Subscribe via RSS Feed

France’s Slave Past

[ 27 ] May 31, 2016 |

be174baf284154ef1497f577fdc08908_1m1

France is finally dealing with the fact that much of its national wealth was built upon the enslavement of Africans.

That will soon change. President François Hollande announced this month the establishment of a major foundation to create a slavery memorial and museum in Paris.

“I wish to give to France an institution it still lacks, a foundation for the memory of the slave trade, slavery and its abolition,” he told reporters.

The government’s announcement comes after years of frustration in France’s black community — one of the largest in Europe — over what they consider the effacement of a traumatic history.

France officially recognized slavery as a “crime against humanity” in 2001 but did little beyond that.

For Louis-Georges Tin, the president of the Representative Council of France’s Black Associations (CRAN), which led the campaign for the new foundation, the long public failure to grapple with slavery and its legacy sends a clear message.

“It clearly means that black lives do not matter,” he said in an interview.

Of course, I’m still waiting for the national museum of slavery in the United States comparable to the Holocaust Museum, an event that took place half way around the world.

FacebookTwitterGoogle+Share

Just got this email; not sure if real

[ 126 ] May 31, 2016 |

manchuria

You’ve probably heard that the omniscient Bill Kristol tweet-hinted this weekend that an independent presidential campaign to #stopTrump and #stopHillary was about to be unleashed:

Just a heads up over this holiday weekend: There will be an independent candidate–an impressive one, with a strong team and a real chance.

— Bill Kristol (@BillKristol) May 29, 2016

Speculation swirled around possible candidates, including Mitt Romney, Ben Sasse, and Condoleezza Rice. It turns out the Kristollian Candidate is . . . well read it for yourself:

***Mandatory Credit: Bloomberg Politics’ Mark Halperin and John Heilemann***

***Mandatory Credit: Bloomberg Politics’ Mark Halperin and John Heilemann***

Kristol Eyes Conservative Lawyer for Independent Presidential Run

BY: Mark Halperin and John Heilemann

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-05-31/kristol-eyes-conservative-lawyer-for-independent-presidential-run

Two Republicans intimately familiar with Bill Kristol’s efforts to recruit an independent presidential candidate to challenge Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton have told Bloomberg Politics that the person Kristol has in mind is David French — whose name the editor of the Weekly Standard floated in the current issue of the magazine.

French is a veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom. According to the website of National Review, where French is a staff writer, he is a constitutional lawyer, a recipient of the Bronze Star, and an author of several books who lives in Columbia, Tenn., with his wife Nancy and three children.

Reached in Israel late Tuesday afternoon, Kristol declined to comment on his efforts to induce French to run. The two Republicans confirmed that French is open to launching a bid, but that he has not made a final decision. One of the Republicans added that French has not lined up a vice-presidential running mate or significant financial support. However, according to this person, some conservative donors look favorably on the prospect of French entering the fray.

In Kristol’s piece in the Standard’s June 6 issue, he argued that “the fact of Trump’s and Clinton’s unfitness for the Oval Office has become so self-evident that it’s no longer clear one needs a famous figure to provide an alternative.” After mentioning Mitt Romney and other possibilities such as Judd Gregg and Mel Martinez, Kristol invoked French’s name and résumé, writing, “To say that he would be a better and a more responsible president than Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump is to state a truth that would become self-evident as more Americans got to know him.”

Ever since Kristol tweeted on Sunday that an “impressive” independent candidate “with a strong team and a real chance” is now prepared to enter the presidential fray, the political world has been engaged in a fevered guessing game over whom that person might be.

Shortly after Kristol fired off that provocative missive on Sunday, he left for Israel and has been avoiding the press, speaking only through a series of tweets taunting Trump for responding to Kristol’s Sunday tweet. Speculation had centered on 2012 Republican nominee Romney, freshman Nebraska senator Ben Sasse, and other current and former state and federal office-holders.

According to one person deeply involved in the efforts to recruit an independent challenger, the search has focused on individuals who have one or more of the following three traits seen as vital for credibly such a bid: fame, vast wealth, and elective experience. Reached by phone Tuesday evening, French declined to answer questions about any possible run.

Bad arguments against a universal basic income

[ 90 ] May 31, 2016 |

robot

Eduardo Porter in the NYT:

Figure out a reasonable amount — the official poverty line amounts to about $25,000 for a family of four; a full-time job at $15 an hour would provide about $30,000 a year — and hand every adult a monthly check. The minimum wage worker stretching to make it to payday, the single mother balancing child care and a job — everybody would get the same thing.

Poverty would be over, at a stroke.

But wait:

Its first hurdle is arithmetic. As Robert Greenstein of the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities put it, a check of $10,000 to each of 300 million Americans would cost more than $3 trillion a year.

It’s easy to miss that a proposal to give every adult a monthly check has suddenly morphed into giving every American, including about 75 million children, that payment. Indeed, a UBI proposal that distributed payments per household would be a little more than a third as large as the $3 trillion price tag Porter tosses about.

That’s not the only shaky math in the article:

The popularity of the universal basic income stems from a fanciful diagnosis born in Silicon Valley of the challenges faced by the working class across industrialized nations: one that sees declining employment rates and stagnant wages and concludes that robots are about to take over all the jobs in the world.

That scenario might lie in our future — I will devote my next column to discussion of such a universe. But it’s certainly not our present. Men at their prime working ages — 25 to 54 — have been falling out of the labor force since the 1960s. Still, today more than eight out of every 10 Americans in their prime are working.

Um, no. The labor force participation rate — the percentage of people who are either “employed” or looking for work — for 25-54 year olds was 80.9% in 2014, while the unemployment rate in that cohort hovers between four and five percent. And describing the 76% or so of 25-54 year olds who are participating in the labor force and not technically unemployed as “working” is a bit of a stretch, since the BLS counts you as “employed” if you’ve been paid for even a single hour of work in the last four weeks, which hardly means that you have a job in the old fashioned (and increasingly archaic) sense of the word.

Moving right along:

Work, as Lawrence Katz of Harvard once pointed out, is not just what people do for a living. It is a source of status. It organizes people’s lives. It offers an opportunity for progress. None of this can be replaced by a check.

A universal basic income has many undesirable features, starting with its nonnegligible disincentive to work. Almost a quarter of American households make less than $25,000. It would be hardly surprising if a $10,000 check each for Mom and Dad sapped their desire to work.

These two paragraphs come dangerously close to flat-out contradicting each other. If work gives people forms of satisfaction that go beyond money, why is giving people money so likely to reduce them to lazy idlers on the dole?

I don’t have an opinion on an particular variety of UBI because I haven’t thought enough about the issue, but these arguments are pretty terrible.

Whither SEK? Also, more importantly, happy birthday LGM and donate, donate, donate

[ 24 ] May 31, 2016 |

Birthdays are a good excuse to get back in touch with old friends, so I figure why not now? But before I do so, remember to donate, we’re not all starving, but you know me, I’m an incident away from living in gutter, so donate. As for where I’ve been, of course there’s my day job in which I help ruin once pristine institutions, and there’s the big divorce and big move and big surgery, but what I haven’t mentioned here is that the big surgery apparently led to something which is utterly real but sounds invented — sudden deafness.

The treatment for this is a steroid regimen that has prevented me from eating solid foods for a few weeks now, and not that I want to contradict Rob, but some of us are indeed starving. (Albeit for a good cause.) So for those of you wondering where the Game of Thrones podcasts went, now you know. Steven’s not actually predictable enough that I don’t need to listen to what he says to respond, so I’ve been useless.

Less than useless, actually, for verging on a month or more now. But one of the things I did do when I thought the steroids wouldn’t work and I’d be deaf forever was compulsively listen to and write about my favorite music, and even though it looks like I’ll be hearing again for the foreseeable future, I thought I might share/you might enjoy some of my musings, and since it’s my blog too (sort of) here we go:

Read more…

Happy Birthday!

[ 69 ] May 31, 2016 |

Screenshot 2016-05-29 20.08.56

To us!

Today is the 12th anniversary of the founding of Lawyers, Guns and Money.  As always on such occasions, we would like to thank all of the readers and commenters who have, over the years, made this blog possible.  We would also like to thank everyone that has linked to the blog over the years, including especially the few stalwarts who have been around since the Golden Age of Blogging.  It goes without saying that Scott, djw, and myself did not expect either this degree of success, or of longevity.

As always on such occasions, we solicit for donations (if the link doesn’t work, please try the button on the near right sidebar). To be clear, while the contributors to LGM currently live in a variety of different economic and professional circumstances, none of us are on the brink of starvation.  We all have some form of upkeep apart from this website, which is quite fortunate given the revenue-generating capacity of the blog.

Nonetheless, donations help make LGM more than just a hobby.  Along with ads, donations enable us to pay all of our writers, including guest contributors; to pay our server fees; to pay our taxes and business fees (and accountants); and to make periodic upgrades to the site (one should be on its way before the election).

We should also note that there are a variety of other worthy causes that you could donate money to, not least the election of a Democratic President, the election of Democratic congresspersons, along with a whole bevy of other situations of need. 

You can also support LGM through following us through various social media:

I’ll add a Snapchat account just as soon as I figure out what the hell Snapchat is.

In any case, thanks again for your generosity in time, in commentary, and everything else. If you have any questions or suggestions or notes to the ombudsman, please leave in comments.

Trump’s Campaign Organization

[ 339 ] May 31, 2016 |

151221122025-trump-shrug-super-alt-11

Is terrible:

Donald Trump’s election as president of the United States would pose an unprecedented threat to the health of American democracy and possibly world stability. There is, however, an upside: Trump’s campaign is an absolute garbage fire. By all accounts it is the most organizationally and strategically inept campaign for a successful major-party nominee in recorded history. Ashley Parker and Maggie Haberman round up many of the details, but the basic story that emerges from their reports and others is that Trump has absolutely no idea what he’s doing.

“Trump is reliant on information he garners himself, and can be swayed by the last person he talked to,” Parker and Haberman somewhat delicately put it. His campaign staff is far too small, and yet constantly at war with itself, already having gone through multiple shakeups and coups. In keeping with his general disdain for data, Trump has eschewed any use of analytics to target voters or competitive areas. Indeed, he has fixated bizarrely on plans to compete in New York and California, two states where any Republican faces hopeless odds against an entrenched Democratic electorate. He is currently in North Dakota for reasons nobody fully understands. He attacks fellow Republicans for no apparent reason. The super-pac donors who are supposed to be raising money on his behalf are disorganized and confused about basic questions like which super-pac they’re supposed to donate to.

As we know, as a candidate Hillary Clinton is no Barack Obama. But she has a real, professional campaign operation. It’s improved since 2008 — if only because she passed the Mark Penn test — and even the 2008 version barely lost to a once-in-a-generation political talent running a nearly flawless campaign. Against a really good Republican nominee, I’d worry that her dubious political instincts would be a serious issue. But in addition to Trump’s other flaws the fact that he’s not actually a professional politician is going to be an issue. In the primaries, running against a large number of tomato cans that allowed for plurality wins, and in which the professional politician with the best ex ante chance of beating him decided to run a Newt Gingrich-style “the INTERNETS make actually campaigning obsolete” joke campaign, this wasn’t fatal. In the general? Let’s say it doesn’t help.

Admittedly, campaigns in general matter less than people think. But in every respect Trump is likely to be a net drag on a party that can’t really afford marginal negative factors in presidential elections. And while the Clinton campaign shouldn’t be complacent, I don’t believe in creating artificial panic either. I’ve seen Clinton in panic/desperation mode in 2008, and…it was not good. Obama is the model here: cool, risk averse, “I’ve got this.” She doesn’t need a great campaign to beat Trump; she needs to avoid major blunders.

Tulsa

[ 33 ] May 31, 2016 |

Tulsa_Race_Riot__1921__Ok__Hist__Soc__

The Tulsa Race Riot is one of the most shameful events in all of American history and as we know, that’s a high bar to meet. That event took place 95 years ago today. Amazingly, an account of this event written by the father of the legendary African-American historian John Hope Franklin, who was a leading black lawyer in Tulsa at the time, was recently discovered.

“I could see planes circling in mid-air. They grew in number and hummed, darted and dipped low. I could hear something like hail falling upon the top of my office building. Down East Archer, I saw the old Mid-Way hotel on fire, burning from its top, and then another and another and another building began to burn from their top,” wrote Buck Colbert Franklin (1879-1960).

The Oklahoma lawyer, father of famed African-American historian John Hope Franklin (1915-2009), was describing the attack by hundreds of whites on the thriving black neighborhood known as Greenwood in the booming oil town. “Lurid flames roared and belched and licked their forked tongues into the air. Smoke ascended the sky in thick, black volumes and amid it all, the planes—now a dozen or more in number—still hummed and darted here and there with the agility of natural birds of the air.”

Franklin writes that he left his law office, locked the door, and descended to the foot of the steps.

“The side-walks were literally covered with burning turpentine balls. I knew all too well where they came from, and I knew all too well why every burning building first caught from the top,” he continues. “I paused and waited for an opportune time to escape. ‘Where oh where is our splendid fire department with its half dozen stations?’ I asked myself. ‘Is the city in conspiracy with the mob?’”

The Tulsa Race Riot needs to be a much more central event to our national history. A national park site would be a good place to start, but given that the city of Tulsa is pretty much unwilling to deal with this event, that’s unlikely to happen soon. The discovery of this manuscript may help.

Why We Need Legally Grown Marijuana, Probably by Corporate Farmers

[ 97 ] May 31, 2016 |

1aa870594d5caa6755cdcee7db803571

There are many reasons to support the legalization of marijuana. For me, one of the most important reasons is to get growing operations out of the national forests and national parks and under a regulatory structure. That probably means corporate control over a lot of it and a lot of local operations that are operating in a horrible manner going under. This is a good reason why:

Northern California is home to numerous wildlife species which are dependent on the unique critical habitat attributes that public lands within this bioregion provide. Some species of conservation concern that inhabit this region include Northern spotted owls, fishers, and Coho salmon. It is also home to numerous terrestrial big game species including black-tailed deer, American black bear and elk.

Therefore, in addition to non-game wildlife benefits this area offers, game species are reliant on the large tracts of public lands in order to sustain viable populations for both natural resource and recreation use benefits. Specifically, all three Roosevelt Elk (Cervus canadensis roosevelti) hunt zones are located within this area. Unfortunately, northern California is also experiencing a sizeable amount of clandestine marijuana cultivation on public lands, much of it entrenched in prime elk habitat.

These illegal cultivation sites on public lands have a long list of deleterious impacts towards natural resources upon which many wildlife species are dependent. They divert large amounts of water, fragment landscapes in order to cultivate marijuana plants, and contaminate native plants, soil and water resources with either legal or illegal pesticides not intended for use in remote forested areas.

Finally, due to the clandestine nature of this activity, armed growers occupy many of these sites for several months who in turn poach and maliciously poison wildlife.

For example, in 2015, Integral Ecology Research Center (IERC) and Law Enforcement agencies discovered several black-tailed deer does and bucks that were illegally harvested or poisoned at grow sites. In addition to deer poaching, IERC research staff documented several black bears and non-game species like gray foxes maliciously poisoned. Occurrences of fawns bedded down in contaminated plots or deer illegally snared were also common and frequently documented. Finally, remote camera systems have detected numerous game species browsing within cultivation plots, raising the question of the potential contamination risks these sites may pose towards human-harvested game.

There are growing operations throughout the northern California forests operating in this manner. There is a horrible environmental price to these. Marijuana needs to be legalized, placed under a regulatory framework,* and those continuing to grow in the national forests need to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

* Yes, I know that there are lots of problems with agribusiness and with the regulations of the agricultural industry. It’s still way better than this.

This Day in Labor History: May 31, 1889

[ 17 ] May 31, 2016 |

Johnstown_Main_Street_1889_flood

On May 31, 1889, the South Fork dam, on the land of the South Fork Fishing and Hunting Club above the city of Johnstown, Pennsylvania, collapsed during a heavy rainstorm. Over 2200 people died in the one of the worst disaster in American history. The Johnstown Flood is not only a horrible disaster but deeply reflective of class divisions during the Gilded Age and the complete lack of legal or moral responsibility the wealthy had toward the working class.

In 1840, the South Fork Dam was built on the Little Conemaugh River, 14 miles upstream from the town of Johnstown, in order to stop the floods that frequently hit the mountainous area. Over time, the canal system that had spurred the original construction fell into disuse. The land where the dam was located was purchased by the steel capitalist Henry Clay Frick and a group of speculators, many of whom were connected to Carnegie Steel, for the South Fork Fishing and Hunting Club. For convenience sake, Frick had the dam lowered in order to build a road across it and built a screen that built up debris behind it. The club opened in 1881. The dam frequently sprung leaks and was only patched with mud. People in Johnstown were concerned about the long-term stability of the dam but Frick and his friends did nothing. By 1889, the club had 61 members. They included Frick, Andrew Carnegie, and Andrew Mellon. This was the peak of the Gilded Age elite. Mellon of course would have a very long career, serving as the staunchly conservative Secretary of the Treasury under Warren Harding, Calvin Coolidge, and Herbert Hoover. His policies contributed significantly to the development of the Great Depression.

By 1889, Johnstown was a big steel town of about 30,000 people. Like many Pennsylvania cities, it’s existence was largely based around the industry. The Cambria Iron Company began in Johnstown in 1852. The company was one of the nation’s most important early blast furnace steel works. By 1858, the company was the nation’s largest producer of rails for railroads and Johnstown grew rapidly. Like the rest of the region’s steel mill towns, after 1880, immigrants from southern and eastern Europe poured into Johnstown to take these incredibly difficult, hot, and deadly jobs in an industry with terrible working conditions. By 1889, the national importance of Johnstown was diminishing, as bigger cities such as Pittsburgh, Chicago, and Cleveland established much larger steel works and had access to significantly larger labor forces, but Cambria Iron Works was still a major industry player. The company controlled nearly everything in the town, from churches to libraries. It also did not allow for labor unions. Like other steel towns, the labor force frequently organized over these terrible conditions. After the Panic of 1873 began, the company began laying off workers, lowering wages, and paying workers in company store credit rather than cash. Workers responded by organizing a union called the Miners National Association. 400 workers joined. The company refused to recognize it. The company then simply shut down operations rather than deal with organized workers. The union quickly collapsed and the company hired everyone back on the condition that they sign a contract pledging never to join a union. The company received glorious praise from The New York Times, among other national publications, for taking such a strong stance against unions. By 1889, the Cambria Iron Works remained union free.

In late May 1889, a powerful storm began to develop over Nebraska and Kansas. It moved east and dumped rain on the mountains of Pennsylvania on the evening of May 30. The next morning, the lake behind the dam had risen precipitously. Johnstown began to flood. In some parts of town, the water rose to as high as 10 feet, trapping some people in their houses. But things got tremendously worse in the fourteen miles the water rushed downstream. Towns on the way were blown away, with 314 dead in the iron town of Woodvale.

When the dam collapsed, there was no way to let the people of Johnstown know in time to escape. The water behind the dam rushed forward at 40 miles an hour, wiping away everything in its path. It just completely wiped out the city. A total of 2209 died, one of the two largest single losses of life in American disasters to that date. 99 entire families were wiped out. The event received immediate national media coverage and relief poured into the city, starting with Clara Barton and quickly becoming a national effort. The Cambria Iron Works was relatively untouched by the flood and its steel production continued almost unabated.

Newspapers attacked Frick and the club members after the flood. The Chicago Herald ran an editorial titled, “Manslaughter or Murder.” It soon became obvious that the dam collapse was the direct responsibility of the club members, both for not maintaining it and for modifying it for their own pleasure, indifferent to the thousands of people below the dam. The club members offered a bit of relief to put themselves in a positive light. Andrew Carnegie donated $10,000. Henry Clay Frick had the club give some blankets.

After the flood, the survivors wanted compensation. But the laws of the Gilded Age allowed the rich to essentially do whatever they want. They could kill their own workers through terrible workplace safety conditions and the courts would find in favor of the companies. They could destroy farmland through the erosion or flooding they caused and the farmers would lose their suits in the name of progress. Given that Frick and the club leaders had adjusted the dam for their own convenience and didn’t maintain the dam effectively. The hunting club hired the preeminent law firm of Knox and Reed to defend them. Both men were club members and Pennsylvania elites; Philander Knox would go on to be Secretary of State in the administration of William Howard Taft. The lawsuits from the survivors were easily fended off by Knox and Reed. The survivors received nothing; Frick and his friends continued as if nothing happened. For them, nothing really had happened. The people of Johnstown didn’t matter.

Henry Clay Frick went on a few years later to manage the busting of the union at Homestead in 1892, becoming the most hated man in America.

This is the 178th post in this series. Previous posts are archived here.

The Lesson of San Jose

[ 61 ] May 30, 2016 |

asdfadfsfas

I have been neglecting my NHL playoff blogging duties, being reduced to Twitter predictions of the conference finals and finals. I don’t have a great deal to say about the finals, which strike me as even more of a coin flip than usual.

I will, however, direct you to my epic post on the Sharks from two years ago. The tl;dr version, applicable to any pro sport, is this: BLOWING UP THE CORE for the sake of BLOWING UP THE CORE because of frustrating losses is really, really dumb. When you trade a star player — not for the chance to add a piece you think fits your team better but to shake up the team or whatever — you very, very rarely receive full value. If you won’t be a contender while your stars are still stars then trading them at a loss might be the right strategy anyway. But if you’re still a good team, don’t trade your core players unless you can actually improve the team. Blaming a team’s best players for disappointing results has led to a large number of personnel blunders. Postseason losses aren’t evidence that great players lack character. I’m not rooting for San Jose, exactly — conference rival and all that — but I will be happy for Thornton and Marleau in particular if they win. Thornton is an underrated a player as a first-ballot Hall of Famer can be, the Bruins were utter idiots to trade him for a fraction of his value, and the Sharks were smart to hang on to him. He’s still a tremendous player at age 36.

The latest team to forget this lesson is the Ducks, who were utter idiots to fire Bruce Boudreau because of a string of game 7 playoff losses (one of which was in the conference finals, to the Blackhawks.) I agree with Anaheim that firing Boudreau will probably solve the team’s problem of Game 7 playoff losses, but not in the way they expect.

American Secularism

[ 134 ] May 30, 2016 |

madison

For your evening reading, check out this Sam Haselby discussion of the United States as a secularist nation, including understanding its Protestant intellectual origins, the heresy of men like Thomas Jefferson and James Madison in pressing for it as the state non-religion for the new nation, and why their goal mostly failed but did not entirely fail.

Clinton and Campaign Finance

[ 65 ] May 30, 2016 |

rf0kcqwwxpgowglurufl

This makes a lot of sense. Even while having to play by the rules as currently defined, Hillary Clinton should be running hard on campaign finance. Her stated positions on it are very solid, even if she has also had to raise a lot of money from corporate donors, perhaps making her reticent to focus on this issue. But it’s a good way to reach out to a lot of voters, including Sanders supporters.

Another, more successful approach—one that Clinton has largely ignored—would be for her to actually campaign on the political money reform platform that she rolled out in September. Clinton won kudos from watchdogs when she pledged to reverse the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United v. FEC ruling, pull back the curtain on secret money in elections, and match low-dollar campaign contributions with public funds.

Clinton’s reform platform is similar to that of Bernie Sanders, but she’s done little to talk it up. When the campaign reform group Every Voice held focus groups in Cleveland earlier this year, says the group’s president David Donnelly, voters given Clinton’s political money platform without hearing who authored it invariably identified it as a Sanders plan. Moreover, Donnelly notes, once participants learned the plan was Clinton’s, they were more inclined to back her.

“She has a tremendous opportunity to seize this issue and inoculate herself against some of the worst criticisms that have been leveled against her,” says Donnelly. Progressive organizers have set out to convince Clinton to champion campaign reform more aggressively. Trump has handed Clinton an opening, by embracing the GOP donor class on the heels of his boasts that self-funding kept him above the fray. And even Sanders, for all his attacks on Wall Street—and on Clinton, for her financial sector ties—has spent little time on the stump talking about actual campaign-finance solutions.

“She’s going to have to do some sort of pivot that turns to the general election, that turns to differentiating herself from Donald Trump, and that attracts the supporters of her primary opponent,” argues Donnelly. “I think this issue hits all three. And she doesn’t have to change her position to talk about this. She just needs to talk about it.”

Clinton may be understandably gun shy. She remains under fire for the $11 million she pulled in for paid speeches to banks and other industries, and for failing to release the transcripts. Reports continue to surface—investigated, no doubt, with the help of the dozen or so conservative opposition research groups, media outlets, and political shops toiling to dig up dirt on her—of the millions raised by the Clinton Foundation from donors with ties to foreign governments. Scandals rightly or wrongly associated with the Clintons have fueled a parade of books, movies, congressional hearings, and investigations, and there are doubtless more to come.

Still, Clinton has yet to give a serious speech spelling out why, while she has mastered the campaign-finance system, the rules need to change. She could be writing op-eds, highlighting state and local campaign-finance reforms, and speaking about these issues directly to angry voters. At a minimum, she could tap a surrogate, such as House Democrat and reform champion John Sarbanes, of Maryland, to rally voter support on her behalf, says Donnelly.

Hopefully, she turns to this in the pivot to defeating the fascist.

Page 1 of 2,29512345...102030...Last »