PA Bill Number: HB2311
Title: Establishing the School Mental Health Screening Grant and Development Program.
Description: Establishing the School Mental Health Screening Grant and Development Program. ...
Last Action: Laid on the table
Last Action Date: Sep 23, 2024
Comey's gift to Republicans :: 07/14/2016
FBI Director James Comey has come under serious fire since Tuesday when he announced that the FBI is not recommending prosecution of Hillary Clinton over her willful negligence in handling classified material on her unauthorized, private email server. While there is plenty of grumbling about the decision in Republican circles, the truth is, Comey’s decision, and his statement of facts during his announcement, is much better for Republicans than if he had chosen to seek an indictment.
While an indictment would have been a black cloud over the Clinton campaign, it would be nothing she’s not accustomed to. The Clintons thrive under clouds. Like vampires, their only real enemy is sunlight. An indictment would have resulted in Hillary’s supporters rallying to her victimhood, and information about the case would be in short supply, with likely gag orders. But an indictment would have been unlikely, even in the face of an FBI recommendation. The chance of Loretta Lynch moving ahead with a prosecution are between slim and none. And if Lynch or one of her minions were the one making the “No Indictment” announcement, it is equally unlikely we would have gotten the juicy details of Hillary’s criminal negligence.
The FBI announcement, with Director Comey’s commentary, is probably the best anyone could have hoped for politically. Comey laid out the case against Mrs. Clinton, giving us point-by-point rebuttals of many of the blatant lies she has told since the case first boiled up, and basically declaring her guilty. Then he said he didn’t think a prosecution would fly – which, let’s face it, it wouldn’t in Barack Obama’s justice system – before reminding everyone that anyone else doing something like this would have at least faced some administrative penalty, and probable loss of their security clearance. In short Director Comey’s non-indictment statement rolled all the talking points the Republicans need into a shiny package just in time for the election.
Now the evidence is out there, and details will continue trickling out over the next several months. The vast majority of people polled right after Comey’s announcement feel that Clinton is getting special treatment, rather than being unfairly persecuted, and that Hillary is an elitist liar. The perception of “special treatment,” Hillary being “above the law,” and that she and her D.C. pals think laws are for “little people,” not important elites like Clinton, is much more damaging than an indictment recommendation, or even an actual indictment, could ever be.
Comey’s reputation might never recover from this decision, but faced with the circumstances and likely outcomes, his decision, and the comments that went along with it, was probably the best that could have been made. Also remember that Comey might not be finished yet. His agency is still investigating abuses within the Clinton Foundation. Whether Comey’s gift to Republicans was intentional or not, it was certainly a gift, and who knows what other surprises might be waiting around the corner.
Meanwhile, back in the trenches of the Gun Rights War, Republicans and the NRA continue to blunder in ways that will cost Republican votes this November and beyond.
Anti-rights forces leaped at the chance to use the terrorist attack in Orlando as an excuse to launch another attack on the right to arms. Their latest rallying cry is “No Fly – No Buy,” meaning that people on the federal “No Fly” list shouldn’t be allowed to legally purchase a gun. Of course, that sounds like a very reasonable suggestion. If you knew someone was a terrorist planning to murder a bunch of people, why would you let him buy a gun? Unfortunately, sounding reasonable and being reasonable are two vastly different things. If the FBI or other law enforcement knows that someone is a terrorist planning to murder people, why is that person freely walking the street? If they are only suspected of being a terrorist, or associating with, or supporting terrorism, do they lose the presumption of innocence until proven guilty? And what exactly does it take to be considered a suspected terrorist or terrorist supporter?
How, exactly, is the Terrorism Watch List compiled and maintained?
Actually, no one knows. Nor does anyone know who is making that determination, what kind of verification process is involved, if any, or how an innocent person gets off the list.
It is unconscionable to even consider allowing constitutional rights to be determined by a secret list compiled with secret criteria by faceless bureaucrats like Lois Lerner.
The average American thinks of a terrorist as a Muslim extremists in a suicide vest with an AK-47, but that’s not who Loretta Lynch is worried about. She says her greatest fear is American “right-wing radicals.” Does that mean neo-Nazis, or others who have been named as “potential terrorists” like Ron Paul supporters, military veterans and members of “anti-government” groups like the NRA and the tea party?
Instead of making this case, pointing out these dangers, and standing on principles, the NRA and Republicans are offering “unconstitutional lite.” Rather than reject the radical Democrats’ proposals, the NRA and some Republicans propose to put your rights into the hands of Loretta Lynch and her army of Lois Lerners, but with the addition of a limited court hearing before a judge, with limited disclosure of charges, limited evidence, no opportunity to face an accuser, and no jury of peers to determine the validity of the charges – and no consequences for bureaucrats who abuse the system.
The “compromise” has outraged grass-roots rights leaders around the country. Open letters to the American people and to Congress have been released, signed by dozens of these rights leaders, decrying the betrayal represented by this rights-weakening compromise. They are warning Republican politicians that any vote for any legislation that strips a person of fundamental rights based only on suspicion and a secret list – regardless of the NRA’s position – will be remembered in November, and worse, that this sort of muddying of the waters serves to disillusion GunVoters and drive them away from both parties, seriously diminishing the potential impact GunVoters can bring to the polls.
Republicans – and the NRA – should take heed of these warnings.
