02/08/16 05:30 PM—UPDATED 02/08/16 05:46 PM
facebook twitter 4 save share group 165
By Pete Williams
In a letter disclosed Monday in a federal court filing, the FBI confirms one of the world’s worst-kept secrets: It is looking into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server.
Why say this at all, since it was widely known to be true? Because in August in response to a judge’s direction, the State Department asked the FBI for information about what it was up to. Sorry, the FBI said at the time, we can neither confirm nor deny the existence of any investigation.
Now, in a letter dated February 2 and filed in court Monday, the FBI’s general counsel, James Baker, notes that in public statements and congressional testimony, the FBI “has acknowledged generally that it is working on matters related to former Secretary Clinton’s use of a private email server.”
Baker says the FBI has not, however, “publicly acknowledged the specific focus, scope or potential targets of any such proceedings.”
He ends the one-paragraph letter by saying that the FBI cannot say more “without adversely affecting on-going law enforcement efforts.”
The letter was filed in one of the Freedom of Information Act cases brought against the State Department over access to documents from Hillary Clinton’s time as secretary of state. This one was filed by Judicial Watch.
Oliver Ralph in London, Demetri Sevastopulo in New Hampshire and Matthew Garrahan in New York
Michael Bloomberg, the billionaire media owner and former New York mayor, has stated for the first time that he is considering a run for US president, a move that would dramatically reshape the 2016 race for the White House.
Speaking to the Financial Times, the founder of the eponymous financial information group criticised the quality of the debate in the presidential race. He said that he was “looking at all the options” when asked whether he was considering putting his name forward.
“I find the level of discourse and discussion distressingly banal and an outrage and an insult to the voters,” Mr Bloomberg said in an interview, before adding that the US public deserved “a lot better”.
Loretta Lynch is on the edge of the spotlight, about to be dragged to the center.
If the FBI finds sufficient evidence to launch a criminal investigation into Hillary Clinton or one of her top aides for mishandling classified information, Lynch’s Justice Department will have to decide whether or not to press ahead.
Even if no evidence of wrongdoing is found, Clinton’s many critics are unlikely to take the word of an appointee of President Obama’s, and will doubt that justice has been served.
Already, top Republicans are calling for a special prosecutor to be brought in and evaluate the situation.
No. 2 Senate Republican John Cornyn (Texas) took to the floor of the Senate last week to call for a special counsel to be appointed “because of the conflict of interest by asking Attorney General Lynch to investigate and perhaps even prosecute somebody in the Obama administration.”
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) agrees that Lynch ought to consider a special counsel, a spokesperson said, to reassure the country that decisions are made “without regard to any political considerations.”
The Justice Department, however, has so far declined the request.
Poll: Trump’s lead grows in NH days before primary
By Caitlin Yilek
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump’s lead widened in New Hampshire just days before the primary, according to the latest CNN/WMUR tracking poll.
Thirty-three percent of likely Republican primary voters said they support Trump, giving the billionaire a 17-point lead over his closest GOP rival. Trump gained 5 points from a similar tracking poll last week.
Trump now has more than double the support of Sen. Marco Rubio, who came in second with 16 percent support.
The final Republican debate before Tuesday’s New Hampshire primary was seen as a moment of do-or-die drama for several candidates. In one exchange in particular, the clash at Saint Anselm University in Manchester lived up to its billing.
Who was celebrating and who was left to lick their wounds?
WINNER
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie
A Christie-Marco Rubio clash overshadowed everything else, and the New Jersey governor was the clear victor.
The exchange began when Christie told Rubio that he had never been involved “in a consequential decision where you had to be held accountable.”
Hitting back, Rubio noted the frequent credit downgrades the Garden State has experienced under Christie’s leadership before trying to pivot toward safer ground: He asserted that Republicans were believing in a “fiction” if they assumed President Obama to be incompetent, rather than purposely changing the nature of the United States.
The pugnacious Christie immediately hit back, accusing Rubio of doing “what Washington D.C., does. The drive-by shot…and then the memorized 25-second speech that is exactly what his advisers gave him.”
Inexplicably, Rubio immediately proved Christie’s point by once again repeating the talking point regarding Obama.
“There it is. There it is. The memorized 25-second speech. There it is, everybody,” said Christie.
It was a dismal moment for Rubio — his worst by some margin in any debate so far — and a terrific one for Christie.
The New Jersey governor was impressive throughout the debate, but everything else paled into insignificance beside the Rubio moment.
Whether any of this will save Christie is highly questionable. He is currently polling right at the back of the “establishment” lane in New Hampshire, behind Rubio, Jeb Bush and John Kasich.
But credit where it’s due: He won big on Saturday night.
MANCHESTER, N.H. — A malfunctioning Marco Rubio crashed as he was overloaded by attacks last night from New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, who tried to portray the Florida U.S. senator as a Washington robot pre-programmed by political consultants during a high-stakes Republican debate.
“See, Marco — Marco — the thing is this,” Christie said, “when you’re president of the United States … the memorized 30-second speech where you talk about how great America is at the end of it doesn’t solve one problem for one person.”
Rubio’s glitchy debate performance could be a game-changer just as independents make up their minds two days before the crucial first-in-the-nation primary. The first-term senator’s rivals have raised concerns he’s too inexperienced — just like, they say, President Obama was — and isn’t ready for prime time.
Four different times — often word-for-word and at awkward non-sequiturs — Rubio claimed Obama intentionally wants to make America like the rest of the world.
CULTURE | By Thom Geier on February 6, 2016 @ 3:38 pm
The feminist icon is drawing hackles online for comments made Friday on HBO’s “Real Time With Bill Maher“
Feminist icon Gloria Steinem has drawn the wrath of the Twitterverse for suggesting that young women supporting Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaign are doing so to gain the attention of men.
“When you’re young, you’re thinking, ‘Where are the boys? The boys are with Bernie,’” Steinem told Bill Maher Friday night on the comic’s HBO show “Real Time.”
Maher leapt right on her comment. “Now if I said that, ‘Yeah, they’re for Bernie because that’s where the boys are,’ you’d slap me,” he said.
NEW YORK (Reuters) – A prominent Democratic donor worried about the party’s chances of winning the presidency emailed dozens of fans of Vice President Joe Biden on Friday, urging them to remain prepared to donate if Biden jumps into the race.
The donor, Bill Bartmann, cited new polling showing Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont nearly tied with the Hillary Clinton, eroding the 30-point lead the former secretary of state held at the end of last year. Bartmann and other party insiders are concerned that Sanders, a self-proclaimed Democratic socialist, is too far to the left to win against a Republican in the Nov. 8 presidential election.
“We cannot afford to lose the White House,” Bartmann wrote in the email, seen by Reuters.
The email drew a string of affirmative responses, also seen by Reuters.
Biden announced in October that he would not seek the presidency, despite support from a group of backers under the name “Draft Biden 2016.” But whispers have continued among some donors who hope that Biden could be convinced to run after all should Clinton’s campaign prove fruitless.
“My sitting on the sidelines has a lot to do with my disappointment that the vice president decided not to get in the race,” Patrick Baskette, one of the recipients of Bartmann’s email, told Reuters. Baskette, a public affairs consultant in Tampa, Florida, was a special assistant to Biden during his time as a senator.
Hillary Clinton at her caucus night rally in Des Moines. REUTERS/Brian Snyder
By John Whitesides
DES MOINES, Iowa (Reuters) – Hillary Clinton’s struggle in Iowa to fend off underdog Bernie Sanders, a self-described democratic socialist, reignited questions about her ability to close the deal with Democratic voters and turned up the pressure on her high-profile White House campaign.
The Democratic presidential front-runner, whose campaign ran off the rails in Iowa in 2008 against Barack Obama, was dealt another setback on Monday in the Midwestern state that begins the 2016 race for the presidency.
The former secretary of state, Clinton, 68, was pushed to a virtual tie with Sanders, a 74-year-old U.S. senator from Vermont.
Next up is New Hampshire, which holds its primary on Feb. 9. Sanders has been leading in opinion polls there and has an advantage because it neighbors his home state. A Clinton loss would start to set off alarm bells with her supporters.
“She has had every possible structural and organizational advantage and Sanders fought her to a draw,” said Dan Schnur, director of the Jesse M. Unruh Institute of Politics at the University of Southern California.
“This is almost a moment by moment rerun of 2008,” Schnur said. “The difference is her competition is not as tough this time.”
Clinton insisted at her post-caucus rally that she was the candidate who could unify her party and prevail against a Republican challenger in the Nov. 8 election but the sense of disappointment was palpable.
Her subdued, six-minute speech contrasted with the ebullient tone of Sanders’ 16-minute speech.
While it was hard to call a winner between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders last night, it’s easy to say who was luckier.
The race between the Democrat presidential hopefuls was so tight in the Iowa caucus Monday that in at least six precincts, the decision on awarding a county delegate came down to a coin toss. And Clinton won all six, media reports said.
The situation came about in precincts where Sanders and Clinton were running neck-and-neck, but there were an odd number of delegates, so they couldn’t be evenly split between the two. That was the case in precincts in Ames, Newton, West Branch, Davenport and two in Des Moines, the Des Moines Register reported.
Univision reporter Fernando Peinado caught one of the Des Moines coin tosses on video:
Millions of people around the world are emerging from poverty thanks to rising economic freedom. But by sharp contrast, America’s economic freedom has been on a declining path over the past decade.
America’s declining score in the index is closely related to rapidly rising government spending, subsidies, and bailouts.
According to the 2016 Index of Economic Freedom, an annual publication by The Heritage Foundation, America’s economic freedom has tumbled. With losses of economic freedom in eight of the past nine years, the U.S. has tied its worst score ever, wiping out a decade of progress.
The U.S. has fallen from the 6th freest economy in the world, when President Barack Obama took office, to 11th place in 2016. America’s declining score in the index is closely related to rapidly rising government spending, subsidies, and bailouts.
Since early 2009:
Government spending has exploded, amounting to $29,867 per household in 2015.
The national debt has risen to $125,000 for every tax-filing household in America—a total over $18 trillion.
The government takeover of health care is raising prices and disrupting markets.
Bailouts and new government regulations have increased uncertainty, stifling investment and job creation.
This is not something to take lightly. Economic freedom is the foundation of U.S. economic strength, and economic strength is the foundation of America’s high living standards, military power, and status as a world leader. The perils of losing economic freedom are not fictional.
It is painfully clear that our economy has been performing far below its potential, with individuals, families, and entrepreneurs being squeezed by the proliferation of big-government bureaucracy and regulations.
As documented by the index, and by other scholars, America’s economic freedom has been declining at an alarming pace.
Indeed, as The Wall Street Journal recently summed it up succinctly, Obama is “a champion when it comes to limiting economic freedom, and American workers have the slow growth in jobs and wages to prove it.”
Not surprisingly, our economic dynamism and innovative capacity have been measurably reduced.
Not surprisingly, our economic dynamism and innovative capacity have been measurably reduced. Self-inflicted wounds include:
The U.S. has the highest corporate tax rate in the developed world. This has driven new jobs to other, more competitive nations and has meant fewer jobs and lower wages for Americans. The overall annual cost of meeting regulatory requirements has increased by over $80 billion since 2009, with more than 180 new regulations in place. In terms of ease of starting a new business, analyzed by a recently published World Bank report, the U.S. is ranked shockingly low at 49th, trailing countries such as Canada, Georgia, Ireland, Lithuania, and Malaysia.
No wonder the labor force participation rate has remained at near record lowsafter more than five years of steady decline.
Worse, vibrant entrepreneurial growth has been stymied by greater policy uncertainty and mounting debt. And a disturbing trend toward cronyism has gravely eroded the rule of law and distorted our free-market system.
House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Kevin Brady, R-Texas, keynote speaker of the official release of the 2016 Index, recently stated:
It’s been almost seven years since the Obama “recovery” began, and our economy is barely out of neutral. Why does America have to settle for this?
Restoring economic freedom is prerequisite to revitalizing and brightening America’s future. 2016 is the year to reaffirm the principles of limited government, free enterprise, and rule of law so that we can reconstitute an America where freedom, opportunity, and prosperity flourish.
Want proof that the liberal social-democratic society works?
Look to Denmark, the country that routinely leads the world in happiness surveys. It’s also notable for having the highest taxes on Earth, plus a comfy social safety net: Child care is mostly free, as is public school and even private school, and you can stay on unemployment benefits for a long time. Everyone is on an equal footing, both income-wise and socially: Go to a party and you wouldn’t be surprised to see a TV star talking to a roofer.
The combination of massive taxes and benefits for the unsuccessful means top and bottom get shaved off: Pretty much everyone is proudly middle class. Danes belong to more civic associations and clubs than anyone else; they love performing in large groups. At Christmas they do wacky things like hold hands and run around the house together, singing festive songs. They’re a real-life Whoville.
In the American liberal compass, the needle is always pointing to places like Denmark. Everything they most fervently hope for here has already happened there.
So: Why does no one seem particularly interested in visiting Denmark? (“Honey, on our European trip, I want to see Tuscany, Paris, Berlin and . . . Jutland!”) Visitors say Danes are joyless to be around. Denmark suffers from high rates of alcoholism. In its use of antidepressants it ranks fourth in the world. (Its fellow Nordics the Icelanders are in front by a wide margin.) Some 5 percent of Danish men have had sex with an animal. Denmark’s productivity is in decline, its workers put in only 28 hours a week, and everybody you meet seems to have a government job. Oh, and as The Telegraph put it, it’s “the cancer capital of the world.”
So how happy can these drunk, depressed, lazy, tumor-ridden, pig-bonking bureaucrats really be?
Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions, a leading voice on trade, immigration and executive powers, is urging Americans to choose their next president carefully because 2016 “is the last chance for the American people to take back control of their government.”
In a sober interview with Secrets, the Republican warned that liberal special interests, Wall Street moguls, and international media conglomerates are fast turning the United States into just another member of the European Union and that the effort is being led by a Democratic president eager to go his own way with executive orders.
“This election is different because we have pell mell erosion of law, the constitutional order, where President Obama has pushed an agenda that eviscerates the immigration legal system, and pushed this trade agreement that will commence decades of transferring American economic power to an ever-expanding international commission. It’s just not going to stop” unless voters take action, he warned.
DES MOINES — The presidential race hurtled over the weekend toward a watershed moment: voting that will start to reveal the true depth of Americans’ desire to cast aside traditional politicians and Washington-style compromise and embrace disruptive outsiders appealing to their passions.
After a year of countless and often conflicting polls, more than 250,000 Iowans are expected to attend caucuses on a relatively mild Monday night and render judgment on insurgent candidates who would bar Muslims from the country (Donald J. Trump), oppose concessions to Democrats (Senator Ted Cruz of Texas) and pursue a high-tax, big-government agenda (Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont). Voters are poised to bring order to the race, or reorder politics, as in no other recent election.
Money, experience and endorsements — advantages that usually turn candidates like Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush, the former governor of Florida, into inevitable nominees — will be tested against the potent messages of rivals promising upheaval.
The intelligence community has deemed some of Hillary Clinton’s emails “too damaging” to national security to release under any circumstances, according to a U.S. government official close to the ongoing review. A second source, who was not authorized to speak on the record, backed up the finding.
The determination was first reported by Fox News, hours before the State Department formally announced Friday that seven email chains, found in 22 documents, will be withheld “in full” because they, in fact, contain “Top Secret” information.
The State Department, when first contacted by Fox News about withholding such emails Friday morning, did not dispute the reporting – but did not comment in detail. After a version of this report was first published, the Obama administration confirmed to the Associated Press that the seven email chains would be withheld. The department has since confirmed those details publicly.
The decision to withhold the documents in full, and not provide even a partial release with redactions, further undercuts claims by the State Department and the Clinton campaign that none of the intelligence in the emails was classified when it hit Clinton’s personal server.
Fox News is told the emails include intelligence from “special access programs,” or SAP, which is considered beyond “Top Secret.” A Jan. 14 letter, first reported by Fox News, from intelligence community Inspector General Charles McCullough III notified senior intelligence and foreign relations committee leaders that “several dozen emails containing classified information” were determined to be “at the CONFIDENTIAL, SECRET, AND TOP SECRET/SAP levels.”
