A judicial election in Wisconsin shows that it’s still alive and well for 2020.
While I remain no fan of Trump, there is (as usual) no Democrat, in the race or out of it (and it seems like more are now in than out) that I can imagine supporting against him.
A major blow for free speech in academia in Australia. And yes, there should be consequences for people who do this sort of thing.
There remain a lot of unanswered questions.
Let’s hope Horowitz, Barr, and maybe Huber get to the bottom of them in the next couple months.
Yes, what happened here does dwarf Watergate in its corruption and criminality. And yes, it should be, but sadly is not amazing that the Democrats and the media (but I repeat myself) continue to attempt to deny that the previous administration spied on the political campaign of its political opponent.
[Update Tuesday morning]
No, Joe Scarborough (who has descended deep into idiocy since he teamed up with Mika), the FBI investigation was not “done by the book”:
Presumably some of the spying on the Trump campaign was done “by the book,” but that doesn’t include using false information as pretext to spy on Americans, attempting to extort elected officials through bogus investigations, refusing to charge ideological allies who committed crimes, lying to Congress, refusing to respond to congressional document requests, using intelligence and law enforcement as “insurance policies” against political enemies, widespread unmasking of political opponents and dissemination of their information, using foreign spies to produce evidence not permissible in court, circular introduction of “evidence” to government agents that is reintroduced through media leaks, and various other actions taken by federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies.
Scarborough would have you believe that these actions are completely typical and normal, that informants are placed against campaigns all the time. If that’s true, who else are they doing it against? Can Donald Trump’s officials open investigations against the many Democratic candidates without notifying Congress, using bogus opposition research to secure wiretaps? To quote an MSNBC morning host, “Is he that stupid?”
Why, yes. Yes he is.
[Update later Tuesday morning]
Behind the shady plan to spy on the Trump campaign.
[Bumped]
How much will it cost? A conversation with Jim Bridenstine.
These days, supporting Trump and Netenyahu makes you a pariah among American leftist (not “liberal”) Jews.
Bob Zimmerman isn’t impressed.
I’d note that Jackie Wattles is one of CNN’s space reporters (the other is Rachel Crane, who I met at last year’s launch, and who just received a space journalism award in February from the Commercial Space Federation, a few weeks after giving birth).
Speaking of FH coverage, here’s Eric Berger’s take.
[Monday-morning update]
[Bumped]
Can Trump legally move the illegal immigrants to them?
While it does put the Democrats in a logical bind, it may be, though, as the article points out, that he’s being too clever by half:
The plan would put thousands of immigrants in cities that are not only welcoming to them, but also more likely to rebuff federal officials carrying out deportation orders. Many of these locations have more resources to help immigrants make their legal cases to stay in the United States than smaller cities, with some of the nation’s biggest immigration advocacy groups based in places like San Francisco, New York City and Chicago.
Well, that could be an oopsie.
[Update a few minutes later]
Spartacus says that moving illegal immigrants to sanctuary cities “makes us less safe.” Didn’t he get the memo? These are the most wonderful people in the world.
[Update a while later]
Yes, Democrats have no interest in illegal aliens, other than as a route to power. Which makes the irony of them declaring that Trump is using them as “political pawns” exceedingly rich.
…are garbage.
Yes, I’ve always thought this was stupid, since California implemented it. If you don’t wash the reusable bags regularly (and many probably don’t), they’re a public-health nightmare.
Was too easy on Hillary.
Well, duh. He was an incompetent boob. As I’ve long said, that case needed a seasoned prosecutor with RICO experience, not an amiable “distinguished” federal judge. While I can easily believe that Hillary was a bitch to her former lover, I remain skeptical that Vince Foster murdered Vince Foster; he was convicted without a proper trial or investigation.