For David Rothkopf, the Editor of Foreign Policy Magazine, “Donald Trump is the Symptom of Our PTSD.” I would like to propose an alternative analysis. The government of the US no longer cares about obtaining the consent of the governed and the government no longer bothers with preserving even the appearance of equal justice. Since 2010, the Democrats' strategy has been to deadlock Congress and use illegal executive orders, rogue courts and regulatory excesses to get what they want without Congress. The power of the purse has been negated by Harry Reid blocking every spending bill until the last minute, then giving Republicans the choice of giving Democrats more or less everything that they want or shutting down the government.
[After posting the above, I got some pushback from a liberal commenter. He said that the Clintons had maintained enough separation from the Foundation so that they were not in violation of a law prohibiting federal employees from receiving money from foreign governments. He said a “living Constitution” was needed to keep the 2nd Amendment as a valid part of the Constitution. He said that Obama’s executive orders were sailing through the courts easily. He said the deadlock in Congress was mainly the result of Republicans refusing to compromise. My response is below.]
The reason for Hillary Clinton's private email server was so she could coordinate Clinton foundation donations with State Department favors. Here's a good place to start on the Clinton Foundation:
[After my post above, the liberal commenter got upset. He insisted I read a Politifact article about the Clinton Foundation. He mentioned how many emails Bush deleted. He said the 2nd Amendment was obsolete because it was written when the US Army had only 5,000 men. He said that the 14th Amendment was too vague for anybody to know what it meant. He mentioned Loving v. Virginia and Griswold v. Connecticut as two cases which would be overturned by my interpretation of the 14th Amendment. He complained about my insulting his “liberal” education. My response to his response to my response is below.]
I read the Politifact article on the Clinton Foundation. It was a whitewash followed by a split decision. The polite fiction was that the Clintons did not receive any direct benefits from the foundation. The foundation was used as a slush fund to support friends of Bill and Hill as a campaign organization in waiting, so the polite fiction was more fiction than polite. The lawyers were of differing opinions. Politifact, not surprisingly, chose to take the opinions most favorable to the Clintons as gospel. Politifact is part of the media bias you've heard so much about. Having "fact" in your name does not make Politifact any less biased that having "truth" in Pravda's name made Pravda any more truthful.
The original article I reacted to.