Last week, the DOJ quietly closed the chapter on it's investigation of the Ferguson, Missouri incident that sparked protests across the US. Turns out, as with the Zimmerman case in Florida, the DOJ was unable to find any indication that Officer Darren Wilson had violated Michael Brown's civil rights when he confronted and shot Brown in what he claimed to be self-defense following an altercation.
The Spectacle Blog
Europeans may as well try pacifism and bone-idleness, as starting two world wars that killed more than a hundred million people didn’t work out so well for them (or for the rest of the world, come to that). At least all those idle hours gives them more time to think of things to criticize America for. Those on the Left like to refer to this America-derangement-syndrome as sophistication. I call it penis envy.
The media has not yet come to learn that Scott Walker is driven by his loyal opposition. Everything they do, Scott Walker gobbles up like he's collecting the souls of the faithful departed. And with each passing "scandal," Scott Walker only grows stronger. Their anger, their fear, their aggression. They are mother's milk to the second term Wisconsin governor.
Unable to pin on him the ludicrous claim that he believes teachers unions and ISIS are one and the same - based on a throwaway comment he made, it seemed, specifically to draw media ire - the local media in Wisconsin have turned to more pressing, nearby matters, such as why Scott Walker's spokeswomen are just so darned hot.
Isthmus, an alternative weekly newspaper out of Madison, raised the allegation in Tell All, a regular advice column.
What I find most intriguing about the Hillary Clinton e-mail story is that it was broken by The New York Times.
If the NYT was vested in getting Hillary elected to the White House would it feature such a story?
Of course, the NYT wants a Democrat to succeed Barack Obama, preferably a woman. But Hillary isn't the only one who can fill those shoes now with the emergence of Elizabeth Warren.
I got to see President Obama's response to Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu's speech while I was eating lunch. I'm surprised I managed to keep my food down.
Obama spoke to the media in the Oval Office before meeting with new Defense Secretary Ash Carter. While the headlines from Obama's response was that Bibi offered "nothing new" and had "no viable alternatives" to the administration's present course of action, I was struck by something else Obama said in response to a question from Julie Pace of the AP about the appropriateness of Netanyahu's speech. Here is the part that caught my attention:
And I think it's important for us to stay focused on the problem at hand. And the specific problem that is being debated right now is not whether we trust the Iranian regime or not -- we don’t trust them. It's not whether Iran engages in destabilizing activities -- everybody agrees with that. The central question is, how can we stop them from getting a nuclear weapon.
Benjamin Netanyahu is basically a badass. His speech today, in front of a joint session of Congress, delivered what was expected and, hopefully, has changed the focus of the conversation over Iran from one of whether the speech was appropriate, to whether the administration's actions can possibly have any effect on Iran's nuclear weapons program. The answer to the later is, quite obviously, from Bibi's speech and elsewhere, pretty much "no."
But not everyone was as positively impacted by Bibi's speech. Nancy Pelosi, for example, who sat in the chamber and rolled her eyes through Netanyahu's speech rather than skipping it like some of her colleagues, was "near tears," but not in a good way.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) hammered Benjamin Netanyahu Tuesday, saying the Israeli prime minister's speech to Congress was an "insult" to the country.
Last night, I listed the 50 Democrats who wouldn't be in attendance in Congress to hear Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's speech.
Well, Elizabeth Warren made it 51. I can't say I'm surprised given her opposition to sanctions against Iran.
This is something we should remember if she decides to run for President.
After nearly six weeks worth of temper tantrums from the Obama Administration and other Democrats because House Speaker John Boehner had the temerity to invite Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to make his case against a nuclear deal with Iran Bibi spoke his peace this morning.
Let me make the following three observations.
First, given the attacks Netanyahu has sustained against his integrity and judgment by the Obama Administration, he has every right to strike back with vengeance. Instead, Netanyahu killed President Obama with kindness making a point of thanking him for assistance during the 2010 Carmel forest fire, the 2011 siege of the Israeli Embassy in Cairo and for missile interceptors against Hamas last year.
I'm sure this only infuriated Obama more because he knew what was coming.
Second, Netanyahu made a point of linking Iran with ISIS:
Don’t be fooled. The battle between Iran and ISIS doesn’t turn Iran into a friend of America.
Now we know why Barry didn’t want Bibi to address the Congress. Netanyahu’s analysis of the Middle East, Israel, and Iran featured both coherence and purpose, two things missing from this administration’s foreign policy. The stark difference in approach might be what one would expect as between a commando and a community organizer.
House Republicans have until Friday to decide how best to recover from the Senate's capituation to Democratic demands over funding the Department of Homeland Security, but it seems they'd prefer to simply get the inevitable over with.
While you were applauding Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu's powerful speech to both houses of Congress, Rep. John Boehner was negotiating a deal that would move a clean DHS spending bill forward with nary a mention of the Amnesty Executive Order that began this fight in the first place.
After months of indecision and strife, Boehner told GOP lawmakers he plans to allow a vote as early as Tuesday on a clean bill to fund the Homeland Security Department through the rest of the fiscal year, dashing the hopes of conservatives who want to tie the money to language clocking President Obama’s executive actions on immigration…
“So he just caved in there,” Rep. Tim Huelskamp said of Boehner, adding: “Guess he forgot that a number of us had recommended that this was a poor strategy back in December."...