Don’t miss out on our future podcasts – subscribe on iTunes here!
What’s worse, momentarily blanking on the name of a foreign city or spearheading a failed CIA-directed regime change that displaced 10 million people and left more than 250,000 dead, many from that city? Based on their coverage of Gary Johnson’s recent Morning Joe blunder, where he inquired, “what is Aleppo?” when questioned about the largest Syrian city, political strategists, pundits, and journalists seem to judge forgetfulness worse than igniting a civil war.
Simply put, the world would be a much much safer place had Hillary Clinton never heard of Aleppo. After failing to disentangle Syria from Iranian influence through secret negotiations with Israel in 2010, Hillary Clinton led the charge for her proxy war to overthrow Assad. By 2011, the US adopted her plan explicitly and used the Arab Spring to align with and arm anti-Assad efforts such as ISIS and initiate what currently stands at over 4,800 airstrikes in Syria.
Despite early attempts at ceasefire negotiations in 2012, the CIA-led insurgency and the predictably violent response by Assad has ravaged Syria. Aleppo in particular has been a focal point of the Syrian civil war for months, with hundreds of people dying on both sides of the conflict. Until America agrees to a ceasefire without regime change, Aleppo will likely continue to suffer the consequences of Hillary’s hubris.
Continue reading at The Daily Caller.
Today, presumptive presidential nominee Hillary Clinton breathes a little easier. Two weeks ago, her husband met Attorney General Loretta Lynch on a tarmac in Phoenix. While Republicans have cried foul, and Lynch herself has acknowledged the rendezvous to be in poor judgment, it is hard to shake the icky feeling that someone’s been suborned.
Let’s credit Bill and Loretta, though, and say this isn’t a House of Cards-style intrigue. Fine. But most people aren’t let off so easy. Consider the zealots who work at the Department of Justice and the low threshold they set for prosecution. Federal prosecutors believe that tossing a red grouper off of the side of a boat is destruction of evidence, and they’re willing to defend that lunacy all the way to the Supreme Court. It’s reasonable to believe, then, that anyone besides the Baroness of Clintonia would be indicted for risking state secrets.
When people of pedigree and power receive superior treatment under a separate law structure, this is a feature of aristocracy. When the privileged few receiving this treatment are running the country, this looks more like monarchy.
Neo-monarchism favors the few over the many, federal power over local control, bureaucrats over business owners. It puts control in the hands of elites, and exempts them from the law. And when those new monarchs choose the law they do desire, which is invariably a law that the citizens reject, neo-monarchism demands complete enforcement so that free choice is eliminated. Continue Reading
We can’t get away with what Hillary can. Tuesday, Director James Comey announced that the Federal Bureau of Investigation would not recommend a suit against Presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton for having an email server used for both private emails and State Department communications. Despite the illegality of her actions, Clinton was only mildly embarrassed by her behavior, but her campaign remains strong and will not face consequences for her transgressions.
Hillary Clinton’s use of a private server was reported by the New York Times in early 2015. Not only was Mrs. Clinton operating a private server, but many say that people within State and the White House knew about it.
House Republicans are thoroughly displeased with the FBI’s decision, so much so that Director Comey was called to testify to Congress on Thursday about the investigation.
There are many problems with Hillary’s behavior, aside from lack of transparency and threats to national security. The issue lies in why Hillary Clinton is treated as above the law. Director Comey said in his statement, “[t]o be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now.” Comey and the FBI have concluded that Hillary Clinton had broken a number of laws and protocol, but will not be charged for her crimes.
Other people throughout the government and military send and receive sensitive information on government servers on a daily basis. Other Secretaries of State and government officials have never been alleged to have over 100 emails containing classified information on a private server in their home. Military personnel who also handle classified and secret information spoke to Independent Journal on how they would be revoked of their security clearance, blacklisted, or fired if they did the same thing as Hillary Clinton.
The only explanation for Hillary getting off with a slap on the wrist is that there truly is a class of political elite, and then the rest of America. This is a sad example of the double-standard that exists within American government today between the government and the people. The political elite are being explicitly exempt from the consequences that any other citizen would face for the same crime.
Gone are the days of politicians and officials being subject to the same rule of law as the rest of the country.
This article was coauthored with Austill Stuart.
Listening to Hillary Clinton on the campaign trail may lead one to assume she is against the sharing economy, or what she calls the “gig economy.” As she promised in her first major economic address at the New School in New York City, the gig economy is “raising hard questions about workplace protections and what a good job will look like in the future… I’ll crack down on bosses who exploit employees by misclassifying them as contractors or even steal their wages.”
But when it comes to her personal life, Hillary Clinton does not detest the gig economy—she loves it. The Clintons’ tax returns show that Hillary and her husband Bill are practically gig economy royalty. After leaving the White House, the Clintons earned just one percent of their labor income from employer paychecks. The rest ($198 million) came from a variety of independent contractor gigs.
Since 2000, the Clintons earned about $200 million from working (as opposed to real estate or other investments). Of that $208 million, $167 million of it (83 percent) came from work that is part of the gig economy, such as giving speeches and private consulting. If one includes income from other non-employee work (such as book promotions and sales) this number shoots up to $198 million, or 99 percent.
Read the rest on Economics 21, here.