Last updated:
10:52 AM, 27 May 2016



Jim Miller on Politics

  Email:
jimxc1 at gmail.com



What's he reading? Francis Parkman.

News Compilers
(Why These?)

A&L Daily
Drudge
Hot Air
Jewish World Review
Lexis-Nexis
Lucianne
Mediaite
memeorandum
Monsters and Critics
*newser
Orbusmax
Rantburg
Real Clear Politics
SciTech Daily
Yahoo


Big Media
(Why These?)

Atlantic Monthly
BBC
CNN
Chosen Ilbo
*Daily Mail (UK)
*Deutsche Welle
Fox News
Globe and Mail (CA)
Guardian (UK)
Investor's Business Daily
Le Figaro (FR)
Le Monde (FR)
The Local (Sweden)
National Review
New York Times
The New Yorker
Politico
Seattle PI
Seattle Times
Slate
Slashdot
The Spectator (UK)
Der Spiegel
Telegraph (UK)
Times (UK)
El Universal
U. S. News
USA Today
Wall Street Journal
Washington Examiner
Washington Post
Washington Times


References:

Adherents
Bureau of Labor Statistics
Census Quick Facts
Dave Leip's Election Atlas
FactCheck
Federal Statistics
How Stuff Works
NationMaster
Refdesk
Snopes
StateMaster
Tax Facts
Unionstats
Wikipedia


Smart Media
(Why These?)

ABC News Note
*The American
The American Spectator
Michael Barone
City Journal
Commentary
Front Page Magazine
Michael Fumento
The Hill
Media Research
Michael Medved
New York Sun
Number Watch
PJ Media
Public Interest
Roll Call
Spinsanity
Townhall
The Weekly Standard


Blogs
(Why These?)

My Group Blog:
Sound Politics

Northwest:


The American Empire
AndrewsDad
Chief Brief
Clear Fog Blog
Coffeemonkey's weblog
Croker Sack
"DANEgerus"
Economic Freedom
Federal Way Conservative
Freedom Foundation
Hairy Thoughts
Huckleberry Online
Andy MacDonald
NW Republican
Orcinus
Public Interest Transportation Forum
<pudge/*>
Northwest Progressive Institute
*Progressive Majority
Matt Rosenberg
Seattle Blogger
Seattle Bubble
Washington Policy Center
West Sound Politics
Zero Base Thinking


Other US:


Ace of Spades HQ
Alien Corn
Ann Althouse
American Thinker
The Anchoress
Armies of Liberation
Art Contrarian
"Baldilocks"
Balloon Juice
Baseball Crank
La Shawn Barber
Beldar
Bleat
Big Government
Bookworm Room
Broadband Politics
Stuart Buck
Keith Burgess-Jackson
*Bush Center
Chef Mojo
Chicago Boyz
Classical Values
*College Insurrection
Confederate Yankee
Jules Crittenden
Daily Pundit
Discriminations
Gregory Djerejian
Daniel W. Drezner
Econlog
Econopundit
Election Law
John Ellis
Engage
Dean Esmay
Gary Farber
Fausta
FiveThirtyEight
Flares into Darkness
Flopping Aces
The Long War Journal
Gateway Pundit
Grasping Reality With Both Hands
Keith Hennessey
Hugh Hewitt
Siflay Hraka
Instapundit
Iowahawk
Joanne Jacobs
Jeff Jarvis
The Jawa Report
Brothers Judd
JustOneMinute
Kausfiles
Kesher Talk
Le-gal In-sur-rec-tion
Little Green Footballs
Megan McArdle
Michelle Malkin
Greg Mankiw
Marginal Revolution
Mazurland
Minding the Campus
The ModerateVoice
*The Monkey Cage Mudville Gazette
"neo-neocon"
Betsy Newmark
Newsbusters
No Watermelons Allowed
Ambra Nykola
*The Optimistic Conservative
The Ornery American
OxBlog
Parapundit
"Patterico"
Daniel Pipes
Polipundit
Political Arithmetik
Political Calculations
Pollster.com
Power and Control
Power Line
Protein Wisdom
QandO
Radio Equalizer
RedState
Riehl World View
Right Wing News
Rightwing Nuthouse
Dr. Sanity
Scrappleface
Screw Loose Change
Linda Seebach
Sense of Events
Joshua Sharf
Rand Simberg
Smart Politics
The Spirit of Enterprise
Stability For Our Time
*Strange Maps
The Strata-Sphere
Andrew Sullivan
Don Surber
Sweetness & Light
Taking Hayek Seriously
TalkLeft
Talking Points Memo
TaxProf
USS Neverdock
VDH's Private Papers
Verum Serum
Villainous Company
Volokh Conspiracy
Washington Monthly
Wizbang
Dr. Weevil
Matt Welch
Winds of Change
Meryl Yourish
zombietime


Canadians:


BlazingCatFur
Colby Cosh
Five Feet of Fury
Kate McMillan
Damian Penny
Bruce Rolston


Latin America:


Babalú
Caracas Chronicles
The Devil's Excrement
Venezuela News and Views


Overseas:


"Franco Aleman"
Bruce Bawer
Biased BBC
Tim Blair
*Andrew Bolt
Peter Briffa
Brussels Journal
Butterflies and Wheels
Crooked Timber
Davids Medienkritik
Egyptian Sand Monkey
EU Referendum
Greenie Watch
Guido Fawkes
Harry's Place
Mick Hartley
Oliver Kamm
JG, Caesarea
*Le Monde Watch
¡No-Pasarán!
Fredrik Norman
Melanie Phillips
*Political Betting
John Ray
samizdata
Shark Blog
Natalie Solent
Somtow's World
Bjørn Stærk
Laban Tall
*David Thompson
Michael Yon

Science Blogs:
The Blackboard
Cliff Mass Weather
Climate Audit
Climate Depot
Climate Science
*Judith Curry
Future Pundit
Gene Expression
The Loom
In The Pipeline
Roger Pielke Jr.
Real Climate
A Voyage To Arcturus
Watts Up With That?

Media Blogs:
Andrew Malcolm
Dori Monson
David Postman
Rhetorical Ammo
Tierney Lab
*White House Dossier

R-Rated:
Horse's A**
Huffington Post

*new



Pseudo-Random Thoughts


President Obama's Hiroshima Photo-Op Versus The Numbers:  It isn't necessary to link to that photo-op; if you pay any attention to the news at all, you have already heard about it, probably even seen parts of it on TV.

Bur it is quite unlikely, unless you are a careful reader of the New York Times, that you have seen these numbers:
A new census of the American nuclear arsenal shows that the Obama administration last year dismantled its smallest number of warheads since taking office. The new figures, released by the Pentagon, also highlight a trend — that the current administration has reduced the nuclear stockpile less than any other post-Cold War presidency.
(Emphasis added.)

Specifically, less than Presidents George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush.

You may be surprised by how much less, when you look at the numbers in this 2014 article, also by William Broad.

As I have said before, the risk of nuclear war has increased while Barack Obama has been president.  Not all of that increase is his fault —it is hard to think of practical ways to restrain North Korea and Iran — but I do think he, and his secretaries of state, Hillary Clinton and John Kerry, might have done better in negotiations with Russia.
- 10:52 AM, 27 May 2016   [link]


What Happens When You Ask Socialist Bernie Sanders About Socialism In Venezuela?  He evades the question.

The exchange is pretty funny, especially when you realize that he should have had a few talking points on the subject, ready to go.

(I am inclined to think, now, that the Bernie Sanders had little or nothing to do with the criticism of the Venezuelan regime that went out under his name.   It doesn't sound like Sanders, so it was probably written by a campaign aide.

Worth reading:  Nick Cohen's brutal critique of leftist political tourists, "Radical tourists have been deluded pimps for Venezuela":
Radical tourism is no different from sex tourism.  In both the political and the coital, the inhabitants of the rich world go to the poor to find the thrills no one will give them at home.
Amazingly, it was published in The Guardian.)
- 9:07 AM, 27 May 2016   [link]


An Old Cold War Joke May Explain The Exodus Of So Many Wealthy Chinese From China:  After he had consolidated his power in the Soviet Union, Nikita Khrushchev invited his aged mother to visit him, so she could see how well he was doing.

He showed her his office and his fancy cars, and took her to see his luxurious dacha, and much else.

His mother didn't seem as impressed as he had hoped she would be.  Instead, if anything, she seemed worried,  Finally, he asked her:  "Aren't you impressed with my success?"

"It's all very nice", she replied.  "But what if the Bolsheviks should come back?"


Many wealthy Chinese must worry that the Red Guards of the Cultural Revolution will come back.  China has not recovered from those traumatic years, and many of those who can are preparing safe retreats, abroad.

For example, Jack Ma, the founder of Alibaba, has bought an estate in the Adirondacks.

If President Xi Jinping continues to tighten his control over China, expect many more to follow Ma's example.

(Cixin Liu's The Three-Body Problem is both an excellent science fiction story, and a good introduction to the Cultural Revolution, as seen from below.)
- 8:02 AM, 27 May 2016   [link]


Charles Murray Reminds Smart Conservatives Of Their Weakness:  And passes on a funny line from P. J. O'Rourke, while explaining why "Hillary is worse" is not a sufficient argument for him, or other conservatives like him.

Murray believes Donald Trump lacks the character needed in a president.
In my view, Donald Trump is unfit to be president in ways that apply to no other candidate of the two major political parties throughout American history.
Although Murray is directing this to smart conservatives, it applies to smart people, generally.
I know that I am unlikely to persuade any of my fellow Establishmentarians to change their minds.  But I cannot end without urging you to resist that sin to which people with high IQs (which most of you have) are unusually prone:  Using your intellectual powers to convince yourself of something despite the evidence plainly before you.
(Murray urges them to watch what Trump says; as you know, I urge people to look at what he has done, over the years.)

Finally, the line from O'Rourke:
P. J. O’Rourke recently announced that he is voting for Clinton.  “She’s wrong about absolutely everything,” O’Rourke said.  “But she’s wrong within normal parameters!”
.Note please, that Murray is directing his argument, not to voters generally, but to those who try, in various ways, to form opinions.  They should, he believes, tell the truth about Trump.
- 3:56 PM, 26 May 2016   [link]


Bureaucrats Tried To Save Hillary Clinton From Her Private Email-Server Blunder:  That's the main thing I learned today from the New York Times lead article, the Wall Street Journal lead editorial, and this Washington Post editorial.

Last August, I argued that setting up that private email server was a bad idea, even from the most selfish Clinton point of view.  There wasn't anything special about my analysis, just a little bit of knowledge about computer security, and bureaucracies.  So I am not surprised that people in the State Department saw the same things I did, and that some were professional and patriotic enough to try to save her from her blunder.

For example:
On March 11, 2011, an assistant secretary sent a memorandum on cybersecurity threats directly to Ms. Clinton, noting a “dramatic increase” in attempts to compromise personal email accounts of senior department officials, possibly for spying or blackmail.  That didn’t stop Ms. Clinton either.
Others suggested setting up two cellphones, one for official business and one for personal use, or setting up a dedicated computer in her office which she could use for personal emails.  She, and her closest aides, ignored all that sensible advice, ignored all those attempts to help.

So why did she and her aides reject all these attempts to help?  Because, according to the Times, of an obsessive desire for personal privacy.  And an unwillingness, I would add, to recognize that what she was doing actually jeopardized her privacy, in the long run.
- 12:41 PM, 26 May 2016   [link]


Tsunamis On Mars?!  Scientists think they have discovered evidence for two mega-tsunamis, billions of years ago.
The geologic shape of what were once shorelines through Mars' northern plains convinces scientists that two large meteorites - hitting the planet millions of years apart - triggered a pair of mega-tsunamis.  These gigantic waves forever scarred the Martian landscape and yielded evidence of cold, salty oceans conducive to sustaining life.
The general argument seems entirely plausible, now that I think about it.  Mars had early oceans, at a time when big meteor strikes were more common all through the solar system.

There are, I would guess, thousands of field geologists who would love to go to Mars to take a closer look at the evidence.  There may even be a few who would go, without a return ticket.

(Nature has more pictures; the National Geographic is more skeptical.)
- 8:13 AM, 26 May 2016   [link]


Three To Start The Morning:  Yesterday's New Yorker cartoon is political, without being specific.  I can't decide whether the man in the center is supposed to be Clinton, Trump, neither, or both.

Today's New Yorker calendar cartoon will appeal to almost anyone who has attended a graduation ceremony.

And the latest Pepper and Salt cartoon explains one of the little mysteries of the news business.
- 8:27 AM, 26 May 2016   [link]


The NSA's Balancing Act:  Time for a few more thoughts on Michael Hayden's book.

If the National Security Agency is not aggressive enough in searching for threats, it will miss some, and expose the United States to`an attack,  After that, the agency will be urged to be more aggressive.  If it is then successful in preventing attacks, soon some, including some who urged it to be more aggressive, will accuse it of violating the privacy of Americans.

So the agency is always looking for guidance from the president, and the Justice Department, and asking how close to the edge of legality it should operate.  And, usually, checking with leaders in Congress to make sure they agree.

To understand how this affects their operations, take a simple case:   Terrorist 1 makes a phone call to Terrorist 2, and NSA intercepts it.  What NSA does with that phone call depends on whether either terrorist is an American citizen, and whether either of them is in the United States when the phone call takes place.  It even depends on whether the call passes through the United States, on its way between two foreign countries.

What the NSA can do is governed mainly by the 4th Amendment, and by the FISA, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

In practice, that means that the NSA asks the president whether a particular program would be legal, and a bunch of government lawyers give their opinions on that question.

In a later post, I'll come back to how that created a problem for the Bush administration, but for now, I want to pose this practical problem for you to think about:  After 9/11, Al Qaeda operatives sometimes called people in the United States.  As an intelligence matter, what would you want the NSA to do if they intercepted one of those calls?  Are you sure what you want them to do is legal?
- 8:13 PM, 25 May 2016   [link]


Leaders, Activists, And Voters:   This year, Washington state provided an unusually neat example of the differences between those three groups.

As far as I can tell from news reports, leaders in the Democratic party mostly favored Hillary Clinton, and leaders in the Republican party mostly favored John Kasich, if they favored anyone.

Washington state has both caucuses and presidential primaries, though the two parties use them differently.  In caucuses, activists dominate.  And both parties choose their delegates to their state conventions in caucuses.

So it won't surprise you that, when the Democrats held their convention, in March, Bernie Sanders won a big victory.  And when the Republicans held their convention, in May, Ted Cruz won a big victory, even though he was no longer an active candidate.

Yesterday, the state held its presidential primaries, and you can see, from these partial results, that the voters paid no attention to the activists.  Hillary Clinton is beating Bernie Sanders, 54-46, and Ted Cruz is barely ahead of John Kasich, each with 10 percent of the vote.

(The primary results will affect the parties differently.  They will have no effect on the Democrats since that party chooses its delegates in the caucuses, and ignores the results of the primary.  The Ted Cruz delegates chosen in the Republican caucuses will be forced to vote for Donald Trump on the first ballot, and there is unlikely to be more than one.)

These differences between activists and voters are, by now, standard in the United States, and found in most other democratic countries.

(If we chose presidential candidates entirely through caucuses, we might be facing a Cruz-Sanders race this November.)
- 2:54 PM, 25 May 2016   [link]


The "Ferguson Effect" Is Real:  So says Heather MacDonald, and she has a pile of new evidence to support her claim.
Federal Bureau of Investigation Director James Comey has again drawn the wrath of the White House for calling attention to the rising violence in urban areas.   Homicides increased 9% in the largest 63 cities in the first quarter of 2016; nonfatal shootings were up 21%, according to a Major Cities Chiefs Association survey.   Those increases come on top of last year’s 17% rise in homicides in the 56 biggest U.S. cities, with 10 heavily black cities showing murder spikes above 60%.
MacDonald defines the Ferguson effect as urban violence resulting from "a falloff in proactive policing".  I would define it somewhat more broadly, and interactively, something like this:  Black neighborhoods have become more hostile to police, and the police have reacted by pulling back from aggressive policing.  As a result, crime has increased in many cities, and soared in a few.

The evidence is now strong enough so that she has won over some critics, notably criminologist Richard Rosenfeld.

Here's how I would summarize what has happened:  Activists have created a false picture of police looking for chances to persecute, or even kill, young black men; the Obama administration legitimized that belief; and our media amplified it,  As a result, crime is up and hundreds have died who might have lived, were it not for that movement, that legitimization, and that amplification.

Naturally those responsible are denying what anyone can see in those numbers.

(Some in our major news organizations may be trying to repair some of the damage they have caused.  Recently, I have been seeing more "nice cop" stories.)
- 10:27 AM, 25 May 2016   [link]


Here's Ramirez's Latest Cartoon, on facebook.

(If you need a bigger dose of Ramirez, you can get it at his site.)
- 7:29 AM, 25 May 2016   [link]


If You Have A Taste For The Absurd, you'll probably like today's New Yorker calendar cartoon.

(I suspect more men than women will like it.)
- 6:47 AM, 25 May 2016   [link]


RoboBees:  They don't look much like bees, do they?

RoboBees

But they can fly, and now researchers have taught them how to perch, like most flying creatures.
They perch one way or another at some time or another.  Many birds grip tree branches, bats hang upside down, and insects land on just about anything.

For robots bigger than the RoboBee, researchers have developed gripping mechanisms, like spikes that shoot into a tree limb or other kind of perch, and aerial anchors that the robot can throw out.

RoboBee scientists came up with an elegant and, necessarily, lightweight solution involving an adhesive patch on the top of the robot.
If you are wondering what use RoboBees might be, eventually, Wikipedia has some possibilities.
The goal of the RoboBee project is to make a fully autonomous swarm of flying robots for applications such as search and rescue and artificial pollination
And I imagine you can think of some military possibilities, without much effort.

How much smaller can researchers go?  I don't know, but networked floating dust motes play an important part in Vernor Vinge's A Deepness in the Sky.  (Vinge is a computer scientist, as well as a science fiction writer.)
- 3:55, 24 May 2016   [link]


More On Donald Trump's "Mandate"  Two weeks ago, I argued that Donald Trump's performance in the primaries and caucuses did not give him a mandate.

In his article, "The Insider", Jay Cost extends that argument.
In fact, Trump has won 41 percent of the primary votes cast to date.  His share of the total primary vote will increase now that he is unopposed, but most—if not all—previous GOP nominees won a larger share than Trump is likely to achieve.  In 2008 John McCain won 47 percent of the Republican primary vote; in 2012 Mitt Romney won 52 percent.  Gerald Ford won 53 percent in 1976, Ronald Reagan 61 percent in 1980, George H.W. Bush 68 percent in 1988, and George W. Bush 63 percent in 2000.  Trump could still eke out a slightly larger share of primary votes than McCain did, but only if there is large turnout in the handful of remaining contests.  In all likelihood, he will be the least-popular nominee in the modern era.
(Emphasis added.)

Bob Dole received 59 percent of the popular vote in 1996, if you were wondering.

And those cheering crowds at Trump rallies? —Trump's supporters are intense but not, by modern standards, especially numerous.

(In the rest of the article, Cost argues that Trump's success owes much to media elites, and to party elites who set up rules intended to make a quick choice of a nominee more likely.)
- 2:06 PM, 24 May 2016   [link]


Andy Kessler Starts His Speech To Graduates with some examples of what not to say.
Debt-laden graduates, affluent alumni, birds-of-a-feather faculty and tuition-burdened parents:  I’m sorry.

I’m sorry that I won’t be sucking up to you with the same old graduation platitudes.  You should have invited Oprah:  “How do you know when you’re doing something right?  How do you know that?  It feels so.”  Or Michael Dell:  “The key is to listen to your heart and let it carry you in the direction of your dreams.”  Or Hillary Clinton:   “Give it your all.  Dare to be all you can be.”

Those are so vapid as to be meaningless—and you young’uns need real advice.   So unscrunchie your man-buns, stop posting anonymous snark on YikYak, and listen up.
(When I saw that quote from Michael Dell, literal fellow that I am, I immediately asked these questions:  But what if your auricles and ventricles disagree, as they usually do?  And how can a pump carry you somewhere?)

Those quotes would be even funnier if we didn't know that the speakers were being paid big money to say those things.

The rest of what Kessler has to say is the kind of practical advice that graduates often need.

(For advice on how the graduates should live their lives, it's hard to beat what Clarence Thomas said.)
- 9:47 AM, 24 May 2016   [link]


Today's New Yorker Hillary Cartoon is just okay, but yesterday's Trump cartoon is pretty funny

(Note on terminology:  For years, I have been calling cartoons from my daily calendar "today's cartoon", not realizing that the New Yorker actually had a daily cartoon at their site.  From now on, I'll say "calendar", if that is where I get a cartoon.

Incidentally, for years I have believed that starting the work day with a cartoon or joke was a good idea, that it made me more productive.  Sadly, I have no evidence for that belief, other than my feelings.)
- 8:55 AM, 24 May 2016   [link]


Justin Trudeau Gets Physical:  With a female member of the Canadian parliament.

Well, he "identifies as a feminist", so the Canadian Prime Minister might have elbowed a male MP, in just the same way.

(Canadians haven't lost their sense of humor.)
- 4:18 PM, 23 May 2016   [link]


More On Trump's Temporary Polling Advantage:  Four days ago, I argued that Donald Trump had a temporary advantage over Hillary Clinton because he no longer had an active opponent.

Now Philip Bump is making the same argument.
As it stands, registered voters prefer Trump by a narrow two-point margin.

But that figure is probably a bit misleading.  No one is actively running against Trump. Clinton is still being challenged by Bernie Sanders, whose vocal base of young voters continues to hope that he’ll defy the odds between now and the convention.  Republicans who were leaning against Trump while he was still battling for the nomination have, largely, fallen in line.  Democrats who don’t want to vote for Clinton haven’t.
But more extensively, and with an annotated graph from 2008, to illustrate the point.

(Nonetheless, it is still true that Trump has been gaining on Clinton among British bettors, during this last week.)
- 3:49 PM, 23 May 2016   [link]


Scylla Or Charybdis, Medusa Or The Erymanthian Boar, Evita Or Hugo, Hillary Or Donald:  There are no good choices in those pairs, are there?

But I have been thinking about what those who are dissatisfied with that last pair should do, in the rest of this year, and afterward.  And I hope to say something useful on those subjects, soon.

(I put up that list of pairs so you can tell which is which; for instance, in the second pair, it should be obvious that Donald Trump is the boar.   (For Charybdis I am using the traditional "whirlpool" definition.)

Perhaps I haven't been following popular culture closely enough, but I don't know whether Clinton is Kang pr Kodos, whether Trump is the Alien or the Predator, or which one is the pack of wolverines.)
- 1:28 PM, 23 May 2016   [link]


"What If Clinton Gets Indicted?"  Karl Rove asks that question, and provides tentative answers.

Here's how he begins his speculative column:
Despite losing the Oregon primary while barely eking out a win in Kentucky, Hillary Clinton emerged with 51 of Tuesday’s delegates to Bernie Sanders’s 55.  To reach the 2,383 needed for the nomination, Mrs. Clinton now needs only 92 of either the 890 still-to-be-elected delegates or the 148 still-unpledged superdelegates.   This is because she is already supported by 524 superdelegates—the Democratic Party’s unelected overclass—to Mr. Sanders’s 40.

Still, she must be concerned about losing the FBI primary.  If the bureau recommends that the Justice Department indict Mrs. Clinton or close aides like Cheryl Mills, Huma Abedin or Jake Sullivan for acting with gross negligence—disregard of known or easily anticipated risks—in sending classified information over a private email server, the campaign could be completely scrambled.
(You can use the usual Google search trick to read the rest of the article at the Journal.)

His speculations seem reasonable to me, though, as I've said, I think the FBI will delay any decision until after the election.

(This wouldn't affect the election, but it occurs to me that — if Clinton loses the general election — the FBI might decide that would be a good time to recommend an indictment.  That would dump the problem in Loretta Lynch's lap, in time for President Obama to offer Clinton a pardon, if he wanted to.)
- 10:46 AM, 23 May 2016   [link]


Steven Hayward's Weekly Collection of pictures.

Some are quite good; one has a serious factual error.  Here's a correction:
In 1973, the Justice Department sued the Trump Management Corporation for alleged racial discrimination, which Trump's company disputed.  The corporation was charged with quoting different rental terms and conditions to blacks and making false "no vacancy" statements to blacks for apartments they managed in Brooklyn, Queens, and Staten Island.[474]  In response, Trump sued the government for $100 million, asserting that the charges were irresponsible and baseless.[475]  The ensuing countersuit was thrown out of court.[47]  The corporation settled out of court in 1975 and did not admit guilt, but promised not to discriminate against minorities.  In addition, the corporation was required to send a bi-weekly list of vacancies to the New York Urban League, a civil rights group and give them priority for certain locations.[476]  In 1978, the Justice Department sued Trump Management in Brooklyn for not satisfying the requirements of the 1975 settlement following allegations of discriminatory housing practices; Trump denied the charges and there is no indication that the Justice Department's suit was successful.[47][477]
There is other, more recent evidence on that question,  If you are curious, look for articles on Trump's long-time butler, Anthony Senecal.

(Were Trump and his father guilty of racial discrimination?  Almost certainly, I would say, given the evidence, and the strong financial incentives they would have had to discriminate.

Incidentally, Trump's father had had other run-ins with the law.)
- 8:56 AM, 23 May 2016   [link]


You Don't See Typos in cartoon captions very often.
- 8:10 AM, 23 May 2016   [link]


Archives

June 2002
July 2002
August 2002
September 2002
October 2002, Part 1 and Part 2
November 2002, Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3
December 2002, Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3

January 2003, Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3
February 2003, Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3
March 2003, Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3
April 2003, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
May 2003, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
June 2003, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
July 2003, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
August 2003, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
September 2003, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
October 2003, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
November 2003, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
December 2003, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4

January 2004, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
February 2004, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
March 2004, Part 1 Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
April 2004, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
May 2004, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
June 2004, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
July 2004, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
August 2004, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
September 2004, Part 1, Part 2. Part 3, and Part 4
October 2004, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
November 2004, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
December 2004, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4

January 2005, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
February 2005, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
March 2005, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
April 2005, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
May 2005, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
June 2005, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
July 2005, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
August 2005, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
September 2005, Part 1 Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
October 2005, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
November 2005, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
December 2005, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4

January 2006, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
February 2006, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
March 2006, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
April 2006, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
May 2006, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
June 2006, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
July 2006, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
August 2006, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
September 2006, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
October 2006, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
November 2006, Part 1 Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
December 2006, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4

January 2007, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
February 2007, Part 1 and Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
March 2007, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
April 2007, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
May 2007, Part 1 Part 2, and Part 3, and Part 4
June 2007, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
July 2007, Part 1 Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
August 2007, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
September 2007, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
October 2007, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
November 2007, Part 1 Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
December 2007, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4

January 2008, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
February 2008, Part 1 Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
March 2008, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
April 2008, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4
May 2008, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
June 2008, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
July 2008, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
August 2008, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
September 2008, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
October 2008, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
November 2008, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
December 2008, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4

January 2009, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
February 2009, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
March 2009, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
April 2009, Part 1 Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
May 2009, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
June 2009, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
July 2009, Part 1 Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
August 2009, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
September 2009, Part 1 Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
October 2009, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
November 2009, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
December 2009, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3. and Part 4

January 2010, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
February 2010, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
March 2010, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
April 2010, Part 1 Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
May 2010, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
June 2010, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
July 2010, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
August 2010, Part 1 Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
September 2010, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
October 2010, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
November 2010, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
December 2010, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4

January 2011, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
February 2011, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
March 2011, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
April 2011, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
May 2011, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
June 2011, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
July 2011, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
August 2011, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
September 2011, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
October 2011, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
November 2011, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
December 2011, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4

January 2012, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
February 2012, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
March 2012, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
April 2012, Part 1 Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
May 2012, Part 1 Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
June 2012, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
July 2012, Part 1, Part 2 Part 3, and Part 4
August 2012, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
September 2012, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
October 2012, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
November 2012, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3and Part 4
December 2012, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4

January 2013, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
February 2013, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
March 2013, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
April 2013, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
May 2013, , Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
June 2013, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
July 2013, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
August 2013, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
September 2013, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
October 2013, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
November 2013, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
December 2013, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4

January 2014, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
February 2014, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3 and Part 4
March 2014, Part 1. Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
April 2014, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
May 2014, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
June 2014, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
July 2014, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
August 2014, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
September 2014, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
October 2014, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
November 2014, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
December 2014, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4

January 2015, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
February 2015, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
March 2015, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
April 2015, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
May 2015, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
June 2015, Part 1 Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
July 2015, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
August 2015, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
September 2015, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
October 2015, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
November 2015, Part 1 Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
December 2015, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4

January 2016, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
February 2016, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
March 2016, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
April 2016, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
May 2016, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4






Coming Soon
  • Plan 17 Conservatives
  • FDR and Waterboarding
  • How Long Do Wars Last?
  • Carbon, Carbon Dioxide, and Crescent Wrenches
  • De-Lawyering and Attorney General McKenna


Coming Eventually
  • JFK and Wiretaps
  • Green Republicans
  • The Rise and Fall and Rise of Black Voting
  • Abortion, Cleft Palates, and Europe
  • Kweisi Mfume's Children
  • Public Opinion During Other US Wars
  • Dual Loyalties
  • The Power Index
  • Baby Dancing
  • Jocks, but no Nerds
  • The Four Caliphs




Best Posts


Books


Strange Obama


The Unknown Bush


University Reform


Uncorrected Mistakes


Vote Fraud


The Gang of Four


Articles


Assignment Desk
(What's This?)


Columns


Common Mistakes
(What's This?)


Chomsky Cult Program


*new