This Wall Street Journal article makes a good point, how did the civil service allow Secretary Clinton to get away with using a private email server for so long?:
Forget the new dump of Hillary Clinton emails. Forget the phony claims that the missing communications were all about wedding plans and yoga routines. Forget, too, the many requests from Doug Band in which the Clinton Foundation honcho hoped his quos (hefty donations to the Clinton Foundation) would translate into quids (e.g., special access to the secretary).
Forget them all. The most disturbing aspect about the FBI dump may not be fresh evidence of another Clinton lie. The most disturbing thing about Mrs. Clinton’s continuing email drama may be where she’s telling the truth.
Or at least a half-truth. Mrs. Clinton told the FBI it was “common knowledge” at State that she used private email. Agents further quote her as saying she “could not recall anyone raising concerns with her regarding the sensitivity of the information she received at her email address.”
However unseemly the cashing in of the Clinton family, whatever the trampling of the ethics accord the Clinton Foundation had signed with the White House, even apart from the walking conflicts-of-interests that were Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills, the much larger stink here is this: Mrs. Clinton was allowed to spend her four years as secretary of state off the grid.
It isn’t so much that Mrs. Clinton set up a personal server so she would not be accountable the way normal political appointees are held accountable. It’s that no one in government stopped her. [Wall Street Journal]
You can read more at the link, but in the military I have never heard or seen a senior officer use a private email address. If someone did it would immediately raise eyebrows and eventually an IG complaint from someone if it continued.
Republican Presidential candidate Donald Trump has taken another swipe at South Korea:
U.S. Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump denounced the free trade pact with South Korea as a “job killing” deal Thursday, pledging to totally renegotiate what he called “horrible” trade agreements.
It was not the first time Trump has voiced criticism of the Korea-U.S. trade agreement, but Thursday’s remark carried greater weight as it came in his first speech since formally winning the nomination at the national convention under way in Cleveland.
In a nationally televised nomination acceptance speech, Trump criticized his Democratic rival Hillary Clinton for supporting many trade deals hurting the American middle class, including the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), and for supporting China’s entrance into the World Trade Organization.
“She supported the job-killing trade deal with South Korea. She has supported the Trans-Pacific Partnership. The TPP will not only destroy our manufacturing, but it will make America subject to the rulings of foreign governments,” Trump said. [Korea Times]
You can read more at the link, but considering how the Korean left was against the US-ROK FTA does this mean that the Korean left are fans of Donald Trump? Now that would be an odd pairing.
I am sure everyone saw this coming, but I am still surprised she wasn’t at least fined like General Petraeus was for mishandling classified information:
FBI Director James Comey makes a statement at FBI Headquarters in Washington, Tuesday, July 5, 2016. CLIFF OWEN/THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
The FBI won’t recommend criminal charges against Hillary Clinton for her use of a private email server while secretary of state, agency Director James Comey said Tuesday, lifting a major legal threat to her presidential campaign.
Comey’s decision almost certainly brings the legal part of the issue to a close and removes the threat of criminal charges. Attorney General Loretta Lynch said last week that she would accept the recommendations of the FBI director and of career prosecutors.
“No charges are appropriate in this case,” Comey said in making his announcement.
But Comey made that statement after he delivered a blistering review of Clinton’s actions, saying the FBI found that 110 emails were sent or received on Clinton’s server containing classified information. He said Clinton and her aides were “extremely careless” and added that it was possible that people hostile to the U.S. had gained access to her personal email account. [Associated Press]
Is it time to scrap the KORUS FTA? US Presidential candidate Donald Trump thinks so, but the ROK finance minister disagrees:
Finance Minister Yoo Il-ho refuted remarks by U.S. Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump that the free trade agreement between Korea and the United States (KORUS FTA) undermines the American economy.
Minister Yoo made his remarks a day after Trump lambasted the KORUS FTA as “a job-killing deal” and said the deal “doubles our trade deficit with Korea and will destroy nearly 100,000 American jobs.”
Yoo also said joining the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) is “very important” for countries in the Pacific region, a stance in stark contrast with Trump’s pledge that he will pull the U.S. out of the 12-nation body if he is elected.
“That will not help any people in the world,” Yoo said during an American Chamber of Commerce in Korea (AMCHAM Korea) General Membership Meeting.
Yoo said that Seoul acknowledges that some criticize the KORUS FTA citing the increased U.S. current account deficit, but stressed that the deal’s advantages “easily outweigh” the disadvantages.
“Trump’s remarks show that he does not understand the KORUS FTA,” Yoo said. “The sales of American automobiles in Korea soared by 28 percent annually, which makes Korea the second largest market for U.S. carmakers,” he said, adding that Samsung Electronics and Lotte Chemical have invested some $15 billion and $3 billion in the U.S., respectively.
Over Trump’s remarks, widely translated as protectionist, Yoo urged that the deal ― which marks its fourth anniversary this year ― should be consolidated further. [Korea Times]
Well known North Korean sympathizing professor Bruce Cumings thinks a Trump presidency would be interesting based on some of his campaign rhetoric about North Korea:
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump could bring a number of “interesting” things to the U.S. presidency, including how the real estate tycoon would deal with North Korea, an American professor said.
Bruce Cumings, a University of Chicago professor with deep expertise on Korea, made the remark in a recent article in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, noting that Trump has expressed a willingness to hold direct talks with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un.
“If Hillary Clinton becomes president, she will undoubtedly continue the policy of isolation and denuclearization of North Korea. Any number of things would make a Trump presidency interesting, to say the least, but one of them is to see what he would really do in regard to Korea policy,” Cumings said. [Yonhap]
I wonder what burger joint Trump would hold this proposed summit at? Would Dennis Rodman be invited?:
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump said Wednesday he would “accept” North Korean leader Kim Jong-un to the United States and hold nuclear negotiations with him while eating hamburgers, according to news reports.
“If he came here, I’d accept him,” Trump said during campaigning in Atlanta, reaffirming his willingness to meet with the North’s leader, according to reports. “Who the hell cares? I’ll talk to anybody.”
Trump first expressed his willingness to meet with Kim in an interview last month, drawing criticism not only from critics, but also from his own party that such a meeting would end up bolstering the dictator.
But while Trump has insisted on his willingness to speak to the North’s leader, but said he won’t go to the North for such talks.
Should Kim visit the U.S., Trump said he won’t throw him a state dinner.
“I wouldn’t give him a state dinner like China or all these other nations who are ripping us off,” Trump was quoted as saying. “We should be eating a hamburger on a conference table and making better deals.”
Trump said he will only “make a good deal” if he were to hold talks with the North’s leader.
The real-estate tycoon was also quoted as saying that there’s a “10 percent or 20 percent chance” he could talk Kim out of developing nuclear weapons. [Yonhap]
You can read more at the link, but I think Donald Trump is over estimating his negotiating skills if he thinks he has up to a 20% chance of talking Kim out of developing nuclear weapons. The only deal I can see that would convince the Kim regime of stopping their nuclear weapons development would be to allow them to conquer South Korea. This is obviously something the US would never agree to so what deal does Trump have in mind that would convince them?
A ROK Drop favorite Congressman Ed Royce is of course correct that any legislation that a possible Trump presidency proposes has to go through Congress. The only affect that I see a possible Trump presidency having on South Korea is that they will have to pay more for the upkeep of the US-ROK alliance:
Q. South Koreans have some trepidation over what a Donald Trump presidency may mean for the U.S. alliance with Seoul, such as Washington maintaining U.S. troops on the peninsula and continuing to extend its nuclear umbrella to the region. Should we be concerned?
A. Well, remember the way in which our system works. It is Congress that has passed many of these laws, and whether it is having given Korea NATO-plus-three status, which was a bill that I authored, or whether it’s [the Korea-U.S. free trade agreement] legislation, which I was a co-sponsor of, it is Congress that has passed these bills. And we are deeply committed.
Republicans and Democrats in a bipartisan way feel that this is a very important alliance for our members in Congress. For our House members and Senate members, this is a strongly held position. And it is Congress that passes the laws. Every spending bill originates in the House of the Representatives. I’m chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee; we have 44 members, and we have set these policies. I’ve been traveling here for over 20 years, and for 10 of those years, I was chairman of the inter-parliamentary exchange working with the [Korean] National Assembly. I would say I’ve never seen the relationship as strong as it is today… and I think it’s going to get stronger. [Joong Ang Ilbo]
By the way Congressman Royce has a lot more in the interview that is worth reading at the link.
The Donald has once again put allies on notice that they better be ready to pay up in a Trump Presidency:
U.S. Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump said Friday he will continue to defend South Korea, but wants the Asian ally to pay more for American defense support.
Speaking on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” Trump also said that he’s willing to hold talks with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, but won’t go to the communist nation.
“As far as Japan and South Korea are concerned, all I’m saying is we defend them. They are paying us a tiny fraction of what it’s costing. I want them to pay,” Trump said. “I would love to continue to defend Japan. I would love to continue to defend South Korea. We have 28,000 soldiers on the line between North and South Korea right now.”
Trump has unnerved foreign countries, especially such allies as South Korea and Japan, as he has displayed deeply negative views of U.S. security commitments overseas, contending the U.S. should stop being the policeman of the world.
The real-estate tycoon has said that the U.S. should be prepared to end protection of allies unless they pay more. He even suggested allowing South Korea and Japan to develop their own nuclear weapons for self-defense so as to reduce U.S. security burdens.
“We are not a country that can afford to defend Saudi Arabia, Germany, the NATO nations, 28 NATO nations, many of which are not paying us and they’re not living up to their agreement,” Trump said on MSNBC. “Japan, South Korea, nobody, we’re like the dummies that protect everybody. All I’m saying is, we have to get reimbursed because we can’t afford it.” [Yonhap]
You can read more at the link, but I was glad to see Trump finally put some focus on Middle Eastern and European nations instead of just Korea and Japan.
