Jill Stein, Too Far Out for America

peace

Jill Stein is sort of groovy in some ways. I agree with her that fracking should be banned. There is a real connection between environmental factors and human health. I remember Love Canal. Stein is a medical doctor with degrees from Harvard. She was an internist for 25 years and she taught future doctors at Harvard Medical School. She fought the industries in her state that ran by burning coal because the pollution was so harmful to living things. She stands up for the things she believes and she has earned some praise for her passion.

However, Jill Stein is sort of far out in other ways, literally way out there in terms of her backing for some discredited causes. In fact I have heard that some call her the Ben Carson of the left. She has given some support to the anti-vax movement by refusing to give her unequivocal acceptance of scientific studies that show no connection between vaccines and autism. Some people who are against vaccinating their children are now arguing that the scheduling of these vaccines is the variable that has contributed to the rise in autism in America. Jill Stein does not say anything to rule this out. It is dangerous when there are 7 billion+ people on the planet. What we definitely do not need is an outbreak of smallpox.

Stein is also against GMO’s (genetically modified organisms) and many others in the forefront of the stay-healthy-eat-pure-hike-kayak-and-bike-and –you-can-live-forever crowd are with her on this. There is nothing really wrong with being anti-GMO although so far no truly harmful effects have been found. Many on the “hippie” fringes of the left believe that messing with Mother Nature always comes back to bite us in the butt. Partnering with this passion is Stein’s support for the argument that nicotine based fertilizers are killing our honey bees. In an article in Slate magazine correspondent Jordan Weissmann, says that most evidence suggests that our bees are doing just fine. However you feel about these matters, these issues are still a bit “out there” as part of a Presidential agenda.

Mrs. Stein has tacked a few new concerns on to her environmental agenda which are a better fit to a broader Presidential agenda but which could also qualify as pandering. She has promised to have the government pay off all student debt using the same mysterious economic trick that was given the title of “quantitative easing” when it was used to buy up bad mortgages and bail out the banks. She is really steamed about what she sees as a con which used a mathematical sounding term to cover up what amounted to a theft of taxpayer money. She shows us how clever and witty she is by creating the term “misleaders” to talk about our government officials and the Fed (which she would reform within an inch of its life). She often also backs reparations for Americans of African Descent, a very controversial piece of pandering which may or may not ever happen.

Jill Stein (picture her with a headband or a chain of flowers in her hair) wants to cut the military budget by 50% and close 700 military bases (picture her chaining herself to a fence near the Pentagon surrounded by angry Republicans and bewildered Democrats). That would certainly buy us a lot of student debt, although my nieces who just finished paying off their loans might be a bit ticked off. It also appeals to my hope for a future that has far more peace than war in it. But it flies in the face of the evidence we can find throughout human history that we are a contentious species and not quite ready to begin the thousand years of peaceful coexistence we would like to see stretching ahead of us.

John Lennon probably would have been a fan of Jill Stein and I am a huge fan of John Lennon, although I can’t imagine having him as our President and I cannot see us electing someone as “airy fairy” as Jill Stein either, although I hope she continues to shake her tambourine and fight the good fight at the intersection of the environment and the health of our planet. Even the anti-war stuff is beneficial, but certainly not Presidential. I cannot see the Green Party candidate, Jill Stein, getting much more than the 3% of the vote that she is currently getting.

Here are two of the sources I used to learn more about Jill Stein:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2016/07/27/jill_stein_is_not_the_savior_the_left_is_looking_for.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jill_Stein

 

Examining Republican Myths

Republican economic myth 3 big

The Economy

Why are we still hearing the whine of Republicans like gnats buzzing our brains by way of our ears, saying things like they do not dare let Democrats get their hands on the economy and that they might be able to cast an extremely reluctant vote for Hillary if she moderates her agenda for the economy? I seem to recall that the Republicans were in office when this country went into the Great American Recession in 2008. I keep thinking (don’t you) that it was lack of regulation on banks and investment firms that created a housing bubble which was destined to burst and do real damage to millions of Americans. I have, with many other middle class Americans, waited for some of that “trickle down” to get into my bank account but that hasn’t happened. We have examined these Republicans myths many times.

So, my question is, why do Republicans still think that they should be put in charge of the American economy? Why do they think that the same policies that tanked the American economy are what we need to set it right? These are the same Republicans who obstructed the Obama administration so much that he was never really allowed to stimulate the economy as much as he would have liked and who then want to use the slow recovery meme against the Democrats in the 2016 election. I guess they think we have very short memories, or that they are so popular (or that their media brainwashing has been so effective) that the truth does not matter.

Thomas Friedman, who leans right, wrote about this in yesterday’s New York Times. He cites Hillary Clinton’s progressive agenda as being anti-business and he suggests that her policies will discourage, rather than encourage investment and innovation. Although Hillary may not have been addressing business interests lately, she knows that this country’s engine of growth is business, employment and a spirit of invention that keeps us striving to break new ground. He makes it sound as if she will replace industry with infrastructure, private with public, but she is not advocating any such dichotomy. She is saying that improvements in infrastructure will boost employment, but will also push economic growth and make it easier and less expensive to do business in America.

Republican myth 3 big

Foreign Affairs

I also keep hearing a chorus, sort of like the chorus in a Greek tragedy, softly chanting a refrain that tells us the heroic tale of the mighty Republicans who are much better at foreign affairs and winning battles than those dumb Democrats who seem to think that we can rely on diplomacy, alliances, and hit and run soldiering. In this version of the Republican myths they blame the Democrats, especially Hillary, for the chaos in Libya and they tell us that Obama and Hillary are to blame for the upheavals in the entire Middle East as if we have already forgotten who took the lid off the pot in Iraq (43). As if the internet played no part in the events of the turn of this century.

They are caught in a narrative that suggests that complex world events have simple causes. According to Republicans people can’t cause climate change, but one person, acting on his/her own can topple empires and create global political chaos with well-intentioned but clumsy advice. Yes Obama backed off from the “red line” in Syria, but where would we be right now if he didn’t? I suppose in GOP-world we would be shut of Assad, the Syrian people would not be flooding Europe (so that their children can have some quality to their lives), and there would be no ISIS. But this is all hypothetical and we might just be stuck sending our sons and daughters into a situation that is still in flux and cannot be solved with powerful rifles and dead soldiers.

They insist that ISIS would not exist if Obama had never brought the troops home from Iraq and the rest of us insist that ISIS would not exist if Bush had never sent our troops to Iraq. By artificially speeding up an awakening that probably was inevitable but perhaps not quite so imminent chaos was loosed on the world in the sense of the conflicting sects of a religion that we once saw as monolithic but which was not, in the sense of how the Islamic religion, which has been left in a peaceful-seeming equilibrium will eventually either temper its fundamentalism with modern secularism or will wall itself off in an ecstasy of purity and either turn its back on the rest of us or force our foreheads to the floor. I think Bush would have done better by all of us if he had gone directly to Afghanistan and left Iraq alone, although the taunting of Saddam Hussein was hard to ignore. Once the Middle East awakened to the 21st century, some Muslims with disgust, some with interest, the changes we are experiencing there were probably inevitable.

The GOP shows no more prescience or military brilliance when faced with our current dilemmas than the Democrats and, in fact, because they do not like to approach the problems we face with any delicacy, their desire to stomp around using the dusty boots of America’s children, and their bombast would actually be harmful. Many people believe that Hillary Clinton is too hawkish to conduct our foreign affairs in these combustible times, but I like to think that Hillary is unlikely to turn Obama’s foreign policy approach aside and become an avenging Amazon. She has too much compassion for women and children to leave the effects of her decisions on them out of the equation.

The GOP, if you really consider the past seven or eight years and the mistakes of G. W., has nothing to offer us on either the American economy or our foreign policy, but Hillary will still take their stand on these issues into account because she wants to unify, rather than divide, America. The Republicans cannot be trusted to do the same if they are in control.

August Book List 2016

stack of books on the dark wood background. toning. selective focus on the middle book
From a Google Image Search

My August Book List 2016 is compiled from four sources: Amazon, Publisher’s Weekly, the Independent Booksellers, and the New York Times Book Review

 

Amazon

 

Wolf Road: A Novel by Beth Lewis

Dark Matter: A Novel by Blake Crouch

The Heavenly Table: A Novel by Donald Ray Pollock

Chaos Monkeys: Obscene Fortune and Random Failure in Silicon Valley by Antonio Garcia Martinez  (NF)

Underground Airlines by Ben H. Winters

A Hundred Thousand Worlds by Bob Proehl

Here Comes the Sun by Nicole Dennis-Benn

As Good as Gone: A Novel by Larry Watson

Pierced by the Sun by Laura Esquivel

Pond by Claire-Louise Bennett

Invincible Summer by Alice Adams

Night of the Animals by Bill Broun

 

Mysteries and Thrillers

 

The Black Widow by Daniel Silva

Wolf Lake: A Novel by Ruth Ware

The Heavenly Table: A Novel by Donald Ray Pollock

The Castle of Kings by Oliver Potzsch

I Am No One: A Novel by Patrick Flanery

All is Not Forgotten: A Novel by Wendy Walter

How to Set a Fire and Why: A Novel by Jesse Ball

The Last One: A Novel by Alexandra Oliva

Dark Matter: A Novel by Blake Crouch

 

Nonfiction

 

The Voyeur’s Motel by Gay Talese

 

Science Fiction and Fantasy

 

Just One Damned Thing After Another: The Chronicles of St. Mary’s, Book One by Jodi Taylor

Time Siege by Wesley Chu

The Dark Side by Anthony O’Neill

 

Publisher’s Weekly

 

Wintering: A Novel by Peter Geye (Sequel to The Lighthouse Road)

The Heavenly Table by Donald Ray Pollock

Problems by Jade Sharma

Before the Fall by Noah Hawley

Magnate: The Knickerbocker Club by Joanna Shupe

The Girls: A Novel by Emma Cline

One Hundred Twenty-One Days by Michele Audin (trans. by Christiana Hills)

 

July 25th

 

You Will Know Me by Megan Abbott

Dark Matter by Blake Crouch

In Loving Memory by Winona Kent (sequel to Persistence of Memory)

The Unseen World by Liz Moore

 

Fall Books

 

The Underground Railroad by Colson Whitehead

Commonwealth by Ann Patchett

Swing Time by Zadie Smith

Here I Am by Jonathan Safran Foer

The Mothers by Brit Bennett

 

Mystery, Thriller, Crime

 

The Lost Boy by Camilla Lackberg

IQ by Joe Ide

The One Man by Andrew Gross

 

Independent Booksellers

 

The Rocks by Peter Nichols

Before the Fall by Noah Hawley

Sweetbitter by Stephanie Danler

First Come Love by Emily Griffin

The Woman in Cabin 10 by Ruth Ware

Homegoing by Yaa Gyasi

Underground Airlines by Ben H. Winters

Barkskins by Annie Proulx

Belgravia by Julian Fellowes

Milk and Honey by Rupi Kaur

The Cartel by Don Winslow

Last Words by Michael Koryta

A Banquet of Consequences by Elizabeth George

Pond by Clair-Louise Bennett

A Hero of France by Alan Furst

The Singles Game by Lauren Weisberger

The Trouble with Goats and Sheep by Joanna Cannon

Siracusa by Delia Ephron

LaRose by Louise Eldrich

The Vegetarian by Han Kang

Eligible by Curtis Sittenfeld

Lily and the Octopus by Steve Rowley

The Light of Paris by Eleanor Brown

The Mandibles: A Family, 2029 – 2047 by Lionel Shriver

Lilac Girls by Martha Hall Kelly

The Course of Love by Alain de Botton

Zero K by Dan DeLillo

The Trap by Melanie Raabe

The Summer Before the War by Helen Simonson

The Noise of Time by Julian Barnes

They May Not Mean to, But They Do by Cathleen Schine

NYT Book Review

 

July 10

 

Vinegar Girl by Anne Tyler

Invincible Summer by Alice Adams

She Poured Her Heart Out by Jean Thompson

 

Crime Fiction

 

The Innocents by Ace Atkins (Bk. 6)

Another One Goes Tonight by Peter Lovesey

Fatal Pursuit by Martin Walker

Brighton by Michael Harvey

 

Editor’s Choice

 

The Sun in Your Eyes by Deborah Shapiro

The Drowned Detective by Neil Jordan

Born on a Tuesday by Elnathan Neil Jordan

Grief is the Thing with Feathers by Max Porter

 

July 17

 

The Mandibles A Family 2029-2047 by Lionel Shriver

The Sunlight Pilgrims by Jenni Fagan

Belgravia by Julian Fellowes

 

Editor’s Choice

 

Lucky Strikes by Louis Bayard

 

July 24

 

Heroes of the Frontier by Dave Eggers

Chronicle of Last Summer by Yasmine El Rashidi

Miss Jane by Brad Watson

The Heavenly Table by Donald Ray Pollock

Pond by Clair-Louise Bennett

The Veins of the Ocean by Patricia Engel

 

Crime Fiction

 

Let the Devil Out by Sarah Crichton

Guilty Minds by Joseph Finder

Fall From Grace by Tim Weaver

The Lost Girls by Heather Young

The Black Widow by Daniel Silva

 

July 31, 2016

 

The Devils of Cardona by Matthew Carr

Good as Gone by Amy Gentry

All the Missing Girls by Megan Miranda

The Death of Rex Nhongo by C B George

You Will Know Me by Megan Abbott

Breaking Cover by Stella Remington

The Wolf of Sarajevo by Matthew Palmer

I Am No One by Patrick Flanery

City of Secrets by Stewart O’Nan

Missing, Presumed by Susan Steiner

Dark Matter by Blake Crouch

Paradime by Alan Glynn

Under the Harrow by Flynn Berry

Dancing with the Tiger by Lili Wright

Exposure by Helen Dunmore

The Kingdom by Fuminori Nakumura

The Crow Girl by Eric Axl Sund

Among the Dead and Dreaming by Samuel Ligon

Fever by Tim Baker

Judenstaat by Simon Zelitch

Underground Airlines by Ben H. Winters

 

 

The Last Great Conspiracy Theory?

 

conspiracytheorybig

Have we reached the last great conspiracy theory? We have been watching a conspiracy theory tennis tournament play out between the Democrats and the Republicans at least since 2012. The Benghazi tennis ball has been smashed back and forth for ages because the damning revelations were supposed to be timed to interfere with the 2016 election. Finally the anticlimactic report of the last Benghazi investigation (we hope it is the last because it’s costing the American people big bucks) concludes that all evidence suggests that Hillary Clinton was not guilty of any wrongdoing in this devastating attack in Libya. There was no assistance that could have arrived in time to save our people in Benghazi and Hillary Clinton was not, as many stated, asleep at the most crucial moments.

The fact that Hillary Clinton used a private server while at the State Department was the one juicy piece of info that came out of the Benghazi investigations. The Republicans put the Benghazi investigation to rest because they gleefully imagined that Hillary would be indicted by the FBI for something, treason, I guess. This seems a rather hyperbolic outcome to wish for given that it would suggest that Hillary is a seer who knew that the attacks in Benghazi would happen when she became Secretary of State and planned in advance to cover her tracks. But it sort of fits the Lucifer label that Republicans tried to attach to her at the RNC last week. (Republicans have a thing about Lucifer – they are so paranoid about the UN that they speak of something called the Luciferian Church of the UN, which does not exist.) I suspect they are saying that if Hillary is Lucifer on earth she could have known about the Benghazi attacks in advance. If you have to use this kind of bizarre reasoning to get where you want to go wouldn’t it seem that it is time to backtrack and start over, or just be quiet?

So now the GOP is left with just one more tennis ball to bat around and they must try to make the volley last until Hillary is tarred and feathered just before people go to the polls because Republicans cannot win this election without sliming their opponent, considering the caliber of their own candidate. This final round of our conspiracy tournament involves the Clinton Foundation and the arms deals made by the State Department while Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State. It is possible that these are two separate spheres that simply look like they overlap (a simple conflict of interest), or it is also possible that there was collusion between Bill and Hillary and that her arms deals while in the State Department were actually tied to the donations made to the Clinton Foundation. I have spoken before about the difficulty with seeing simple cause-effect relationships in complex matters. You must carefully connect the dots to prove that the money given to the Clinton Foundation was indeed used to influence arms deals in the State Department. The optics are bad, but is there actually any connection?

I don’t recall a time when we have had a husband and wife team where each partner had aspirations for the Presidency of the United States of America. Had the times been different for women would Eleanor Roosevelt have made a great Presidential candidate? Possibly. But that moment did not happen. But we are fifty plus years past those days. We now have a past President, Bill Clinton, doing his post Presidential best to help save the people on the planet from poverty and exploitation. And we have Hillary Clinton who believes she can do a good job as our first female President. I assume Bill Clinton’s goals are altruistic. Others assume he is using the Clinton Foundation to increase his personal wealth and bankroll his wife’s election campaign. People who hypothesize about this know that such activities are illegal and yet they believe that Bill and Hillary Clinton are so powerfully connected and privileged that they will not only steal from a charitable foundation with the family name right on it but also that their guilt will be covered up by powerful people. That all sounds pretty diabolical. But is it true?

Furthermore the argument goes on to say that Hillary drummed up contributions for the family charity while she made her rounds as Secretary of State and that she traded State Department arms deals for those contributions. There are the charts hanging out on the internet that look pretty damning.   http://www.ibtimes.com/clinton-foundation-donors-got-weapons-deals-hillary-clintons-state-department-1934187

clinton foundation chart 1 big

 

 

clinton foundation chart 2 big

 

Yikes! I can see why people get all exercised over this. But just because events are contiguous does not prove a cause-effect relationship. If there is a true cause and effect connection between these two sets of data then perhaps Bill and Hillary Clinton should be in jail. But, even though Hillary’s judgment was called into question on the email server decision, it would take some pretty stunningly unrealistic rationalizations for the Clintons to sell arms through the State Department in exchange for campaign contributions from foreign governments and make those funds look like charitable donations. Why would anyone expect to get away with something so blatantly illegal when contemplating a run for the highest office in our nation? I still do not accept that the Clintons are corrupt enough to plan and execute a scheme like this. I believe that the Clinton Foundation is Bill’s project and does have charitable goals. I also believe that Hillary did not go around the globe trading ostensibly charitable contributions from foreign governments for arms offered to foreign nations by the State Department. Connect the dots if you can. If you can’t retire the ball and get off the court and end this third round of the great conspiracy tennis tournament.

 

 

Donald Trump is Deranged: The Details

narcissist 4 sm

Once again I argue that Donald Trump is deranged. His derangement takes several forms. He is, first of all, a certifiable megalomaniac (see narcissistic personality disorder). People with this disorder are sometimes leaders because their ego drives them to destroy all obstacles in their path, but they are usually too selfish to share power with anyone. While Julius Caesar began his governance of Rome by heading a republican form of government, he soon became disillusioned with the Roman senators and he felt that he towered over them in every way. He became “dictator in perpetuity” and the Fall of Rome began. (By the way, he was also assassinated,) Donald Trump is just such a man. He does not have equals, only underlings.

He is not the right person to head a Democracy. He does not even believe in free speech unless it praises him. This should be frightening to all who love America and what we stand for. If he gets elected I will be scared to speak against him. Is he just a verbal bully or is he a true thug who will use power like a weapon? We don’t know, do we? I was only ever nervous about speaking out against two other Presidents – Nixon and G W Bush (because of his henchmen) – both Republicans.

The Republican Party seems to think that in order to keep order in America we must flirt with fascism. (Donald Trump acts like a fascist.) They don’t like people who speak softly even if they do carry a big stick. They want to be sure the world knows that any leader they back will talk tough and use that big stick, with malice, at the slightest offense. The problem with this is that our biggest stick is actually a nuke, which Donald Trump refuses to say he will only use under the most dire circumstances.

Donald Trump is a deal maker, which in his case, means that he will do almost any sleazy old thing as long as it is marginally legal. So he tells Americans, who think our government is taking care of so many undeserving people that it can no longer take care of them, that he will build a wall – that he will kick out all the freeloaders. And he will bring back all the jobs. But if he can’t do these deals, he will not mind disappointing his followers and he will do different deals which they may or may not like. That is the true “Art of the Deal.”

Trump seems to have the emotional maturity of a child. Name-calling, cheap taunts, foolish nicknames, these things may look like they send opponents scurrying but his targets only disengage because if they fight back they have to lose any gravitas they might ever have in the future. Donald is a junk yard dog who will keep throwing dirtier dirt until his temper tantrum gets him what he wants. He may seem to win but he really just sets his “phaser” to stun and those he vanquishes decide to walk away and live to fight another day.

I understand that the things he promises look appealing to some. He seems like he can bring back simpler times when Americans were predominantly Christians of European origin who spoke English. His followers seem to yearn for this and believe that he will basically give them back the America of their childhoods. The world has moved on however, and it will most likely prove impossible for Donald Trump to produce an American future that corresponds to his fantastical promises. The 21st century is what it is and that is what we must learn to participate in and we must prove that we know how to thrive even as our world changes. As for Donald, if he is President I hope he gets good meds. If he is not elected he can be as eccentric as he pleases. He is wealthy enough to get away with it.

Donald Trump is Deranged

Donald Trump 2

Donald Trump is deranged. It is covered over right now with engineered speeches, teleprompter puppeteering, suave political management, and a boring running mate, but the crazy is still in there. We already got to listen to it for an entire primary season. The Republican National Committee now has Donald Trump tied down like Gulliver in Lilliput (Jonathan Swift). Donald Trump will either break free at some point and invite us to his rave once again or his children will be running our government with the able (that’s sarcasm) help of another intolerant throwback to the 50’s, Mike Pence, his VP.

Media

How did he, Donald Trump get this far? I blame all of the media, currently very busy denying they had any part in this. And even more, I blame their bosses who, I am sure, insisted they televise every move Trump made in the primaries because the ratings were through the roof (today’s version of the events the Roman Coliseum was designed for). We know this happened because the print media and the broadcast media have both kept us informed about the money Donald didn’t have to spend. Commentators on every network got to relax and let Donald script their shows for them in his shockingly unscripted way.

What does it matter now who is to blame? We are apparently stuck with this nightmare scenario. However, it does still matter. The media, even the liberal-leaning media, likes to paint Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton as being somehow equally awful. Sometimes Hillary even has a slight edge over Donald. I don’t know what your favorite channel choice is, but mine is MSNBC. At least once in almost every hour of every day someone on Morning Joe, and Meet the Press Daily, and Andrea Mitchell’s show, or even the new Bloomberg offering goes on and on about Hillary’s unfavorable and untrustworthy ratings and sums up, ad infinitum, the (unproven) sins she committed that have earned her the low ratings. I have never seen anyone so maligned for so little. Even Donald Trump is not so consistently assigned to the suddenly proverbial burning dumpster and he has done and said some truly reprehensible things.

So, although it seems clear to rational folks that Donald Trump should never be the President of the United States of America here we are watching a week long pretense in the form of the Republican Convention that seems to say that what we are witnessing is a normal and traditional election, when we could actually be witnessing the end of America as we know it. The entire charade is shameful and without the endless media circus might never have happened. Do you job, media people, and make sure that you find a way to repair the damage you have done before it is really too late, if it isn’t already.

The State Department and Hillary Clinton

Hillary home DC small Hillary home small

I want to make another argument on behalf of Hillary Clinton – surprise, surprise – because I just don’t feel that we are using the correct perspective to examine this issue of the “emails”. I also know that what I am suggesting is not an understanding that is written anywhere, or one that perhaps has ever been mentioned before. However, given the unusual nature of the position of Secretary of State, and given that due weight has not been given to how the State Department operates in the digital age, I feel that there are some extenuating circumstances that affect whoever holds this position and that there needs to be some discussion about the role of the Secretary of State.

I am suggesting that the position of Secretary of State is unique because the Secretary of State is rarely in the State Department in Washington, D C but is traveling constantly to near and distant locations. I am arguing that, for this reason, wherever the Secretary of State is, the State Department goes with her or him. So if the Secretary is on a plane, the bubble of the State Department goes along. If the Secretary of State is in a hotel room, the State Department is there. If the Secretary of State is with a foreign leader or a group of foreign nationals, the State Department is there. When the Secretary of State is in his/her home office, the State Department is there. I would argue that Hillary did not ever remove documents from the State Department because wherever she went the State Department was there. As long as Hillary Clinton was the Secretary of State, the State Department and Hillary Clinton were inseparable.

If her arrangements threatened national security the threat does not seem to be greater than that to any other system, including government systems. We do not have a way to make our digital networks completely secure at this time. However, given that the Secretary of State takes the State Department with her/him at all times, government security should reach to all digital equipment in the Secretary’s home and equipment carried abroad.

It seems to me that we need to update government agencies to operate in this digital age much more than we need to prosecute employees who take it into their own hands to set up systems that work without undue complexity. I also do not believe that Hillary lied to Congress about receiving or sending classified emails, especially now that we are aware of the inconsistencies in the classification system. I believe it was shown that she only sent emails to people who were classified, although some nasty soul pointed out that her assistants handled emails and they did not have clearance and her lawyers read her email and they did not have clearance. (I’m sure that has never happened before.) Hillary will have to explain why she said that the State Department knew about her private server, but if she is always the head of the State Department then it seems that her home office is simply an extension of the State Department and the same attention to national security is observed at her home office either in Chappaqua or in Washington, DC as would be observed at the State Department in Washington, D C.

I still believe that this issue is being blown out of all proportion because of the 2016 election and the Republicans who are having a hissy-fit because it looks like all their careful plan to capture the Presidency and possess the power in all three branches of Congress seems to be thwarted at every turn, reminiscent of the Road Runner and Wiley E Coyote.

The FBI is being used by the GOP, but the FBI has limitations. However much we may trust them to be nonpartisan, they can only conduct investigations that are narrow in scope and defined by the limits of the task they are given. The FBI cannot look at the big picture and analyze all aspects of this particular situation. The GOP can keep giving them new directives forever and if there is even a whiff of wrongdoing then the FBI will have to investigate. But the optics are that the GOP has the FBI playing fetch. (Good dog.)