The Peeing Pug!

First, there was the Wall Street bull statue, better known as Charging Bull:

(hat tip to Wikipedia for the pic)

Then there was the Fearless Girl statue, which was built as an ad for a feminist index fund:

(hat tip to The Mary Sue for the pic)

And now, we have the Peeing Pug:

According to CNN:

Fearless Girl and the Charging Bull were joined briefly on Monday morning by a third statue, a urinating dog.

The roughly-hewn pug, made partially out of papier mache, was relieving himself at Fearless Girl's feet.

The creator of "Peeing Pug," New York City artist Alex Gardega, wanted to draw attention to the fact that the Fearless Girl was commissioned by asset-manager State Street Global Advisors. The artist removed the statue after a few hours because "people were kicking it," and broke the pug's leg. The artist has since fixed the injury.

The Fearless Girl statue by artist Kristen Visbal was unveiled on March 7 and has been incredibly well received. Fans have flocked to her side to snap photos, and she's received tons of press coverage -- nearly all of which notes that the statue is backed by State Street.

The problem with the Fearless Girl statue is its placement, in direct opposition to the Charging Bull. Is this a feminist statement or an anti-Wall Street statement? Or a combination of both?

The Peeing Pug artist Alex Gardega says it best:

Gardega adds that his dog was also meant to make a point on behalf of sculptor Arturo di Modica, who created the Charging Bull statue that stands opposite of Fearless Girl.

Di Modica argues that Fearless Girl is infringing on his copyright. Gardega doesn't know Di Modica personally, but was bothered by Fearless Girl's proximity to the Charging Bull.

"It's kind of like sticking something... in front of Michelangelo's David," he said. By having his pug pee on Fearless Girl, he was "showing what it was like to invade [the bull's] space."

...Ultimately, [Gardega] worries that the Fearless Girl will be seen as comparable to the Wall Street bull, which was funded by Di Modica himself. "I would totally be pro [Fearless Girl] if it was done by some punk-rock artist," Gardega said. "That's not the case at all."

Gardega understands that Fearless Girl is important to people. "I did notice it made people happy, which is a good thing," he said. But he disagrees with the message he thinks Fearless Girl is sending. "I'm pro-feminist," he said, "but that's kind of corporate baloney feminism."

Regardless of how you interpret the Fearless Girl, it was created as an advertisement for a Wall Street product, which runs contrary to the placement of the statue. It is in no way against Wall Street, and in fact promotes it via politically correct messaging, or "corporate baloney feminism" as Gardega calls it.

That said, I find the interpretation of Fearless Girl to be far more worthwhile than its crass origin. But I also appreciate Peeing Pug for the same reason: Art should enlighten, and Peeing Pug reminds us that Fearless Girl lacks the virtue of artistic intent, regardless of how we personally interpret it.

Covfefe: Today's News for May 31st

The Guardian:

What is covfefe? Trump baffles with late night Twitter post

What is "covfefe"? At the risk of killing the joke, it was a typo of the word "coverage". However, the internet went off on it in a lighthearted way. The article above shows a bunch of tweets ridiculing the president's error, but my personal favorite:

Ask your doctor if Covfefe is right for you. pic.twitter.com/XcDAXMNw1m

— Travon Free (@Travon) May 31, 2017

Sometimes, I love humanity.

UPDATE: Even Trump himself is having fun with it:

Who can figure out the true meaning of "covfefe" ??? Enjoy!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 31, 2017

In more serious news...

CNN:

Afghanistan explosion: 80 killed in blast near diplomatic area

A huge explosion hit near foreign embassies in Kabul on Wednesday morning, killing at least 80 people and injuring 300 others, the Afghan health ministry said.

Anyone who reads me knows I have a policy against reporting on terrorist actions. This is NOT a terrorist act.

Multiple countries are currently occupying Afghanistan, with the U.S. leading the occupation. Ergo, this is an act of rebellion, no different than what the French Resistance did against the German occupiers in World War II. These are people fighting inside their own country against foreign occupiers. Whether you agree with them or not, let us be honest about what is happening here.

Continuing:

The blast was caused by a suicide attack, according to Najib Danish, a spokesman for the interior ministry.

It hit about 400 yards from the German Embassy, and was in a water delivery truck, according to journalist Jennifer Glasse.

German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel said the attack was in the "immediate vicinity" of the nation's embassy.

"The attack was aimed at civilians and those who are in Afghanistan to work with the people there for a better future of the country," Gabriel said. "In the attack, officials of the German embassy were also injured. In the meantime, all employees are safe." 

Replace "Afghanistan" with "France", and that German comment could have been made in World War II.

Finally...

Washington Times:

More than 5,500 illegals registered to vote in Virginia in last decade; 1,852 actually cast ballots

When Maureen Erickson registered to vote in Prince William County, she listed her home address as a street in Guatemala, in what should have been a very strong indication that she wasn’t a regular Virginia resident.

Yet she remained on the voting rolls for years, and even cast ballots in 14 different elections, up through the 2008 presidential contest. She was only purged in 2012, just ahead of the election, after she self-reported as a noncitizen, according to a new report released Tuesday by the Public Interest Legal Foundation.

Ms. Erickson was one of more than 5,500 noncitizens who were registered to vote in Virginia this decade, and were only bumped from the rolls after they admitted to being ineligible. Some 1,852 of them even managed to cast ballots that were likely illegal, though undetected, the PILF, a conservative voter integrity group, said in its report.

I wonder if the Leftist media would care if those noncitizens were Russian?

Pogo for the Left: Today's News for May 30th

As soon as the Left puts up a story about the Trump administration and Russia, the Right knocks it down, and the never-ending game of whack-a-mole continues...

Fox News:

Jared Kushner didn't suggest Russian communications channel in meeting, source says

A December meeting between Jared Kushner, President Donald Trump’s son-in-law and one of the senior advisers in the Trump administration, and Russian ambassador Sergei Kislyak at Trump Tower focused on Syria, a source familiar with the matter told Fox News Monday.

During the meeting the Russians broached the idea of using a secure line between the Trump administration and Russia, not Kushner, a source familiar with the matter told Fox News. That follows a recent report from The Washington Post alleging that Kushner wanted to develop a secure, private line with Russia.

The idea of a permanent back channel was never discussed, according to the source. Instead, only a one-off for a call about Syria was raised in the conversation.

That Russian story is dead. Next?

CNN:

Sources: Russians discussed potentially 'derogatory' information 

about Trump and associates during campaign

Russian government officials discussed having potentially "derogatory" information about then-presidential candidate Donald Trump and some of his top aides in conversations intercepted by US intelligence during the 2016 election, according to two former intelligence officials and a congressional source.

One source described the information as financial in nature and said the discussion centered on whether the Russians had leverage over Trump's inner circle. The source said the intercepted communications suggested to US intelligence that Russians believed "they had the ability to influence the administration through the derogatory information."

And then, the article goes on to discredit itself:

But the sources, privy to the descriptions of the communications written by US intelligence, cautioned the Russian claims to one another "could have been exaggerated or even made up" as part of a disinformation campaign that the Russians did during the election.

The details of the communication shed new light on information US intelligence received about Russian claims of influence. The contents of the conversations made clear to US officials that Russia was considering ways to influence the election -- even if their claims turned out to be false. 

Which leads us to Comey's fake email story:

CNN:

Graham: It's 'stunning' Comey never told Congress about fake email

First, the story:

On Wednesday, The Washington Post reported that the FBI received a document detailing a supposed email from Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who was at the time the head of the Democratic National Committee, where she said someone in the Department of Justice told her Attorney General Loretta Lynch was containing the investigation into Hillary Clinton's email practices as secretary of state. The report said the details came from "a dubious Russian document" and that this document influenced Comey's decision to make his thinking on the case public. On Friday, CNN reported that Comey acted on this document, even though he knew it to be fake. 

The reaction:

Sen. Lindsey Graham said Sunday that former FBI Director James Comey would have been "incredibly incompetent" if he took actions based on email he knew to be fake.

Graham said in an interview on CNN's "State of the Union" that Comey told the Senate and House select committees on intelligence about such an email, but never indicated it was fake.

"He talked to members of the Senate and House intel committee that he was sitting on emails that the Russians had between the Democratic Party and the Department of Justice that were highly explosive," Graham said. "He never once told a member of the House or the Senate that he thought the email was fake."

...Graham called the report "stunning" and said Comey "needs to be held accountable."

"I can't imagine a scenario where it's OK for the FBI director to jump in the middle of an election based on a fake email generated by the Russians and not tell the Congress," Graham said.

Over the weekend, Michael Walsh at Pajamas Media had an interesting editorial, "In the 'Russia' Investigation, Democrats, Spooks and Media Have Most to Fear", where he points out that it is unlikely that Trump or his people did anything illegal, but it is very likely the Obama administration and our intelligence agencies did something incompetent, basically allowing the Russians to lead them around by the nose with a bunch of false intelligence.

The worst part is that the American Left, including the Democrats and the media, are STILL allowing that false narrative to guide them. Today, the entire socialist/progressive movement in America gets the Pogo award:

  

Weekly Finale: Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Heart's Club Band

For this week's musical finale, I am honoring today's 50th anniversary of the release of The Beatle's "Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Heart's Club Band".

While there are many people who denounce the "Sgt. Pepper" as garbage, there are just as many who praise it. Regardless of where you stand, the influence of the album on both music and Western culture is undeniable. Personally, I find the album to be more of a musical curiosity. It takes some musical risks, with some successes and some head-scratchers.

Here is my ranking of the top 5 songs on the album (which is all you will need to hear from the album), based on my own personal preferences:

1. Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Heart's Club Band/With a Little Help From My Friends: I put these two songs together because that was how they were played on the radio for decades. Nowadays, in the era of digital downloads, they get broken into two songs, which actually defeats the purpose of the initial song, which is an intro to a band performing the second song.



Overall, these two songs are just a fun departure from reality, creating a little scene for the listener's ears, with a bit of ear candy to tease the listener's enjoyment. The inclusion of "With a Little Help From My Friends" in the 1980 PBS film "The Lathe of Heaven" cemented the song in my mind, as the movie gives it a haunting quality, which expanded my own subjective view of it.

Also, "With a Little Help" got a lift with its most famous cover, by Joe Cocker, two years later at Woodstock:



2. A Day in the Life: This song is a musical LSD trip, with a lot of intense imagery that seems to go by in an unconnected train of stoned thought. However, this song was incredibly ground-breaking for its time, and is arguably the most important song from the album.



While "Day in the Life" has been covered multiple times, the strangest and yet most true to the original has to be the duet from Flaming Lips and Miley Cyrus:



3. When I'm Sixty-Four: A silly little ditty, but expressing a strangely sweet sentiment within an album full of LSD-inspired music, causing this song to stand out. However, when I think of this song, I will always think of the opening of the 1982 movie, "The World According to Garp":



4. Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds: Another musical LSD trip, but the imagery is downright beautiful. This song is more a work of art than a song:



In spite of the song's obvious connection to LSD (just look at the initials of the  capitalized words in the title), John Lennon claimed he got the song from a painting his son Julian made in nursery school entitled "Lucy—in the Sky with Diamonds", and confirmed by Ringo Starr. I'm not buying that story.

While Elton John had the most famous cover of "Lucy", the worst cover of it (and possibly any Beatles' song ever) belongs to William Shatner:


5. Lovely Rita: One of the strangest songs ever recorded by the Beatles, this is a love song to a meter maid, inspired by a traffic ticket Paul McCartney once got from a meter maid named Meta Davies:



Although the song has been covered multiple times, it is more of a curiosity tune than anything great musically. I like thinking of it as the greatest practical joke ever played by the Beatles on the musical world. Anyone who falls into the trap of covering it is silly, in my opinion. It is like trying to cover the "Alphabet song". That said, the Beatles' version is still enjoyable, albeit silly.

That is all for this week. If you aren't having fun this weekend, maybe get a little help from your friends? Regardless, I will return Monday for more blogging.

UPDATE: Silly me. Monday is Memorial Day. I will return on Tuesday. Sorry for the confusion.

Gianforte Wins Anyway: Today's News for May 26th

Fox News: 

Gianforte wins: Montana House candidate facing assault charge wins special election

Republican Greg Gianforte won Montana’s special election Thursday despite being charged with assaulting a reporter just hours before polls opened across the state.

What was funny about this story was how the media was already chalking up a Democratic Party victory in this after Gianforte beat up a reporter. They forget that Republican voters tend to dislike the media. It takes more than a bodyslammed reporter to get Republicans to consider voting for a progressive socialist with a "D" after his name.

On another point, how does the Left-leaning media compare in their coverage of this story?

CNN:

Republican Greg Gianforte wins Montana special election, CNN projects

Republican Greg Gianforte has won the special election for Montana's open US House seat, CNN projects, defeating Democrat Rob Quist and capping off a whirlwind final 36 hours of the campaign that saw Gianforte being charged for allegedly assaulting a reporter.

There isn't any significant difference between the two stories, Right or Left, in the headlines or the first paragraphs. But the second and third paragraphs start to show the bias.

Fox's second and third paragraphs:

With 84 percent of precincts reporting, Greg Gianforte led Democrat Rob Quist by more than 24,000 votes out of nearly 270,000 ballots cast.

Gianforte said in his victory speech late Thursday that his victory is a victory for all Montana. He also used the platform to apologize to the reporter he allegedly assaulted on election eve and a Fox News team that witnessed the encounter.

CNN:

In his acceptance speech, Gianforte apologized by name to Ben Jacobs, the Guardian reporter who accused the Republican of "body-slamming" him and breaking his glasses.

"When you make a mistake, you have to own up to it," Gianforte told his supporters at his Election Night rally in Bozeman. "That's the Montana way."

Notice how CNN is pushing the violence of the story as early as possible, whereas Fox is avoiding describing the violence of what happened. In fact, nowhere in the Fox story is the incident described, even though their reporters actually witnessed it.

In other news...

Circa:

Declassified memos show FBI illegally shared spy data on Americans with private parties

The FBI has illegally shared raw intelligence about Americans with unauthorized third parties and violated other constitutional privacy protections, according to newly declassified government documents that undercut the bureau’s public assurances about how carefully it handles warrantless spy data to avoid abuses or leaks.

...Once-top secret U.S. intelligence community memos reviewed by Circa tell a different story, citing instances of “disregard” for rules, inadequate training and “deficient” oversight and even one case of deliberately sharing spy data with a forbidden party.

For instance, a ruling declassified this month by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA) chronicles nearly 10 pages listing hundreds of violations of the FBI’s privacy-protecting minimization rules that occurred...

The behavior the FBI admitted to a FISA judge just last month ranged from illegally sharing raw intelligence with unauthorized third parties to accessing intercepted attorney-client privileged communications without proper oversight the bureau promised was in place years ago.

The court also opined aloud that it fears the violations are more extensive than already disclosed.

“The Court is nonetheless concerned about the FBI’s apparent disregard of minimization rules and whether the FBI is engaging in similar disclosures of raw Section 702 information that have not been reported,” the April 2017 ruling declared.

The FBI normally is forbidden from surveilling an American without a warrant. But Section 702 of the Foreign Surveillance Act, last updated by Congress in 2008,  allowed the NSA to share with the FBI spy data collected without a warrant that includes the communications of Americans with “foreign targets.”

The problem with the FSA is it violates the Constitution's 4th Amendment, which states:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

"Good intentions" by law enforcement are not valid reasons to allow Constitutional violations. The worst part about FSA is that violations can occur without Americans ever knowing.

Continuing:

...by early 2017, the court became more concerned after the Obama administration disclosed significant violations of privacy protections at two separate intelligence agencies involved in the Section 702 program.

The most serious involved the NSA searching for American data it was forbidden to search. But the FBI also was forced to admit its agents and analysts shared espionage data with prohibited third parties, ranging from a federal contractor to a private entity that did not have the legal right to see the intelligence.

Laws like FSA remove the essence of American freedom, which does the terrorists' work for them.

Thursday Thoughts: Leonardo da Vinci

(hat tip to Leonardodavinci.net for the pic)

"To lie is so vile, that even if it were in speaking well of godly things it would take off something from God's grace; and Truth is so excellent, that if it praises but small things they become noble."-- Leonardo da Vinci

Wrestling the Media: Today's News for May 25th

For once, it isn't President Trump wrestling with the media:

Fox News:

Greg Gianforte: Fox News team witnesses GOP House candidate 'body slam' reporter

From Fox News reporter Alicia Acuna:

The race to fill Montana's sole seat in the U.S. House of Representatives took a violent turn Wednesday, and a crew from the Fox News Channel, including myself, witnessed it firsthand.

As part of our preparation for a story about Thursday's special election to air on "Special Report with Bret Baier," we arranged interviews with the top two candidates, Republican Greg Gianforte and Democrat Rob Quist. On Wednesday, I joined field producer Faith Mangan and photographer Keith Railey in Bozeman for our scheduled interview with Gianforte, which was to take place at the Gianforte for Congress Bozeman Headquarters.

Faith, Keith and I arrived early to set up for the interview in a room adjacent to another room where a volunteer BBQ was to take place. As the time for the interview neared, Gianforte came into the room. We exchanged pleasantries and made small talk about restaurants and Bozeman.

During that conversation, another man — who we now know is Ben Jacobs of The Guardian — walked into the room with a voice recorder, put it up to Gianforte's face and began asking if he had a response to the newly released Congressional Budget Office report on the American Health Care Act. Gianforte told him he would get to him later. Jacobs persisted with his question. Gianforte told him to talk to his press guy, Shane Scanlon.

At that point, Gianforte grabbed Jacobs by the neck with both hands and slammed him into the ground behind him. Faith, Keith and I watched in disbelief as Gianforte then began punching the reporter. As Gianforte moved on top of Jacobs, he began yelling something to the effect of, "I'm sick and tired of this!"

...To be clear, at no point did any of us who witnessed this assault see Jacobs show any form of physical aggression toward Gianforte, who left the area after giving statements to local sheriff's deputies.

As for myself and my crew, we are cooperating with local authorities. Gianforte was given a citation for misdemeanor assault and will have to appear in court sometime before June 7.

This is called having a news scoop handed to you on a silver platter.

As for Gianforte, his political career just got a Darwin Award:

In other news...

Reuters:

In first under Trump, U.S. warship challenges Beijing's claims in South China Sea

A U.S. Navy warship sailed within 12 nautical miles of an artificial island built up by China in the South China Sea, U.S. officials said on Wednesday, the first such challenge to Beijing in the strategic waterway since U.S. President Donald Trump took office.

The officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the USS Dewey traveled close to the Mischief Reef in the Spratly Islands, among a string of islets, reefs and shoals over which China has territorial disputes with its neighbors.

China said its warships had warned the U.S. ship and it lodged "stern representations" with the United States. China said it remained resolutely opposed to so-called freedom of navigation operations. 

Of course, if Trump really wants to challenge China, it might be better if he wasn't giving away classified information, such as...

Huffington Post:

Trump Revealed Location Of U.S. Nuclear Subs In Call With Duterte

U.S. President Donald Trump told his Philippine counterpart that Washington has sent two nuclear submarines to waters off the Korean peninsula, the New York Times said, comments likely to raise questions about his handling of sensitive information.

The transcript of the call was first reported by the Intercept.

...Trump told Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte Washington had “a lot of firepower over there”, according to the New York Times, which quoted a transcript of an April 29 call between the two.

“We have two submarines — the best in the world. We have two nuclear submarines, not that we want to use them at all,” the newspaper quoted Trump as telling Duterte, based on the transcript.

In another award-winning performance, Trump gets the bear today:

The Rest of Today's News for May 24th

The Hill:

Here are the 66 programs eliminated in Trump's budget

President Trump's fiscal 2018 budget proposal would completely eliminate 66 federal programs, for a savings of $26.7 billion.

Some of the programs would receive funding for 2018 as part of a phasing-out plan.

To paraphrase the old lawyer joke, what do you call 66 federal programs at the bottom of the ocean? A good start.

Among some of these great wastes of Americans' money:

• Green Climate Fund and Global Climate Change Initiative
• National Endowment for the Arts 
• National Endowment for the Humanities 
• McGovern-Dole International Food for Education
• Abandoned Mine Land Grants 
• State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (under the Justice Department)
• Energy Star and Voluntary Climate Programs
• Corporation for Public Broadcasting 
• Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars

Sadly, it is doubtful all 66 programs, or even a significant number of them, will be eliminated.

This is why:

The Hill:

GOP senators bristle at Trump's Medicaid cuts

GOP senators are balking at President Trump’s proposed steep cuts to the nation's healthcare system for the poor, worrying that it could leave millions without health plans.

Trump’s budget proposal would gut Medicaid by $627 billion over the next decade, on top of the $839 billion that would be cut under the House-passed ObamaCare repeal-and-replace bill. Combined, Trump and House Republicans have proposed slashing $1.4 trillion from Medicaid.

The budget also includes a $5.8 billion cut to the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), which helps families that make too much money to qualify for Medicaid.

Presidential budgets are largely wish lists of administrative priorities that Congress generally ignores. Former President Barack Obama’s final budget never even got a vote.

It was a nice thought, Mr. President. Welcome to Washington.

Fortunately, there are some people holding the president accountable:

The Hill:

Paul plans to force vote on $110B Saudi defense deal

Sen. Rand Paul intends to force a vote on a $110 billion defense deal President Trump signed with Saudi Arabia, according to an aide to the Kentucky Republican.

Paul is expected to introduce a measure to disapprove of the sale later on Wednesday, the aide said, over concerns that the deal may pull the U.S. into Yemen's civil war.

The move will allow Paul to force a vote in early June. Under the Arms Export Control Act, he can bring the measure up on the Senate floor after 10 calendar days, but the Senate is leaving town on Friday for a week-long Memorial Day break.

The Senate in September overwhelmingly rejected a similar move from Paul to halt a $1.15 billion arms sale between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia.

Feel free to explain why the U.S. needs to be funding a civil war in Yemen. Yemen's GDP was only $36 billion in 2013. We could probably buy Yemen for $110 billion.

Good move Senator Paul. Trump gets the shark for this one:

Finally...

Business Insider:

The Dakota Access pipeline sprung 2 new leaks

The United States' most notorious oil project is continuing to prove its detractors correct.

On Tuesday, the Associated Press reported that the Dakota Access pipeline has already leaked on two more occasions in 2017 — bringing the total number to three since President Donald Trump  ordered the project to be completed in January.

Did you catch the fuzzy math there? So the pipeline leaked TWO more times in 2017, and THREE more times since January, which was also in 2017.

Math is hard.

Sadly, the leaks were even more insignificant than the writer's math skills: 84 gallons (twice) and 20 gallons, for a total of 188 gallons. If it were one spill, it wouldn't be significant:

None of these spills were large enough to warrant categorization as " significant " pipeline incidents by the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, which requires spills of at least five barrels — or 210 gallons — to be counted in that category. But they go a long way toward validating the concerns expressed by local indigenous tribes and their allies over the past year.  

We have exited "news story" and entered the "editorial" realm. Please remain seated, as the logic becomes bumpy here. Even the story/editorial itself calls this logic into question:

Oil flow was "immediately" cut off to contain the spill, and contaminated snow and soil were removed without any damage being done to local wildlife or waterways,  AP reports.

Business Insider really needs to get some new editors.

James Bond Defeats the Terrorists: Today's News for May 24th

(hat tip to Laser Time for the pic)

BBC:

Sir Roger Moore, James Bond actor, dies aged 89

Actor Sir Roger Moore, best known for playing James Bond, has died aged 89, his family has announced.

He played the famous spy in seven Bond films including Live and Let Die and A View to a Kill.

Sir Roger's family confirmed the news on Twitter, saying he had died after "a short but brave battle with cancer".

Aside from honoring the best James Bond who ever lived, in my opinion, I bring this up because I noticed something yesterday. As the news of Moore's death hit the media, the terrorist incident in Manchester got knocked off the media's overly obsessive news feeds.

In his last act, a James Bond defeated the terrorists.

One last point from the story:

The veteran star, who died in Switzerland, will have a private funeral in Monaco in accordance with his wishes, his children said.

Bond buried in Monaco? Nothing could be more appropriate.

On to today's lede in most media:

CNN:

What will the Pope tell President Trump?

Long story short: President Trump is meeting with Pope Francis today. Yawn.

But the CNN story is notable for the following paragraph:

It's a meeting millions have been waiting for, an encounter between two of the world's most intriguing and complex characters: The holy man in white who preaches good news to the poor and the brash businessman in the dark suit who embodies American extravagance.

"Holy man in white"? "Brash businessman in the dark suit"? They could just compare Trump to Darth Vader.

(hat tip to Tee Public for the pic)

Instead of the innocuous Trump-Pope meeting, this is what should be the lede today:

Circa:

Obama intel agency secretly conducted illegal searches on Americans for years

The National Security Agency under former President Barack Obama routinely violated American privacy protections while scouring through overseas intercepts and failed to disclose the extent of the problems until the final days before Donald Trump was elected president last fall, according to once top-secret documents that chronicle some of the most serious constitutional abuses to date by the U.S. intelligence community.

More than 5 percent, or one out of every 20 searches seeking upstream Internet data on Americans inside the NSA’s so-called Section 702 database violated the safeguards Obama and his intelligence chiefs vowed to follow in 2011, according to one classified internal report reviewed by Circa.

The Obama administration self-disclosed the problems at a closed-door hearing Oct. 26 before the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court that set off alarm. Trump was elected less than two weeks later.

The normally supportive court censured administration officials, saying the failure to disclose the extent of the violations earlier amounted to an “institutional lack of candor” and that the improper searches constituted a “very serious Fourth Amendment issue,” according to a recently unsealed court document dated April 26, 2017.

The admitted violations undercut one of the primary defenses that the intelligence community and Obama officials have used in recent weeks to justify their snooping into incidental NSA intercepts about Americans.

If it was Trump's name attached to this violation of Americans' rights, the MSM would be screaming it for weeks.

In other news...

Gateway Pundit:

BOOM!! Kim Dot.Com DROPS BOMBSHELL! — 

SETH RICH LEAKED DNC EMAILS TO WIKILEAKS

Internet entrepreneur and hacker, Kim DotCom, admitted on Saturday that he was part of an operation along with Seth Rich to get stolen DNC emails to Wikileaks.

In other words, it was not the Russians. It was done from inside the DNC.

Here is the full statement from Kim Dot.com's website:

#SETHRICH WAS A HERO

I KNOW THAT SETH RICH WAS INVOLVED IN THE DNC LEAK.

I know this because in late 2014 a person contacted me about helping me to start a branch of the Internet Party in the United States. He called himself Panda. I now know that Panda was Seth Rich.

Panda advised me that he was working on voter analytics tools and other technologies that the Internet Party may find helpful.

I communicated with Panda on a number of topics including corruption and the influence of corporate money in politics.

“He wanted to change that from the inside.”

I was referring to what I knew when I did an interview with Bloomberg in New Zealand in May 2015. In that interview I hinted that Julian Assange and Wikileaks would release information about Hillary Clinton in the upcoming election.

The Rich family has reached out to me to ask that I be sensitive to their loss in my public comments. That request is entirely reasonable.

I have consulted with my lawyers. I accept that my full statement should be provided to the authorities and I am prepared to do that so that there can be a full investigation. My lawyers will speak with the authorities regarding the proper process.

If my evidence is required to be given in the United States I would be prepared to do so if appropriate arrangements are made. I would need a guarantee from Special Counsel Mueller, on behalf of the United States, of safe passage from New Zealand to the United States and back. In the coming days we will be communicating with the appropriate authorities to make the necessary arrangements. In the meantime, I will make no further comment.

Mind you, this is still not definitive. For example, how did Kim know that Panda was Seth Rich?

In Kim's defense, he did call it in the May 2015 Bloomberg interview he references above:

Kim Dotcom, the founder of the defunct file sharing site Megaupload who wants to bring his Internet Party to the United States in 2016, said Wikileaks founder Julian Assange will be Hillary Clinton’s “worst nightmare.”

In an interview with Emily Chang on Bloomberg’s Studio 1.0, Dotcom was asked about a tweet he sent in December saying that he himself will be “Hillary’s worst nightmare in 2016.”

I'm not a pirate.
I'm not a fugitive.
I'm not a flight risk.

I'm your Internet Freedom fighter

AND

Hillary's worst nightmare in 2016!

— Kim Dotcom (@KimDotcom) December 1, 2014

The interview raises the question of the role hacking could play in an election involving someone as simultaneously high profile and secretive as Clinton.

“I have to say it’s probably more Julian,” who threatens Hillary, Dotcom said. “But I’m aware of some of the things that are going to be roadblocks for her.”

Assange has access to information, Dotcom said, though he added that he didn't know anything more specific.

There is a strong ring of TRUTH to this story. It may not be 100% verifiable, but it is close to that number. There is more than enough here to at least call out the mainstream media for their obsession over Russia.

Health Care's Better, Faster, and Cheaper

From The Sacramento Bee:

The price tag is in: It would cost $400 billion to remake California’s health insurance marketplace and create a publicly funded universal heath care system, according to a state financial analysis released Monday.

California would have to find an additional $200 billion per year, including in new tax revenues, to create a so-called “single-payer” system, the analysis by the Senate Appropriations Committee found. The estimate assumes the state would retain the existing $200 billion in local, state and federal funding it currently receives to offset the total $400 billion price tag.

That is JUST California. Let it sink in: $400 billion for a universal health care system, twice what they are paying for their current system. Remember, this is not just money plucked from trees. It is removed from the economy to pay for health care.

Keep in mind, removing the profit incentive also has other effects:

The problem with removing profit in the health care industry is you remove the incentive for innovation.

— Austin Petersen (@AP4Liberty) May 22, 2017

What does providing health care have to do with innovation? Everything. When government provides anything, there is the big public incentive to provide it "better, faster, and cheaper". There is an old joke in business: Everyone wants everything "better, faster and cheaper", but you have to pick two.

Unfortunately, government cannot really control the "faster" part unless they increase the supply of doctors. But making more doctors could create less quality (less "better") and increase costs to pay all those doctors (less "cheaper").

This leaves the government mostly with control over the "better" and "cheaper". Even more unfortunate, government creates "better" through drug and medical process regulations, which work in opposition to "cheaper", because "better" costs money. "Better" medicine isn't free. Also, drug and medical process regulations create testing requirements, which delays the rollout of new medicines and processes to the markets (less "faster").

Finally, we have cheaper. Government cost controls create cheaper medicine, but at the risk of scarcity. When you hear about governments negotiating drug contracts to create "cheaper", that works well with established drugs. But pharmaceutical companies have limits to how low they can go with new drugs, because they are still paying all the costs for innovating under the burdensome government regulations (the "better" requirement"). If you take away big pharma's ability to charge through the nose for new drugs, you will watch the innovation pipeline dry up. Less "better".

People love to praise the universal health care models of the world's governments, but they also fail to recognize why they work. If you look closely at them, they have sacrificed the "better" for the "faster" and "cheaper", leaving the United States to be the universal provider of "better". If the United states leaves the medical innovation industry, who will provide it next? That will be the third world countries. Enjoy your trips to Mexico for the most innovative medicine on the planet. Just don't drink the water with your pills.

Today's News for May 23rd

You will notice I am not covering the terrorist incident in Manchester. As is my policy, routine terrorism does not deserve publicity or notice, which only gives them what they want. The best way to defeat terrorism is to ignore them, and remove any attention incentive. Refuse to give them your fear, and they will gain nothing from these deplorable acts.

Admittedly, this is my luxury. But the purpose of this blog is to ascertain TRUTH among all the noise of biased reporting. However, the major news outlets are reporting what they know at this point, in all its ugliness. We are all just rubberneckers driving past this incident in the road of life. It is best we drive on, and allow the authorities to do what they do best.

In other news...

NPR:

Ethics Agency Rejects White House Move To Block Ethics Waiver Disclosures

The Office of Government Ethics has rejected a White House attempt to block the agency's compilation of federal ethics rules waivers granted to officials hired into the Trump administration from corporations and lobbying firms.

The White House action, a letter to OGE Director Walter M. Shaub Jr. from Office of Management and Budget Director Mick Mulvaney, was first reported by The New York Times. The newspaper had earlier published a detailed account of lobbyists turned appointees who were granted waivers and now oversee regulations they previously had lobbied against.

With an ethics waiver, a federal official is free to act on matters that normally would trigger concerns about conflicts of interest or other ethical problems. Federal regulations say the waivers generally should be made public on request. The Obama administration routinely posted waivers online. The Trump administration has issued an unknown number and released none.

Time to roll out a new award. I call it the Nixon Award:

(hat tip to Memesuper for the pic)

This Nixon goes to the Trump administration, for a clear case of corruption, since there is no good reason why they would prevent ethics waivers from being publicized. However, this will probably get overlooked, because the average person wouldn't know an ethics waiver from a hole in the ground.

Rant off.

NPR:

U.S.-Turkey Dispute Over Washington Protest Heats Up

A diplomatic dispute deepened when Turkey summoned the American ambassador in Ankara to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Monday, to protest "the aggressive and unprofessional actions taken" by American security personnel against Turkish security officers.

It stems from a violent confrontation that broke out in front of the Turkish Embassy in Washington, D.C., on May 17 — the same day Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan was visiting President Trump at the White House. Video appears to show Erdogan's security forces pushing past D.C.'s Metropolitan Police officers and violently breaking up a group of protesters, knocking down some and repeatedly kicking them in the head. Around a dozen people were injured.

D.C.'s police chief called it "a brutal attack on peaceful protesters."

But now Turkey is requesting that "US authorities conduct a full investigation of this diplomatic incident and provide the necessary explanation."

With friends like Turkey, we don't need enemies.

Seriously, Turkey could be a problem with their new dictatorship. Watch them closely.

Finally...

The Telegraph:

Europe was the birthplace of mankind, not Africa, scientists find

The history of human evolution has been rewritten after scientists discovered that Europe was the birthplace of mankind, not Africa.

Currently, most experts believe that our human lineage split from apes around seven million years ago in central Africa, where hominids remained for the next five million years before venturing further afield.

But two fossils of an ape-like creature which had human-like teeth have been found in Bulgaria and Greece, dating to 7.2 million years ago.

The discovery of the creature, named Graecopithecus freybergi, and nicknameded ‘El Graeco' by scientists, proves our ancestors were already starting to evolve in Europe 200,000 years before the earliest African hominid.

An international team of researchers say the findings entirely change the beginning of human history and place the last common ancestor of both chimpanzees and humans - the so-called Missing Link - in the Mediterranean region. 

By the way, this is not "settled science". If anything, it is proof that science, much like mankind, evolves.

Comey's Testimony

Six days before he was fired by President Trump, former FBI Director James Comey gave the testimony shown above. In discussing whether the FBI had ever been asked to end an investigation for political reasons, he said it would be a "big deal", and "It has not happened in my experience."

If Comey believed that Trump had been asking him to end the investigation into Mike Flynn, as has been alleged, then why would he say the above? Either Comey was lying to Congress, which is possible, or else he didn't consider Trump's comments to be a request to end an investigation.

Admittedly, Comey could say his testimony was only about Justice Department officials asking to end an FBI investigation, but that is a Clintonesque "definition of is" kind of interpretation. Cutting that fine a legal point only sells in a courtroom, not in the court of public opinion.


Overall, if Comey does pursue a vendetta against Trump, Comey may find himself in an equally bad legal situation, unless he can get an immunity deal.

All the President's Nut Jobs: Today's News for May 22nd

New York Times:

Trump Told Russians That Firing ‘Nut Job’ Comey Eased Pressure From Investigation

President Trump told Russian officials in the Oval Office this month that firing the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, had relieved “great pressure” on him, according to a document summarizing the meeting.

“I just fired the head of the F.B.I. He was crazy, a real nut job,” Mr. Trump said, according to the document, which was read to The New York Times by an American official. “I faced great pressure because of Russia. That’s taken off.”

Mr. Trump added, “I’m not under investigation.”

...The White House document that contained Mr. Trump’s comments was based on notes taken from inside the Oval Office and has been circulated as the official account of the meeting. One official read quotations to The Times, and a second official confirmed the broad outlines of the discussion. 

Sean Spicer, the White House press secretary, did not dispute the account.

This is an incredible revelation from the White House. For Trump to have made such comments, in front of Russian officials no less, is at the very least politically indiscreet, and at worst creating legal implications. The fact he specifically equates the firing of the FBI director with removing the "great pressure because of Russia" is almost a confession that he fired the FBI director because of the Russian investigation.

Note that "almost a confession" is not a confession. Especially because the source document for these quotes has not been publicly released.

Not surprisingly, Fox News somehow missed this story. Instead, this is what they covered today:

Fox News:

Hill Republicans wary of cuts in Trump's 2018 budget plan out Tuesday

Top Republican lawmakers have expressed concerns about the cuts President Trump plans to make for the 2018 budget year, which is due out Tuesday.

The blueprint is certain to include a wave of cuts to benefit programs such as Medicaid, food stamps, federal employee pensions and farm subsidies. The fleshed-out proposal follows up on an unpopular partial release in March that targeted the budgets of domestic agencies and foreign aid for cuts averaging 10 percent -- and made lawmakers in both parties recoil.

The new cuts are unpopular as well.

Of course the cuts are unpopular. Congress doesn't like budget cuts, regardless of political party affiliation.

That said, this is a lede story? Get real. Presidential budgets are typically ignored by Congress, as they do their own thing (if they do anything at all).

In other words, Fox ignored Trump's potentially self-incriminating comments for a non-story lede.

Even CNN manages to find something much more interesting with their lede, and actually about something which was news over the weekend, namely Trump's Middle East trip:

CNN:

Can Donald Trump solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?

US President Donald Trump arrives in Israel Monday in search of what he has called "the ultimate deal".

When he hosted Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in Washington earlier this month, Trump said: "we will get it done," as the two men discussed a deal to end the conflict in the Middle East.

But like so many US presidents who have believed it their duty to bring peace to the region, Trump will face a series of challenges, which have grown increasingly insurmountable.

Seven years on since Abbas and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu last held talks, the same issues remain -- disagreements over borders, security, Jerusalem, a right of return for refugees and mutual recognition are no closer to being solved.

"Everybody wants peace, they just want it on their terms," Senator George Mitchell who worked on peace talks between the Israelis and Palestinians in 2010, told CNN.

"I don't think it's a case of finding people who want to make peace. If you said to everyone: 'do you want peace?' then of course they'll say they want peace. But they define peace differently and want it according to their definition, not the other side's definition."

This has been a problem for American presidents since Harry Truman. If Trump does broker a true peace, it would be a monster diplomatic event, especially considering the reasons given above by George Mitchell. This would be an event for Trump comparable to the "only Nixon could go to China" event.

And then he wakes up.

Weekly Musical Finale: Gin Wigmore

Welcome to the musical finale for this week.

Gin Wigmore is a 30 year old New Zealander who may not be well known to the average music aficionado, but she is definitely worth adding to your playlist, especially for fans of Amy Winehouse, although Wigmore's repertoire is a bit more extensive. I would call Wigmore superior to Winehouse, although their vocals are similar. Wigmore brings more fun to her work, without nearly as much of the "funeral dirge" quality that permeates much of Winehouse's music.

To better understand Wigmore, just consider the list of musical genres she has listed on her Wikipedia entry: "Folk rock, alternative rock, pop, pop rock, soul, blues, blues rock, jazz, hip hop". That is somebody with a love of music, and that is one of the best qualities for any musical performer to have.

Which is not to say Wigmore isn't intense or even dark. She has her moments, such as in "Black Sheep":



I would call "Black Sheep" a female version of George Thorogood's "Bad to the Bone".

But that is her charm. Wigmore takes a song with lyrics which could easily be depressing or dark, and she accompanies it with an upbeat tune, to make a deceptively fun song.

For example, consider "Man Like That", which is about a cheating man:



But what makes Wigmore so appealing to me is the diversity of her musical genre sampling. "Devil in Me" has a western sound to it:



On the other hand, "Willing to Die" reaches into hip hop and rap, while still retaining Wigmore's own vocal stylings:



All in all, Wigmore is an eclectic artist, who could end up being the 21st century's version of Billy Joel with her talent and fearlessness to travel across genres.

That is all for me this week. Enjoy your weekend, and I will return Monday with more blogging.

Tweet of the Day

My Tweet of the Day award goes to:

pic.twitter.com/PCdKB5TA0u

— Anarchyball💰 (@Anarchyball) May 17, 2017

Obamacare Repeal's Mulligan: Today's News for May 19th

Bloomberg:

House May Need to Vote Again on GOP Obamacare Repeal Bill

House Speaker Paul Ryan hasn’t yet sent the [Obamacare repeal] bill to the Senate because there’s a chance that parts of it may need to be redone, depending on how the Congressional Budget Office estimates its effects. House leaders want to make sure the bill conforms with Senate rules for reconciliation, a mechanism that allows Senate Republicans to pass the bill with a simple majority.

Republicans had rushed to vote on the health bill so the Senate could get a quick start on it, even before the CBO had finished analyzing a series of last-minute changes. The CBO is expected to release an updated estimate next week.

House Republicans get the bear:

Seriously, if you need a sign that government has gotten too big for humans to try and run it, this is it. Humans cannot even figure out the legislative process.

By the way, these are the same people overseeing your health care. If that isn't enough to make you sick...

Fox News:

Joe Lieberman emerges as Trump's top choice for FBI director

President Trump said Thursday he is “very close” to naming a new FBI director to replace James Comey, and his leading contender is former Democratic Sen. Joe Lieberman.

Lieberman, 75, who served in the Senate from 1989-2013, first as a Democrat and then as an independent, met with Trump at the White House on Wednesday afternoon to discuss leading the law enforcement agency. A late and somewhat unlikely addition to Trump's short list, Lieberman is nonetheless the sudden frontrunner.

When asked point-blank by a reporter in the Oval Office Thursday if Lieberman was the leading contender, Trump replied, "Yes."

...Lieberman’s law enforcement experience stems from his two-term tenure as Connecticut’s attorney general, spanning from 1983 until his resignation in 1989 when he was elected to the U.S. Senate.

The best we can do is a 75 year old politician whose only law enforcement experience was as an attorney general? Even then, his Wikipedia entry states, "As Attorney General, Lieberman emphasized consumer protection and environmental enforcement." That isn't criminal law investigation/enforcement. This is being a politician in an attorney general's role.

Lieberman has no experience to qualify him for being FBI director. But if being a good politician is all we need from an FBI director, couldn't we find somebody a lot younger than Lieberman?

Regardless, when political rumors are the lede stories for both the Right and Left, you know it is a slow news day.

The rumor lede from the Left:

CNN:

Pence is a loyal soldier, but news cycle is wearing on him

After a fast and furious news cycle at the White House this week, the last few days may have worn on Vice President Mike Pence.

Though Pence will continue to be a "loyal soldier" because he is a "relentlessly positive guy, he "looks tired," a senior administration adviser observed on Thursday, outlining the vice president's schedule and trying to explain his relative absence from the public eye.

In summary, the vice president is tired.

Apparently, the editor for CNN is also tired.

Scott Adams, George Washington, and Sulla

"Dilbert" creator Scott Adams has been my go-to for understanding the Donald Trump phenomena, as he was the first to accurately analyze Trump. While he sometimes comes off as a Trump cheerleader, and it is clear that Adams does admire Trump's skillful handling of both the media and his opponents, Adams has usually been spot-on with his analysis.

Until now.

His latest blog post, "The Slow-Motion Assassination of President Trump", reads like a 1973 defense of President Nixon:

Today’s headline news is that an alleged Comey memo indicates President Trump tried to obstruct justice in the Flynn investigation by saying to Comey in a private meeting, “I hope you can let this go.”

Key word = hope

How did the New York Times characterize Trump’s expression of hope?

Do you see Trump asking Comey to end the Flynn investigation in the quote “I hope you can let this go”?

All I see in that sentence is “duh.” Obviously Trump HOPED his friend and advisor Flynn would be okay. Did it need to be said? Was there some confusion on this point with Comey? Did Comey enter the meeting thinking maybe President Trump wanted to see his friend and advisor Flynn get eaten by the system?

Adams fails to see his own point in there: That "hope" shouldn't have had to be said. So why did Trump say it?

When a boss says to an employee, "I sure hope I can get a cup of coffee", what is he REALLY saying? He is saying he wants a cup of coffee.

When a male boss says to a female employee, "I sure hope I can have sex tonight", is there an implicit demand for sex being made there? Many courts would say "yes", contrary to Adams' next statement:

I’m no lawyer, but I can’t see any judge or jury in the United States prosecuting someone for expressing a hope that the future turns out well for his friend.

On the other hand, Adams does get his next political analysis correct:

I also think we are seeing with the recent leaks the first phase of Mutually Assured Destruction of our government. The leaks will destroy Trump if they continue. But if that happens, no Democrat and no anti-Trump Republican will ever be able to govern in the future. Payback is guaranteed. The next President to sit in the White House will be leaked to the point of ineffectiveness. And that’s how the Republic dies.

That isn’t necessarily bad news. The Republic form of government doesn’t make sense in the modern world anyway. We already evolved into a form of direct democracy via social media and polling. Our politicians can’t risk going against a big majority – even for noble reasons – because social media will organize to drive that person out of office over the issue. In effect, we are already a direct democracy. The Republic is already history, except in a technical sense.

This may already be happening. If you go back to the start of the Obama administration, when the Republicans vowed to obstruct all of Obama's actions, the Democrats took that to heart. What is happening with Trump may be the fruit of that Republican decision, even though that should be the purpose of an "opposition" party.

However, George Washington warned us about the dangers of political parties:

I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the state, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party, generally.

This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.

The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty.

Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind, (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight,) the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.

It serves always to distract the Public Councils, and enfeeble the Public Administration. It agitates the Community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which find a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.

There is an opinion, that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the Government, and serve to keep alive the spirit of Liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in Governments of a Monarchical cast, Patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in Governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And, there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be, by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.

Adams' warning, combined with Washington's warning, should give you a brief pause at getting overjoyed about what is happening to Trump today, even if Trump deserves it. Trump will be a footnote to what could end up being a long and painful civil war, although I will speculate we have a few years, possibly decades, before we reach that point. But we already see the cracks forming, with plenty of secession talk on both sides.

(hat tip to Wikipedia for the Sulla pic)

I originally thought Trump might be the American Sulla, but I don't see that happening unless he can bounce back from these setbacks. However, if Trump isn't our Sulla, we may not be far from it. If Adams' prediction proves accurate, we could only be a president or two from an American Sulla. Thus would begin the decline into American civil war, followed by dictatorship.

Have a nice day.

Special Counsel Appointed: Today's News for May 18th

CNN:

Special counsel appointed in Russia probe

The Justice Department on Wednesday appointed former FBI Director Robert Mueller as special counsel to oversee the federal investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, including potential collusion between President Donald Trump's campaign associates and Russian officials.

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein appointed Mueller to the position in a letter obtained by CNN. Attorney General Jeff Sessions previously recused himself from any involvement in the Russia investigation due to his role as a prominent campaign adviser and surrogate.

As special counsel, Mueller is "authorized to prosecute federal crimes arising from the investigation of these matters," according to the Justice Department order Rosenstein signed.

Mueller's appointment aims to quell the wave of criticism that Trump and his administration have faced since Trump fired FBI Director James Comey last week in the middle of the FBI's intensifying investigation into contacts between Trump campaign associates and Russian officials.

In a statement, Trump said an investigation will confirm that "there was no collusion" between his campaign and Russia. 

This story was covered across the political spectrum with surprisingly little bias, although there isn't much that can be said to paint this positively or negatively.

In related news analysis from Fox News attorney Gregg Jarrett...

Fox News:

Comey's revenge is a gun without powder

Three months ago, the then-FBI Director met with President Trump.  Following their private conversation, Comey did what he always does –he wrote a memorandum to himself memorializing the conversation.  Good lawyers do that routinely.

Now, only after Comey was fired, the memo magically surfaces in an inflammatory New York Times report which alleges that Mr. Trump asked Comey to end the Michael Flynn investigation.  

Those who don’t know the first thing about the law immediately began hurling words like “obstruction of justice”, “high crimes and misdemeanors” and “impeachment“.   Typically, these people don’t know what they don’t know.

Here is what we do know.

Under the law, Comey is required to immediately inform the Department of Justice of any attempt to obstruct justice by any person, even the President of the United States.  Failure to do so would result in criminal charges against Comey.  (18 USC 4 and 28 USC 1361)  He would also, upon sufficient proof, lose his license to practice law.

So, if Comey believed Trump attempted to obstruct justice, did he comply with the law by reporting it to the DOJ?  If not, it calls into question whether the events occurred as the Times reported it.

Obstruction requires what’s called “specific intent” to interfere with a criminal case.  If Comey concluded, however, that Trump’s language was vague, ambiguous or elliptical, then he has no duty under the law to report it because it does not rise to the level of specific intent.  Thus, no crime.    

In other words, if Comey says that Trump was trying to obstruct justice, then Comey himself is liable to be prosecuted for being complicit in a conspiracy to obstruct justice. It is a Catch-22 for Comey, so don't be surprised if he downplays any obstruction charges against Trump. On the other hand, if Comey is given immunity from prosecution, expect him to sing from obstruction hymnal.

Speaking of Catch-22's...

Fox News:

Flynn reportedly told Trump team he was under investigation before inauguration

Weeks before President Trump's inauguration, Michael Flynn told the transition team he was under federal investigation for working as a paid lobbyist for Turkey during the campaign, the New York Times reported late Wednesday.

The disclosure by Flynn on Jan. 4 was first made to then-Trump transition team lawyer Donald F. McGahn II, who is now the White House counsel, two people familiar with the case told the newspaper.

Flynn's conversation with the transition team came a month after the Justice Department notified Flynn he was under investigation, according to the Times.  

Most politicians would have spinelessly disconnected themselves from Flynn. This is clearly a case where Trump could have used a bit more political savvy.

But it is an intriguing Catch-22 for anyone in politics: How does a politician remain loyal to someone who is politically toxic to them? There is no easy answer.

The Rest of the News for May 17th

There was some good news for President Trump. Yesterday's alleged blockbuster about him giving classified intel to the Russians gained some perspective:

Newsbusters:

Guests Remind NBC, CNN: Obama Gave Classified Intel to Russia

While NBC and CNN joined the rest of the media in rushing to condemn the Trump White House over an unconfirmed Washington Post report that the President inadvertently shared classified information with Russian officials, guests on both networks provided important context that the Obama administration intentionally shared classified intelligence with Russia less than a year ago.

Unfortunately for Trump, the media got a better story to run with today.

In other news...

Cato Institute:

E-Verify Has Delayed or Cost Half a Million Jobs for Legal Workers

E-Verify is a government national identification system that employers currently use voluntarily to screen out unauthorized immigrant workers. Members of Congress want to make the program mandatory for all employers with the Legal Workforce Act, which has passed the House Judiciary Committee three times. This legislation would be the largest employer regulation in terms of scale in the history of the United States, applying to every single employer and every single worker in the country and also roping in several agencies to run it.

The system has already proven remarkably ineffective at its intended purpose—keeping unauthorized workers away from jobs. In fact, in many cases, it does the opposite—keeping authorized workers away from employment. While many have focused on how making it mandatory would increase the number of these errors, E-Verify is already causing headaches and costing jobs for legal workers.  In fact, from 2006 to 2016, legal workers had about 580,000 jobs held up due to E-Verify errors, and of these, they lost roughly 130,000 jobs entirely due to E-Verify mistakes.

Here’s how E-Verify catches innocent people. The system checks information all workers must provide on their I-9 forms against the databases of either the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for legal immigrants or the Social Security Administration (SSA) for U.S. citizens. If the system fails to verify this information, it will issue a “tentative nonconfirmation” (TNC). People who receive a TNC must challenge it within two weeks or it turns into a “final nonconfirmation” (FNC), and the employer must fire them.

Legal workers can receive an erroneous TNC for a variety of reasons. Employers may have put their information into the system incorrectly. This is especially common for hyphenated names or individuals with multiple last names. It can also happen if someone changes their name, but SSA or DHS has failed to update their entry in the database. Errors can also occur when SSA or DHS employees enter a person’s information into the database.

If you ever need an example of how government regulations can cost people jobs, this is probably one of the most egregious examples.

However, this story doesn't show how many illegal immigrants were caught or turned away because of E-Verify. But even if the actual answer is in the millions, is it worth it?

This appears to be doubling down on stupid. We already have our immigration process over-regulated to the point where immigrants are trying to enter the country illegally. Now we add another law which impacts legal citizens?

Abraham Maslow said it best:

"I suppose it is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail."

In the case of government, the only tool it has is the law.