1) An armed school staffer could have stopped the murderer
Well, obviously. The catch is you have to have one with the courage to go into danger instead of running away from it. Such people exist, but they are hard to identify until the danger presents itself. This, along with other recent events like the Vegas shooting response, suggest that we can't rely on armed security as a panacea to threats. Armed security will do great helping a drunk out of your casino or breaking up fights between high schoolers. They won't help -- not reliably -- against mass murders, because sometimes people even with the best of intentions freeze and fail to respond in the moment, and you can't really tell who until it happens. And mass murders are rare enough, despite their media visibility, that needing that level of response is unlikely.
Having more school staff armed will increase the chances of someone being both willing and able to respond decisively. Relying on a single "school resource officer" is relying on that one middle-aged donut cop who got the safest job he could think of on his path to a healthy retirement on his public pension. Maybe he'll rise to the occasion, but it's good to have other options.
2) The murderer had 6 round magazines and reloaded several times
Why 6 round magazines? Last I checked Florida was not a magazine limit state. You can order 20 or 30 round magazines online easily and they function reliably. You can order 100-round magazines if you don't mind an increased chance of a jam. I'm glad that he didn't, but this illustrates that magazine size limits do not solve anything.
Credible allegations of domestic abuse against Dem AG candidate Keith Ellison
Allegedly Ellison was abusive with a former partner. Her son made the accusation on Facebook and claims there are text messages and a video to corroborate the abuse. I don't know if it's real or not, but the relationship appears to be and the claimed evidence presents a testable claim.
Normally, I'd say back off a bit on this stuff. This is an attack on character not policy, with unproven allegations that may never see a court of law, and (while not flattering) are not necessarily disqualifying.
But these are the new rules. Democrats use this sort of accusation against Republican candidates all the time, often when the accusations are a lot less credible with less supporting evidence. As far as I'm concerned, you can blanket Ellison's state with ads featuring the video. Democrats no longer get a free pass.
It's easy to interact with certain bureaucracies as a legal resident and get registered to vote accidentally, but that doesn't seem to be what happened here. Instead we had petition volunteers collecting information, and apparently registering signers to vote without their knowledge. Why would they do that? Well, I'm sure you can think of a reason.
Youtube adds propaganda captions to anti-global warming videos
Youtube has no business inserting itself into the "conversation" between someone making videos and someone watching videos, much less inserting propaganda into the videos which supports YouTube's own interest. Sure, as a private company, they can probably do this; that doesn't make it right, and it means that alternatives are needed more than ever.
Twitter outrage mobs are a horrible way to get people fired, but the only way to get rid of them is to make sure both sides feel their pain equally. And really, if you are running for office, why did you hire someone who thinks America is a "shithole country"?
Black Lives Matter now tracking down police officers at weddings
This whole thing where leftists track down people they don't like in their private and personal lives and harass them needs to stop. It needs to stop because it is going to get someone killed, probably by a complete stranger who read about some other complete stranger on the internet and got mad.
Prosecution's star witness in Manafort trial has zero credibility
The guy they are trying to use to convict Manafort of colluding with Russians has admitted to tax evasion, cheating on his wife, embezzling funds from the company he worked for (ie, Manafort) to pay for his mistress, submitted false expense claims when he worked on Trump's inaugural committee, and then lying to the special counsel (Mueller) before negotiating a plea bargain in which he would accuse Manafort of.. I guess of participating in his own crimes? And this is after the judge rebuked the prosecution for showing the jury pictures of Manafort's expensive suits and home renovation bills, as if being well off is criminal.
As far as witness credibility goes, Mueller picked a real gem.
Steele views Mueller as part of the soft coup team?
The above is a big deal, but the documents only support it indirectly.
The obvious thing here is that Steele and Bruce are still talking. Steele thinks Mueller and the Bureau can "reengage" in something, presumably some aspect of investigating Trump. But Mueller can't engage with the Bureau and the Bureau can't engage with an investigation of Trump -- that's precisely the reason for a special counsel, he's supposed to be reasonably independent. So why does Steele think he can and should "reengage" with Mueller? Is he feeding Mueller information from Russian or other intel sources on Trump? It sure sounds like it -- and we know that the Trump investigation has been heavily funded by private sources.
But the biggest takeaway is that these transcripts go all the way to December of 2017. That's a year after the election. Why are Ohr and Steele still talking a year after the election? Remember, Steele was fired as a confidential source from the FBI before the election even happened. Bruce Ohr at DOJ picked up the information thread and fed information from Steele to the DOJ and FBI. Apparently, this continued past the election and almost a year into Trump's presidency, just from these excerpts. Possibly longer.
This is not how a normal government functions. This is a coup.
I'm guessing the exculpatory information was the fact that Carter Page was working as an FBI informant in the earlier case he was involved in. That would be enough, because it's pretty devastating to the claim that Page was presently a Russian spy. If you tell the court that Russians are trying to recruit Page, that you think he may have become an agent, and you need a warrant to keep an eye on him, it would be pretty exculpatory to learn that the "Russian contacts" he had who tried to recruit him were then tried and convicted of espionage with Carter Page's help.
My theory is this: The FBI knew Carter Page. They knew he had contact with Russians and the Russians had tried to recruit him. They knew that if they were careful about their wording, they could weave those facts together with his volunteer status on the Trump Team to sell a narrative about him being a Russian agent and the Russians colluding with Trump to subvert the election.
I suspect the only suspicious contact with Russians Carter Page had was that related to the case in which he testified, which had nothing to do with Trump and the election.
The question in my mind is whether the FBI asked Page to cooperate in this scheme, and perhaps encouraged him to volunteer for the campaign, or just took advantage of his history to get an unjustified FISA warrant.
There's a lot of new information here. One thing that's notable is that Ohr and Steele seemed to share communications in which they were aware it was sketchy behavior for Ohr to continue receiving information from Steele after Steele was fired by the FBI. They also referred to an unknown source as someone they needed to protect and who did not want to have to go "home", which I guess he (or she?) might be if certain aspects of the investigation continued.
Nearly 60 people shot over the weekend in gun control paradise
That's one or two media-saturation mass murders over the course of an ordinary weekend in the closest thing to gun control paradise you can find in the United States -- yet no one in the media is asking what makes Chicago different from all the other large cities that don't have a murder rate that compares unfavorably to a war zone.
The core problem here is that many financial services companies -- perhaps most of the large ones -- are incorporated in or based in New York, and thus subject to that state's regulations even when their business is national. If political forces in New York want to have a national political impact, one way they can do that is by pressuring companies subject to their regulations. That's what happened here: New York politicians are pressuring banks and insurance companies not to do business with the National Rifle Association specifically, and the firearms industry in general.
If they succeed with the NRA and are not stopped, how will the smaller organizations and even local gun stores manage? Answer: they won't, at least not in the short term. Eventually alternative services not subject to the same pressure will likely appear, but that will take a while, and most businesses are required to carry various types of insurance. And of course all businesses need to be able to collect payments from their members and customers, something else that has been under attack.
That's enough illegal votes to overturn even a 100% vote in the other direction, if this was a political fraud operation. We have a lot of work to do on election security, but this was probably not the Russians trying to give Trump the election. More likely a local politician trying to ensure their "reelection".
Hospitals required to post prices publicly under new regulations
This is a good first step. The problem is that the posted prices will all be absurdly high, because those are the prices charged to uninsured patients as negotiating positions. The insurance companies negotiate lower prices, for their patients only, in return for things like directing patients to that hospital and a guarantee of prompt payment for things most people would otherwise need to take out a loan to pay for. Hospitals don't want to be collection agencies.
The only people who get the real prices are those who come in with cash and are willing to walk out and go somewhere else. They can usually negotiate a cash discount, which is really a "we don't have to file a lot of crap with the insurance company" discount. But the ability to walk out and go elsewhere is key to this negotiation, and can be hard to do when you've just been in a car accident or are unconscious, which is another reason for insurance to act as a negotiating agent in those circumstances.
Publicly posted prices will at least help the people who are in a position to price shop and hopefully begin a competition among providers for that business. And if that happens, insurance companies will use it as leverage to get their prices lower. Medical providers know this and will try to avoid starting the price war. But if the law requires them to post their prices publicly, someone will have an incentive to lower them.
I hesitate to call this brilliant. It's probably fair to call it a good start.
Court orders DOJ to preserve Comey's personal emails
To borrow a phrase, I'm sure these emails have already been "wiped, like with a cloth" to ensure there is nothing incriminating. In fact, a cynical mind would think that is exactly why the DOJ delayed here. Because there was no official order, they could send someone to run and tell Comey to make sure his email was clean before any official preservation order arrived. Of course, Comey likely did that on his own initiative a long time ago.