Some friends recently tripped to Iceland.
They loved it, but remarked “it was pretty cold”.
I asserted that you waive you right to carp about chilliness when you choose to go to a place called “Iceland”.
After chuckling, I said it was a branding issue … and, my friends said “that’s right … and there’s a story about the naming of Iceland and Greenland.”
=========
Digging a bit, here’s the story that I’ve been able to piece together …
I’ve got an alternative scenario for you.
========
DNC operatives are trying to shift the conversation from the substance of the purloined DNC emails … to the hackers … blaming the Russians for being pro-Trump and releasing the emails to spoil Hillary’s campaign.
There’s hand-wringing and outrage that the Russians might be trying to impact a U.S. election.
Even President Obama has weighed in.
=======
But, U.S. intelligence officials have conceded that they are basing their views on deductive reasoning and not conclusive evidence. Source
I’ve got an alternative deduced scenario for you. Let’s connect some dots on this one …
Did Comey punt to American voters: let them decide if Hillary is guilty and whether it matters?
The DNC email flap has given rise to another possible adjudicator- designate: the Russians.
=======
For the record, HomaFiles was early on to this one.
The day after Comey dished Hillary her stay-out-of-jail-free card – we posted:
The Russians claim to have Hillary’s emails in their possession.
What if they release a couple of damning ones?
See Why did Comey choke on the biggest decision of his career?
========
Let’s flashback …
Let’s connect a couple of dots today …
1) The DNC was caught red-handed trying to extinguish, or at least, contain Bernie Sanders.
2) The purloined emails threw some gasoline on the smoldering Bernie embers … maybe not for him, but for many of his supporters.
3) Dem-darling pollster Nate Silver says that Bernie supporters aren’t “reliable voters” … based on historical data, they tend to stay home rather than vote for “imperfect” candidates.
4) For avid Bernie supporters who are still likely to vote, Hillary isn’t a 2nd choice … she’s part of “the problem”.
Here’s the pay-off punch:
According to yesterday’s CNN poll, the Libertarian & Green candidates (Johnson & Stein) are getting some traction … and they’re approaching critical mass — a combined 21% — among the under 45 crowd — many of whom still feel the Bern.
=========
Think about that for a moment …
Disaffected Bernie supporters are unlikely to bolt to Trump … but they may stay home … or, go Green or Libertarian … either as a protest vote or because they think one of those long-shot candidates can get into the debates and be a factor.
Keep your eye on the migration from Hillary to the 3rd parties.
========
Thanks to SMH for planting the seed.
========
#HomaFiles
Follow on Twitter @KenHoma >> Latest Posts
========
“He ‘pulled a Comey’ on us”.
Responding to Cruz’s convention speech, star-rising Kentucky State Senator Ralph Alvarado cut to the chase.
OMG … an FBI Director has become a part of speech.
=========
You know, like Xerox is not just a company … it‘s a noun synonymous with “ copy”. … and a verb, as in “go Xerox this”.
What did Alvarado mean?
=======
Basically, Cruz seemed to be laying out a case supportive of Trump, then he took a turn with “vote your conscience”.
Alarado coined it a “Comey”
Now, Comey’s dictionary legacy will be:
(1) Comey, noun … an illogical or counterfactual conclusion drawn from a compelling body of evidence .. e.g. “to pull a Comey”
(2) Comey, adjective … an illogical or counterfactual conclusion drawn from a compelling body of evidence … e.g. “that’s Comey logic”
(3) Comey, verb … to draw an illogical or counterfactual conclusion from a compelling body of evidence.
=======
Comey wanted to go down in the history books as a fair, just, apolitical FBI Director.
Instead, he may have planted his legacy in the Urban Dictionary.
========
#HomaFiles
Follow on Twitter @KenHoma >> Latest Posts
=======
A couple of common words … plagiarism?
Melania said:
“On July 28th, 2006, I was very proud to become a citizen of the United States – the greatest privilege on planet Earth.”
=======
In 2008, Michelle said:
“For the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country.”
========
Hmmm.
Both proud of being Americans … for about the same length of time … Melamia for a little longer.
Wonder why the mainstream media didn’t make a plagiaristic cause celebre out of this one?
Too nuanced, perhaps?
Or, too sharp of a contrast?
=======
#HomaFiles
Follow on Twitter @KenHoma >> Latest Posts
========
Both seem rational & hard-working with some degree of moderation … history of working across the aisle.
Sure, they’re boring … and my favorite (Pence) would probably lose … but I’d sure feel better about the election.
Agree?
=========
#HomaFiles
Follow on Twitter @KenHoma >> Latest Posts
========
“As the mother of 3 children, I know that all working mothers should have access to affordable childcare. I will be their voice.”
More notable snippets:
Trump’s speech last night had some clear takeaways: (1) law & order (2) anti-terrorism (3) outreach to both LGBTQs and Evangelicals (4) dignity and economic hope for the working class.
The speech was civilized .. which was probably disappointing those folks who were rooting for a crash & burn.
My opinion: he came across as a credible “blue-collar billionaire” … has genuine empathy for the working class …. still, a bit rough around the edges.
Breaking: CNN “snap poll” reports that 74% of viewers had a favorable reaction to Trump’s speech.
The speech reminded me of a great piece in the Washington Post by Barton Swaim author of “The Speechwriter: A Brief Education in Politics.”
His basic conclusion: “The most distinctive about Trump … is the structure of his language.”
======
Swain says that Trump — nnlike most politicians –doesn’t speak in political rhetoric; he speaks in punchlines – short jabs, not convoluted passages.
Why did Ted Cruz give the kind of speech he did at the RNC convention … and refuse to endorse Trump?
In a news conference Thursday, Cruz asserted that he it was because he’s “a man of principle who keeps his word.”
Really?
Remember that pesky pledge that all of the GOP candidates signed saying that they’d support the party’s nominee?
That was an not-so-clever ploy to keep Trump from running as a 3rd party candidate.
Never did the 15 losers think that the tables would turn and they’d be signing a commitment to support Trump.
Oops.
========
Cruz got a chance to clarify during the Fox News debate:
BAIER: Senator Cruz, yes or no, you will support Donald Trump is he’s the nominee?
CRUZ: Yes, because I gave my word that I would.
Oops again.
So Ted, you’re a man of your word unless …
Now, tell me again why we should ever believe a word you say?
========
For the record, I was a Rubio fan … with Cruz and Kasich my runners-up.
I really did think that they were me of their word.
Not so much any more.
TrusTED?
I don’t think so.
=======
#HomaFiles
Follow on Twitter @KenHoma >> Latest Posts
Election time, so some politicos are back to touting how the Feds “saved the US auto industry”, so I thought it was time to do a quick retrospective on the bailout.
Let’s put a stake in the ground: Ford didn’t take any Federal bailout money.
Since share price is a measure of financial performance, how has Ford stock performed?
Simple answer: At par with the S&P 500 when measured from pre-financial crisis levels … better than the S&P if measured from the financial crisis trough. (Ford is the thin green line on the chart, S&P is the blue).
========
And, how has the Fed-saved GM done?
Will “uneducated” voters determine the 2016 Presidential election?
=========
The most recent Washington Post poll – showing Hillary leading Donald by a couple of points — provides some very interesting drill down data … it’s worth some browsing time.
Buried in the numbers is some interesting data…..
======
MSM headlines frequently stereotype Trump’s supporters as non-college degreed whites … and often, the label is shorthanded as a more pejorative “uneducated”, i.e. mind-numbed dummies.
According to the WaPo poll, it’s true that Trump is favored by “white non-college” almost 2-to-1 … 60% to 33%
=======
No surprise there …
But, here are some findings that did surprise me a bit since they never gets spotlighted in the mainstream media…
Bottom line: The “fact-checkers” get 4 Pinocchios … based on their “facts” and some simple arithmetic.
Chatting with one of my liberal friends over the weekend (<= note that I didn’t say “My one liberal friend”), he dished the Dem talking point that Trump is not an accomplished business man … he could have grown his wealth more by simply investing in an S&P index fund.
Really?
========
Let’s pull some “facts” from the liberal “fact-checkers” (WaPo and Tampa Bay Times) and do some simple math…
Everybody knows that Trump supporters are uninformed Neanderthals, right?
Well, Pew has devised a 12-question quiz to measure News IQ.
So …
If you’re a Trump supporter, take the quiz to see if the critics are right.
If you’re a No-Trumper, take the quiz to see if the uninformed shoe fits you, too.
=======
Take the quiz … and then come back to this HomaFiles post for some interesting summary data.
Click to take the Pew News IQ Quiz.
The horrific attack in Nice yesterday was hardly an isolated event.
So far, during 2016, there have been 1,268 Islamic terror attacks in 50 countries, in which 11,664 people were killed and 14087 injured.
And, that’s only counting attacks for which ISIS and other Islamic terrorist groups have claimed credit.
Below are the most recent … click the chart to see the full list for 2016 and other post 9/11 years.
click to see full list
======
#HomaFiles
Follow on Twitter @KenHoma >> Latest Posts
========
Apparently the FBI didn’t since the Benghazi Report provides a detailed case-relevant linkage to the damage sowed by Clinton’s email “carelessness”.
In previous posts, I concluded that Comey ruled illogically because he didn’t want to tilt a potentially historic election.
For months, left-leaners were crying “foul” … asserting that the DOJ shouldn’t get involved in cases involving high profile candidates in election years … especially if the charges are as trivial as carelessly giving our enemies a backdoor into our nation’s top secret information.
What if that classified information led to the death of an American ambassador and 3 members of his “off-the-books” security detail?
Still just trivial oversight?
=======
Just in case you haven’t had a chance to read the Benghazi Report …
Neither the left- nor right-leaning media echo chambers seem to have landed on what, in my opinion, may be the case study that best demonstrates why Hillary Clinton’s email “carelessness” was a big deal … a life or death situation.
Note to left-leaning readers: This post will be more balanced than you might expect.
========
I’ll provide some details and links below …. for now, the bottom line:
Though Clinton was hawkish on US involvement in Libya (to oust Gadaffi), she lost the argument and was relegated to implementing Obama’s “lead from behind” and “no boots on the ground” policies.
Accordingly, the State Department under-protected the diplomats (e.g. Ambassador Stevens) who were tasked to “connect” with the anti-Gadaffi rebels.
Said differently, the Presidential Policy disallowed any overt military security for the diplomats … i.e. no marines deployed before or during the attack.
My take: Clinton – who I hold in very low regard – was just implementing the Administration’s “no boots” policy.
She argued the contrary to Obama, but lost the argument … she could have resigned, but that would have been politically inopportune for the Dems in the run-up to the 2012 election. Instead, she dutifully implemented.
Following the attack, Clinton tried to provide air cover for her boss, pitching the fraudulent video defense ad nauseam.
Of course, politicos lying to the American public isn’t exactly new news…
So, again, I’ll give her a pass for being a good team player.
Here’s where things go off-track for Clinton.
According to the Benghazi Report …
There were numerous emails on her home-brew email system that spoke explicitly to the lack of military security for the diplomats and provided details re: the diplomats travel schedules – when and where the diplomats would be, and how little protection they’d have.
Any reasonable person would consider those nuggets to be classified information … even if they weren’t “marked classified at the time that I sent or received them”.
Assuming that the non-secure email system was compromised (a fair assumption, I think) … then the diplomats were sitting ducks.
But, there wasn’t any direct evidence uncovered that Hillary intended to make them sitting ducks … so, harm, but no foul, right?
=======
Here’s some detail from the Benghazi Report that’s worth reading for “texture” and context….
My conclusion is that Comey ruled illogically because he didn’t want to be responsible for tilting a potentially historic election.
For months, many left-leaners were crying “foul” … asserting that the DOJ shouldn’t get involved in cases involving high profile candidates in election years … especially if the charges are as “trivial” as carelessly handling our nation’s top secret information.
Say, what?
Memo to Comey: It was DOJ action that changed the course of our nation in 2008 — giving us, for example, ObamaCare.
Flashback to 2008 … you know, the year that Barack Obama was elected.
Well, the DOJ didn’t indict Sen. John McCain for anything … or, overtly pave the way for Obama’s election …. but the DOJ did tilt the scales in a defining way.
Who did they indict?
=======
The DOJ indicted Alaska’s Ted Stevens, the longest-serving Republican senator in U.S. history. He was indicted during his 2008 re-election campaign.
What were the charges, what were the implications, and how was the case ultimately resolved?
Short answer: A majority disagree with Comey’s decision not to indict Secretary Clinton.
======
Two recent polls queried public opinion on Comey’s decision to let Hillary off the hook.
The right-leaning Rasmussen Reportl headlined:
“Most voters disagree with FBI Director James Comey’s decision not to seek a criminal indictment of Hillary Clinton.”
Specifically, 54% of likely U.S. voters disagree with the FBI’s decision and believe that the FBI should have sought a criminal indictment of Clinton … 27% agree with Comey and 10%) are undecided.
Said differently, 2/3’s of the people with an opinion disagreed.
The Rasmussen results are consistent with those of the left-leaning Washington Post / ABC poll which put the split at 56% disagree to 35% agree.
![clip_image002[1]](https://homafiles.info/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/clip_image0021.jpg "clip_image002[1]")
======
Digging deeper, the details – “internals” in research jargon – are directionally predictable, but interesting…
Comey probably expected to be attacked from the right for his illogical decision – amassing a pile of evidence that he then summarily dismissed by parsing words (“extremely careless” vs. “gross negligence”), inserting criminal intent as a criteria (apparently never hearing of, say, negligent homicide) and channeling George Castanza: “Perjury? Is that wrong?”
======
But, since he slipped Hillary a stay-out-of-jail-free card, I doubt that he was expecting to be attacked from the left.
Silly boy.
Quickly, Team Hillary moved from defense to offense …
========
First, the Washington Post ran an op-ed by Matthew Miller – a former director of DOJ’s public affairs office under Eric Holder.
Title of the piece was James Comey’s abuse of power.
I was expecting the guy to point out that Comey should have simply presented the evidence and let the prosecutors do the prosecuting.
Wrong.
Miller’s central premise was that Comey – since he let Hillary off the hook – had no right to present a litany of half-baked circumstantial evidence.
How would you feel if you were innocent of any wrong-doing and a sloppy, indiscriminate fact-finder started airing your inconsequential dirty laundry.
Shame on you, Mr. Comey.
========
Piling on, Team Hillary started reprising their original talking points.
Facts be damned, there were no emails that were specifically marked classified at the time that they were sent or received.
Don’t throw arcane classification symbols at us, Mr. Comey … show us the word “classified” on the documents.
No reasonable person would expect the Secretary of State to know all of the classification symbols.
And, disregard that document she signed saying that she understood the law re: handling classified material … and the legal consequences.
She had to sign so many things that she couldn’t possibly read them all. Get serious, Mr. Comey.
Say, what?
=======
Finally, when Wolf Blitzer – CNN’s journalistic attack dog (<= sarcasm)– sheepishly asked Hillary about Comey’s ruling, she asserted: Mr. Comey made many assertions that are based on solely on supposition.
“My record as Secretary of State demonstrates that protected classified information and the security of the country”.
English translation: There is no direct evidence that any of the information from my emails is in the hands of enemy agents. You said yourself, Mr. FBI Director.
So, Mr. Comey, prove it … or STFU.
Ouch.
=======
Comey probably didn’t expect that the proverbial dog would eat the hand that fed it the stay-out-of-jail card.
But, it did.
Comey tried to give everybody half-a-loaf.
He may have ndicted Hillary politically by airing her carelessness and lies, but he let her off the legal hook.
As the saying goes, he might have been “too clever by half”… and simply angered both sides.
Comey said that his 2 life priorities are his family and his reputation.
Now, he might want to just focus on his family …
======
#HomaFiles
Follow on Twitter @KenHoma >> Latest Posts
She looks very innocent ….
========
But, Team Trump had to raise the controversial question…
First, let’s establish a basic point:
The killing of 5 police officers in Dallas is a horrific tragedy to their families, to the city and to the country,
The massacre may go down as a defining moment in American history.
Time will tell/
======
That said, can you imagine the likely bipolar reaction at Hillary’s campaign headquarters?
One one hand, I’m sure that they shared the heartfelt shock and grief that most Americans felt.
======
On the other hand …
Can you imagine the sigh of relief when there was nary a word about the Comey hearings on the news yesterday?
Nothing yesterday … probably won’t be anything today or tomorrow or the next day or the day after that.
A tragedy of monumental proportions has shifted the spotlight off of Hillary at a very opportune time.
I’ll skip the obvious tasteless cliche and just say:
For better or worse, maybe Hillary is a woman of destiny.
Think about it …
======
#HomaFiles
Follow on Twitter @KenHoma >> Latest Posts
======
I watched the bulk of the Comey hearings yesterday.
First, I commend the Comey for showing up, for his 5-hour mental-physical stamina, for his recall of specifics and, with a couple of exceptions, his apparent forthrightness.
Second, too bad that Chaffetz and Gowdy couldn’t have all the GOP time for questions. They provided the most revealing moments.
=======
Specifically, here are my takeaways.
A very loyal reader sent me an email reminding me of a post from last December when the GOP Presidential primary race was heating up.
Who was my pick?
You guessed it: James Comey.
=======
Among Comey’s qualities that I lauded were:
· High Integrity: Consistently praised by both ends of the political spectrum — not for being bi-partisan, but for being non-partisan
· Apolitical: He’s clearly “in the game” for the right reasons – to serve the country and its people.
· Independent: Earned enough FU-money in his real world jobs that he can’t be bought or swayed.
I thought that I was on safe ground since I had even fact-checked with somebody very, very close to Comey who assured me that the Director was the real deal.
Ouch.
I got it wrong … but somebody had the guy pegged right all along.
Short answer: He didn’t have the stones to make a historic decision.
Image from The Drudge Report
=======
A weird turn of events put Comey under a particularly bright spotlight.
Before the events of the past week, the way I expected things to work out:
Comey would have drawn the correct legal opinion based on the evidence, but the course of history wouldn’t have changed.
But, things didn’t work out that way, and Comey found himself in a much brighter spotlight … and, when the story ends, it won’t be pretty for Comey
FBI Director Comey spent 14 minutes laying out the case against Hillary Clinton:
Extremely careless handling of classified material (a felony) that in high likelihood has fallen into the hands of sophisticated enemies of the state.
======
Then, he spent less than 1 minute explaining that since there was no direct evidence of wrongful intent, the FBI is recommending that no criminal charges be brought against Clinton.
A total non sequitur.
The last honest man just lost his title.
=======
Next time you’re stopped for doing 70 in a 55, jest tell the cop that you didn’t intend to speed.
Surely, he’ll let you off since he would have no direct evidence of your intent to speed.
Let me know how it goes.
=======
P.S. We called this one … See our prior post AG Lynch: “Depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is …”
======
Click for a transcript of Comey’s remearks
#HomaFiles
Follow on Twitter @KenHoma >> Latest Posts
=======
A lesson in word parsification.
======
OK, AG Lynch didn’t parse the word “is” … Bill Clinton did.
And, he didn’t parse it during his private plane chat with AG Loretta Lynch.
After all, she said that their conversation was “primarily about grandchildren and golf.”
Hmmm.
=======
Today’s lesson is on how to say nothing by parsing your words ….
First, some background …
The tests I give my students always include some questions that can reasonably be tagged “memorization”.
Some students are repulsed by them them and shout the cultural refrain: “Don’t memorize anything that you can look up.”
The apparent thinking: You’ve only got a limited amount of space in your brain, so don’t clog it with an overload of information … only store the stuff you can’t look-up.
What’s wrong with that argument?
The Homa Files 