Continued compelling commentary on the Clintons, crime, punishment and the 1994 Crime Bill

In this post over the weekend, titled "The many challenge of a fully nuanced understanding the Clintons, crime, punishment and the 1994 Crime Bill," I highlighted nearly a dozen articles and commentary to stress that there are many nuances essential to a full understanding of just what the 1994 Crime Bill did (and did not) achieve, and just what has been the role and record of former Prez Bill Clinton (and Prez candidate Hillary Clinton) on criminal justice reforms past and present. And because these stories are so nuanced, and I glad we are continuing to see lots of worthy commentary on these fronts, such as these recent pieces from various sources:

• "Bill Clinton, 'Black Lives' and the Myths of the 1994 Crime Bill: Pause the debate for some inconvenient history."

• "The Messy, Very Human Politics of Bill Clinton’s Crime Bill: The activists who denounce the bill now have much in common with the activists who supported it in 1994."

• "Bill Clinton Is Wrong About His Crime Bill. So Are the Protesters He Lectured."

• "Bill Clinton Has Always Been This Person"

• "We confronted Bill Clinton about race: 'In that moment he revealed himself and his true thoughts on black people'"

• "The real reason mass incarceration happened"

I am very pleased to see this important 20-year-old story is getting some useful attention now as part of the 2016 campaign.  But, for a variety of reasons, I hope attention soon turns to the more recent (very mixed) records of Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama on crime and punishment with focused questions to all the remaining 2016 candidates about whether, why and how they will be eager to continue or to change various modern federal criminal justice policies and practices.