The witty Greg Gutfeld and an equally witty panel!

"If you asked President Obama what his biggest mistake was, he'd say, "I was too perfect." The media would nod like starry-eyed blowfish!"

Leaks (GOP) versus Russian collusion (Dems). It's like two hobos fighting in the street over the last cigarette butt."

Should President Trump get a pet? What species? It would be the one species liberals hate. PETA would say, "You can eat it!" The media would say it has Russian ties."

The Gorsuch hearings: did anyone watch? Is Gorsuch a robot?

Did you know Greg only gets profiled in the public library?

The Good News that almost happened in 2016

Peoples Cube puts out a front page fake newspaper story of all the things that didn't happen in 2016.


h/t Gerard

Win!

Oregon Muse takes a look at 2016, and decides it wasn't all that bad after all:

On the other hand, for all the talk of 2016 being a bad year, consider:

1. Hillary lost.
2. The Cubs won.
3. The MSM beclowned itself so thoroughly during the election that it may never recover.
4. Even before taking office, Trump is pantsing the opposition.
5. Gawker was sued into non-existence.
6. Rolling Stone may follow.
7. Fidel Castro relocated to warmer climes, where he is being repeatedly ravaged by the barbed you-know-what.
8. Brexit passed.
9. The progressive left is continuing to lose its sh*, daily (see #4).
10. And of course, Hillary Clinton will never be president.

So, win.

"Humiliating themselves in the marathon group grovel that America insists on putting its presidential candidates through."

Dave Barry thinks 2016 should never have happened. for example, there was the election:

The fall campaign was an unending national nightmare, broadcast relentlessly on cable TV. CNN told us over and over that Donald Trump was a colossally ignorant, narcissistic, out-of-control sex-predator buffoon; Fox News countered that Hillary Clinton was a greedy, corrupt, coldly calculating liar of massive ambition and minimal accomplishment. And in our hearts we knew the awful truth: They were both right.

On the Democratic side, Clinton and Sanders are also in a tight and testy battle, although Clinton slowly gains the upper hand thanks to the Democratic Party’s controversial formula for allocating “superdelegates,” which is as follows:

▪ 57 percent go to Clinton.

▪ The remaining 43 percent also go to Clinton.

Responding to charges from the Sanders camp that the Democratic National Committee is tipping the scales in Clinton’s favor, chairperson Debbie Wasserman Schultz states that “the DNC is scrupulously neutral in the contest between Secretary Clinton and the senile Commie fart.”

...In March, But by far the most controversial political issue of the month — which nobody thought about before, yet which all of a sudden is the defining civil rights struggle of the 21st century — is the question of who can pee where in North Carolina.

...In April … England observes the 90th birthday of Queen Elizabeth II, who celebrates the occasion by wearing a large hat and smiling grimly at horses.

...In May, … tragedy strikes the Cincinnati Zoo when zoo authorities, fearing for the life of a 3-year-old who has climbed into the gorilla enclosure, are forced to shoot and kill a gorilla named Harambe, who instantly becomes way more revered on the internet than Mother Teresa.

...In August, the opening of the National Football League season provides a much-needed diversion to Americans who are sick of being bitterly divided over politics and welcome the opportunity to be bitterly divided over how players respond to the National Anthem.

...In October, In a chilling reminder of the nation’s technological vulnerability, a series of cyberattacks disrupts popular internet sites such as Twitter and Netflix, forcing millions of Americans to make eye contact with each other.

...In November, … which begins with yet another letter to congressional leaders from FBI Director Comey, who lately has generated more correspondence than Publishers Clearing House. This time he says, concerning the newly discovered emails on Anthony Weiner’s laptop: never mind. This forces Republicans and Democrats to again swap positions on whether Comey is a courageous patriot or total scum. For a brief period members of Congress are so confused about who stands where that they are in real danger of accidentally working together and accomplishing something. Fortunately before this happens the two sides are able to sort things out and resume being bitterly deadlocked.

Trump’s victory stuns the nation. Not since the darkest days of the Civil War have so many Americans unfriended each other on Facebook. Some even take the extreme step of writing “open letters.” Angry, traumatized protesters cry, march, shout, smash windows, set fires —and that’s just the New York Times editorial board. Leading celebrities who vowed to leave the country if Trump won immediately start making plans to … OK, to not actually leave the country per se, but next time they definitely will and YOU’LL BE SORRY.

...Meanwhile, the Democrats — now on a multi-year losing streak that has cost them the presidency, both houses of Congress and a majority of the state legislatures — desperately seek an explanation for their party’s failures. After a hard, critical look in the mirror, they are forced, reluctantly, to stop seeking scapegoats and place the blame where it belongs: the Electoral College, the Russians, Facebook and, of course, James Comey.

In the month’s biggest non-election news, the death of Fidel Castro is greeted with expressions of sorrow from several dozen world leaders who never had to live under his rule, and tears of happiness from many thousands of Cubans who did.

Finally, mercifully, 2016 draws to a close. On New Year’s Eve, a festive crowd gathers in Times Square, and millions more tune in on TV, to watch the ball drop that marks the dawn of the new year. This is one of the great traditions that connect us as a nation, and it serves to remind us that, although we disagree on many things, we are all part of the same big family — the American family — and when all is said and done, we hate each other.

This is what we are thinking as the big lighted ball begins to slowly descend the pole, traveling roughly two feet before it is vaporized by Russian fighter jets.

Happy New Year, fellow Americans. It’s going to be exciting.

Read much more here.

"In 2016, what could never have happened usually did."

Victor Davis Hanson writes,

...Trump delivered to the Republicans their most astounding political edge in nearly a century. The candidate who was most despised by the party unified it in a way no other nominee could have.

Obama proved Israel’s best friend — even though that was never his intention. By simultaneously alienating Israel and the Sunni moderates in Jordan and Egypt, and by warming up to the Muslim Brotherhood, appeasing Iran, and issuing empty red lines to the Assad regime in Syria, Obama infuriated but also united the entire so-called moderate Middle East. The result was that Arab nations suddenly no longer saw Israel as an existential threat. Instead, it was seen as similarly shunned by the U.S. — and as the only military power capable of standing up to the soon-to-be-nuclear theocracy in Iran that hates Sunni Arabs and Israelis alike.

Today, Israel is in the historic position of being courted by its former enemies, as foreign fuel importers line up to buy its huge, newly discovered deposits of natural gas. As the Arab Spring and the Islamic State destroyed neighboring nations, Israel’s democracy and free market appeared as an even stronger beacon in the storm.

Almost every major initiative that Obama pushed has largely failed. Obamacare is a mess. He nearly doubled the national debt in eight years. Economic growth is at its slowest in decades. The reset with Russia, the Asian pivot, abruptly leaving Iraq, discounting the Islamic State, red lines in Syria, the Iran deal — all proved foreign-policy disasters.

Yet Obama has been quiet about one of the greatest economic revolutions in American history, one that has kept the U.S. economy afloat: a radical transformation from crippling energy dependency to veritable fossil-fuel independence. The United States has become the world’s greatest combined producer of coal, natural gas, and oil. It is poised to be an energy exporter to much of the world.

The revolution in fracking and horizontal drilling has brought in much-needed federal revenue, increased jobs, weakened Russia and our OPEC rivals, and given trillions of dollars in fuel savings to American consumers.

Yet Obama opposed the energy revolution at every step. He radically curtailed the leasing of federal lands for new drilling, stopped the Keystone XL pipeline, and subsidized inefficient and often crony-capitalist wind and solar projects. Nonetheless, Obama’s eventual failure to stop new drilling ended up his one success.

Read more here.

Who would be best to lead America in a time of global crisis?

At PJ Media Richard Fernandez asks what kind of leader will the United States need in February 2017. He presumes that it will be a time of global crisis in terms of security and probably also economic.

The requirements of a crisis leader turn out to be surprisingly different from those best suited to times of peace.

...For the sake of discussion, let me suggest that only four things matter in selecting a man to face a challenge whose present dimensions cannot be predicted. For purposes of debate, let these four qualities in descending order of importance be:

An ability to face the facts, however unpleasant they may be. The most important quality of the next president should be a lack of self-deception and a willingness to see things as they truly are, even if he or his ideology wish them to be otherwise. This is so important that it trumps the next item.

...An unswerving patriotism. This is not the same as a sincere feeling of love or empathy for America, though that is good. In this context it means the willingness to share the fate of the principals of which he is an agent.

...Nerve. This is the quality of grace under pressure who no one, unless he has the misfortune to be tested, can be sure he possesses.

...Intelligence. This is important, because it determines basic competence. But it surprisingly the least important attribute in this list. Intelligence, though rare, is not nearly as hard to find as the 3 characteristics above. You can find staffers who can give you intelligent advice. You cannot find staff to give you a character that you do not possess.

Once the presidential hopefuls are examined through the prism of who can be "chief of men, through a cloud" they will look surprisingly different. Try to imagine Bernie, Hillary, Donald, Ted, Marco, Ben or Carly facing what might likely have to be faced. The criteria may or may not change your original choice of the best candidate.

It is perhaps symptomatic of the problem that the campaign highlights other desirable, but in this context inessential, qualities. We are shown personability, physical attractiveness, sharpness of wit, familiarity with policy, even entertainment skills of the various contestants. These are important, and perhaps all-important in selecting the leader of a boring, crisis-less world. They would be vital in another time; the question is whether they are vital for 2017.

Read more here.

Too many accommodations?

Bret Stephens believes we Americans have made too many accommodations. He writes in the Wall Street Journal that our votes for presidential candidates have, since bill Clinton, looked past issues of character and intellect. We must not be choosing the candidate he wants (Marco Rubio). Read more here.

It's getting interesting

The closer we get to the February 1 Iowa caucuses, the more interesting are the Democrat and Republican races for the presidency. Virginia Postrel writes,

The DC Establishment is really rallying to Trump: Bob Dole, Peter King, Rudy Giuliani, now Chuck Grassley. Screw the country--they're determined to stop Cruz by any means necessary. (These aren't actual endorsements...yet...just flirtations combined with attacks on Cruz.)

Which politicians are viewed most favorably? That is the question Nate Silver examines at the number-crunching website Five Thirty Eight.

We’ve got an unpopular set of presidential candidates this year– Bernie Sanders is the only candidate in either party with a net-positive favorability rating — but Trump is the most unpopular of all. His favorability rating is 33 percent, as compared with an unfavorable rating of 58 percent, for a net rating of -25 percentage points. By comparison Hillary Clinton, whose favorability ratings are notoriously poor, has a 42 percent favorable rating against a 50 percent unfavorable rating, for a net of -8 points. Those are bad numbers, but nowhere near as bad as Trump’s.

Go here to see Silver's charts.

Are you looking forward to 2016?

Bulldog writes at Maggie's Farm,

...as 2016 beckons, I hope everyone has the chance to reflect on what's good in their life, temporarily place doubts and worries to the side, make positive and self-affirming decisions and see the abundant good spirit and opportunity our world has. The promise of a better tomorrow is what drives us, and it's only worthwhile to have a better tomorrow if we are mentally prepared to enjoy it.

Read more here.

Part of the problem is that people just can't seem to admit any flaws of their own, or of their candidates. And admitting that makes life so much simper, and more honest.

Ace of Spades has a wonderful analysis of the political campaigns today. He starts by bringing us up-to-date on the current polling data. These data show

Sanders ahead of Clinton by 9 in NH.

Furthermore, Sanders has closed on her in Iowa:

In Iowa, Clinton maintains her previous advantage over Sanders -- but her lead has declined from 24 points in July (49 percent to 25 percent) to 11 points (38 percent to 27 percent); Biden sits at 20 percent.

Drudge is headlining this poll from SurveyUSA, not only showing Trump beating Hillary by five (45-40) but also beating Joe Biden (44-42), Bernie Sanders (44-40), and Al Gore (44-41) in potential head-to-head matchups -- a remarkable turnaround from initial polling showing Hillary decisively beating Trump. As Drudge points out, perhaps the most surprising aspect of the poll is that Trump is polling at 25% of the black vote, a number Republicans haven’t seen for generations.

In other Trump news -- there is always Trump news -- Trump said something very very stupid, claiming that he had always "felt" as if he had been in the military because he had attended a pricey military-themed boarding school as a youngster, and so had "dealt with those people."

Ace quotes AllahPundit at Hot Air:

...Trump has clarified how many of the outrages that sweep conservative media from day to day are based on true outrage and how many are purely opportunistic, seized on only because they’re useful in making a disfavored figure squirm.

...The whole "outrage" game is being exposed as a fraud by Trump, a guy who's already committed -- and been absolved of -- more conservative heresies than a much-loathed RINO like Mitt Romney could commit in two lifetimes. That's good for the movement too. American politics, especially as practiced on the Internet, needs a higher tolerance for outrages. Maybe Trump will help generate that.

Ace adds,

I think Allah suggests this but I would make it more explicit: While the Outrageyness of the grassgroots is silly and opportunistic, so too is the Outrageyness of the Establishment class, which every day hits new heights of hysteria in denouncing Trump as a heretic.

Part of the problem is that people just can't seem to admit any flaws of their own, or of their candidates. And admitting that makes life so much simper, and more honest.

...This was in fact a stupid thing for Trump to say, and it is more evidence (if you needed any more) that he considers himself an All-Being, Master of Time, Space, and Dimension (in Steve Martin's words).

One can't really spin this as a positive, and one really shouldn't spin too hard to even make it less of a negative. It's a negative.

On the other hand: Can we all be grown up and admit that we all have flaws, and so do our candidates, and in the final analysis, there are few flaws which are absolutely disqualifying?

...Many on the establishment right are chiefly hostile to Trump on the basis of class-based disgust at him. Not only is he a boastful vulgarian (higher-class people do not proclaim their superiority; they instead suggest it by more subtle means), but he's also an immigration skeptic.

And there is no getting around this: The Establishment right is quite pro-amnesty, for a mix of reasons, including their inability to get past the idea that erecting any real barriers to immigration is "racist."

And to be racist is, of course, the worst sin a member of the Comfortable Class could be accused of; and so this is largely about establishing oneself as "not racist."

...The way to get people to accept your preferred policies and your preferred order of prioritization of issues is to actually talk about policies and prioritization, not engage in this silly, endless He Said a Dirty Word tattle-taling.

Read more here.

Largesse

Julie Bykowicz of AP writes about a conference that has been taking place this week in Dana Point, California. It is put on by Charles Koch of Koch brothers fame. Attendees were

450 business leaders — many among them top political contributors — and the elected officials who receive that largesse. They've been strategizing with officials at the education, policy and activist groups that Koch and his brother David have spent years building up and funding.

That network has a budget of $889 million through the end of 2016 — and much of it will be directed at electing a Republican to the White House.

As such, five GOP contenders spoke to the donor group, answering questions.

...The Koch donor conferences, held twice a year, are insular affairs.

Only those who have donated $100,000 or more to Koch-backed groups are invited. Yet even those deep-pocketed donors must check their mobile phones at the doors of some strategy sessions.

For the first time, a small number of reporters were invited to hear the 2016 candidates and attend some other forums. As a condition of attending, reporters were not permitted to identify any of the donors in attendance.

Most of the Koch-backed entities are nonprofits that do not have to disclose their donors. The two most politically active groups are American for Prosperity, which deploys activists to knock on doors and discuss issues important to the Kochs, and Freedom Partners, which has a super PAC that can spend directly on elections.

Although leaders for those two groups say they aren't endorsing anyone in the GOP primary, donors at the retreat have the ability to write million-dollar checks to boost a candidate's chances.

Read more here.

The latest poll

Here is the latest Washington Post-ABC poll:

Sometimes cartoons are the most effective way of communicating

Thanks to my friend Lt. Col Curt Dale

The Outrage Train

John McCain has been going after Donald Trump. Trump tried to get back at him today, by saying, "He was a war hero because he was captured. I like people who were not captured." Ace of Spades comments,

We just had one Know-Nothing Know-It-All Princeling as President; I'm not sure I'd like to see a different variation of the breed.

Read more here.

One of Ace's commenters writes,

Trump is being attacked, let's be honest, because we are powerless to attack the real evil in our presence.

We can't defeat obama or clinton or msnbc or Planned Abortionhood, or even Bernie Sanders. So we claw at the easy targets. This week it's Trump. Next week it will Ann Coulter or Rush. After that it will be Franklin Graham for something he said.

Another commenter said,

IMO, he was useful, because he turned the heat on the other GOP candidates. However, saying stupid stuff like this discredits him, and by extension, the issues he raises. The GOPe will now simply dismiss anti-amnesty as the ravings of a self-indulgent clown.

Another said,

Not offended by what Trump said. I AM greatly offended by the existence and prominence of John Kerry, who DID insult me and all my brethren.

Here is a little more context:


Ace adds,

the north vietnamese wanted to trade back McCain, ahead of everyone else, because his dad was an Admiral, and they sought to curry favor.

McCain insisted on staying with the guys, and only going when they all went.

He stayed for seven years.

Yes, that's a heroic thing.

what's trump's claim to heroism? Saving the Miss Universe pageant from chapter 11?

Another commenter said,

If Trump goes away, you will get another safe, mushy campaign of cold oatmeal.

After which the Jeb loses like a Gentleman.

Another commenter:

Trump's a rich butthead, and I really don't want him to win, but against this field of milk toasts and wieners, what are people supposed to do?

Another commenter:

The absurd (and predictable) part of all this is -- watch the MSM suddenly take up the cause of honorable POWs grievously hurt by Trump.

I stopped quoting commenters at number 109. At last check there were 480 comments. It is the best discussion I have seen anywhere about 2016. Go here to read more. I can only wish I had this many commenters in a year, not to mention in one day!

Ignoring the concerns of large numbers of voters

Glenn Reynolds writes at USA Today,

...as The New York Times recently noted, the benefits of this "recovery" have gone almost entirely to the rich. "In the first three years of the current expansion, incomes actually fell for the bottom 90% of earners, even as they rose nicely for the top 10%. The result: The top 10% captured an impossible-seeming 116% of income gains during that span. ... One percent of the population, in the first three years of the current expansion, took home 95% of the income gains."

Sanders' solutions might be ill-conceived, but at least he's talking about a problem that the incumbent, and the front-runner, are largely happy to ignore. And though, as an aged, openly Socialist, white male, he might not have been the dream candidate, Sanders draws enthusiastic crowds who are grateful that someone is speaking to their concerns.

Likewise, Trump. His signature issue is immigration. The GOP establishment likes open borders because its big corporate donors want cheap labor. (The Democratic establishment likes open borders because immigrants usually vote Democratic.) But many ordinary Americans — mostly, but not at all exclusively, Republicans — wonder what's in it for them. More immigrants means more competition for jobs, pushing wages down, whether it's at entry-level unskilled jobs, or at the higher-level tech jobs where employers abuse H1B visas to bring in cheap foreign labor.

Most GOP pols won't touch this issue, which pairs the risk of scaring off immigration-dependent donors with the added danger of being called racist by Democrats. Trump doesn't care, so he is willing to raise the issue anyway. And he has done so effectively: Two weeks ago, the immigration template involved stories about "DREAMers" who want to go to college; now it involves multiple-arrested undocumented immigrants who kill women. Trump might not be the ideal candidate of the Republican Party's discontented members either, but, again, they're grateful that someone is talking about their concerns instead of trying to bury them.

Both Sanders and Trump pose threats to their respective establishments. Sanders might be another Eugene McCarthy, who garnered tremendous enthusiasm in 1968 while sapping the energy of Democratic establishment candidate Hubert Humphrey, who went on to lose. Trump might turn out to be another Ross Perot, whose plain talk about deficits excited a lot of GOP voters who then saw George H.W. Bush as an unappetizing substitute.

In a democratic polity, you can't ignore the concerns of large numbers of voters forever. Both Democrats and Republicans are learning that lesson yet again.

Read more here.

Rick Perry is doing better this time

At Powerline Steven Hayward believes that former Texas governor Rick Perry has learned from his presidential run in 2012. Perry writes an excellent piece in the Wall Street Journal, which Hayward quotes at length. Hayward recommends we pay attention to what Perry is saying.
Read more here.

Update: Roger L. Simon is another who believes Perry deserves a second chance. Read his take here.

Update 2: Elizabeth Price Foley is another who likes Perry. Read her comments here.

Trump and Sanders popular in New Hampshire

Hot Air reports that a new CNN poll in New Hampshire

finds Trump at 11%, just behind Bush at 16% in a wide open contest for the Republican nomination for president. Bush and Trump are followed by Rand Paul at 9%, Scott Walker at 8%, and Carly Fiorina and Marco Rubio both at 6%. Ben Carson and Chris Christie each have 5% support.

As the low numbers at the top of the pack indicate, the field is far from settled. Twenty-one percent say they don’t know which of the 19 candidates tested in the poll they’d support, and overall, 75% say they’re not committed to any candidate.

Ace of Spades writes,

Donald Trump is the Establishment's own fault. I've been saying this forever: These are not business-as-usual times. 1996 was a business-as-usual time. The economy was growing, the country was at peace, relatively, and there wasn't any bizarre cult of Identity undermining all the pillars of stability in society.

We have been in an extraordinary time for a while -- and I don't mean that in a good way-- and rather that comprehend this and act upon this, and realize that being a conservative in dire times means more than wearing a conservatively-tailored suit, our idiots have continued to play all the old McConnell/Boehner games, losing policy so we could win on the issue, Failure Theater, dissembling catch-phrase rhetoric, etc.

A billion-channel universe

What would Seth Godin do if he were running for president?

If I were crazy enough to be running, I'd organize my own debate, challenging one or two of my competitors to an hour-long conversation, and then post it online. Even better, I'd challenge one of the candidates from the other party and have a substantive conversation. Bernie Sanders debating [pick your candidate]. It elevates both sides because each person had the guts to address the issues, to go head to head, to speak up and make a case.

The Debate Channel can't be far behind. No grandstanding, with chess clocks provided for fairness, no wasted time on moderators, merely conversations, some of which can't help but go viral and get ratings that would, in aggregate, compete with the TV variety.

...The magic is the open nature of a billion-channel universe. The organization with an FCC license is no longer in charge, debates aren't something that happen to you, they're something you can choose to do.

Pick yourself.

Read more here.

How do Republican candidates propose to deal with Islamic State?

Roger L. Simon writes at PJ Media,

Houston, we have a problem this Memorial Day weekend!

ISIS has taken Palmyra and Ramadi and is threatening Baghdad and Damascus, making inroads into Afghanistan, Libya and, yes, Malaysia while planting who knows how many sleepers here to Heidelberg. Iran continues to run roughshod over the Middle East (and South America), planting a flag in Yemen while pretending to negotiate with the West as they move inexorably closer to the bombs and the ICBMs to deliver them in everyone’s back yard. The revived Russian Bear is moving in on Eastern Europe again while backing up the Iranians in negotiation. China is surpassing the United States in practically everything, including space, and North Korea is off doing what North Korea does only more so (starving its people while building nukes). Meanwhile, his unexcellency the current president of these Younited States is off lecturing the Coast Guard about climate change!

...So what’s going on in the Republican presidential campaign that’s supposed to solve this mess and rescue us from more of the same (therefore worse) from the serially mendacious Dame Hillary?

...what we have here is basically a game of I’m-more-libertarian-than-you or I’m-more-conservative-than-you, depending on your preference, while the world burns.

...Anyway, back to the real Memorial Day story. Apparently, our good friends in ISIS, not to be outdone by those nasty Shiites in Tehran, are claiming they are about to buy a bomb of their own.

Simon links to a story in the Independent by Heather Saul, in which ISIS claims to be planning to buy a nuclear weapon from Pakistan in the next twelve months.

Simon concludes:

And speaking of time flying, what I would love to see from the Republican candidates is some specific, real detail on how they intend to deal with this global conflagration that seems to be spreading faster than pancreatic cancer. I know Rubio and Graham have said some things, maybe a few others, but we are in an immensely difficult situation. It deserves serious discussion this Memorial Day weekend and in the days following like nothing I can think of.

By the way, I am completely uninterested in what the Democrats have to say about this. Listening to Bernie Sanders discussing national security is like listening to Kim Kardashian discuss Einstein’s Unified Field Theory. As for Hillary Clinton, I don’t want to hear anything about anything ever again from that congenital liar except three simple English words, ”Guilty, your Honor.”

Read more here.

Legislating from the bureaucracy

Should we expect any better from Hillary should she become president? William Jacobson, writing in Washington Examiner, doesn't think so;

in fact, I think we can expect worse.

Consider that Hillary went off the government grid to conduct her official business by setting up a private server at her home that was controlled by her personal staff.

...The server scandal is a metaphor for the old Hillary — opaque, controlling, paranoid, ruthless and power-hungry. It's proof that she hasn't changed.

...Campaign consultants can remake a candidate's image, but they can't remake the candidate herself. A President Clinton would almost certainly face a Republican House of Representatives in 2017, if not a Republican-controlled Congress.

Rather than trying to work with such a Congress, Hillary has made it clear she would be even more aggressive than Obama in expanding presidential power at the expense of Congress and the Constitution.

Read more here.