecution."

If in the next couple of weeks none use a burner phone to tell a friendly reporter how angry they are at the outcome, how disgusted they feel that Hillary is "too big to indict," then we can conclude this affair is truly over.  Today is much too soon to draw that conclusion.

Cillizza: Clinton's Lies Exposed

The Washington Post's Chris Cillizza is normally in the tank for Democrats, no surprise at WaPo which has a Tower of Pisa-like lean to the left. That only makes his characterization of FBI Director Comey's briefing on the Clinton email investigation more striking, see what Cillizza wrote:

It’s hard to read Comey’s statement as anything other than a wholesale rebuke of the story Clinton and her campaign team have been telling ever since the existence of her private email server came to light in spring 2015. She did send and receive classified emails. The setup did leave her — and the classified information on the server — subject to a possible foreign hack. She and her team did delete emails as personal that contained professional information.

Those are facts, facts delivered by the Justice Department of a Democratic administration. And those facts run absolutely counter to the narrative put forth by the Clinton operation: that this whole thing was a Republican witch-hunt pushed by a bored and adversarial media.

For a candidate already badly struggling on questions of whether she is honest and trustworthy enough to hold the office to which she aspires, Comey’s comments are devastating.

A country dumb enough to elect this deeply dishonest woman president deserves its fate.

The Stench of Clinton Corruption

David Harsanyi is Senior Editor at The Federalist, his topic today is the FBI decision not to recommend prosecution of Hillary Clinton. He concludes:

Many people have been prosecuted for far less, including John Deutch, Sandy Berger, David Petraeus, and lesser-known names. Comey’s own words tell us Hillary should have met a similar fate. Hillary will campaign with Barack Obama today, creating the perception that the fix was in. Yesterday, a week after her husband had a private meeting with the Attorney General, some Democrats signaled through a New York Times story that Hillary would probably rehire Loretta Lynch. The stench of Clinton corruption is back. She is above the law. And there is no one to stop her.

As Michael Walsh wrote, under the nom de plume of David Kahane, as quoted by Ed Driscoll at PJ Media,

Think of the Democratic Party as what it really is: a criminal organization masquerading as a political party.

Quote of the Day

Federal Bureau of Investigation Director James Comey, as quoted by RealClearPolitics' Alexis Simendinger:

Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of the classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless (emphasis added) in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.

Extreme carelessness in handling "very sensitive, highly classified information" is not presidential behavior, by any standard I recognize.

Willful Blindness

I love irony, and I just found a putrid, steaming pile of it at USA Today. Stephen Henderson writes to criticize Donald Trump's notion of making America great again.

Henderson runs through all the usual bumf about how, in times past when the U.S. was doing well in the world, and prosperous at home, there were people left behind.

For blacks and other people of color, and women, whose misfortunes in the land of the free have often persisted in contrast to white, male, majority success.

So, you're asking, where is the irony? At the bottom of the article it lists Henderson as

The editorial page editor of the Detroit Free Press.

OMG, the irony. If there is anyone anywhere in the entire United States who should understand the concept of "America's former greatness," it should be someone from Detroit.

Detroit was once a symbol of all that was great and powerful about the U.S., it was "Motor City." The factories hummed and black people streamed there from all across the South to build cars for the world and more affluent lives for themselves. And everyone loved the Motown Sound.

Today Detroit is a symbol of all that has gone to hell in the U.S.: thousands of abandoned homes, ruined schools, mass poverty and unemployment, civic bankruptcy, crime and dysfunction on steroids.

How someone from Detroit can misunderstand America's former greatness is beyond imagination. The willful blindness is astounding.

A Hard Lesson

Columnist Bret Stephens, writing in The Wall Street Journal, about years of Turkish ambivalence, even support, toward ISIS ... perhaps now ended?

Until recently Mr. Erdogan’s attitude toward Islamic State (sic) matched ambivalence with indifference, to put it diplomatically.

As we have repeatedly noted, those like Erdogan who lie down with dogs, get up with fleas.

All of which reminds me of the lyric of an ancient Johnny Rivers pop song:

Ah, shut up silly woman,
Said that reptile with a grin.
You knew damned well I was a snake
Before you took me in.

Erdogan has learned the hard way ISIS is an equal opportunity 'snake' that will bite anyone, even its supporters. If anything good can come out of the Istanbul airport massacre, that learning could be its silver lining.

BTW, don't pronounce the "g" in Mr. Erdogan's name, it is sort of
ERR-doh-ahn.

Express: Think Dominoes

Mental image of the 28 European Union nations represented by dominoes, 27 standing on end and one, marked "U.K." lying down. Guess what? The next in line is rocking, it's marked "Hungary."

The Daily Express (U.K.) uses that very image to describe the following news story:

In the wake of the UK's Brexit vote and the decision to leave the European Union (EU), the Hungarian President, Janos Ader, has ordered a nationwide referendum on October 2.

The Hungarian people will be asked whether they want to accept any future European Union quota system for resettling migrants.

The question will be: "Do you want the European Union to be entitled to prescribe the mandatory settlement of non-Hungarian citizens in Hungary without the consent of parliament?"

If like me you expect Hungarians will overwhelmingly vote "No," what next? Can the EU do other than stonewall on this issue? I think not. Then, can a Hungarian parliamentary vote to leave the EU be far behind? If forced to bet, that's where my money would be placed.

The very fact of this announcement will encourage Euro-skeptics elsewhere across the EU, in Frnace and the Netherlands, for instance. Perhaps in Denmark as well.

It may turn out many actions emanating from Brussels are unpopular, are unsupported by the people so governed. Hat tip to Lucianne.com for the link.

Deaths of Despair

The Wall Street Journal draws a nearly inescapable conclusion:

White Americans have been hard hit by the loss of manufacturing jobs, and the fact that their lifespans are suffering correlates with ample research showing that earning less is tied to dying earlier.

A physician interviewed for the article called these "deaths of despair," an elegant turn of phrase. I suggest what is happening to lower class whites in the U.S. is akin to what has happened to much of the Russian population: losing hope. The result in both cases has been a drop in life expectancy.