Hillary “Emails” Clinton had her immediate staff hold a number of conference calls with “supporters, party operatives, former staffers and elected officials” to assure them of her enthusiasm and support of their efforts for the coming campaign.
Those on the receiving end were hoping for more.
Some supporters said they were hoping to hear more specifics about campaign events or voter outreach strategies.
Typical Democrats. “More specifics” and “outreach strategies”—aren’t these what those on the receiving end supposed to develop? Even if not, do not these worthies have the initiative to work on those questions without waiting to be told what to do?
The Drug Enforcement Agency has the way of the Secret Service, at least in Colombia: partying with prostitutes. DEA seems to have taken the thing a step further, though: the parties appear to be funded by the drug cartels the partying agents were sent to investigate.
The agents’ punishment? Two weeks of suspension. Naturally, Congress is…dismayed…both with the behavior and with the wrist-slap. How the anger is expressed is instructive, though. DEA Administrator Michelle Leonhart testified in front of the House Oversight Committee that there’s not much more she can do; civil service system law and regulations keep her from doing more. She’s not even allowed to have input on the sanctions to be applied for such misbehavior.
Fighting raged overnight [Tuesday night] and in the early hours on Tuesday on the outskirts of the rebel stronghold of Donetsk in eastern Ukraine despite an agreement reached by the Ukrainian and Russian foreign ministers a day earlier.
And a significant fraction of the rebel troops in the fight are Russian Green Men.
Russia wants Ukraine back in the Russian empire. Full stop.
Permanent link to this post
(79 words, estimated 19 secs reading time)
…to the plaint that Congress’ bill asserting its capacity to approve or disapprove Obama’s coming Executive Agreement with Iran regarding the latter’s nuclear weapons program would fatally imperil those negotiations?
Now the guy who sits in the Secretary of State’s chair, John Kerry, is saying
Yesterday there was a compromise reached in Washington regarding congressional input. We are confident about our ability for the president to negotiate an agreement, and to do so with the ability to make the world safer.
The only change of substance was to withdraw a requirement that President Barack Obama certify every 90 days that Iran was not supporting terrorist organizations anymore.
Here’s an example of the 10th Amendment in action:
While the United States and Iran edge closer to a nuclear deal, nearly two dozen US states are imposing their own sanctions against Tehran—a move some say could derail fragile talks between the two countries.
The states, though, say they aren’t budging. In fact, Kansas and Mississippi are even considering adding more sanctions.
Several states across the country have put their own measures in place to punish Iran-linked companies operating in certain sectors of its economy, directing public pension funds with billions of dollars in assets to divesting from the firms and sometimes barring them from public contracts[.]
Hillary Clinton’s foreign policy cred.
At a moment when foreign policy figures to loom larger in this presidential race than in recent election cycles, none of Mrs Clinton’s prospective opponents can match her credentials as a four-year secretary of state. Ordinarily that would be a strong selling point. Yet Mrs Clinton also is tied to Obama-era overseas initiatives that have largely proved unpopular and she’ll be hard-pressed to cite concrete achievements that she made happen on her watch, analysts say.
Ronald Bailey at Reason had this iteration of “more.” He brought this item up, even though it’s been described before:
In the absence of the higher minimum wage, employers would generally hire more workers to meet an increased demand for fast food. Boosting the minimum wage means that the revenues that would have otherwise been used to hire new workers is not available. The end result: fewer jobs created and more folks unemployed.
But then he cited some actual research:
President Barack Obama told Congress to be quiet regarding his “deal” with Iran over the latter’s nuclear weapons program. Now he’s sending his guy who sits in the Secretary of State’s chair to tell them directly.
[Secretary of State John] Kerry said he would brief House members on Monday and senators on Tuesday. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee is set to take up the legislation on the same day.
The administration should be free to negotiate without interference until the June 30 deadline for a final agreement, Kerry said on CBS’ Face the Nation.
CIA Director John Brennan had this to say at the Harvard Institute of Politics regarding the nuclear weapons deal “negotiated” with Iran:
I must tell you the individuals who say this deal provides a pathway for Iran to a bomb are being wholly disingenuous, in my view, if they know the facts, understand what’s required for a program[.]
How dare you criticize your Betters!?
Sit down, and shut up.
As The Wall Street Journal put it,
Mr Brennan’s naked public partisanship harms the CIA by making whatever it now says about Iran simply unbelievable.
President Barack Obama really doesn’t like it when folks disagree with him.
Obama said that Arizona Senator John McCain (R, AZ) had suggested Secretary of State John Kerry’s explanations of the framework agreement in Iran were “somehow less trustworthy” than those of Iran’s supreme leader.
Never mind that Kerry released a FAQ on the framework “deal” (after it had been…negotiated…and before the proposed terms had been discussed with Congress) that’s radically different from what the Iranians thought they had tentatively agreed. Released by a man who once, in public and sworn testimony, accused our military of wholesale, routine war crimes. A man who tried to avoid his home state’s luxury taxes by berthing his multi-million dollar yacht in another state. Yeah, Kerry is entirely trustworthy.