Deep state watch: The Right Response to FBI Leaks

Cracking down on the culture of leaking at the FBI — a problem highlighted by Thursday’s release of the Department of Justice inspector general’s report on the Hillary Clinton e-mail probe — can hurt government transparency, argues Eli Lake at Bloomberg. “Without leaks, the public would be informed essentially by press releases.” That doesn’t mean the government should back off arresting leakers entirely, but strike a balance between zero-tolerance and free rein, he suggests. Indeed, “the problem is not that there are too many leaks. Rather there are too many state secrets. The FBI cannot be expected to protect all of them. Better to narrow in on the kinds of state secrets really worth protecting, like the identities of Americans under court-ordered surveillance.”

Foreign desk: China, Not Kim, Is Key to NoKo Nukes

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s meeting with Chinese president Xi Jinping carries more weight than Trump’s North Korea summit for US relations in Asia, argues Matthew Continetti at The Washington Free Beacon. Though Trump drummed up much “fanfare” about convincing North Korea to denuclearize, Pompeo vows not to lift sanctions until the hermit kingdom makes good on its promises. That requires pressuring China: “Want to see results in North Korea? Resist Chinese hegemony,” says Continetti. By “pressuring China at several points at once, you make it more likely Xi Jinping will exert influence over his vassal. Just so we back off.” China, he notes, fears “North Korea may cut its own deal with the United States and, like Vietnam and Laos, become a one-party state that nevertheless balances against the Middle Kingdom.”

Culture critic: Left Targets Even a Trump Bio for Kids

A new children’s biography of Trump has drawn criticism from a left-wing publisher because it “glosses over his racism, misogyny, xenophobia, and treatment of workers,” reports Dave Huber at The College Fix. Social Justice Books — the books arm of Teaching for Change — calls the bio “anything but neutral” and that its second-grade-level presentation of Trump is a “false narrative” and “dangerous from a democratic standpoint.” Huber adds, however, that Social Justice Books treated the previous installment in the series, “Who is Barack Obama?” with “no critical articles.” Readers of both books “would be better equipped to handle a more in-depth examination of political issues.”

Foreign desk: Brennan Could Pose National-Security Risk

Ex-CIA Director’s John Brennan’s speculation that Trump “has something to fear” from Russian President Vladimir Putin could pose a national-security risk, warns Daniel Hoffman at The Hill. Hoffman argues that Brennan’s prestige and experience give his opinions more weight than others’, and he should use that power judiciously. If he was truly worried about Trump threatening national security, Brennan “should have spoken privately with special counsel Robert Mueller.” Instead, he chose to imply to other world leaders that the White House is under Russian influence: “Brennan’s public statements carry weight, and forcing such a self-inflicted wound on our national security — at a time when we are already under siege from the Kremlin’s onslaught — only serves, unwittingly, to help further Putin’s ambitions.”

From the right: Netflix’s Harassment Rules May Backfire

New Netflix anti-harassment rules could actually damage the company’s workplace environment, notes Katherine Timpf at National Review. The rules include bans on coworkers “looking at each other for more than five seconds” and “asking their colleagues for their phone numbers.” They also encourage employees to “Shout ‘Stop, don’t do that again!’ ” if someone has acted inappropriately. Timpf warns that Netflix could end up punishing people for trivialities, like someone staring at a coworker when he’s just “spaced out” or asking for a phone number for “completely platonic” reasons. Timpf concludes that Netflix’s new policies undermine its goal to make workplaces safe: “Calling an innocent six-second glance ‘harassment’ trivializes the very real struggles of those who are actually harassed, and a no-phone-numbers rule is going to make it more difficult for employees to communicate.”

— Compiled by Nicholas Rowan