When FBI Director James Comey decided in July to violate Justice Department guidelines and publicly announce that the FBI would not recommend charges against Hillary Clinton, he explained that he was taking such an exceptional step because the “American people deserve those details in a case of intense public interest.”
Comey’s decision last week to inform Congress that the FBI is now reviewing additional emails that apparently originated from Clinton’s private server has ignited an even more furious debate, with Democrats accusing him of election interference and law breaking.
There’s a reason that the Justice Department has nondisclosure rules about ongoing or closed investigations. Lots of things emerge in investigations that are not true, or do not amount to crimes. Disclosing those things can ruin reputations. So it is typically left to prosecutors to decide what accusations to make public, in the form of an indictment.
Among the people criticizing Comey for his latest foray into radical transparency were former attorney generals Alberto Gonzales and Eric Holder, who both pointed out that it is against Justice Department policy to comment on ongoing investigations, certainly within 60 days of an election.
Comey’s actions have raised lasting questions about when the public interest outweighs the current policy, and whether there should be a “public interest” exception to the Justice Department’s secrecy rules.
In his July announcement, Comey said that “given the importance of the matter, I think unusual transparency is in order.” Part of his goal was clearly to reassert the FBI’s independence from political pressure. “No outside influence of any kind was brought to bear,” he said.
If there were a public interest exception, there are many other high-profile investigations that the Justice Department could be encouraged to discuss.
In 2012, for instance, the Justice Department closed a three-year investigation into CIA torture. The investigation reportedly found that the CIA tortured multiple detainees to death but did not lead to the prosecution of any Bush administration officials. Due to suspicions of meddling by the Obama administration, perhaps the Justice Department should explain why it chose not to prosecute anyone.
In September, Elizabeth Warren noted Comey’s new chattiness and called for a similar level of transparency about why the Justice Department had not brought cases against bankers responsible for the 2008 financial crisis.
“You explained these actions by noting your view that ‘the American people deserve those details in a case of intense public interest,’” Warren wrote in a letter to Comey. “If Secretary Clinton’s email server was of sufficient ‘interest’ to establish a new FBI standard of transparency, then surely the criminal prosecution of those responsible for the 2008 financial crisis should be subject to the same level of transparency.”
A public interest exception could help the government explain why it so often fails to bring powerful people to justice. But so far, Comey only seems interested in applying that exception to Hillary Clinton.
Top photo: FBI Director James Comey prepares to testify before the House Homeland Security Committee on July 14, 2016, in Washington, D.C.
Silicon Valley billionaire (and now pariah) Peter Thiel defended his support for Donald Trump in a speech this morning. The excellent oration wondered from the ignorance of the elites and the bankruptcy of the nation, to the endless and pointless wars and America's slumping quality of life...
* * *
Full Transcript:
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR HAVING ME HERE.
EVERYONE KNOWS WE HAVE BEEN LIVING THROUGH A CRAZY ELECTION YEAR. REAL EVENTS SEEM LIKE THE REHEARSALS FOR SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE.
ONLY AN OUTBREAK OF INSANITY WOULD SEEM TO ACCOUNT FOR THE UNPRECEDENTED FACT THAT THIS YEAR, A POLITICAL OUTSIDER MANAGED TO WIN A MAJOR PARTY NOMINATION.
TO THE PEOPLE WHO ARE USED TO INFLUENCING OUR CHOICES, THE WEALTHY PEOPLE WHO GIVE MONEY AND THE COMMENTATORS WHO GIVE REASONS WHY, IT ALL SEEMS LIKE A BAD DREAM.
DONORS DON'T WANT TO FIND OUT WHY WE GOT HERE, THEY JUST WANT TO MOVE ON. COME NOVEMBER 9, THEY HOPE EVERYONE ELSE WILL GO BACK TO BUSINESS AS USUAL. BUT IT IS THIS HEEDLESSNESS: THE TEMPTATION TO IGNORE IN DIFFICULT REALITIES INDULGED IN BY OUR CITIZENS THAT GOT US WHERE WE ARE TODAY.
A LOT OF SUCCESSFUL PEOPLE ARE TOO PROUD TO ADMIT IT SINCE IT SEEMS TO PUT THEIR SUCCESS IN QUESTION. BUT THE TRUTH IS, NO MATTER HOW CRAZY THIS ELECTION SEEMS, IT IS LESS CRAZY THAN THE CONDITION OF OUR COUNTRY. JUST LOOK AT THE GENERATION THAT SUPPLIES MOST OF OUR LEADERS. THE BABY BOOMERS. THEY ARE ENTERING RETIREMENT IN A STATE OF ACTUARIAL BANKRUPTCY. 54% OF THOSE OVER THE AGE OF 55 HAVE LESS THAN ONE YEARS WORTH OF SAVINGS TO THEIR NAME.
THAT IS A PROBLEM, ESPECIALLY WHEN THIS IS THE ONLY COUNTRY WHERE YOU HAVE TO PAY UP TO 10 TIMES AS MUCH FOR SIMPLE MEDICINES AS YOU WOULD PAY ANYWHERE ELSE. AMERICA'S OVERPRICED HEALTH CARE SYSTEM MIGHT HELP SUBSIDIZE THE REST OF THE WORLD, BUT THAT DOES NOT HELP AMERICANS WHO CANNOT AFFORD IT AND THEY HAVE STARTED TO NOTICE.
OUR YOUNGEST CITIZENS MAY NOT HAVE MEDICAL BILLS, BUT THEIR COLLEGE TUITION KEEPS ON INCREASING FASTER THAN THE RATE OF INFLATION, ADDING MORE EVERY YEAR TO OUR $1.3 TRILLION MOUNTAIN OF STUDENT DEBT. AMERICA HAS BECOME THE ONLY COUNTRY WHERE STUDENTS TAKE ON LOANS THEY CAN NEVER ESCAPE, NOT EVEN BY DECLARING BANKRUPTCY.
STUCK IN THIS BROKEN SYSTEM, MILLENNIALS ARE THE FIRST GENERATION THAT EXPECT THEIR OWN LIVES TO BE WORSE THAN THE LIVES OF THEIR PARENTS. WHILE AMERICAN FAMILY EXPENSES HAVE BEEN INCREASING RELENTLESSLY, THEIR INCOMES HAVE BEEN STAGNANT. IN REAL DOLLARS, IMMEDIATE HOUSEHOLD MAKES LESS MONEY TODAY THAT MADE 17 YEARS AGO. NEARLY HALF OF AMERICANS WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO COME UP WITH $400 IF THEY NEEDED IT FOR AN EMERGENCY.
YET, WHILE HOUSEHOLDS STRUGGLED TO KEEP UP WITH THE CHALLENGES OF EVERYDAY LIFE, THE GOVERNMENT IS WASTING TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS ON TAXPAYER MONEY ON FARAWAY WARS. RIGHT NOW, WE'RE FIGHTING FIVE OF THEM. IN IRAQ, SYRIA, LIBYA, AND SOMALIA.
IN THE WEALTHY SUBURBS OF WASHINGTON DC, PEOPLE ARE DOING JUST FINE. WHERE I WORK IN SILICON VALLEY, PEOPLE ARE DOING JUST GREAT. BUT MOST AMERICANS DON'T LIVE BY THE BELTWAY OR THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY. MOST AMERICANS HAVE NOT BEEN PART OF THAT PERSPECTIVE. IT SHOULDN'T BE SURPRISING TO SEE PEOPLE VOTING FOR BERNIE SANDERS OR DONALD TRUMP, WHO IS THE ONLY OUTSIDER (VERY FEW PEOPLE WHO VOTE FOR PRESIDENT HAVE EVER THOUGHT OF DOING SOMETHING SO EXTREME AS RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT. THE PEOPLE WHO RUN ARE OFTEN POLARIZING).
THIS ELECTION YEAR, BOTH MAJOR CANDIDATES ARE IMPERFECT PEOPLE TO SAY THE LEAST. I DON'T AGREE WITH EVERYTHING DONALD TRUMP HAS SAID AND DONE, AND I DON'T THINK THE MILLIONS OF OTHER PEOPLE VOTING FOR HIM DO EITHER. NOBODY THINKS HIS COMMENTS ABOUT WOMEN WERE ACCEPTABLE. I AGREE, THEY WERE CLEARLY OFFENSIVE AND INAPPROPRIATE. BUT I DON'T THINK THE VOTERS PULL THE LEVER TO ENDORSE A CANDIDATE'S FLAWS.
IT IS NOT A LACK OF JUDGMENT THAT LEADS AMERICANS TO VOTE FOR TRUMP, WE ARE VOTING FOR TRUMP BECAUSE WE JUDGE THE LEADERSHIP OF OUR COUNTRY TO HAVE FAILED.
THIS JUDGMENT HAS BEEN HARD TO ACCEPT FOR SOME OF THE COUNTRIES MOST FORTUNATE, SOCIALLY PROMINENT PEOPLE. IT CERTAINLY HAS BEEN HARD TO ACCEPT FOR SILICON VALLEY, WHERE MANY PEOPLE HAVE LEARNED TO KEEP QUIET IF THEY DISSENT FROM THE COASTAL BUBBLE. LOUDER VOICES HAVE SENT A MESSAGE THAT THEY DO NOT INTEND TO TOLERATE THE VIEWS OF ONE HALF OF THE COUNTRY.
THIS INTOLERANCE HAS TAKEN ON SOME BIZARRE FORMS. THE ADVOCATE, A MAGAZINE WHICH ONCE PRAISED ME AS A GAY INNOVATOR, EVEN PUBLISHED AN ARTICLE SAYING THAT AS OF NOW I AM, AND I QUOTE "NOT A GAY MAN" BECAUSE I DON'T AGREE WITH THEIR POLITICS. THE LIE IN THE BUZZWORD OF DIVERSITY COULD NOT BE MADE MORE CLEAR. IF YOU DON'T CONFORM, THEN YOU DON'T COUNT AS DIVERSE, NO MATTER WHAT YOUR PERSONAL BACKGROUND.
FACED WITH SUCH CONTEMPT, WHY DO VOTERS STILL SUPPORT DONALD TRUMP? EVEN IF THEY THINK THE AMERICAN SITUATION IS SERIOUS, WHY DO THEY THINK TRUMP OF ALL PEOPLE CAN MAKE IT BETTER?
I THINK IT IS BECAUSE OF THE BIG THINGS THAT TRUMP GETS RIGHT. FOR EXAMPLE, FREE TRADE HAS NOT WORKED OUT WELL FOR ALL OF AMERICA. IT HELPS TRUMP THAT THE OTHER SIDE JUST DOES NOT GET IT. ALL OF OUR ELITES TREAT FREE TRADE AND EXPLAIN THAT CHEAP IMPORTS MAKE EVERYONE A WINNER ACCORDING TO ECONOMIC THEORY. BUT IN ACTUAL PRACTICE, WE'VE LOST TENS OF THOUSANDS OF FACTORIES AND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO FOREIGN TRADE. HEARTLAND HAS BEEN DEVASTATED. MAYBE ELITES REALLY BELIEVE NO ONE LOSES OR MAYBE THEY DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT TOO MUCH BECAUSE THEY THINK THEY ARE AMONG THE WINNERS.
THE SHEER SIZE OF THE U.S. TRADE DEFICIT SHOWS SOMETHING HAS GONE BADLY WRONG. THE MOST DEVELOPED COUNTRY IN THE WORLD SHOULD BE EXPORTING CAPITAL TO LESS DEVELOPED COUNTRIES. INSTEAD, THE UNITED STATES IS IMPORTING MORE THAN $500 BILLION EVERY YEAR. THAT MONEY FLOWS INTO FINANCIAL ASSETS, DISTORTS OUR ECONOMY IN FAVOR OF MORE BANKING AND MORE FINANCIAL'S ASIAN AND GIVES WELL-CONNECTED PEOPLE WHO BENEFIT A REASON TO DEFEND THE STATUS QUO. BUT NOT EVERYONE BENEFITS, AND THE TRUMP VOTERS KNOW IT.
TRUMP VOTERS ARE ALSO TIRED OF WAR. WE HAVE BEEN AT WAR FOR 15 YEARS AND WE HAVE SPENT MORE THAN $4.6 TRILLION. MORE THAN 2 MILLION PEOPLE HAVE LOST THEIR LIVES AND MORE THAN 5000 AMERICAN SOLDIERS HAVE BEEN KILLED. BUT WE HAVE NOT ONE. THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION PROMISED $50 BILLION COULD BRING DEMOCRACY TO IRAQ. INSTEAD, WE SQUANDERED 40 TIMES AS MUCH TO BRING ABOUT CHAOS. EVEN AFTER THESE BIPARTISAN FAILURES, THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY IS MORE HAWKISH TODAY THAN AT ANY TIME SINCE IT BEGAN THE WAR IN VIETNAM. HARKING BACK TO THE NO-FLY ZONE BILL CLINTON ENFORCED OVER IRAQ BEFORE BUSH COSTS FAILED WAR, NOW HILLARY CLINTON HAS CALLED FOR A NO-FLY ZONE OVER SYRIA. INCREDIBLY, THAT WOULD BE A MISTAKE EVEN MORE RECKLESS THAN INVADING IRAQ. SINCE MOST OF THE PLANES FLYING OVER SYRIA ARE RUSSIAN PLANES, CLINTON'S PROPOSED COURSE OF ACTION WOULD INVOLVE US IN A MESSY CIVIL WAR -- IT WOULD RISK A DIRECT NUCLEAR CONFLICT.
WHAT EXPLAINS THIS EAGERNESS TO ESCALATE A DANGEROUS SITUATION? HOW COULD HILLARY CLINTON BE SO WILDLY OVEROPTIMISTIC ABOUT THE OUTCOME OF WORK?
I WOULD SUGGEST IT COMES FROM A LOT OF PRACTICE. FOR A LONG TIME, OUR ELITES HAVE BEEN IN THE POWER A LONG TIME, OUR ELITES HAVE BEEN IN THE HABIT OF DENYING DIFFICULT REALITIES. THAT IS HOW BUBBLES FORM. WHEREVER THERE'S A HARD PROBLEM BUT PEOPLE WANT TO BELIEVE IN AN EASY SOLUTION, THEY WILL BE TEMPTED TO DENY REALITY AND INFLATED BUBBLE. SOMETHING ABOUT THE EXPERIENCE OF THE BABY BOOMERS, WHOSE LIVES HAVE BEEN SO MUCH EASIER THAN THEIR PARENTS OR THEIR CHILDREN HAS LED THEM TO BUY INTO BUBBLES AGAIN AND AGAIN. THE TRADE BUBBLE SAYS EVERYONE IS A WINNER. THE WAR BUBBLE SAYS VICTORY IS JUST AROUND THE CORNER, BUT THESE OVEROPTIMISTIC STORIES SIMPLY HAVE NOT BEEN TRUE AND VOTERS ARE TIRED OF BEING LIED TO.
IT WAS BOTH INSANE AND SOMEHOW INEVITABLE THAT D.C. INSIDERS EXPECTED THIS ELECTION TO BE A RERUN BETWEEN THE TWO POLITICAL DYNASTIES WHO LET US THROUGH THE TWO MOST GIGANTIC FINANCIAL BUBBLES OF OUR TIME. PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH PRESIDED OVER THE INFLATION OF THE HOUSING BUBBLE SO BIG THAT IT'S COLLAPSE IS STILL CAUSING ECONOMIC STAGNATION TODAY. BUT WHAT IS STRANGELY FORGOTTEN IS THAT THE LAST DECADE HOUSING BUBBLE WAS JUST AN ATTEMPT TO MAKE UP FOR THE GAINS THAT HAVE BEEN LOST THE DECADE BEFORE THAT. IN THE 1990'S, PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON PRESIDED OVER AN ENORMOUS STOCK MARKET BUBBLE AND DEVASTATING CRASH IN 2000 JUST AS HIS SECOND TERM WAS COMING TO AN END. THAT IS HOW LONG THE SAME PEOPLE HAVE BEEN PURSUING THE SAME DISASTROUS POLICIES.
NOW THAT SOMEONE DIFFERENT IS IN THE RUNNING, SOMEONE WHO REJECTS THE STORIES THAT TELL US EVERYTHING IS FINE, HIS LARGER-THAN-LIFE PERSONA ATTRACTS A LOT OF ATTENTION. NOBODY WOULD SUGGEST DONALD TRUMP IS A HUMBLE MAN. BUT THE BIG THINGS, HE IS RIGHT ABOUT AN AMOUNT TO A MUCH-NEEDED DOSE OF HUMILITY. HE HAS QUESTIONED THE POOR -- THE CORE CONCEPT OF AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM.
HE DOESN'T THINK THE FORCE OF OPTIMISM ALONE CAN CHANGE REALITY WITHOUT HARD WORK. JUST AS MUCH AS IS IS ABOUT MAKING AMERICA GREAT, TRUMP'S AGENDA IS ABOUT MAKING AMERICA A NORMAL COUNTRY, A NORMAL COUNTRY DOES NOT HAVE A HALF TRILLION DOLLAR TRADE DEFICIT. A NORMAL COUNTRY DOES NOT FIGHT FIVE SIMULTANEOUS UNDECLARED WARS.
IN A NORMAL COUNTRY, THE GOVERNMENT ACTUALLY DOES ITS JOB. TODAY, IT IS IMPORTANT TO RECOGNIZE THE GOVERNMENT HAS A JOB TO DO. VOTERS ARE TIRED OF HEARING CONSERVATIVE POLITICIANS SAYING GOVERNMENT NEVER WORKS. THEY KNOW GOVERNMENT WAS NOT ALWAYS THIS BROKEN. THE MANHATTAN PROJECT, THE INTERSTATE HIGHWAY SYSTEM, THE APOLLO PROGRAM, WHATEVER YOU THINK OF THESE VENTURES, YOU CANNOT DOUBT THE COMPETENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT THAT GOT THEM DONE, BUT WE HAVE FALLEN VERY FAR FROM THAT STANDARD. WE CANNOT LET FREE-MARKET IDEOLOGY SERVE AS AN EXCUSE FOR DECLINE.
NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENS IN THIS ELECTION, WHAT TRUMP REPRESENTS IS NOT CRAZY AND IT'S NOT GOING AWAY. HE POINTS TOWARD A NEW REPUBLICAN PARTY BE ON THE DOGMAS OF REAGANISM. HE POINTS BEYOND THE REMAKING OF ONE PARTY TO A NEW AMERICAN POLITICS THAT OVERCOMES NILE, REJECTS BUBBLE THINKING AND RECKONS WITH REALITY. WHEN THE DISTRACTING SPECTACLES OF THIS ELECTION SEASON ARE OVER AND THE HISTORY OF OUR TIME IS WRITTEN, THE ONLY IMPORTANT QUESTION WILL BE WHETHER OR NOT THAT NEW POLITICS CAME TOO LATE. THANK YOU.
ORIGINAL LINK
Could these connections be enough to implicate the Clinton Foundation in the alleged early vote rigging in Texas? As usual, the internet has come through as the ultimate watchdog while the supposed safeguards of our democracy have failed. A Gab…
In the 24 hours since FBI Director Comey dropped perhaps the biggest bombshell of the entire Presidential campaign, sending Democrats (and media) scrambling headless-chicken-like for answers (and blame-scaping), does anyone else find it odd that 'FBI Emails' does not appear to be a hot topic, trending, big deal on any social media?
Word has reached me from Washington that the FBI has reopened the Hillary case of her violation of US National Security protocols, not because of the content of the new email releases, but because voter support for Trump seems to be overwhelming, while Hillary has cancelled appearances due to inability to muster a crowd. The popular vote leaves the FBI far out on the limb for its corrupt clearance of Hillary. The agency now has to redeem itself.
I myself do not know what precisely to think. Having been at the top of the Washington hierarchy for a quarter century, I have seen many mistaken judgments. At one time I had subpoena power over the CIA and was able to inform President Reagan that the CIA had misled him. He took note and proceeded with his policy of ending the Cold War with the Soviets. On other issues I have been mistaken, because I assumed that there was more integrity in government than actually exists.
However, FBI director Comey did not need to reopen the case against Hillary simply because some new incriminating emails appeared. Having dismissed the other incriminating evidence, these emails could have passed unremarked.
The problem for the FBI, which once was a trusted American institution, but no longer is, is that there is no longer any doubt that Donald Trump will win the popular vote for president of the United States. His appearances are so heavily attended that thousands are turned away by local fire/occupancy regulations. In contrast, Hillary has curtailed her appearances, because she doesn’t draw more than 30 or 40 people.
Americans are sick to death of the corrupt Clintons and the corrupt American media. The Clintons are so completely bought-and-paid-for by the Oligarchy that they were able to outspend Hollywood on their daughter’s wedding, dropping $3,000,000 on the event.
Nevertheless, I don’t underestimate the power of the Oligarchy. As Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury I experienced the Oligarchy’s power. If I had not been backed by the President of the United States, I would have been destroyed.
Indeed, the Oligarchy is still trying to destroy me.
Possibly Trump, as his enemies allerge, is just another fake, like Obama who misled the electorate. However, Trump attacks the Oligarchy so strongly that it is hard to believe that Trump isn’t real. Trump is asking for a bullet like John F. Kennedy, like Robert Kennedy, like Martin Luther King, like George Wallace.
In Amerika, dissidents are exterminated.
Trump is up against voting machines over which he has no control. If there are no INDEPENDENT exit polls, Trump can easily be robbed of the election, as the Texas early voting scandal indicates, with the electronic machines assigning Trump votes to Hillary. The “glitch” doesn’t assign any Hillary votes to Trump.
My expectation is that, unless Trump’s popular vote is so overwhelming, the electoral collage vote will be stolen. Because of the absence of any valid reporting by the presstitutes, I don’t know what impact the orchestrated election of Hillary would have on the electorate. Possibly, Americans will break out of The Matrix and take to the streets.
I beleve that Hillary in the Oval Office would convince the Russians and the Chinese that their national survival requires a pre-emptive nuclear attack on the crazed, insane government of the United States, the complete narcisstic state that in the words of Hillary and Obama is “the exceptional, indispensible country,” empowered by History to impose its will on the world. This crazed American agenda is not something that Russia and China will accept.
Here is Donald Trump speaking to Americans in words Americans have been waiting to hear:
I do not agree with Trump on many issues, but the American people do. For me and for the world, the importance of Trump is the prospect of peace with Russia. Nuclear war makes every other problem irrelevant.
If Hillary is installed by the Oligarchy—this is a word used by former Democratic President Jimmy Carter who said that the US is no longer a functioning democracy but is ruled by an Oligarchy—war with Russia and China will be upon us.
After 15 years the Taliban and ISIS still run wild in the Middle East despite the efforts of the American “superpower.” Unable to defeat a few lightly armied Taiban after 15 years, what prospects does the enfeebled US have of winning a conflict with Russia and China?
None whatsoever.
The United States has had an entire generation of people born into a war for which the purpose is inexplicable. Why these wars? Why this endless slaughter of women and children and endless columns of refugees overwhelming all of Europe desperately striving to escape Washington’s wars of world hegemony. Why do not the total dumbshits in Washington hear when the President of Russia says that “Russia can no longer tolerate the state of affairs that Washington has created in the world.”
The unjustified arrogance of Washington, a washed up Third World State, is likely to destroy life on earth. No greater danger to life exists than Washington. We have to hope that Trump can clean out the Augean Stables.
I
Lebanese Muslim Shiite women (Credit: Getty/Patrick Baz)
In a new 90-second video ad, a Muslim-focused political action committee rightly slams Donald Trump for his sinister proposal to ban Muslims from entering the United States.
While Trump is wrong-minded as he pounds the drumbeat of “us vs. them” with the Islamic world, I also hope liberals can move beyond blind defense of the Muslim religion and assess it with greater nuance. I say this as someone who has endured considerable alienation by challenging the premises of Mormonism, my childhood faith (even after facing discrimination growing up because of my religion). While initially painful, thinking about Mormonism objectively has broadened my worldview and allowed me greater ability to analyze any institution, religious or otherwise.
I wish many Muslims and liberals would be so objective when looking at the brutally misogynistic behavior associated with some Muslims’ interpretations of sharia and reject the knee-jerk reaction that paints anyone who questions the modern Muslim world as Islamophobic. The refusal to do so is chilling those of us who unequivocally believe in women’s rights, who believe in freedom of expression, who believe in rationality and critical thinking. Last week in a #SalonTalks interview, author Amani Al-Khatahtbeh, who is otherwise incredibly talented and articulate, essentially said that the horrible French move to ban the “burkini” is essentially on par with an anti-woman acid attack; this is as false equivalency.
Bill Maher often wisely points out the hypocrisy of liberals and feminists whose calls for equality stop at the borders of Islamic thought and Muslim-majority countries. Liberals often take shots at Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a heroine who has risked more to dismantle the patriarchy than any American woman like Al-Khatahtbeh, who is lucky to be an American and not subjected to the obscenely anti-woman practices of genital mutilation, arranged marriage, acid attacks and more that many Muslim girls not living in the West are forced to endure.
Pew has done broad research on Muslims’ views of women. A disappointingly high percentage of Muslims worldwide, across all countries, believe a woman must obey her husband. Pew reports that Muslims in South Asia and Southeast Asia overwhelmingly hold this view, and that in all countries surveyed in these regions, some 90 percent or more say wives must obey their husbands. And in the countries surveyed in the Middle East and North Africa, about 75 percent or more say the same.
Then there is the issue of the veil. There is broad disagreement among Muslim-majority nations about whether women have the choice to remain uncovered or be forced to wear a veil, a textbook definition of patriarchy.
The sexist attitudes run deep and keep women in economic subservience. According to Pew, very few Muslim-majority countries have a majority of respondents who believe that men and women should receive equal inheritance.
Sadly, the United Nations turns a blind eye to the abuses against women, in part emboldened by U.S. policy toward the Middle East.
As Ida Lichter, author of “Muslim Women Reformers: Inspiring Voices Against Oppression,” points out:
“Defenders of women’s rights have been thwarted by the U.S. Administration’s disregard of reformers, and backing for the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood, despite Egypt and Tunisia deposing their Brotherhood affiliated governments. Women’s rights were also hindered in the UN when Iran was elected to the UN Commission on the Status of Women (CSW), and Islamist Sudan was nominated to join the UN Human Rights Council and the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), which elects members of CSW. Although the UN does important humanitarian work, it is overgrown with the weeds of a dysfunctional bureaucracy and spineless leadership, and has become a watering hole for states that are prepared to sanction sex discrimination and extremist ideology without fear of serious challenge by the world body.”
Some liberal observers have argued that global misogyny is agnostic; it can exist in any country dominated by any religion. For them, the Muslim world’s misogyny is not inherently Muslim, but rather a twisted interpretation of Islamic law. And for this I am proud of liberal, rational Muslims: for being powerful voices calling for a reformed, moderated and pro-woman interpretation of Islam. Their voices must be bolstered and amplified.
Yet the truth remains that substantial majorities of Muslims in the Middle East, South Asia and Africa believe that sharia should be the basis of law in their countries. These Muslim majorities do not believe in the separation of church and state. It boggles the mind how Western liberals can hyperventilate about a harmless Christmas tree or the phrase “In God We Trust” even as Muslim countries are explicitly using sharia to defend their misogyny.
I have many Muslim friends, including women who are like sisters to me. I’ve lived and traveled extensively throughout the Middle East — I speak from a position of respect, not one of denial. There is much to admire about Muslim faith and culture. Just as I’m very proud of my Mormon friends for taking a principled moral stand against the bigotry of Donald Trump, I’m proud of many Muslims who have fought against the onslaught of hate released by Trump on Khizr and Ghazala Khan, a Gold Star, American Muslim family whose son perished fighting overseas to defend America. As a fellow religious minority, Mormons join with Muslims in understanding that Trump’s call for a ban on the followers of an entire faith is discriminatory and utterly un-American.
Even while speaking out and defending against the persecution of Muslims, non-Muslim observers should be able to point out that women receive subhuman treatment in many Muslim-majority countries without being accused of attacking Islam. We are simply saying that there are major problems in these countries and let’s do something about it rather than defending Islam or attacking Islam. We are not anti-Muslim simply by being 100 percent pro-woman.
Election week is only about a week away. No matter who wins, rage will break out across the US landscape because, for the time being, the flames are kept minimally under a lid by hope on each side that their candidate will win. If Hellary Clinton loses, the establishment will come unhinged. If Trump loses, the Tumpettes are already sounding their war cry against the election results. Nothing is going to settle down no matter who wins; but to give Trump’s supporters some encouragement, should the worst befall them, I offer the following silver lining:
As horrible as I believe a Hillary presidency would be — with its suffocating smog of endless scandals and swirl of smoke clouds from all the wars she would continue to instigate — as she so clearly did while senator and then secretary of state — a Hillary presidency would have one great benefit: it would in fairly short order bring clarity for the entire nation to the fact that the nation’s economic ruin is the fault of the establishment (something about which many are obviously in great denial or they wouldn’t vote for Hillary in the first place).
Hillary is as establishment as you get; so is Obama; so was George Bush (both of them); so are most of the Republicans and Democrats in congress. While that is stating the obvious, the point I am working up to is that a Hillary victory is a chance for a total flush four years from now.
The US economy is beyond saving at this point, anyway, regardless of who wins, and it will take a crash to push the reset button and wake America up. Having that crash hit while the establishment fully holds the reins should leave 100% of the blame at their feet, and it’s not the much longer to wait.
I was thinking of writing about this hope when I read the following from David Stockman about what Hillary will face as president if she wins, with which I entirely agree, though I’d give a much shorter timeframe for the inevitable chain of events to come:
…because things are going to blow up in the next four years, there will be a stock market crash, there will be a recession, the annual deficit will be back in the plus trillion dollar category very soon and it will all come down on her head and on the watch of the establishment….
And maybe that will wake up the public, because it’s going to be bad. And what Trump proved in this campaign is that the establishment, you know, will do anything politically to stop a challenge. But if we have the crisis that I know is coming, then maybe this thing can be busted wide open and we have a chance to clear the decks and start again.(Newsmax)
That, I think, is the best outcome from this election — national clarity when it all comes down as it most certainly is beyond saving at this point. For that reason only, I think a Hillary victory would actually be the best thing to happen to us (economically, but I am not sure it is worth the other non-financial costs we’d pay). The crash of the entire economy around Hillary’s feet would galvanize the resistance to the establishment and all but assure an anti-establishment victory across the entire political landscape in the next election.
Signs of indifference that needs to break
The flatlining stock market, which I wrote about in my last article, barely had enough energy to raise an eyebrow today at the ostensibly good news that GDP growth doubled since last quarter to almost 3% — a number associated with fairly normal US economic growth.
It didn’t go up because, “Yay, the economy is finally running at normal speed” or down because “Yikes, that means the Fed will be more likely to raise interest rates.” Instead of either response, like a dying person, the market couldn’t have cared less what was happening economically in the world today. That says to me the crash is imminent.
This same day, it registered the kind of upheaval that will come from the establishment if Trump wins. The market immediately plunged a hundred points when news broke of another FBI investigation that could cause trouble for Hillary. Not to worry, though, the Fed or government fix kicked in shortly thereafter and brought the market back up to its flatline status quo.
My biggest concern if Hillary wins is that Trump (and with him all anti-establishment voters) will be made into the establishment’s scapegoat. They have already been preparing for this in consort with their media supporters, through whom they plan to say to American voters, “We told you the stock market would crash and take the economy down with it you elected Trump. See what happens when you don’t listen to us and support the superior establishment.”
Of course, a world raging with wars, as I’ve shown Hellary has planned, is a steep price to pay for the opportunity to lay all blame for our economic doom at the establishment’s feet. That’s why it’s hard to say a Hillary victory, besides meaning I have to endure four years of nausea is worth the cost. I have no idea how bad the cost in wars might actually get if she wins.
The US economy is sinking fast, regardless of today’s GDP number
Consider the following recent headlines as a sign of the way the national and global economy continue to slide into the abyss of the Epocalypse — regardless of what the GDP data indicated today: (The headlines help explain the continual decent that is seen in the flatlining graph of the Dow I presented earlier this week even during a time when the government appears to have pulled out all stops to keep the economy afloat through the election year.)
“Caterpillar Posts Lower Earnings, Cuts 2016 Outlook” Cat has been in relentless decline for the last three years because heavy industry all over the world (including in the US) is in decline, so companies are not buying heavy equipment.
“Twitter Said to Plan Hundreds More Job Cuts as Soon as This Week” Twitter is symptomatic of a decline throughout high-tech. The euphoric ride up for unprofitable companies came to an end more than a year ago, just as happened when the euphoric dot-com boom went bust. Even Apple, which carried the Tech sector on its back for years, reported its first annual decline in sales since 2001 due to a 17% drop in China, and China was the market that was maintaining some demand for the rest of the world.
“Italian Bank to Cut 2,600 Jobs, Close Branches in Rescue Overhaul” Italy’s oldest bank and Germany’s oldest and largest bank continue to teeter on the edge of bankruptcy. These are some of the oldest banks in the world — banks that survived the Great Depression — but their days are clearly numbered. “The bank published the plan Tuesday as it posted a 1.15 billion-euro ($1.3 billion) loss for the three months through September.”
“Ford to Idle Four Factories as Slowing Sales Bloat Inventory” The press was crowing in their mind-numbing way about how well American auto manufacturers were doing all of last year and at the start of this year. I said it wasn’t so — that US automakers would find themselves in a bad situation this year because because they’re now counting leases as sales and would soon be getting back millions of used cars and because they repeated all their past financial gimmicks: absurdly slack credit terms on their internal auto loans looked just like what auto manufacturers were doing before the economic crisis of 2007-8 … when I also said automakers would be going down within a year. Those slack loan terms, coupled with an increase in defaulting loans, made me say last year, “What’s your end game for next year once you have pulled sales from that year into the present with these easy-to-walk-away-from terms?” Well, we’re there … again! Its even falling apart in the area of Ford’s greatest strength — its truck and SUV plants. Mustang sales, too, dropped 32% at the start of this auto year (September).
“Harley-Davidson Plans to Cut Jobs as US Sales Fall 7 Percent” Things are not looking any better for the nation’s oldest continuously operating motorcycle manufacturer either. “The motorcycle manufacturer cited continued slowed U.S. motorcycle industry growth as the main factor for weaker retail sales.”
“Bank of America has a recession warning that’s downright ‘scary’” BofA joins HSBC to say it sees a chilling trend: “We are seven years into a full-fledged, all out, central bankers doing everything they can to stimulate demand.” Yet demand is beyond evasive. “There are a lot of itchy trigger fingers. There’s lot of violent trades that can really roil a fairly complacent environment.”
“China facing full-blown banking crisis, world’s top financial watchdog warns” “The Bank for International Settlements warned in its quarterly report that China’s ‘credit to GDP gap’ has reached 30.1, the highest to date and in a different league altogether from any other major country tracked by the institution. It is also significantly higher than the … the US subprime bubble before the Lehman crisis. Studies of earlier banking crises around the world over the last sixty years suggest that any score above ten requires careful monitoring.”
“Biggest market crash in HISTORY is coming as HUGE debt bubble bursts, top investor warns” Michael Pento, a bond fund manager who has written for The Huffington Post, Bloomberg, Peak Prosperity, USA Watchdog, and who has often appeared on CNBC says we are now living in “the most dangerous [time] I have ever witnessed in my entire life – and I’ve been investing for over 25 years. The membrane has been stretched so wide and so tight that its about to burst.”
“Why the Stock Market Could Be Headed for a 1987-like Crash” Chris Matthews writes in Fortune that “we’re in the middle of the longest earnings recession since 2008…. What’s worse, estimates show that they will decline for a sixth straight quarter…. But Jim Bianco, president of Bianco Research argues that even this forecast might be overly optimistic…. Big picture, all the lines are headed down.”
That is far from a list of all that is currently going wrong with the US economy. It’s simply the headlines that caught my eye in the last week or two. The economy is dying to where the establishment can barely even keep the stock market alive at a time when it would be devastating for them to have it crash. Nothing has the power to save us from this fate, not even the braggadocios Trump.
If Hillary wins, all hell will break loose. It’s a rage that needs to happen, and it will be next to impossible to deny where the blame lies (I think, although the grip of economic denial has been indefatigable so far). Not saying I wish a Hillary victory on the nation or the world; just trying to be an optimist by pointing out the silver lining on the clouds.
Clarity and breaking out of economic denial so that we get a real grasp of what we need to do are more important for the nation than anyone’s poorly conceived economic recovery plan at this point. Until the nation gets real about what its problems are, its not going to find any real answers to them. That has to start with the majority of people coming to grips with the fact that the establishment doesn’t have any answers at all. It’s not even looking for an answer.
WAR is a racket. It always has been. It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small “inside” group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes.
Do the committees that oversee the vast U.S. spying apparatus take intelligence community whistleblowers seriously? Do they earnestly investigate reports of waste, fraud, abuse, professional negligence, or crimes against the Constitution reported by employees or contractors working for agencies like the CIA or NSA? For the last 20 years, the answer has been a resounding “no.”
My own experience in 1995-96 is illustrative. Over a two-year period working with my wife, Robin (who was a CIA detailee to a Senate committee at the time), we discovered that, contrary to the public statements by then-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Colin Powell and other senior George H. W. Bush administration officials (including CIA Director John Deutch), American troops had in fact been exposed to chemical agents during and after the 1991 war with Saddam Hussein. While the Senate Banking Committee under then-Chairman Don Riegle, D-Mich., was trying to uncover the truth of this, officials at the Pentagon and CIA were working to bury it.
At the CIA, I objected internally — and was immediately placed under investigation by the CIA’s Office of Security. That became clear just days after we delivered the first of our several internal briefings to increasingly senior officials at the CIA and other intelligence agencies. In February 1995, I received a phone call from CIA Security asking whether I’d had any contacts with the media. I had not, but I had mentioned to CIA officials we’d met with that I knew that the CBS newsmagazine “60 Minutes” was working on a piece about the Gulf War chemical cover-up. This call would not be the last I’d receive from CIA Security about the matter, nor the only action the agency would take against us.
In the spring of 1995, a former manager of Robin’s discreetly pulled her aside and said that CIA Security agents were asking questions about us, talking to every single person with or for whom either of us had worked. I seemed to be the special focus of their attention, and the last question they asked our friends, colleagues, and former managers was, “Do you believe Pat Eddington would allow his conscience to override the secrecy agreement he signed?”
The agency didn’t care about helping to find out why hundreds of thousands of American Desert Storm veterans were ill. All it cared about was whether I’d keep my mouth shut about what the secret documents and reports in its databases had to say about the potential or actual chemical exposures to our troops.
Seeing the writing on the wall, I began working on what would become a book about our experience: “Gassed in the Gulf.” The agency tried to block publication of the book and attempted to reclassify hundreds of previously declassified Department of Defense and CIA intelligence reports that helped us make our case. After I filed a lawsuit, the agency yielded. We left and became whistleblowers, our story a front-page sensation just days before the 1996 presidential election. Within six months, the CIA was forced to admit that it had indeed been withholding data on such chemical exposures, which were a possible cause of the post-war illnesses that would ultimately affect about one-third of the nearly 700,000 U.S. troops who served in Kuwait and Iraq. None of the CIA or Pentagon officials who perpetrated the cover-up were fired or prosecuted.
A U.S. soldier, wearing a gas mask and chemical warfare equipment, stands in front of a French armored vehicle from the 6th Foreign Legion Engineers Regiment in Saudia Arabia on Feb. 9, 1991.
Photo: Michel Gangne/AFP/Getty Images
Around this time, a small, dedicated group of NSA employees was trying to solve another national security problem: how to make it possible for the government to eavesdrop successfully in the age of the internet.
Led by NSA crypto-mathematician Bill Binney, the team developed an ingenious technical program called ThinThread, which allowed the NSA to process incoming surveillance information but segregate and discard the communications of innocent Americans. The program was innovative, cheap, and badly needed. But just months before the 9/11 attacks, then-NSA Director Michael Hayden rejected ThinThread in favor of an untested, expensive alternative called Trailblazer, offered by a Washington, D.C.-based defense contractor. It became a pricey boondoggle that never produced a single piece of intelligence.
Enraged that a program they believed could have prevented the 9/11 attacks had been jettisoned, Binney and his colleagues privately approached the House Intelligence Committee. When that failed to produce results, they issued a formal complaint to the Defense Department’s inspector general.
The subsequent investigation validated the allegations of the NSA ThinThread team. But in spite of this vindication, all who had filed the complaint were subsequently investigated by the FBI on bogus charges of leaking classified information. The episode is now the subject of an Office of Special Counsel whistleblower reprisal investigation, involving former NSA senior manager and ThinThread proponent Tom Drake. I have read the Defense Department inspector general report, which is still almost completely classified, and filed a Freedom of Information Act request seeking its declassification. The Pentagon has stonewalled my request for more than a year and a half.
Congress has made no effort to investigate any of this.
Within the small, tight-knit circle of ex-intelligence community whistleblowers and the nonprofit organizations that work on their behalf, the ThinThread/Trailblazer case became infamous. By early 2013, it had come to the attention of a young NSA contractor named Edward Snowden, who had surreptitiously collected damaging proof that the NSA had taken the very technology that Binney and his team had developed and turned it inward, on the American public.
After blowing the whistle to multiple news organizations, Snowden made clear that the terrible experience of the NSA ThinThread team had led him to believe that taking his concerns to Congress would be pointless. Given the subsequent revelations by then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and then-Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., that they privately objected to the George W. Bush administration’s domestic spying program but did nothing to stop it, Snowden’s decision was entirely rational.
In September 2016, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., released a three-page summary of a classified 36-page “damage assessment” on Snowden’s revelations. Although it claimed that Snowden’s disclosures had “caused tremendous damage to national security,” the committee produced no evidence that the leaks had led to the death of a single American. The committee did imply that Snowden had given American secrets to the Russians — an allegation no prosecutor involved in the case has made and not contained in the Justice Department’s indictment against him.
Most outrageously, the committee claimed that laws at the time provided protection for Snowden to blow the whistle through official channels. That’s false. Legal safeguards for contractors working for the NSA and other spy agencies existed in pilot form between 2008 and 2012. When they were up for renewal in the annual Defense Department policy bill in 2013, they were rejected — by the House Intelligence Committee.
We now live in a country where the committees charged with reining in excessive domestic spying instead too often act as apologists and attack dogs for the agencies they are charged with regulating. As a result, it’s pretty clear that those intelligence agencies — and not the elected representatives of the American people — are really running the show in Washington.
Top photo: A photographer closes in on CIA Director John Deutch on Capitol Hill on Feb. 22, 1996, prior to a hearing of the Senate Intelligence Committee. Deutch and other intelligence officials had made statements about the use of chemical weapons during the Gulf War—that no such weapons were used—that contradicted the findings of Eddington and his wife.
Scientists are planning to release an army of millions of modified mosquitoes in areas of Brazil and Colombia. They say the unusual approach is an attempt to provide “revolutionary protection” against mosquito-borne diseases such as Zika and chikungunya.
