At the tail end of a Wall Street Journal article discussing the relationship between Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and Congress (and in particular the House Freedom Caucus), Rosenstein made this remark:
We have a responsibility to work with the Congress. They have a responsibility to understand their duty is not to interfere.
This is a breathtaking lack of understanding by a Federal lawyer. Oversight by Congress does not mean simply watching. Interference is absolutely required if Congress, through its oversight, detects inappropriate or wrong behaviors.
Or would Rosenstein insist that funding cuts—Congress doing its job—are interference?
Mine has been getting a workout lately. It’s pegged again.
Russian lawmakers visited Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in the aftermath of the US-UK-French strikes on the center of al-Assad’s chemical weapons production facilities and before the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons “inspects” the site of al-Assad’s chemical attack on women and children that prompted the allied response. Among other things,
[t]he Syrian president also reportedly accepted an invitation to visit Siberia….
I recall an earlier time of invitations to visit Siberia.
The Seattle Times has the shameful story.
…a brazen attempt by [Washington State] lawmakers to exempt themselves from the state’s Public Records Act. These elected officials are evading the ruling of a judge and contradicting Attorney General Bob Ferguson, both of whom said legislators are subject to the law.
[SB 6617] tries to permanently ban access to lawmakers’ past emails, text messages and calendars, as well as past disciplinary proceedings and complaints about lawmakers’ conduct.
What are these guys trying to cover up?
The Communist Party of China has before it a Constitutional amendment that would abolish term limits for the Presidency of the People’s Republic of China. The CPC is expected to ratify the amendment, along with a number of others that also will enhance the power and apparent prestige of the incumbent, Xi Jingping.
The CPC is expected to ratify….
It’s interesting that the Chinese people aren’t allowed a voice in the document the CPC uses to subjugate them. This is the contempt for ordinary citizens that the men of the government of the People’s Republic of China will inflict on all the nations over which the PRC gains control.
The Supreme Court heard arguments the other day on an Ohio voter registration law. That law removes voters from the roll if they haven’t voted over a two-year period and don’t respond to a follow-up notice from Ohio’s Secretary of State.
It’s a partisan case from the Left’s perspective: those opposing the law argue, with some justification, that those who live in urban regions (and who happen to vote Democratic) relocate more frequently than do those who live in the ‘burbs and out in the country (and who happen to vote Republican). This would seem to put Democrats at a disadvantage in elections since they’re more likely to have not voted over a two-year period and not responded to the follow-up notice.
The FBI’s management says it supports strong encryption, but out of the other side of their mouth they claim that the FBI’s
inability to access data [is] “an urgent public safety issue” that requires “significant innovation.”
Here we go again. Heads up for FBI Director making plain what he’s now only hinting at: he wants a backdoor into our encryption so Government can enter whenever it takes a notion to.
FBI Director Chris Wray is seeking to reboot the privacy-versus-security debate surrounding law enforcement’s inability to access data on electronic devices protected by powerful encryption.
Information belongs to the government of the People’s Republic of China, apparently. Especially when it’s investment information, information that might facilitate the prosperity of individual citizens and their businesses, information that might lessen their dependence on and control by, that government.
A Chinese quasi-regulator told the country’s top raters of investment funds to stop publicizing the sizes of money-market mutual funds, in what is being seen as another attempt by Beijing to slow the industry’s rapid pace of asset accumulation.
Because an informed investor can make his own decisions instead of the decisions Government wants him to make.
Long live Mao.
People’s Republic of China’s newly crowned Emperor and President-for-Life Xi Jinping has mounted his throne and is starting to exercise his power.
Under Mr Xi’s orders, mandatory political-study sessions emphasizing his speeches and policies were revived for all party members.
So was the Mao-era practice of members criticizing others and themselves.
Can we look forward to reeducation camps, too? Maybe. Here’s Xi on necessary fervor and “right thinking:”
We must continue to rid ourselves of any virus that erodes the party’s fabric[.]
China’s Communist Party granted President Xi Jinping authority on a par with Chairman Mao, revising its constitution to inscribe a political theory bearing Mr Xi’s name and endorse policies to make the nation a world power.
A weeklong party congress that ended Tuesday appeared to give Mr Xi unassailable power as he begins a second five-year term.
The move was unanimous, with not a single Party member out of 2,336 willing to vote no—an indication of Xi’s already present overweening power.
Spain’s Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy had and has an obligation to uphold the Spanish Constitution which, among other things, made the recent Catalan independence referendum illegal even to hold. I’ve written elsewhere about what I think of his tactics in his enforcement campaign.
Whether Rajoy ordered his Policia Nacional and his Guardia Civil to engage in the violence they inflicted in Catalonia (nearly 900 Catalan casualties) or they acted on their own initiative, it’s hard to believe Rajoy was so stupid as to not know the violence would ensue when he ordered them in.