[FOX] The Justice Department may not be pursuing charges against Hillary Clinton over her private email server, but the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee's legal troubles are not over, according to Judge Andrew Napolitano.
On "Fox and Friends" this morning, he explained that there are several investigations into Clinton that are in progress or not yet started, including that she misled Congress and she failed to turn over all of her work-related emails.
Judge Napolitano said the biggest allegation against Clinton, however, is that she made decisions as secretary of state that benefited foreign nationals and foreign states in return for enormous donations to the Clinton Foundation.
"The largest of these? $145 million, and it involved Mrs. Clinton allowing a Canadian to buy shares in a uranium mine in Utah, which he promptly turned around and sold to the Russians, who could never have bought it on their own," Judge Napolitano explained.
He said it's unclear if any of these investigations will lead anywhere, but he anticipates that the FBI will want to resolve them quickly.
"She's about to become the Democratic nominee. The Democratic Party and the American public [have] the right to know if there's more evidence of wrongdoing against this woman," Judge Napolitano said, noting that the easiest case against her is that she misled Congress under oath.
Sorry Judge, but the truth is that Hilda is above petty annoyances like law and being held to account for pandering, lying, malfeasance in office and extortion. She's going to be president because she deserves it in her mind.
[Breitbart] Although former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan said the UK referendum to leave the EU was a "terrible mistake" that led to a "terrible outcome in all respects," he now expects "Brexit" will cause an inevitable return to the "gold standard."
In 1966, Greenspan published "Gold and Economic Freedom" in Ayn Rand's "Objectivist" libertarian newsletter to praise the virtues of the gold standard:
An almost hysterical antagonism toward the gold standard is one issue which unites statists of all persuasions. They seem to sense -- perhaps more clearly and subtly than many consistent defenders of laissez-faire -- that gold and economic freedom are inseparable, that the gold standard is an instrument of laissez-faire and that each implies and requires the other.
[DAWN] The liberal pushback against the establishment’s outlook argues that: (i) the state must not interfere in Afghanistan’s affairs if we expect others not to do the same to us; (ii) the state should promote regional economic integration to improve Indo-Pak ties; and (iii) we should not use hard boy proxies against neighbours because of the instability it creates. All undisputable on normative grounds.
But a hard-core realist would calculate otherwise: (i) will my opponent not gain if I stop interfering in Afghanistan? India has favourable geography with all other regional countries. Why should I not take advantage of my geography vis-à-vis Afghanistan to outmanoeuvre it in this theatre? (ii) Trade with India is my bargaining chip. If I give it up, I’ll lose leverage and my core interest in Kashmire would be permanently compromised. (iii) Am I the only one using proxies? Isn’t this a game that goes on in South Asia and elsewhere?
How does one anchor in liberalism while engaging realism? By explaining that Pakistain’s current strategic outlook is not realist, it is ’hyper-realist’ (an example of realism gone wrong); it defies the two most cardinal principles of realism: the costs of your policy choices must match your capacity and resources; and policy outcomes must be in line with your self-defined goals.
(i) Afghans see Pak policies negatively. The sentiment has made it politically beneficial for Kabul ...the capital of Afghanistan. Home to continuous fighting from 1992 to 1996 between the forces of would-be strongman and Pak ISI/Jamaat-e-Islami sock puppet Gulbuddin Hekmayar and the Northern Alliance, a period which won Hek the title Most Evil Man in the World and didn't do much for the reputations of the Northern Alliance guys either.... to reach out to New Delhi, increasing the latter’s manoeuvring space in Afghanistan, precisely the opposite of what the establishment wants; (ii) engaging regionally on the economic front will increase, not reduce, Pakistain’s leverage over India. Any deal that makes Pakistain the transit route for energy, trade, or transport that a sizeable part of the Indian population depends on will strengthen Pakistain’s bargaining position. And (iii) proxies are directly responsible for much of the internal hard boy chaos Pakistain has faced since 9/11. Pakistain’s capacity and resources no longer allow use of this tool, irrespective of how others may be approaching the option.
Overall, Pakistain’s current policy has led to its growing isolation in the region -- the Indo-Iranian-Afghan clique being the latest example. This is self-inflicted.
Of course, my intent is not to dismiss either Pakistain’s legitimate security concerns or the intrinsic value of the liberal public discourse. But separately, neither is optimal. Pakistain’s foreign policy would gain tremendously if the two sides were to speak more directly and constructively to (instead of past) each other.
The state can help create this space by making the strategic liberals feel more welcome -- for starters, by stopping the ridiculous trend of declaring naysayers unpatriotic or anti-national. And the liberals would do themselves a favour by stepping out of their social media echo chambers and recognising how irrelevant they have become.
Posted by: Fred ||
07/12/2016 00:00 ||
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
[SultanKnish] Hallel Yaffa Ariel, a 13-year-old girl, was asleep when she was murdered in her own bedroom. She had just graduated 8th grade. It was her summer vacation and she was taking it easy. The Muslim terrorist who broke into her bedroom stabbed her over and over again. Eventually he slit her throat.
The mattress that she slept on was soaked in blood. Her room with its casual teenage disarray, clothes tossed around carelessly, was stained red with the last gush of life from the girl who had played there, danced there and dreamed of the future that would never be hers.
The murder happened in Israel, but Hallel was an American citizen. Her government not only failed to protect her, it financed her bloody death. And it will go on rewarding her killer’s family.
Muslim terrorists in Israel, no matter which specific Islamic terrorist group they claim allegiance to, whether they are described as members of a cell or lone wolves, have their attacks funded by the terrorist administration of the Palestinian Authority which provides salaries to terrorists and their families. The Palestinian Authority is funded almost entirely by foreign aid, most of it from us. Obama insisted that Abbas, the terror boss of the Palestinian Authority, had “renounced violence”. This would have come as news to Abbas who boasted, “There is no difference between our policies and those of Hamas.” Last month, an Abbas adviser had said, “Every place you find an Israeli, slit his throat.”
That’s what Mohammed Tarayrah, the Muslim terrorist who murdered Hallel in her bedroom, did.
The core components of the Palestinian Authority, including its official news agency, called him a “martyr”. Mohammed’s mother, who will be richly rewarded by the Palestinian Authority and its international financiers, for her son’s horrific crime, said, "My son is a hero. He made me proud.”
At her funeral, Hallel Yaffa Ariel’s mother tried to hug her daughter one last time. “Halleli, goodbye, sweetie. Have one last hug from mom.”
The United States has officially condemned Hallel’s murder. Its current government however will do nothing to stop the Palestinian Authority from funding terrorism. Instead it will continue using its power to fight for the same cause as Abbas and Mohammed. Hallel was not the first American to be murdered by Muslim terrorists this year. She was the seventh. More at the link
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.