Displaying posts categorized under

NATIONAL NEWS & OPINION

50 STATES AND DC, CONGRESS AND THE PRESIDENT

A Trump Choice for Veterans Shulkin favored the status quo of limited health-care options.

It wouldn’t be a normal week in Washington without a Trump Administration personnel melodrama. But this week’s removal of Veterans Affairs Secretary David Shulkin is important on the policy merits, and let’s hope his successor is more amenable to allowing retired service members to make their own health-care choices.

On Thursday Mr. Shulkin took to the New York Times to warn of “political appointees choosing to promote their agendas instead of what’s best for veterans” by supporting “privatization leading to the dismantling of the department’s extensive health care system.” This self-justification exercise will not be remembered as the most graceful exit.

Mr. Shulkin has been on the way out for several weeks, and his euphemisms are about his months of infighting with White House and other Administration officials. The unsubtle innuendo in the press is that Mr. Shulkin was run out by the nefarious Charles and David Koch through a policy group called Concerned Veterans for America.

Yet no one except Mr. Shulkin is talking about “privatization.” Concerned Veterans for America in a white paper has sketched out a plan to restructure the VA and allow it to focus more on the expertise its doctors have developed in, say, post-traumatic stress and prosthetics. The plan includes a premium-support payment so vets could buy discounted private coverage from a menu, much like federal employees do. A current vet who preferred to be treated for diabetes elsewhere would be free to make that choice.

A Muslim Committed the Worst Anti-Semitic Hate Crime of 2018 And no one is talking about it. Daniel Greenfield

The worst anti-Semitic hate crime of 2018 took place outside a restaurant in Cincinnati, Ohio.

Izmir Koch, an Ahiska Turkish migrant who had already been in trouble with the law, allegedly demanded to know if there were any Jews around. A man who been at the restaurant replied that he was Jewish. Izmir punched him in the head, and then kicked him while he lay on the ground.

The victim, who wasn’t actually Jewish, suffered bruised ribs and a fractured eye socket.

Now a federal grand jury has indicted Izmir for committing a hate crime. The violent assault was the single worst anti-Semitic hate crime of 2018. So far. And it’s generated very little interest from the same activists and media outlets who had been accusing the White House of not acting against anti-Semitism.

Izmir had already been facing two counts of felonious assault, one involving a deadly weapon, from 2016. He was found guilty a month after the Cincinnati assault, along with a number of comrades and family members. That assault had taken place outside their trucking company in Dayton, Ohio.

A former employee had come to collect the money that he was owed, and Izmir Koch, Baris Koch, Sevil Shakhmanov and Mustafa Shakhmanov allegedly assaulted him with crowbars, and possibly brass knuckles and a baseball bat. The victim, who apparently had a knife, fought back.

Izmir, Boris and Murad were Turkish Muslims from the former Soviet Union who had migrated to this country. A few years before that fight, the local media was talking up their “positive impact” on the community in Dayton. But it didn’t take long for the legal problems to begin. The benefits of bringing these Turkish Muslims to Dayton were quickly outweighed by the violence they had brought.

The Cincinnati assault is one of the most physically violent recent anti-Semitic attacks. But the perpetrator is a Muslim immigrant and the alphabet soup organizations don’t want to talk about it.

It doesn’t fit their profile or their agenda.

Furor Over The Citizenship Question On The Latest Census Is Ignorant Fearmongering By Kyle Sammin

The Commerce Department announced Monday that the 2020 Census will include a question about whether the people being counted are citizens. This seemingly uncontroversial inquiry has sent many activists on the Left into a tailspin as they prophesy discrimination against immigrants, especially those who immigrated here illegally. California announced the state would sue to stop the change.

Everyone should take a deep breath and relax. Questions about citizenship and national origin have been a part of the United States Census for more than a century without any negative effects on the non-citizens it surveys. Of all the questions the government asks on the census, this one — which merely confirms information the government already has or should have — is the least problematic, and is completely in line with the Census Bureau’s historical practices.
It’s Not A New Question

The Constitution requires the federal government to take a census every ten years, but it does not require them to collect very much information. The grant of power is specific, but also contains a degree of flexibility: “The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct.”

For the first five censuses, the government stuck very narrowly to this remit. From 1790 to 1840, they listed only the name of the head of the household and the number of people living there. These numbers were divided by age group, sex, race, and (because of the Constitution’s three-fifths clause) condition of servitude. The slavery question was the only one strictly necessary, since the apportionment of representatives did not vary based on the sex or age ratios within a given congressional district.

Stormy Daniels: The Crime and the Cover-Up By Andrew C. McCarthy

Would a $130,000 payment to buy a porn star’s silence violate campaign-finance laws?

Greetings from beautiful Orange County. We’re getting ready for the second of two Golden State events (we were in San Francisco yesterday), part of National Review Institute’s celebration of Bill Buckley’s legacy a decade after his passing.

For me, the road trip is tacked on to a longer-than-usual vacation. It has ended up being the longest break I have taken from writing in many years — maybe since I started writing full time 15 years ago. I am grateful for the time to think at length about things rather than trying to analyze them on the fly.

Even before detaching, I had mostly stopped watching television news, since there doesn’t seem to be much effort at straight news anymore. When the mainstream media fawned over the Obama administration, I was glad to have the conservative media as an alternative because much of the criticism was pointed and thoughtful. But now that we have an administration I usually agree with on policy led by a president who is, at best, a deeply flawed man, I find the cable coverage almost completely useless. Much of the opposition to Trump is unhinged — though, having had some time to reflect on it, the natural impulse of Trump critics to conflate policy disagreements with personal revulsion over Trump’s character is, if not excusable, at least understandable. Even Trump fans (and there are many we’ve visited with in California) tend to temper their praise with grumbling over the president’s antics. Meanwhile, much of conservative media sounds eerily like the mainstream media during the administration of Bill Clinton, even as comparisons to that deeply flawed man have become the leitmotif of Trump apologia.

On vacation, I contented myself with flipping through news sites and reading books — the best of which were Yuval Levin’s The Fractured Republic and David Bahnsen’s Crisis of Responsibility (and in the making-up-for-lost-time category, I’ve even almost finished Anna Karenina!). Sunday night’s 60 Minutes episode featuring the Stormy Daniels interview was the first news program I’ve watched in a while (mainly because it came on right after the Kansas–Duke thriller). I’ve been on the road ever since, so maybe the snippets of reactive coverage I’ve seen are not fully representative, but they have been awful.

What Frightens the Left Most? The Constitution By Michael Walsh

As we’ve long since learned, the Left always tells us what they fear most, by reacting to political developments or policy proposals like scalded vipers, hissing and spitting as they writhe around in agonized hysteria. Not for nothing is the word “catastrophic” one of their favorite descriptive adjectives, since it pretty much describes just about anything they don’t agree with and thus keeps them forever on the edge.

To rational people, their collection of tics, neuroses, and phobias may seem at first to lack a certain consistency, other than a tendency to go from zero to obscenities on Twitter in no time flat. They can easily be against gay marriage (Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, et al.) before they were for it; against illegal immigration (Bill Clinton) before they were for it; and for the Russians (the entire Democratic Party) before they were against them.

Do they contradict themselves? Very well, then, they contradict themselves—after all, they contain multitudes. The only song they really know is Whitman’s “Song of Myself.”

Their latest conniption fit has come over two apparently unrelated things. The first, of course, is guns and by extension the right to one’s own personal self-defense in a dangerous and (thanks to the second thing, about which more in a bit) rapidly destabilizing world. The American frontier of the late 18th century was similarly fraught, as the young country began both to deal with the mature, and often hostile nation-states of old Europe, and to push west, across 2,000 and more miles of unknown territory; the success of the American experiment was far from certain. Accordingly, the Framers bequeathed us the Bill of Rights, which although numbered as amendments are as much a part of the Constitution as the main document.

Revenge of NeverTrump: Mr. Murphy Makes a War Room By Julie Kelly

President Trump should be afraid. Very afraid.

No, not of the flailing Robert Mueller investigation or the latest accusations by porn star Stormy Daniels. He shouldn’t fear a trade war with China or the prospect of another government shutdown weeks before the crucial midterms elections. This threat is far more insidious, far more dangerous to the legitimacy of his presidency and the possibility he will win a second term.

It is: The NeverTrump War Room.

The mere thought likely sends chills down the steely spines of Trump supporters everywhere. I mean, it’s one thing to stare down Senator Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) or Kim Jong-un. It takes a whole different level of gamesmanship to go toe-to-toe with Senator Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) and shrewd GOP “consultants” such as Mike Murphy. How will Trump ever prevail over these masterminds, these cunning masseurs of the Republican electorate?

Talk about big button versus small button.

The NeverTrump War Room is the brainchild of Murphy, who—at least according to him—is “one of the Republican Party’s most successful political media consultants.” He’s a diehard NeverTrumper who worked for Jeb Bush in 2016. But despite raising $119 million for the former Florida governor’s amazing presidential campaign, Murphy couldn’t get his candidate past the March 2016 South Carolina primary, where Bush came in fourth place. (After that humiliating loss, Murphy defended himself, telling the Los Angeles Times without a hint of irony, “There are a lot of people in the cheap seats with a lot of opinions. What have they done?”) That wasn’t even Murphy’s most expensive defeat: He helped Meg Whitman spend $150 million of her own money to lose the California governor’s race in 2010.

So who better to offer crack advice about how to beat Trump in a Republican primary in 2020? In a menacing column for Politico Magazine that must have Team Trump in a full-blown panic, Murphy claims “plenty of exhausted Republican elected officials” are asking him whether Trump will face a primary opponent in 2020. Murphy’s weary imaginary pals allegedly pray another Republican will take on a president with approval ratings in the low-to-mid 80s among his fellow partisans.

The Distortions of Our Unelected Officials By Victor Davis Hanson

On March 17, ex-CIA Director John Brennan tweeted about the current president of the United States: “When the full extent of your venality, moral turpitude, and political corruption becomes known, you will take your rightful place as a disgraced demagogue in the dustbin of history. . . . America will triumph over you.”

That outburst from the former head of the world’s premier spy agency seemed a near threat to a sitting president, and former U.N. Ambassador Samantha Power tweeted that it probably was: “Not a good idea to piss off John Brennan.”

If there is such a thing as a dangerous “deep state” of elite but unelected federal officials who feel that they are untouchable and unaccountable, then John Brennan is the poster boy.

Immediately after the 2008 election of Barack Obama, the careerist Brennan quickly reinvented himself as a critic of the very methodologies that he once, as a George W. Bush administration official, had insisted were effective. Brennan was initially appointed Obama’s top counterterrorism adviser, and then took over the CIA after the abrupt and mysterious resignation of Gen. David Petraeus following the 2012 election.

Brennan claimed that intelligence agencies had not missed clear indications in 2009 that Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the so-called “underwear bomber,” would try to take down a U.S. airliner. Just days later when his denials were ridiculed, Brennan flipped and blasted intelligence agencies for their laxity.

In 2011, Brennan falsely alleged that the Obama administration’s drone program had not caused a single civilian death in Pakistan over the previous year. In truth, around 50 civilians had been killed by drones since the 9/11 attacks.

AT THE VA 2 YEARS AGO: WHO EARNS HOW MUCH, FOR WHAT AND WHERE

Two years ago, Americans were horrified to learn that as many as 1,000 of our nation’s veterans had died while waiting for medical care at Department of Veterans Affairs facilities.

Any hopes of reforming the dysfunctional VA culture were dashed two days ago when Secretary Robert McDonald made an appalling comparison to waiting in line at Disney parks.

“When you go to Disney, do they measure the number of hours you wait in line? What’s important is, what’s your satisfaction with the experience.”
Today, nearly half a million veterans still wait to see a VA doctor.

So, we opened the books on the VA. Here’s just a sample of our findings:

The VA spent $1.7 million on ’employee engagement’ and other satisfaction surveys with Gallup (2010-2014). There is no indication these polls found, flagged or identified the most egregious scandal in VA history.
The VA paid $303 million in salaries to non-essential positions: Painters ($185 million), Interior Designers ($64 million), and Gardeners ($54 million). While veterans were dying, the VA managers were rewarding the efficiency of these positions with bonuses (2012-2015.)
$751.1 million spent on ‘household’ and ‘office’ furniture including furniture rental, draperies, curtains, carpeting, modification, repair and maintenance (2010-2015). Much of from luxury, upscale manufacturers.

While the veterans wait weeks to see a doctor, we found:

The VA lawyered up and added 175 attorneys.
Dramatically increased their spending on public relations (PR).
Reformed bonuses’ so millions of dollars continued to flow to many of the same employees who gamed-the-system during the scandal.

and much more…

Donald Trump Ousts VA Secretary David Shulkin President said he’d nominate Rear Adm. Ronny Jackson, his physician, to the post By Rebecca Ballhaus and Ben Kesling

https://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-trump-ousts-va-secretary-david-shulkin-1522274017?mod=cx_politics&cx_navSource=cx_politics&cx_tag=collabctx&cx_artPos=2#cxrecs_s

WASHINGTON—President Donald Trump on Wednesday said he had ousted his Veterans Affairs secretary, David Shulkin, and tapped the White House physician, Ronny Jackson, as his replacement.

“I am pleased to announce that I intend to nominate highly respected Admiral Ronny L. Jackson, MD, as the new Secretary of Veterans Affairs,” Mr. Trump tweeted Wednesday. He said Robert Wilkie, who currently serves as under secretary of defense for personnel and readiness at the Department of Defense, would serve as acting secretary “in the interim.”

In a statement issued by the White House, Mr. Trump praised Dr. Shulkin’s work and “the many great things we did together at Veterans Affairs, including the VA Accountability Act that he was helpful in getting passed.” The president called Dr. Shulkin a “great supporter of veterans across the country and I am grateful for his service.”Dr. Shulkin didn’t return a request for comment on Wednesday.

Dr. Jackson is a U.S. Navy rear admiral who has served as a White House physician during the past three administrations. In that role, he has overseen health care for the cabinet and senior staff, served as a physician supervisor at Camp David and led the White House Medical Unit, the White House said.

Dr. Jackson, if confirmed by the Senate, would take over the second-largest federal agency, which has more than 370,000 employees. The agency is responsible for, among other duties, providing health care services to veterans. The agency has struggled in recent years following a 2014 scandal over wait-times for VA hospital appointments.

G-Men Under Subpoena Christopher Wray promises Congress a more cooperative FBI.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/g-men-under-subpoena-1522278053

Director Christopher Wray said Tuesday that he is doubling to 54 the number of FBI agents working to respond to documents subpoenaed by House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte, and it’s about time.

Mr. Goodlatte is looking into the FBI’s investigation of Hillary Clinton’s private server and its use of the Steele dossier to spy on former Trump campaign associate Carter Page, among other things. The FBI has been notably uncooperative, and news reports say Mr. Wray’s latest cooperation came only after Attorney General Jeff Sessions told him no more slow-walking information.

What matters now is whether the FBI provides Congress the records in a timely way—and without the sneaky redactions that have been used to keep the American people in the dark. One example: the text messages between FBI paramours Peter Strzok and Lisa Page regarding Rudolph Contreras. Federal Judge Contreras presided over the case against former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn. He and Mr. Strzok knew each other, so Mr. Strzok and Ms. Page were excited when Judge Contreras was appointed to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court in 2016.