Returning from Freedom Fest in Las Vegas. One of several good presentations was from Nebraska Senator Ben Sasse, who is one of the most grounded and brightest stars on the Conservative horizon. The Wall Street Journal quoted Ben Sasse on the election:
One of the conventions in Philadelphia or Cleveland could still surprise us and nominate someone the Founding Fathers would be proud of, and someone our kids and grand-kids won’t be ashamed of. Ask yourself: Why are these two the most unpopular candidates in the history of presidential polling? Because they are not honest. And everyone knows it.They do not embody the best of America.
If we shrug at public dishonesty—if we normalize candidates who think that grabbing power makes it okay to say whatever they need to in the short-term—then we will be changed by it. Given what we now know about them, choosing to vote for these two individuals is in some ways less about them than it is about us.
The excellent and telling graph above is from Mark Perry’s Carpe Diem. The incredible jump correlates very strongly with higher minimum wages that took place in several large urban areas.
Gordon Crovitz at the Wall Street Journal writes Clinton’s Information Lockdown The private email server was only semiprivate: Putin likely has everything.
No public official since LBJ has gone as far as Hillary Clinton to evade public-disclosure laws. In 2010 her adviser Huma Abedin recommended that she use a government email account, as the State Department required. “I don’t want any risk of the personal being accessible,” Mrs. Clinton responded in an email that has since come to light. She used a private email server for all her communications because this kept both official and personal communications off government servers, where they would have been subject to disclosure under FOIA.
FBI Director James Comey concluded that Mrs. Clinton’s mishandling of classified information in her emails didn’t meet the legal test for a crime because he couldn’t prove that she intended to disclose national secrets. But Mr. Comey testified to Congress last week that the FBI determined that Mrs. Clinton did violate the Federal Records Act, which makes his legal analysis of her intent incomplete. Her most relevant intention was to defy disclosure laws. Her actions had the incidental effect of mishandling confidential communications.
Most ominously, Mr. Comey confirmed that foreign intelligence agencies have more access than Americans to what Mrs. Clinton hid on her home-brew computer. The FBI confirmed that foreign hackers almost certainly raided her unsecure server to get the nation’s top secrets. This includes all 60,000 of her emails—not just the 30,000 she chose to disclose.
Mrs. Clinton’s missing 30,000 emails could still become public. Recent reports indicate that Russian agents hacked the servers of the Clinton Foundation and the Democratic National Committee. Vladimir Putin can now triangulate information from the Clinton emails, the Clinton Foundation and the DNC. He could launch an October surprise to affect the U.S. election by disclosing information Mrs. Clinton tried to keep hidden. Or he could keep the information for himself as a sword over the head of a potential next president.
The risk of Clinton’s negligence or intent is far greater than we think.
Measuring income inequality is more difficult than most realize. Is it a problem if the middle class is shrinking if the reason is that most are moving into the upper class? Why isn’t Obama bragging about this?