THERE'LL BE NO "SHORT TAKES" TONIGHT BECAUSE OF THE SHEER QUANTITY OF THE DAY'S NEWS.  I'VE HAD TO DEVOTE VIRTUALLY ALL AVAILABLE TIME TO MONITORING WHAT'S BEEN HAPPENING, AND COMPARING THE WORK OF NEWS OUTLETS.  HERE ARE SOME OBSERVATIONS:

DALLAS:  The last time I heard the words "sniper in Dallas" was November 22, 1963, when President Kennedy was assassinated.  Tonight in Dallas 11 police officers were shot, and five of them died.  A civilian was also hit.  The action occurred during a mass rally to protest police killings of blacks in Louisiana and Minnesota in the last few days.

But do not automatically assume that the Dallas attacks were related to those police killings.  We don't actually know.  It could be that the shooters used the rally, with its packing of large crowds together, to carry out a plan that was already underway.  Three suspects, including one female, are in custody.  Another is still involved in a standoff with police.  One suspect has boasted that bombs have been planted  Observers note that the level of precision and coordination involved in the attacks could not have been developed overnight.  Several of the suspects were arrested in a car packed with explosives. 

Although there are suspects in custody, police have refused to name them.  I wonder why.  Is it routine, or is there something about the names that might be of, uh, particular interest?  I am just speculating.  But I would not be shocked if this plot had an international component. 

Fox and CNN will be covering the story all night.   

 

THE CLINTON E-MAIL PROBE:  FBI Director James Comey appeared before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, but really added little to his statement of last week explaining why the FBI will not recommend prosecution of Hillary Clinton.

The real news is that the Republicans will not let the matter rest, and neither will some other players in Washington.  We could sense visceral GOP anger during the committee hearing over the belief that Queen Hillary has gotten away with it, and a determination by Republicans not to let that happen.

Republicans on the committee will send a formal referral to the FBI, asking that Bureau to investigate statements Clinton made to Congress for perjury.  Comey has already said that Clinton was not truthful in many of her statements.  Will the House ask the Justice Department to punish Clinton?

Also, the State Department announced that its own internal probe of Clinton's handling of classified e-mails will resume, now that the FBI investigation has been concluded.   I thought the e-mail matter had been set to rest, but it hasn't.

Finally, Comey was asked whether the FBI was investigating the Clinton Foundation, which took in barrels of money from foreign countries while Hillary was secretary of state.  Was Clinton influenced to do favors for these countries because of their "gifts" to the foundation?  Comey refused to say whether an investigation of the foundation was in progress, but he didn't slam the door. 

Several weeks ago a major Washington reporter told me that his sources reported that Clinton's e-mail problem would disappear, but that the foundation probe was key to what the FBI was doing, and that a criminal referral was likely.  So far my contact has been correct.

This ain't over. 

July 7, 2016