Please note that you can leave a comment on any of our posts at our Facebook page.  Subscribers can also comment at length at our Angel's Corner Forum.

SECOND SUBSCRIPTION DRIVE OF 2018

LAST WEEK!

(Report to readers:  Five days to go before our drive ends.  Please do subscribe or donate.)

Subscriptions and donations make our work possible.  Without them, we could not continue.  

By participating you'll be supporting our efforts, but you'll also receive our twice-a-week emailed page, the Angel's Corner.  It features posts by subscribers and donators like you, and is our most popular feature.  Our readers can write, many have vast experience in areas we cover, and they have plenty to say.   

Details on subscribing and donating are in the right-hand column of this page, opposite these words, under SUBSCRIPTONS. 

If you're already a subscriber or donator, please consider raising your participation to secure our future. 

You can join us through PayPal, or use SENDINC, which has become widely accepted by our readers.  If you prefer a regular mail subscription, just email me at service@urgentagenda.com, and I'll give you our mailing address. 

We hope to welcome you.

JUNE 19,  2018

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 11:54 P.M. ET: 

ETERNAL VIGILANCE, MY FRIEND – FROM AFP:   LONDON, United Kingdom – An extremist who plotted a suicide attack on British Prime Minister Theresa May wanted to decapitate her in a bomb and knife assault, a court heard Tuesday.  Naa’imur Zakariyah Rahman, 20, allegedly wanted to make “big news” by storming Downing Street as May spoke outside her office.  Rahman was fully prepared to die in the attack, England’s Old Bailey central criminal court in London heard.  I wonder how many similar attacks are being planned right now.

WHY NOT TEN? – FROM THE DETROIT FREE PRESS:   LANSING — The unprecedented outpouring of activism from students after the shooting at Marjorie Douglas Stoneman High School in Parkland, Fla., in February is the genesis for a bill introduced in the Legislature last week that would change the voting age in Michigan to 16.  "We allow 16-year-olds to go off and get jobs and pay taxes, but we fail to allow them to exercise their voice come election time," said Sen. David Knezek, D-Dearborn Heights. "Young people are setting aside their differences and identifying issues they think need to change. And they can do everything to get that change except vote."  The real reason for the absurd idea is that young people tend to be liberal, and the Democratic Party wants their vote.  My own feeling has always been that we should raise the voting age to 25, to compensate for the mass immaturity that seems to be gripping the nation.

SAD FOR GENERAL ELECTRIC – FROM CNN MONEY:  S&P Dow Jones Indices announced on Tuesday that the iconic maker of light bulbs and jet engines will be replaced in the 30-stock index by Walgreens Boots Alliance.  GE (GE) was an original member of the Dow in 1896 and has been in it continuously since 1907.  Being ousted from the Dow is the latest indignity for GE, which is dealing with a serious cash crisis caused by years of bad deals. GE has replaced its CEO, slashed thousands of jobs and cut its coveted stock dividend in half.  Last year, GE was the worst-performing stock in the Dow, losing almost half of its value.  Used to be a household name.  And its spokesman used to be Ronald Reagan.  And its slogan was, "Progress is our most important product."

June 19, 2018       Permalink 

CALIFORNIA DREAMIN' – AT 11:21 P.M. ET:  There are many wonderful things about California.  Indeed, I have family there, and have spent much happy time in the golden state.  But there are some things, namely the left-wing fringe of the Democratic Party, that are less-than-wonderful.  Their newest proposal is an example.  From the Sacramento Bee: 

Democratic lawmakers on Tuesday advanced a proposal that would restrict the circumstances under which California police officers could use deadly force.

Assembly Bill 931, which would raise the standard for lethal use of force from “reasonable” to “necessary,” passed the Senate Public Safety Committee on an initial vote of 5-1.

It was the first hearing for the controversial measure, which has raised sharp objections from law enforcement groups that contend it would put officers’ lives in danger. Under the bill, deadly force could only be justified if there were no reasonable alternatives.

“We ask officers to run toward danger and sacrifice their safety,” Cory Salzillo of the California State Sheriffs’ Association said. It would be “unfair” to ask them to do so when an after-the-fact analysis might undermine their actions in the field, he added.

Supporters filled the committee room, many of them carrying pictures of friends and family members who had been killed by police. Several lawmakers expressed that the bill was necessary to address a deeper problem of racism in policing.

 “It always blows me away that law enforcement only fear for their life when they are facing black and brown people,” Sen. Steve Bradford, D-Gardena, said.

COMMENT:  That is simply not true.  Most people killed in police shootings are in fact white.  However, that is really not the issue.

The "reasonable man" test is time honored.  Yes, it has been abused on occasion.  No standard is perfect.  And yes, there are bad cops.  That's why we have internal affairs divisions in police departments.  And yes, there are prejudiced juries that exonerate officers who should be convicted.  All these things are true.

But Mr. Salzillo is right.  We ask officers, many of them married, with children, to run toward danger and risk their lives.  If an officer fires his weapon, and that is actually rare, he does so because he reasonably believes he will be killed if he doesn't.  The decision is almost always made in the heat of action.  If you drop "reasonable" and put in "necessary" you are asking for a value judgment that would confound even Solomon. 

Who would you get to patrol the streets?  Who would want that job if a cop could be second-guessed by someone who never travels in anything but a taxi and determines that, while reasonable, the officer's action was not "necessary"?

The answers to the rare but heartbreaking examples of mistaken shootings are much better training, the development of non-lethal tactics, and vastly improved community-police relations.  I might also add that teaching young people, especially in minority communities, to approach police officers with respect, rather than hostility, might help.

June 19, 2018       Permalink

OPTIMISM – AT 12:08 P.M. ET:   The psychology of America at the moment is decidedly positive and optimistic, and that is a very good thing.  From the Washington Times: 

More Americans are satisfied with the country’s direction than at any point during the Obama presidency, according to a Gallup poll released Monday.

The survey found that 38 percent of the population is content with the way things are going — the highest rate since 39 percent of the country reported they were satisfied in September of 2005.

The satisfaction rate, which Gallup began tracking in 1979, is also back in line with the historical average of 37 percent.

And it’s the first time since 2005 that Gallup has recorded consecutive months with satisfaction above 35 percent. Last month, 37 percent of the country said they were content with the way things are going.

One’s satisfaction with the country largely depends on one’s political party, the poll found.
Among Republicans, 68 percent said they were satisfied with the country’s direction, compared to just 13 percent of Democrats. Independents said they were satisfied at a 36 percent clip.

Men were more likely than women to have a positive view of the way things are going, 45 to 31 percent.

Among different age groups, people older than 55 had the highest opinion of the country’s direction at 41 percent. The 18-34 demographic reported a 33 percent satisfaction rate, while those in the 35-54 age bracket said they were satisfied at a 37 percent clip.

An advanced degree also increases the chance that one will be dissatisfied with the country’s direction. Among postgraduates, 30 percent were satisfied with the way things are going, compared to 37 percent of college graduates, 39 percent of those with some college and 40 percent of those with no college.

COMMENT:  We have to give Trump credit for this.  With all his faults, he fights for America, and is not ashamed of it, and it is reflected in public support.  Other polls show similar optimism.  The left is on its way to a huge group-therapy session.  Covered by Obamacare.

June 19, 2018       Permalink

REAL COMBAT – AT 11:51 A.M. ET:  A less gentlemanly day in Congress.  I love it.  From Fox:

House Oversight Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy scorched James Comey in a blistering opening statement at a high-profile congressional hearing on Tuesday, declaring “we can’t survive with a justice system we don’t trust.”

Gowdy kicked off the hearing featuring testimony from Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz on his review of the Hillary Clinton email case. The top DOJ watchdog is on Capitol Hill for the second day in a row to discuss the explosive report.

But Gowdy launched into Tuesday's hearing with a fiery condemnation of the former FBI director and certain agents in the bureau he led.

Referring to IG findings that Comey defied his superiors in his handling of the Clinton email case, Gowdy accused the ex-director of essentially operating by his own rules.

"We see Jim Comey and Jim Comey alone deciding which DOJ policies to follow and which to ignore," he said.

Gowdy accused Comey of watering down his initial statement on the investigation's findings and making other decisions on his own. While Comey has suggested he acted unilaterally out of concern for the Justice Department's handling of the case, Gowdy questioned why he didn't seek a special counsel -- as he indirectly did regarding concerns about the Trump administration.

“Instead, he appointed himself FBI director, attorney general, special counsel, lead investigator and the general arbiter of what is good and right in the world according to him,” Gowdy said.

Gowdy said that Horowitz’s report, which was released last Thursday, should “conjure anger, disappointment and sadness in anyone who reads it.”

COMMENT:  I'm glad to see the tension and the cutting comments.  These "investigations" have gone on too long, and it's time to get to the bottom of important matters – especially the strange exoneration of Hillary Clinton and the virtual takeover of the FBI by anti-Trump forces.

Gowdy is the man to do it.

June 19,  2018     Permalink

JUNE 18, 2018

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 11:55 P.M. ET:

GREAT MOMENTS IN EDUCATION – FROM FOX:  CHICAGO – A Chicago Public Schools principal suddenly retired after she outraged parents by inviting an anti-police extremist to talk to students on “Career Day.”  Mary Beth Cunat personally invited the anti-police activist, Ethan Ethos, to speak to sixth through eighth-grade students at Wildwood Elementary School. Ethos is a self-described “radical” who routinely posts violent anti-police rhetoric online...In an apology letter to parents, Cunat wrote that she brought in Ethos to talk to students about his poetry and civic work, but things went off the rails.  “He told them all the police are bad and all the police wanted to kill people,” said Linda Ricciardi, who had three children listen to Ethos on career day. “I was very disappointed that someone would come into this school and preach hate about the police. Or, even if he was talking about someone else, I would still be upset.”  One wonders how something like this can happen.  It is perfectly evident that the extreme left has penetrated into our school systems.  This is just one example.  And when the disgrace is detected and publicized, the educators claim they didn't know.  I recall that line from history.

LATEST POLL RESULTS – FROM DAILY BEAST:  Self-identified Republicans now have a marginally more favorable view of Kim Jong Un than they do for House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), according to a new Ipsos poll done exclusively for The Daily Beast.  The poll of roughly 1,000 adults aged 18 and over was conducted June 14-15, shortly after President Trump’s historic summit with the North Korea dictator. According to the results, 19 percent of Republicans indicated they had a favorable view of Kim with 68 percent saying they had an unfavorable view (12 percent of voters overall had a favorable view of Kim, compared to 75 percent who viewed him unfavorably). That compared slightly better than the perception of Pelosi, who had a 17 percent favorable, 72 percent unfavorable rating among self-identified Republicans.  I think Republicans are being too harsh.  Kim is a killer; Nancy is only a bore.  I say, one cheer for Nancy.

DAKOTA SHOWDOWN – FROM THE HILL:   The Senate race in North Dakota between Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D) and Rep. Kevin Cramer (R) is all but a toss-up, a poll released Monday found.  The Mason-Dixon poll showed Cramer with a 4-point lead over Heitkamp, which falls within the survey’s margin of error.  Forty-eight percent of voters said they would support Cramer if the election were held today, while 44 percent said they’d back Heitkamp. Another 8 percent said they are undecided.   The poll surveyed 625 adults in North Dakota between June 13 and June 15. Its margin of error is 4 percentage points.  Heitkamp is among the most vulnerable senators up for re-election in November. President Trump won North Dakota in the 2016 presidential election by roughly 36 percentage points over Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton.  The president is scheduled to make a trip to Fargo, N.D., on June 27, ostensibly to rally support for Cramer.  I'm a bit uneasy about this.  North Dakota is a red state, and the GOP challenger should be further ahead by now.  Heitkamp, as the incumbent, has higher name recognition, and that may explain the closeness of the race.  I'm hoping for a GOP pickup.

June 18, 2018       Permalink

THE PITS – AT 3:01 P.M. ET:  We write a great deal here about bad journalism, and we never exhaust the subject.  One of the worst ingredients of bad journalism is tasteless journalism, especially when committed by a "prestigious" newspaper.   The New York Times just committed a whopper.  From the Washington Times: 

The long knives (and brass knuckles) are clearly out for EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt. We wrote weeks ago about the organized Left’s attacks on President Trump’s most effective and influential cabinet secretary. His efforts in rolling back job-killing regulations have been a prime force in driving the Trump economy and the media and Democrats can’t stand it.

Through all of the attacks, smears and innuendos Pruitt has persevered and not gone shrinking into the night. In the rough and tumble world of the DC Swamp, Pruitt isn’t playing by the regular rules.

When hit pieces are published with half-truths and innuendo dressed up as “scandals” that aren’t really scandals at all, the “where there’s smoke there’s fire” attitude dictates that the target of the slime must acquiesce and resign. That’s just what’s expected.

But Pruitt won’t go. He has work to do and he’s going to do it. So now, they’re going after his family.

Last week the New York Times published the latest charge against Pruitt. They claim Pruitt forces employees at the EPA to do personal favors for the administrator and his family.

The most volatile and damning allegation was that Pruitt used his position as Trump’s man at EPA to twist arms at the University of Virginia Law School to get his daughter admitted. The implication is clear. That Pruitt’s daughter was admitted despite her lack of qualifications and only because her daddy is well placed in the Trump Administration.

Except, the story wasn’t true.

In a massive correction, The Times explains that not only did the recommendation for Pruitt’s daughter (a thing that pretty much every student acquires when applying for a prestigious school like UVA Law) was obtained not only before Pruitt was EPA Administrator, it happened before the presidential election of 2016.

COMMENT:  Please read the whole thing.  At least The Times apologized, but that is hardly enough.  The damage is done.  Every time this young woman's name is Googled, for the rest of her life, the "false story" is bound to come up.  Even after an apology, it leaves a shadow. 

First rule:  We don't go after the children of public figures.

Second rule:   All basic facts, especially dates and timelines, are checked before the story is handed in.

Third rule:  Blind hatred leads to bad journalism.

June 18,  2018     Permalink

PREVIEW OF COMING ATTRACTIONS – AT 10:40 A.M. ET:  It's High Noon in Congress.  But who will play the Gary Cooper role?  And Grace Kelly?  From Fox:

FBI Director Christopher Wray and Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz are expected to be the centers of attention Monday when they testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Horowitz's bombshell report on the FBI's investigation of Hillary Clinton's personal email server.

Horowitz's report, released Thursday, singled out then-FBI Director James Comey for harsh criticism and referred five other bureau employees for potential disciplinary action.

Most notably, Horowitz found that anti-Trump text messages between FBI agent Peter Strzok and FBI attorney Lisa Page "potentially indicated or created the appearance that investigative decisions were impacted by bias or improper considerations."

However, the report also noted the FBI's decision not to prosecute Clinton in July 2016 was not motivated by political bias against then-candidate Donald Trump.

In one text exchange from August 2016, Page texted Strzok: "[Trump’s] not ever going to become president, right? Right?!"

"No. No he won’t. We’ll stop it," Strzok responded.

Another FBI attorney, who was the primary attorney assigned to Special Counsel Robert Mueller's Russia investigation until this past February, messaged an FBI employee the day after Trump's election as president that he was "just devastated."

"I just can't imagine the systematic disassembly of the progress we made over the last 8 years," the attorney, dubbed "FBI Attorney 2" in the report, later added.

However, the watchdog found that "no evidence that the conclusions by the prosecutors were affected by bias or other improper considerations."

"The question I have [is] was the Department of Justice and the FBI, the people in charge of the Clinton investigation, were they really in the tank or not?" Judiciary Committee member Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said on Thursday. "We'll see what the conclusions are and I will challenge Mr. Horowitz [on whether] his conclusion that they weren’t in the tank makes sense. Time will tell."

COMMENT:  We're finally getting to possible paydirt on all these investigations.  One question that will come up is whether probes into Hillary Clinton will be reopened.

June 18,  2018     Permalink